Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts

2007 Election status

Endlessdan

Voting for me is a vote for straight stone cold chillin. No gimmicks needed. EndlessDan 17:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Support

Don't know what I'm voting for, but stone cold chillin' is gangsta. NO EXPLANATION NEEDED -- Bren202 ( talk) 02:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Bren202 does not have suffrage -- uǝʌǝs ʎʇɹnoɟ ʇs(st47) 23:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  1. Moral Support, for actually wanting to do this. This fellow candidate appriciates your enthusiasm. Wizardman 00:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  2. — trey( wiki) 00:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  3. It was very bold of you to do this, and for that, you get my support. Kwsn (Ni!) 00:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  4. Nice answers to questions. Tim Q. Wells 00:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  5. Quite sincerely, what the arbcom needs. Breath of fresh air. Mart inp23 00:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  6. For actually wanting the hellish job that is arbcom (and not being an ego mad nutjob like some who've wanted it) ... you've got my vote.   ALKIVAR ™ ☢ 00:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  7. east.718 at 00:33, December 3, 2007
  8. I feel like shaking the tables of ArbCom and electing someone more chill than I could ever wish to be. MessedRocker ( talk) ( write these articles) 00:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  9. Yes, makes a mockery of these elections. — Random832 00:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  10. Moral support – Makes these elections less dull. — Animum § 00:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  11. Yamanbaiia 00:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  12. -- U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 00:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  13. Even if you don't get elected, feel free to apply some straight stone cold chillin to editing disputes. Gracenotes T § 00:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Support conditionally. Extended comments moved to talk page. -- Ned Scott 01:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  14. Makes a balance for the serious side and a (nonexistent) funny side. Pre ston H 01:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  15. Moral Support sh ¤ y 01:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  16. -- Docg 01:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  17. Mike H. Celebrating three years of being hotter than Paris 02:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  18. krimpet ⟲ 02:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  19. I did not expect to support. Hús ö nd 02:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  20. *votes for straight stone cold chillin* Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 03:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  21. Videmus Omnia Talk 03:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  22. :) Snowball support for a guaranteed fail, thanks for the stone cold answers to your questions DUDE. -- Cactus.man ✍ 03:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  23. Strangely more with it than many others. Why the hell not? -- Bdj 03:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  24. He'd only be one voice of 15. It'd be nice to laugh at ArbCom every now and then instead of always holding my head and crying; an outsider's perspective (as seen in #3 here) would be valuable. -- JayHenry 03:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  25. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 04:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  26. You appear to be more sensible than some of the other candidates running in this election. Spebi 04:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  27. Moral support. I  dorftrottel I  talk I 05:21,  December 3, 2007
  28. Strong support. Seems very reasonable. RyanGerbil10 (Говорить!) 05:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  29. - Nice enthusiasm. Scarian Talk 08:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  30. Neil  ☎ 10:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Support — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanBealeCocks ( talk • contribs)
    Indented vote. Sorry, but 150 mainspace edits before November 1 are required to vote. —  TKD:: Talk 12:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  31.  Grue  13:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  32. The enlightened take things lightly. the wub "?!" 14:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  33. Indeed they do Wily D 15:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  34. I agree with Kwsn. Acalamari 17:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  35. support -- Rocksanddirt 18:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  36. Moral support OhanaUnited Talk page 18:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  37. Someone this amusing is surely highly intelligent - ergo will make a good arbitrator. Moreschi If you've written a quality article... 18:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  38. Support. I can understand why people are voting to oppose, but can't understand the lack of a sense of humor of some people. MookieZ 19:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  39. Oppose through support of this candidacy.-- Isotope23 talk 20:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  40. Support - fight the Cabal, man! Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 20:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  41. Some people take themselves too seriously. Regards, — Celestianpower háblame 22:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  42. Support- Dureo 23:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  43. Support. Will make reading ArbCom decisions much more enjoyable :) Kaldari 00:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  44. He makes the ArbComm elections not suck. The committee needs diverse points-of-view and humor. Otherwise, it will become a dull and frustrating place. Any bad proposal can be voted down (as they often are) and he has never been mean-spirited. maclean 01:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  45. Support Moral support. Actually, I think making him a clerk could be a good idea if he really wanted to do that. MrMurph101 03:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Support Making Arbcom a joke you say? Well, I think we already have debacles like Allegations of apartheid and Attack sites to thank for that. -- arkalochori |talk| 04:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Blocked indef Secret account 00:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  46. Support I like to chill. Atropos 05:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  47. Support. I love the platform! -- ffroth 05:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  48. Support I love the chutzpah! Xdenizen 05:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  49. Support I vote for third-party candidates occasionally, too. -- Lukobe 08:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  50. Support, just for the attitude. Dan100 ( Talk) 13:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  51. Strong Support. We need ArbCom members from outside the wiki-"establishment", who will be genuinely independent. (This is not a joke, it's actually a serious support.) Walton One 15:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  52. Go for it. — CharlotteWebb 20:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  53. Moral Support ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 20:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    I believe in you Emericanbuddha||talk|
    User does not have the necessary 150 mainspace edits prior to 1st November and as such does not have suffrage. Nick ( talk) 00:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Pass the green cookies and warm milk. SilkTork * SilkyTalk 00:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 04:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  54. Grandmasterka supports the "minor party" candidate! This guy has the philosophical prowess and intestinal fortitude I'm looking for, although I love Eli Manning. ;-) Grand master ka 06:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  55. Support for his adventurous spirit. A much better candidate than some who are making a more conventional run for the position. DGG ( talk) 06:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  56. Support Kyaa the Catlord ( talk) 11:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  57. 举 Ageru! - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 14:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  58. Support Paul Beardsell ( talk) 15:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  59. Support semper fictilis 15:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  60. Support ROFL. Skinwalker ( talk) 18:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  61. Support because Endlessdan opposes - consider your vote neutralized. (can't believe I'm hitting Save Page) .... Keeper | 76 19:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  62. My boy Walton has this one quite right. Joe 21:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  63. Support per User:Secret. His answers to voters' questions put my user subpage to shame.-- The Fat Man Who Never Came Back ( talk) 02:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  64. Moral Support -- Ferkelparade π 17:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  65. Support we need more people like this guy. -- Explodicle ( talk) 18:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  66. Support YES. Everyone loves a court jester, right? Right?? Nobody of Consequence ( talk) 18:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  67. This chilling of the stone cold, it must happen. ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 01:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Redstarsldr ( talk) 02:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC) Good attitude. reply
    User does not have suffrage Nick ( talk) 02:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  68. moral support, as I certainly agree that "on a whole everyone needs to be chill". -- phoebe/( talk) 09:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  69. Support, unlike some others, you don't take yourself too seriously... something that ArbCom needs badly! Lankiveil ( talk) 09:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC). reply
  70. -- My feeling is that a shot of DGAFism may be just what ArbCom needs. This is Wikipedia, not life or death; You get that. -- Ssbohio ( talk) 16:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  71. Support. Outsiders desperately needed. Eliot ( talk) 19:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  72. Support. Yours is the chillin' which will pierce the heavens! -- Gwern (contribs) 21:29 7 December 2007 (GMT)
  73. Support KleenupKrew ( talk) 13:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Word Blahaccountblah ( talk) 17:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    User got caught up in the sock net and, thus, can't vote. Harsh. Blahaccountblah ( talk) 17:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Support -- Jab843 ( talk) 21:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  74. Support, because my stone has been feeling a little warm of late. Ashdog137 ( talk) 02:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  75. Support - I am amazed to see an ArbCom candidate who not only doesn't take himself too seriously, but in fact has a sense of humor! ugen64 ( talk) 06:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  76. Mike R ( talk) 19:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  77. Support with proviso. I'm concerned about the amount of chillin' ArbCom can take. As such, I believe that this election should accept 6 candidates rather than 5, and the stone-cold chair would not posses suffrage lest others' votes be overwhelmed. SnowFire ( talk) 01:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  78. Strong suppoert. Bacchiad ( talk) 04:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  79. Oppose Sorry, but to meet my strict ArbCom voting standards you must have at least 50 edits in the Help talk: namespace and improve your chillin' percentage by 15%. szyslak 09:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  80. Support wbfergus Talk 20:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  81. Support, since SPUI isn't running this year, why not!-- R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) ( talk) 22:44, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Support' [[[maxpower37]]
    Less than 150 mainspace edits Secret account 01:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  82. Support. No gimmicks needed indeed! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 05:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  83. Support Has some strong points. Mrs.EasterBunny ( talk) 17:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  84. straight stone cold chillin support -- Hdt83 Chat 05:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  85. Support merely on the stance that he was smart enough to vote against himself. -- Son ( talk) 23:58, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Oppose

