Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/MONGO

By my count, the vote, at the time it was closed was 53/13/3.Gator (talk) 20:59, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Your count is quite right, since the 'vote' doesn't close until a bureaucrat closes it. -Splash talk 21:47, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

That's really not how it works. It's closed when the time and date is reached. Why else would there be a deadline? The final count is 53-13-3. Can't win em all.Gator (talk) 22:13, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Nope. AfDs are continued until someone gets the time to close them, same with everything else, including RfAs. There is a deadline because otherwise noone would ever become an admin. Pester the bureaucrats. Win? Who's wanting to win? -Splash talk 22:17, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

It said "ending 5:59, 21 November 2005 (UTC)" Seems pretty clear to me, unless that just means nothing. People can vote after that if it's not removed, but they just won' count. I know youy were opposed to this one, but ending it when it actually ended actually cuases more support votes to be lost then oppose.Gator (talk)
 * If it seems clear, then unfortunately, you've misunderstood. I hope the good, decent bureaucrats we have know that all edits are welcomed, and we don't just go ignoring people's opinions, for that would be very poor. -Splash talk 22:21, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

What they do with the extra votes is their business, but to say it's open no matter what it ACTUALLY says is just plain wrong. We've gone back and forth on this and have gotten no where. This has remained on the main page for a day and a half, which is way too long for a contentious RFA like this. I did contact a bureacrat earlier today, so, hopefully, this will be dealt with very soon. He did seem to think it was over too (see my talk page). No hard feelings. See you around.Gator (talk) 22:29, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, he agreed it was past its sell by date. He didn't even imply that this meant discarding peoples opinions. -Splash talk 22:34, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't want ot argue anymore. Talk to I don't have a name if you think that votes should still be counted after voting closes. Some opinions should not be counted if there just not made in time. Why else have rules and deadlines if they're not going to mean anything. I'm done. This will all be moot very soon (hopefully).Gator (talk) 22:36, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The meaning of the deadline is the earliest it can be closed (unless someone decides to close it earlier, an action I do not usually agree with). -Splash talk 23:13, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The idea of ignoring someone's recomendation because the "deadline" has passed is ludicrous. I'd dearly hope that no B-cat would do such a thing. -  brenneman (t) (c)  23:27, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing that a bureaucrat will take whatever input he/she considers relevant, I'm surprised that no one has jumped in with WP:NOT yet. On the other hand I don't know if it's ever been tested besides actually extending an RFA. Rx StrangeLove 04:27, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I always thought that the votes were alway counted until a 'crat closes it. For three days I think the margin had hovered between 77 and 81 percent so it was borderline anyway. I also realize that just because the total may be over 80% that it doesn't guarantee promotion, especially if the opposition is particularily good at presenting reasons for opposing, as most everyone here did. I think the ending time is the minimum, not that it is actually the ending time for vote count. I do see that it was closed at 54/14. I would have preferred a 90% margin and will do all I can to ensure that those who supported me know they made a good choice, and that the opposition to this nomination will also learn to trust me as well.--MONGO 04:55, 23 November 2005 (UTC)