That made about much sense as your blanket "too many administrator" votes, while behind the scenes, you say that you'd consider nominating someone for adminship. You do this for attention, Dougstech. Plain and simply, you like riling up the !voters and have never given a reasonable/logical reason for your persistent opposes with zero consideration for the individual candidate. You know what that is? It's trolling. Tan | 3903:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And the official policy that you use to prove your point? None. If you are tired, then take a wp:wikibreak. What policy says that I must explain myself? Even though I have many times, and I will not do it again.DougsTech (talk) 03:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's no official policy that says the sky is blue, either; what I point out is the obvious. You have not explained yourself (believe you me, I've been through all those threads multiple times, and there's no explanation whatsoever). If you have, provide a diff. You can't, because you've been asked to dozens of times and you always dismiss the incredulous query with an "I already have". Quit lying. Quit trolling. Tan | 3903:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You need to learn to read before you speak. ^^^This an example of exactly why I oppose admins. Admins like this guy need to be removed pronto. Instead of doing admin duties, they are here calling people trolls and liars. Oh, and the diff you couldnt be bothered to look for...one of the many is hereDougsTech (talk) 03:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's your explanation? Excuse me, I was looking for something reasonable/logical. Fun to read the responses to those diffs. And believe me - regarding how I should be removed "pronto", editors like yourself make me want to leave this project for good. Tan | 3903:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone else feel free to move this section to the usual place on the talk page. I tried to; I was reverted. I am confident in my opinions; I just realized it's pretty unfair to the candidate to have this discussion here. Tan | 3903:42, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"If you felt it was unfair, then you shouldn't have started any discussion"? On the contrary, if you disagree with a logic, it seems only reasonable to initiate a discussion. –Juliancolton | Talk03:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Juliancolton, you are not following the discussion. He felt it unfair to start the discussion on that page...but he started it anyway, now wants to remove it. --DougsTech (talk) 03:54, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's impossible to argue with your logic. Your reasons for your oppose are so illogical that I gave you the benefit of the doubt about your intellect; that's where the lying bit came from. Apparently it was my initial fear. At any rate, it was my mistake to start this here; I knew how it'd turn out. Please think about letting me or another editor move it to the talk page. Tan | 3903:50, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This has got to stop. Is there nothing prohibiting such disruptive behavior? I think a topic ban is in order, and would obviously prevent a great deal of disruption. Look at the last 500 edits of Doug's. Trolling RFA is nearly all this user does. He will not even argue his position. People need not compare Dougs to Kurt, Dougs is trolling, plain and simple. I fail to understand why his blanket opposes, and trolling has been tolerated for so long. The fact that he just recently nominated someone for adminship says it all. He claims there are too many admins, yet he has done nothing about that, and he knows good and well his blanket opposes are not even gave a second look by the closing crat. Landon1980 (talk) 06:06, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