  1. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  2. —  Coren  (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  3. ragesoss 00:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  4. Chaz Beckett 00:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  5. Oppose (my fuller vote explanations) -- Jd2718 00:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  6. No, makes a mockery of this elections This is a Secret account 00:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  7. Definitely not. Rjd0060 00:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  8. Nufy8 00:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  9. futurebird 00:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  10. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  11. – Gurch ( talk) 00:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  12. Hell no. Nick 00:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  13. Good God, no. Qst 00:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  14. Mackensen (talk) 01:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  15. Star dust 8212 01:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  16. Snowolf How can I help? 01:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  17. -- drini [meta:] [commons:] 01:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  18. Oppose -- Avi 01:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  19. Captain panda 01:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  20. I thought this was a joke at first. Absolutely not. -- Core desat 01:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  21. SQL Query me! 02:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  22. Alex fus co5 02:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  23.   M2Ys4U ( talk) 02:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  24. Cryptic 02:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  25. Zocky | picture popups 02:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  26. Rebecca 02:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  27. Oppose Thatcher131 02:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  28. Icestorm815 02:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  29. Zginder ( talk) ( Contrib) 02:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Do not give up on you quest. I just do not think you are ready. reply
  30. Nor will he ever be. ⇒ SWATJester Son of the Defender 03:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  31. Mercury 03:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  32. Glass Cobra 03:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  33. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 03:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  34. KTC 03:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  35. — madman bum and angel 03:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Oppose - Dureo 03:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  36. — xaosflux Talk 04:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  37. — Mira 05:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  38. I appreciate the fresh approach but I don't think you would make a good arbitrator. James086 Talk | Email 06:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  39. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 06:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  40. -- MONGO 06:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  41. - Crockspot 07:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  42. Oppose — does not seems serious. -- Jack Merridew 07:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  43. If you think your nomination was very funny, you're awfully wrong. MaxSem( Han shot first!) 07:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  44. DrKiernan 08:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  45. Who are you? — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 08:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  46. Stone cold no. -- Mcginnly | Natter 10:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  47. —  TKD:: Talk 10:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  48. Are you serious? Stifle ( talk) 11:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  49. I smiled, but sorry, rather have serious candidates elected. -- Stormie 11:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  50. Sorry, but that is not a really good way to show your "motivation and determination" as an arbitrator..not funny..-- Comet styles 12:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  51. Johnbod 12:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  52. Oppose, obviously. Splash - tk 13:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  53. Oppose ArbCom is not a venue for absurdist comedy. Xoloz 13:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  54. Davewild 13:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  55. Addhoc 14:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  56. -- barneca 14:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  57. Endless Dan 14:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Preposterous! This card is not ArbCom material! reply
  58. Oppose as per Stormie. Mindraker 15:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  59. Oppose Waste of time. Rhinoracer 15:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  60. Oppose — Rudget contributions 16:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  61. Not convinced.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 16:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  62. Ral 315 — ( Voting) 16:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  63. Oppose. The last thing Arbcom needs is endless chillin. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  64. Oppose. - JodyB talk 16:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  65. Hate to see such a stone-cold guy go down, but you're getting jobbed! Grab a beer and enjoy. -- Marcsin | Talk 17:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Oppose. Avruch Talk 17:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Avruch does not have suffrage 24.0.64.193 ( talk) 22:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  66. - Philippe | Talk 18:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  67. This candidacy reminds me of Stephen Colbert's failed presidential bid. Scob e ll302 18:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  68. Oppose Ripberger 20:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  69. I get the joke. In other words, Moral support, but Factual oppose. Thanks, Luc "Somethingorother" French 20:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  70. Pagra shtak 20:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  71. Support through opposition to this candidacy.-- Isotope23 talk 20:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  72. Oppose Going commando & drinking Heineken is for lamers. ;-) llywrch 21:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  73. Oppose - doesn't live up to Colbert. -- Schneelocke 21:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  74. Oppose but I enjoyed the humour. Cheers. -- Malcolmxl5 21:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  75. — Ruud 21:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  76. Oppose, come on, fun's fun, but this joke needs to end. Corvus cornix talk 22:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  77. Oppose. -- Pleasantville 22:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  78. No. Not nearly enough experience; 3700 edits and no mop an ArbCom member does not make. NF24( radio me!) 23:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  79. Though I do think ArbCom could use a little more "stone cold chillin"... WjB scribe 23:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  80. Slack statement; did not provide to question about portfolio. — Sebastian 23:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  81. EconomistBR 01:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  82. No. Arbitration has binding consequences; we need serious candidates. Horologium (talk) 01:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  83. Oppose. Yes, we need serious candidates × Meegs 01:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  84. I agree with WP:DGAF but standing for Arbcom as a joke? lol:) Merkinsmum 02:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  85. Oppose. Jonathunder 02:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  86. Jerry 02:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  87. Sephiroth BCR ( Converse) 03:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  88. Enuja (talk) 03:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  89. oppose. Kingturtle 03:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  90. COGDEN 03:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  91. Oppose, unless you can somehow amuse those on the losing side of