Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for adminship/Gordon Ecker/Archive 1

Note: This RFA has been resolved. Please do not add further support/oppose opinions.

Gordon Ecker

Created per request of Dirigible. -- Gordon Ecker 01:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Candidate statement

I accept this nomination. -- Gordon Ecker 01:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Status

Succeeded 08:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC).

Support

1. Support. A very experienced contributor, helpful towards new users, poised and objective in even when the discussions get heated. --Dirigible 02:04, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
2. Support. Solid contributor, experienced with the sysop tools. Definitely a boon to the wiki. -Auron 02:10, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
3. Support. If it isn't me, it's Gordon ;) Experienced, calm, a user I trust with sysop tools - anja 07:47, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
4. Support. LordBiro 21:32, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
5. Support. As per Auron's comments above. -- ab.er.rant 09:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
6. Support.Should have access to the sysop tools. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 16:48, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
7. Support. One seriously committed guy :) --Snograt 01:36, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
8. Support. See comments above -- Indochine talk 15:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
9. Support No lack of trust. Backsword 11:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

1. ...

Neutral

1. Neutral - this vote may change, I simply haven't had many experiences with the user in question to provide much insight. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 02:06, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
2. Neutral - Same as Aiiane. Vengeance Signet 02:10, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
3. Neutral - I personally haven't seen him on the wiki before. --File:Rein Of Terror-sig.pngRein Of Terror (talk · contributions) 01:28, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Request for Reconfirmation

1. User:Gordon Ecker/Block reviews - in my opinion, showing bad judgement, being easily trolled (and prolonging the trolling of the trolls), and overturning blocks for no good reason. More arguments given at User talk:Gordon Ecker/Block reviews#To be quite honest, you've got it completely backward. In general, I'm having "wtf" moments when viewing Gordon's actions regarding administration (and, in some cases, policy/consensus). -- pling 16:11, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
2. I wasn't sure what to think when Gordon started the reconfirmation project, but ever since then I've seen nothing but bad news. I think admins with different backgrounds and strengths is a good thing, but if a particular sysop is absolutely terrible at dealing with trolls, that sysop is expected to stay away from troll cases. Gordon isn't doing that. Furthermore, Gordon is overturning year-old cases without really reading the discussion going on. Downplaying solid evidence and personal confessions as rumors and hearsay, ignoring built-in wiki features as ways to identify users with malicious intent, and placing way too much faith in the CheckUser extension all make me wary of his continued sysophood. I would prefer he simply realize his mistakes and atone for them, but I don't foresee that happening. -Auron 16:27, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
3. Is there anything else to say? :/ - J.P.Talk 20:50, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
4. I agree. Initially the project was just a waste of time that came from nowhere, but now it's becoming detrimental to the wiki on many different levels (removing bans that should not have been removed, second guessing other sysops, etc). Erasculio 20:56, 4 December 2009 (UTC)