Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/PaxEquilibrium

message: PaxEquilibrium's edit stats using "wannabe Kate" tool as of 00:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

message: Like I said in the comments already. If someone mentions me a single good reason why I should not be an administrator - he/she should do notify me in person of that and I will withdraw the request.
So far I've seen (aside from votestalking and allegations of my *insanity*) the only argument presented (although User:Alabamaboy has noted the edit summaries, however I do not see this enough as explained at his talk page) is the huge incident that happened over my death hoax around a year ago. I need only one b'crat to come to me and notify me that this is why I simply cannot be trusted admin tools (regardless of whether I'm just a victim or the culprit; I'll understand sensible arguments) - and I will pull this nomination. --PaxEquilibrium 07:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bureaucrats judge consensus. There was clearly no consensus - and therefore we cannot promote. Secretlondon 20:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem 

message: OK, so let's see:
* User:Zmaj, User:Ceha and possibly (although not surely) User:Ante Perkovic's votes seem to be invited (the first one for sure, probably the second too), while they (the first and the last) call upon my insanity in their (opposing) votes.
* User:Hipocrite has said that he will (or a bureaucrat, if he doesn't) move his vote to neutral after I assured him that I posses a strong password. 
* 3 Neutral votes have decided to sit and wait before they finally decide whether they support or oppose me. 
** 2, one has just determined for Support. --PaxEquilibrium 07:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Votes 

message: Again a lot of canvassing against an editor who yes has got a POV (we all have), and yes does not keep out of nationalist POV pushing discussions and editing conflicts, and still keeps calm under difficult circumstances. 
So much canvassing, in fact, that some habitual visitors of Requests for Adminship start looking for a reason to vote against. "Gee, this guy is controversial, let's find a stick to hit him with."
With Errabee it was his opinion on Commons that was the stick (never mind that nobody actually believed that he would use his adminship to keep copyright violations on Wikipedia), here it is PaxEquilibrium's lack of comment summaries that is used to thwart him (never mind that precisely because PaxEquilibrium keeps cool during tribal wars he writes a lot on talk pages and many people, like me, do not really think those edits need comment summaries).
It seems like people who get involved in such tribal war discussions have virtually no chance of ever becoming an admin now, though Wikipedia actually needs people who know what the ... it is all about. Never mind that PaxEquilibrium's block log is clean, that Errabee was supported by a Polish editor (not me) and that PaxEquilibrium has people from various quarters in the area who want him to be an admin. Too bad. Too bad. (I write that only twice, because if I wrote it thrice, some nut would find something hidden behind that as well).--Pan Gerwazy 18:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another [[User:Errabee|Errabee]] ...