ArbCom cases. --健次( derumi) talk 03:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  92. Elephant. -- Carnildo 03:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  93. Oppose Greeves ( talk • contribs) 04:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  94. Dekimasu よ! 04:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  95. DarkFalls talk 05:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  96. -- Mbisanz 06:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  97. Oppose -- DHeyward 06:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  98. Oppose, Arbcom isnt a hobby, its a terrible responsibility. John Vandenberg 06:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  99. It's funny only to a certain point. Past that, you risk mocking only yourself. — Kurykh 06:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  100. Oppose, no offense but an arbitrator should be an admin Alex Bakharev 07:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  101. Regretful oppose - though I like your style, that questions page was a laugh I well and truly needed :) Orderinchaos 11:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  102. Oppose: I don't know what kind of stone we'd be chilled to. I don't want to be pumice. Geogre 11:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  103. I was really disappointed by the lack of a plan of action of how to bring the stupid flavor. - Banyan Tree 12:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  104. Oppose Sorry, but stone cold chillin' doesn't do it for me. Cardamon 19:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  105. Oppose -- SECisek 19:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  106. Oppose, while laughing merrily. But in the end, ArbCom is at least moderately serious. Guy ( Help!) 22:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  107. Oppose Needs more cowbell Bfigura ( talk) 23:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  108. Michael Snow ( talk) 23:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    And wear a seat belt when driving dangerously. SilkTork * SilkyTalk 00:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  109. Oppose Haber ( talk) 01:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  110. Oppose. Viriditas 02:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  111. Dude. (And in further explanation: Dude. Duude. Dude. Stone cold dude.) -- AnonEMouse (squeak) 03:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  112. Weakly opposing all but the 10 candidates I'd explicitly like to see on Arbcom to double the power of my vote. -- MPerel 04:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  113. Oppose Didn't offer me beverages. OK, actually, this is not a serious candidacy. Ante lan talk 05:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  114. Oppose, though applaud the candidancy. Professor marginalia ( talk) 07:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  115. Oppose. Wetman ( talk) 08:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  116. Opposition to joke candidacies can be taken for granite. GRBerry 17:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  117. Oppose. Sweetfirsttouch ( talk) 17:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  118. Oppose. Does not mention why this is a strong candidate and treats this a joke. -- Kimon talk 19:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  119. The candidate promises " stone cold chillin", but I'd prefer someone who's not afraid to make use of metals. :) – Black Falcon ( Talk) 01:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  120. Oppose - The arbcom is evil, so any candidate who chooses to participate in it in any manner shows poor judgment. Gentgeen ( talk) 03:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Oppose - Just not enough stone-cold chillin. Frozenbrains ( talk) 04:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    User had fewer than 150 mainspace edits as of 1 November 2007, and thus lacks suffrage ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 04:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  121. Oppose failure to answer key questions, including one important to me. SashaNein ( talk) 04:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  122. Poor taste in beers. Kusma ( talk) 09:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  123. Dessources ( talk) 15:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  124. Oppose nope, nice approach, wrong committee docboat ( talk) 16:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  125. Oppose Terence ( talk) 16:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  126. Samsara ( talk •  contribs) 17:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  127. Oppose not fit for ArbCom based on reply to questions pruthvi ( talk) 20:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  128. Law Lord ( talk) 21:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  129. Oppose. I usually don't mind humor, but come on... there's a time to be funny, and this isn't it. Titoxd( ?!? - cool stuff) 07:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  130. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 16:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  131. Oppose - as per Orderinchaos. Hαvεlok беседа мансарда 19:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  132. Oppose - second batch of voting, adding some opposes. Frivolous candidacy. Got a few laughs though. Carcharoth ( talk) 09:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  133. Oppose( olive ( talk) 00:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)) reply
  134. Oppose for giving Crash a 5. It deserves better. :( — xDanielx T/ C\ R 08:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  135. Oppose Tonywalton  Talk 12:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  136. Oppose Showers ( talk) 02:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  137. Oppose - it's not life or death, but there are some people for whom ArbCom is important. I'd like to see them elected. Warofdreams talk 18:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  138. Oppose Luqman Skye ( talk) 07:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  139. Oppose -- Allen3  talk 16:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  140. Oppose Matt Zero 20:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  141. Oppose -- Pixelface ( talk) 03:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  142. Oppose-- Saudade7 21:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC) - No offense but I read your responses to the questions you were posed and you don't seem capable of answering a question seriously. I want arbitrators to be calm and rational and to take all aspects of the debate/problem into consideration. I don't think "Stone Cold Chillin'"is a valid arbitration skill. reply
  143. Oppose-- There's a time to laugh and a time to chill, to act civilized and act real ill... Come back when you've learned the difference! Eaglizard ( talk) 07:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  144. Oppose per Professor marginalia. K issL 13:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Oppose. You iz not serious candidate, and Arbcom are serious matter. MrVibrating ( talk) 15:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Less than 150 mainspace edits before November 1st, sorry Secret account 01:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  145. Oppose. Has the completely wrong attitude for ArbCom. Arbitration is very serious, and acting in that manner is not appropriate for it. L337 kybldmstr ( talk) 23:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  146. Maxim (talk) 00:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  147. Oppose - the littlest answer to a big issue. Rgds, - Trident13 ( talk) 01:34, 15 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  148. Oppose. Joke candidacy. -- Muchness ( talk) 00:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  149. Oppose. Gen. von Klinkerhoffen ( talk) 01:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  150. No purpose except winning. - Pika ten10 ( talk) 06:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  151. Oppose Karl2620 ( talk) 11:00, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  152. Oppose. -- JWSchmidt ( talk) 19:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  153. Oppose -- Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  154. Oppose Alex Pankratov ( talk) 21:39, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  155. -- Aqwis ( talk – contributions) 22:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  156. Strong Oppose Try not to act silly. -BlueAmethyst .:*:. ( talk) 23:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  157. Oppose Midorihana (talk) (contribs) 23:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  158. Oppose. Sam Blacketer ( talk) 23:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Moo

  1. Some questions cannot be answered. >Radiant< 17:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  2. Couldn't have said it better myself, Radiant. - Chardish ( talk) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  3. Seriously. -- Fang Aili talk 21:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  4. Ditto. Dreadstar † 22:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  5. The d00d's got bull sized balls for staying in this long. so.. Moo. or Mu. Whichever. ++ Lar: t/ c 04:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  6. I'm tempted to support, if for nothing than to see a remedy to the effect of " User:Someoneoranother is reminded to chill out. Like, seriously." Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    I would love to see that applied as a remedy. It would make ArbCom more fun. ♠ P M C♠ 22:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  7. If I were to support any candidate, it would be you. But I ain't, so I won't. Good luck though. Leith p 13:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    C'mon, mate...you know you want to:)-- R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) ( talk) 22:46, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  8. I like pie. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  9. :{} Fainites barley 23:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  10. Per Radiant!. This candidacy is impossible to support --- though I want to. It is also impossible to oppose though I feel an obligation to do so. -- Blue Tie ( talk) 16:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  11. My coin spun swiftly / over and over again / landing on its edge --- Sluzzelin talk 20:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Meow

  1. - Jehochman Talk 16:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  2. Drama is good, yes? Homestarmy ( talk) 17:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  3. Straight stone cold chillin? On my Arbcom election? It's more likely than you think. Shem (talk) 07:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  4. Meow - there's really no other sensible vote here. -- Hyperbole ( talk) 06:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  5. ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 16:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  6. Precisely. -- \/\/slack ( talk) 03:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  7. Bearian ( talk) 19:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  8. Risker ( talk) 05:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC). I am afraid Xolox is incorrect, Arbcom could very well be considered absurdist comedy on some days. reply

Rawr!

  1. Where's Bishzilla? Miranda 01:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  2. 'Zilla can only count to hrair, but probably not 150 mainspace edits. :-( Unless extra good vandalism edits count double. Then support little Dan. Down with editcountitis! bishzilla ROARR!! 08:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC). reply

Chihuahua

Put some more cheese sauce on that chalupa!
  1. We don't need a Roast Beef au Jus, we need a cheese chalupa. Put some more cheese sauce on that chalupa or else! Pocopocopocopoco ( talk) 04:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Braiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiins

  1. Braiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiins. DS ( talk) 23:23, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2007/Vote/Endlessdan&oldid=1147978952"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts

2007 Election status

Endlessdan

Voting for me is a vote for straight stone cold chillin. No gimmicks needed. EndlessDan 17:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC) reply

Support

Don't know what I'm voting for, but stone cold chillin' is gangsta. NO EXPLANATION NEEDED -- Bren202 ( talk) 02:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Bren202 does not have suffrage -- uǝʌǝs ʎʇɹnoɟ ʇs(st47) 23:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  1. Moral Support, for actually wanting to do this. This fellow candidate appriciates your enthusiasm. Wizardman 00:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  2. — trey( wiki) 00:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  3. It was very bold of you to do this, and for that, you get my support. Kwsn (Ni!) 00:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  4. Nice answers to questions. Tim Q. Wells 00:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  5. Quite sincerely, what the arbcom needs. Breath of fresh air. Mart inp23 00:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  6. For actually wanting the hellish job that is arbcom (and not being an ego mad nutjob like some who've wanted it) ... you've got my vote.   ALKIVAR ™ ☢ 00:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  7. east.718 at 00:33, December 3, 2007
  8. I feel like shaking the tables of ArbCom and electing someone more chill than I could ever wish to be. MessedRocker ( talk) ( write these articles) 00:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  9. Yes, makes a mockery of these elections. — Random832 00:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  10. Moral support – Makes these elections less dull. — Animum § 00:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  11. Yamanbaiia 00:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  12. -- U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 00:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  13. Even if you don't get elected, feel free to apply some straight stone cold chillin to editing disputes. Gracenotes T § 00:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Support conditionally. Extended comments moved to talk page. -- Ned Scott 01:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  14. Makes a balance for the serious side and a (nonexistent) funny side. Pre ston H 01:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  15. Moral Support sh ¤ y 01:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  16. -- Docg 01:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  17. Mike H. Celebrating three years of being hotter than Paris 02:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  18. krimpet ⟲ 02:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  19. I did not expect to support. Hús ö nd 02:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  20. *votes for straight stone cold chillin* Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 03:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  21. Videmus Omnia Talk 03:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  22. :) Snowball support for a guaranteed fail, thanks for the stone cold answers to your questions DUDE. -- Cactus.man ✍ 03:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  23. Strangely more with it than many others. Why the hell not? -- Bdj 03:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  24. He'd only be one voice of 15. It'd be nice to laugh at ArbCom every now and then instead of always holding my head and crying; an outsider's perspective (as seen in #3 here) would be valuable. -- JayHenry 03:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  25. -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 04:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  26. You appear to be more sensible than some of the other candidates running in this election. Spebi 04:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  27. Moral support. I  dorftrottel I  talk I 05:21,  December 3, 2007
  28. Strong support. Seems very reasonable. RyanGerbil10 (Говорить!) 05:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  29. - Nice enthusiasm. Scarian Talk 08:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  30. Neil  ☎ 10:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Support — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanBealeCocks ( talk • contribs)
    Indented vote. Sorry, but 150 mainspace edits before November 1 are required to vote. —  TKD:: Talk 12:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  31.  Grue  13:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  32. The enlightened take things lightly. the wub "?!" 14:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  33. Indeed they do Wily D 15:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  34. I agree with Kwsn. Acalamari 17:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  35. support -- Rocksanddirt 18:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  36. Moral support OhanaUnited Talk page 18:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  37. Someone this amusing is surely highly intelligent - ergo will make a good arbitrator. Moreschi If you've written a quality article... 18:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  38. Support. I can understand why people are voting to oppose, but can't understand the lack of a sense of humor of some people. MookieZ 19:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  39. Oppose through support of this candidacy.-- Isotope23 talk 20:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  40. Support - fight the Cabal, man! Darkson (Yabba Dabba Doo!) 20:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  41. Some people take themselves too seriously. Regards, — Celestianpower háblame 22:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  42. Support- Dureo 23:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  43. Support. Will make reading ArbCom decisions much more enjoyable :) Kaldari 00:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  44. He makes the ArbComm elections not suck. The committee needs diverse points-of-view and humor. Otherwise, it will become a dull and frustrating place. Any bad proposal can be voted down (as they often are) and he has never been mean-spirited. maclean 01:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  45. Support Moral support. Actually, I think making him a clerk could be a good idea if he really wanted to do that. MrMurph101 03:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Support Making Arbcom a joke you say? Well, I think we already have debacles like Allegations of apartheid and Attack sites to thank for that. -- arkalochori |talk| 04:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Blocked indef Secret account 00:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  46. Support I like to chill. Atropos 05:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  47. Support. I love the platform! -- ffroth 05:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  48. Support I love the chutzpah! Xdenizen 05:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  49. Support I vote for third-party candidates occasionally, too. -- Lukobe 08:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  50. Support, just for the attitude. Dan100 ( Talk) 13:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  51. Strong Support. We need ArbCom members from outside the wiki-"establishment", who will be genuinely independent. (This is not a joke, it's actually a serious support.) Walton One 15:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  52. Go for it. — CharlotteWebb 20:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  53. Moral Support ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 20:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    I believe in you Emericanbuddha||talk|
    User does not have the necessary 150 mainspace edits prior to 1st November and as such does not have suffrage. Nick ( talk) 00:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Pass the green cookies and warm milk. SilkTork * SilkyTalk 00:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 04:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  54. Grandmasterka supports the "minor party" candidate! This guy has the philosophical prowess and intestinal fortitude I'm looking for, although I love Eli Manning. ;-) Grand master ka 06:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  55. Support for his adventurous spirit. A much better candidate than some who are making a more conventional run for the position. DGG ( talk) 06:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  56. Support Kyaa the Catlord ( talk) 11:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  57. 举 Ageru! - Mailer Diablo ( talk) 14:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  58. Support Paul Beardsell ( talk) 15:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  59. Support semper fictilis 15:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  60. Support ROFL. Skinwalker ( talk) 18:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  61. Support because Endlessdan opposes - consider your vote neutralized. (can't believe I'm hitting Save Page) .... Keeper | 76 19:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  62. My boy Walton has this one quite right. Joe 21:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  63. Support per User:Secret. His answers to voters' questions put my user subpage to shame.-- The Fat Man Who Never Came Back ( talk) 02:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  64. Moral Support -- Ferkelparade π 17:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  65. Support we need more people like this guy. -- Explodicle ( talk) 18:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  66. Support YES. Everyone loves a court jester, right? Right?? Nobody of Consequence ( talk) 18:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  67. This chilling of the stone cold, it must happen. ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 01:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Redstarsldr ( talk) 02:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC) Good attitude. reply
    User does not have suffrage Nick ( talk) 02:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  68. moral support, as I certainly agree that "on a whole everyone needs to be chill". -- phoebe/( talk) 09:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  69. Support, unlike some others, you don't take yourself too seriously... something that ArbCom needs badly! Lankiveil ( talk) 09:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC). reply
  70. -- My feeling is that a shot of DGAFism may be just what ArbCom needs. This is Wikipedia, not life or death; You get that. -- Ssbohio ( talk) 16:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  71. Support. Outsiders desperately needed. Eliot ( talk) 19:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  72. Support. Yours is the chillin' which will pierce the heavens! -- Gwern (contribs) 21:29 7 December 2007 (GMT)
  73. Support KleenupKrew ( talk) 13:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Word Blahaccountblah ( talk) 17:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    User got caught up in the sock net and, thus, can't vote. Harsh. Blahaccountblah ( talk) 17:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Support -- Jab843 ( talk) 21:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  74. Support, because my stone has been feeling a little warm of late. Ashdog137 ( talk) 02:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  75. Support - I am amazed to see an ArbCom candidate who not only doesn't take himself too seriously, but in fact has a sense of humor! ugen64 ( talk) 06:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  76. Mike R ( talk) 19:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  77. Support with proviso. I'm concerned about the amount of chillin' ArbCom can take. As such, I believe that this election should accept 6 candidates rather than 5, and the stone-cold chair would not posses suffrage lest others' votes be overwhelmed. SnowFire ( talk) 01:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  78. Strong suppoert. Bacchiad ( talk) 04:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  79. Oppose Sorry, but to meet my strict ArbCom voting standards you must have at least 50 edits in the Help talk: namespace and improve your chillin' percentage by 15%. szyslak 09:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  80. Support wbfergus Talk 20:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  81. Support, since SPUI isn't running this year, why not!-- R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) ( talk) 22:44, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Support' [[[maxpower37]]
    Less than 150 mainspace edits Secret account 01:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  82. Support. No gimmicks needed indeed! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 05:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  83. Support Has some strong points. Mrs.EasterBunny ( talk) 17:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  84. straight stone cold chillin support -- Hdt83 Chat 05:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  85. Support merely on the stance that he was smart enough to vote against himself. -- Son ( talk) 23:58, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Oppose

  1. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  2. —  Coren  (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  3. ragesoss 00:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  4. Chaz Beckett 00:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  5. Oppose (my fuller vote explanations) -- Jd2718 00:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  6. No, makes a mockery of this elections This is a Secret account 00:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  7. Definitely not. Rjd0060 00:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  8. Nufy8 00:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  9. futurebird 00:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  10. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  11. – Gurch ( talk) 00:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  12. Hell no. Nick 00:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  13. Good God, no. Qst 00:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  14. Mackensen (talk) 01:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  15. Star dust 8212 01:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  16. Snowolf How can I help? 01:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  17. -- drini [meta:] [commons:] 01:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  18. Oppose -- Avi 01:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  19. Captain panda 01:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  20. I thought this was a joke at first. Absolutely not. -- Core desat 01:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  21. SQL Query me! 02:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  22. Alex fus co5 02:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  23.   M2Ys4U ( talk) 02:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  24. Cryptic 02:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  25. Zocky | picture popups 02:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  26. Rebecca 02:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  27. Oppose Thatcher131 02:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  28. Icestorm815 02:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  29. Zginder ( talk) ( Contrib) 02:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Do not give up on you quest. I just do not think you are ready. reply
  30. Nor will he ever be. ⇒ SWATJester Son of the Defender 03:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  31. Mercury 03:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  32. Glass Cobra 03:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  33. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 03:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  34. KTC 03:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  35. — madman bum and angel 03:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Oppose - Dureo 03:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  36. — xaosflux Talk 04:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  37. — Mira 05:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  38. I appreciate the fresh approach but I don't think you would make a good arbitrator. James086 Talk | Email 06:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  39. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 06:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  40. -- MONGO 06:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  41. - Crockspot 07:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  42. Oppose — does not seems serious. -- Jack Merridew 07:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  43. If you think your nomination was very funny, you're awfully wrong. MaxSem( Han shot first!) 07:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  44. DrKiernan 08:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  45. Who are you? — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 08:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  46. Stone cold no. -- Mcginnly | Natter 10:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  47. —  TKD:: Talk 10:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  48. Are you serious? Stifle ( talk) 11:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  49. I smiled, but sorry, rather have serious candidates elected. -- Stormie 11:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  50. Sorry, but that is not a really good way to show your "motivation and determination" as an arbitrator..not funny..-- Comet styles 12:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  51. Johnbod 12:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  52. Oppose, obviously. Splash - tk 13:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  53. Oppose ArbCom is not a venue for absurdist comedy. Xoloz 13:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  54. Davewild 13:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  55. Addhoc 14:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  56. -- barneca 14:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  57. Endless Dan 14:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Preposterous! This card is not ArbCom material! reply
  58. Oppose as per Stormie. Mindraker 15:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  59. Oppose Waste of time. Rhinoracer 15:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  60. Oppose — Rudget contributions 16:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  61. Not convinced.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 16:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  62. Ral 315 — ( Voting) 16:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  63. Oppose. The last thing Arbcom needs is endless chillin. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  64. Oppose. - JodyB talk 16:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  65. Hate to see such a stone-cold guy go down, but you're getting jobbed! Grab a beer and enjoy. -- Marcsin | Talk 17:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Oppose. Avruch Talk 17:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Avruch does not have suffrage 24.0.64.193 ( talk) 22:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  66. - Philippe | Talk 18:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  67. This candidacy reminds me of Stephen Colbert's failed presidential bid. Scob e ll302 18:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  68. Oppose Ripberger 20:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  69. I get the joke. In other words, Moral support, but Factual oppose. Thanks, Luc "Somethingorother" French 20:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  70. Pagra shtak 20:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  71. Support through opposition to this candidacy.-- Isotope23 talk 20:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  72. Oppose Going commando & drinking Heineken is for lamers. ;-) llywrch 21:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  73. Oppose - doesn't live up to Colbert. -- Schneelocke 21:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  74. Oppose but I enjoyed the humour. Cheers. -- Malcolmxl5 21:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  75. — Ruud 21:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  76. Oppose, come on, fun's fun, but this joke needs to end. Corvus cornix talk 22:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  77. Oppose. -- Pleasantville 22:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  78. No. Not nearly enough experience; 3700 edits and no mop an ArbCom member does not make. NF24( radio me!) 23:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  79. Though I do think ArbCom could use a little more "stone cold chillin"... WjB scribe 23:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  80. Slack statement; did not provide to question about portfolio. — Sebastian 23:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  81. EconomistBR 01:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  82. No. Arbitration has binding consequences; we need serious candidates. Horologium (talk) 01:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  83. Oppose. Yes, we need serious candidates × Meegs 01:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  84. I agree with WP:DGAF but standing for Arbcom as a joke? lol:) Merkinsmum 02:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  85. Oppose. Jonathunder 02:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  86. Jerry 02:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  87. Sephiroth BCR ( Converse) 03:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  88. Enuja (talk) 03:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  89. oppose. Kingturtle 03:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  90. COGDEN 03:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  91. Oppose, unless you can somehow amuse those on the losing side of ArbCom cases. --健次( derumi) talk 03:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  92. Elephant. -- Carnildo 03:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  93. Oppose Greeves ( talk • contribs) 04:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  94. Dekimasu よ! 04:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  95. DarkFalls talk 05:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  96. -- Mbisanz 06:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  97. Oppose -- DHeyward 06:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  98. Oppose, Arbcom isnt a hobby, its a terrible responsibility. John Vandenberg 06:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  99. It's funny only to a certain point. Past that, you risk mocking only yourself. — Kurykh 06:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  100. Oppose, no offense but an arbitrator should be an admin Alex Bakharev 07:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  101. Regretful oppose - though I like your style, that questions page was a laugh I well and truly needed :) Orderinchaos 11:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  102. Oppose: I don't know what kind of stone we'd be chilled to. I don't want to be pumice. Geogre 11:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  103. I was really disappointed by the lack of a plan of action of how to bring the stupid flavor. - Banyan Tree 12:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  104. Oppose Sorry, but stone cold chillin' doesn't do it for me. Cardamon 19:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  105. Oppose -- SECisek 19:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  106. Oppose, while laughing merrily. But in the end, ArbCom is at least moderately serious. Guy ( Help!) 22:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  107. Oppose Needs more cowbell Bfigura ( talk) 23:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  108. Michael Snow ( talk) 23:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    And wear a seat belt when driving dangerously. SilkTork * SilkyTalk 00:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  109. Oppose Haber ( talk) 01:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  110. Oppose. Viriditas 02:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  111. Dude. (And in further explanation: Dude. Duude. Dude. Stone cold dude.) -- AnonEMouse (squeak) 03:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  112. Weakly opposing all but the 10 candidates I'd explicitly like to see on Arbcom to double the power of my vote. -- MPerel 04:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  113. Oppose Didn't offer me beverages. OK, actually, this is not a serious candidacy. Ante lan talk 05:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  114. Oppose, though applaud the candidancy. Professor marginalia ( talk) 07:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  115. Oppose. Wetman ( talk) 08:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  116. Opposition to joke candidacies can be taken for granite. GRBerry 17:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  117. Oppose. Sweetfirsttouch ( talk) 17:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  118. Oppose. Does not mention why this is a strong candidate and treats this a joke. -- Kimon talk 19:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  119. The candidate promises " stone cold chillin", but I'd prefer someone who's not afraid to make use of metals. :) – Black Falcon ( Talk) 01:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  120. Oppose - The arbcom is evil, so any candidate who chooses to participate in it in any manner shows poor judgment. Gentgeen ( talk) 03:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Oppose - Just not enough stone-cold chillin. Frozenbrains ( talk) 04:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    User had fewer than 150 mainspace edits as of 1 November 2007, and thus lacks suffrage ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 04:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  121. Oppose failure to answer key questions, including one important to me. SashaNein ( talk) 04:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  122. Poor taste in beers. Kusma ( talk) 09:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  123. Dessources ( talk) 15:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  124. Oppose nope, nice approach, wrong committee docboat ( talk) 16:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  125. Oppose Terence ( talk) 16:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  126. Samsara ( talk •  contribs) 17:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  127. Oppose not fit for ArbCom based on reply to questions pruthvi ( talk) 20:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  128. Law Lord ( talk) 21:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  129. Oppose. I usually don't mind humor, but come on... there's a time to be funny, and this isn't it. Titoxd( ?!? - cool stuff) 07:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  130. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 16:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  131. Oppose - as per Orderinchaos. Hαvεlok беседа мансарда 19:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  132. Oppose - second batch of voting, adding some opposes. Frivolous candidacy. Got a few laughs though. Carcharoth ( talk) 09:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  133. Oppose( olive ( talk) 00:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)) reply
  134. Oppose for giving Crash a 5. It deserves better. :( — xDanielx T/ C\ R 08:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  135. Oppose Tonywalton  Talk 12:45, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  136. Oppose Showers ( talk) 02:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  137. Oppose - it's not life or death, but there are some people for whom ArbCom is important. I'd like to see them elected. Warofdreams talk 18:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  138. Oppose Luqman Skye ( talk) 07:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  139. Oppose -- Allen3  talk 16:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  140. Oppose Matt Zero 20:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  141. Oppose -- Pixelface ( talk) 03:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  142. Oppose-- Saudade7 21:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC) - No offense but I read your responses to the questions you were posed and you don't seem capable of answering a question seriously. I want arbitrators to be calm and rational and to take all aspects of the debate/problem into consideration. I don't think "Stone Cold Chillin'"is a valid arbitration skill. reply
  143. Oppose-- There's a time to laugh and a time to chill, to act civilized and act real ill... Come back when you've learned the difference! Eaglizard ( talk) 07:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  144. Oppose per Professor marginalia. K issL 13:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Oppose. You iz not serious candidate, and Arbcom are serious matter. MrVibrating ( talk) 15:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    Less than 150 mainspace edits before November 1st, sorry Secret account 01:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  145. Oppose. Has the completely wrong attitude for ArbCom. Arbitration is very serious, and acting in that manner is not appropriate for it. L337 kybldmstr ( talk) 23:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  146. Maxim (talk) 00:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  147. Oppose - the littlest answer to a big issue. Rgds, - Trident13 ( talk) 01:34, 15 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  148. Oppose. Joke candidacy. -- Muchness ( talk) 00:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  149. Oppose. Gen. von Klinkerhoffen ( talk) 01:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  150. No purpose except winning. - Pika ten10 ( talk) 06:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  151. Oppose Karl2620 ( talk) 11:00, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  152. Oppose. -- JWSchmidt ( talk) 19:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  153. Oppose -- Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  154. Oppose Alex Pankratov ( talk) 21:39, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  155. -- Aqwis ( talk – contributions) 22:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  156. Strong Oppose Try not to act silly. -BlueAmethyst .:*:. ( talk) 23:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  157. Oppose Midorihana (talk) (contribs) 23:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  158. Oppose. Sam Blacketer ( talk) 23:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Moo

  1. Some questions cannot be answered. >Radiant< 17:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  2. Couldn't have said it better myself, Radiant. - Chardish ( talk) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  3. Seriously. -- Fang Aili talk 21:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  4. Ditto. Dreadstar † 22:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  5. The d00d's got bull sized balls for staying in this long. so.. Moo. or Mu. Whichever. ++ Lar: t/ c 04:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  6. I'm tempted to support, if for nothing than to see a remedy to the effect of " User:Someoneoranother is reminded to chill out. Like, seriously." Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    I would love to see that applied as a remedy. It would make ArbCom more fun. ♠ P M C♠ 22:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  7. If I were to support any candidate, it would be you. But I ain't, so I won't. Good luck though. Leith p 13:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
    C'mon, mate...you know you want to:)-- R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) ( talk) 22:46, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  8. I like pie. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  9. :{} Fainites barley 23:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  10. Per Radiant!. This candidacy is impossible to support --- though I want to. It is also impossible to oppose though I feel an obligation to do so. -- Blue Tie ( talk) 16:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  11. My coin spun swiftly / over and over again / landing on its edge --- Sluzzelin talk 20:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Meow

  1. - Jehochman Talk 16:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  2. Drama is good, yes? Homestarmy ( talk) 17:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  3. Straight stone cold chillin? On my Arbcom election? It's more likely than you think. Shem (talk) 07:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  4. Meow - there's really no other sensible vote here. -- Hyperbole ( talk) 06:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  5. ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 16:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  6. Precisely. -- \/\/slack ( talk) 03:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  7. Bearian ( talk) 19:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  8. Risker ( talk) 05:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC). I am afraid Xolox is incorrect, Arbcom could very well be considered absurdist comedy on some days. reply

Rawr!

  1. Where's Bishzilla? Miranda 01:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC) reply
  2. 'Zilla can only count to hrair, but probably not 150 mainspace edits. :-( Unless extra good vandalism edits count double. Then support little Dan. Down with editcountitis! bishzilla ROARR!! 08:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC). reply

Chihuahua

Put some more cheese sauce on that chalupa!
  1. We don't need a Roast Beef au Jus, we need a cheese chalupa. Put some more cheese sauce on that chalupa or else! Pocopocopocopoco ( talk) 04:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Braiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiins

  1. Braiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiins. DS ( talk) 23:23, 16 December 2007 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2007/Vote/Endlessdan&oldid=1147978952"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE