Greetings. I'm Merovingian. I've been a Wikipedian since November 2003 and an administrator since March 2004. That doesn't really matter, though. Wikipedia has changed immensely since I joined, and the key to its prosperity is only more change. As the community has grown and diversified, the need for binding solutions has grown, too. The Arbitration Committee is dedicated to finding and developing these solutions.

Certainly, the committee has been a mixed blessing. While it has solved many disputes, it has been plagued by a backlog of cases and too much unimportant arguing. Usually, a fairly simple disagreement escalates, and the committee spends too much time picking through longwinded rants. An enlargement of the Arbitration Committee of just three could very well move cases through much more quickly.

I believe that I can help. During my time at Wikipedia, I have tried my very best to adhere to the projects tenets of honesty, good faith, and neutrality. All three are important features to be found in an arbitrator. If elected, I will maintain a high level of participation; the committee’s progress has been hindered by inactive members and resignations. I care about this project too much to give up. If elected, I will act with fairness to all involved parties, and conduct my work with the other arbitrators in the open. If elected, I will keep my personal views out of all cases, as I have tried to do when writing articles.

I welcome questions, comments, or criticisms.

Questions

1. Haukur 00:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
2. Support. See my voting rationale. Talrias ( t | e | c) 00:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
3. -- Ancheta Wis 00:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
4. -- a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 00:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
5. -- Sean| Bla ck 00:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
6. Support. – Quadell ^{( talk) ( bounties)} 00:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
7. – ugen64 00:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
8. — Kirill Lok s hin 00:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
9. DarthVader 00:23, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
10. Support -- PRueda29 / ^Ptalk29 / ^Pcontribs29 00:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
11. Support. -- GraemeL ^(talk) 00:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
12. The Land 00:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
13. -- Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 00:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
14. Raven4x4x 00:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
15. Support. User:Zoe| ^(talk) 00:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
16. Support. Your ideas about policy are very interesting. Batmanand 01:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
17. JYolkowski // talk 01:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
18. Support. -- Миборовский ^{U| T| C| M| E| Chugoku Banzai!} 01:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
19. Support. - EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 01:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
20. Support-- Duk 01:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    Support Pintele Yid 22:35, 13 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    User did not have 150 edits as of 00:01 January 9, so may not have suffrage. (Bringing this matter up on the talk page, since if including January 9, user has more than 150 edits.) Flcelloguy ( A note?) 23:09, 13 January 2006 (UTC) reply

21. Support -- SusanLarson ^{( User Talk, New talk, Contribs)} 01:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
22. Why the hell not? Johnleemk | Talk 02:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
23. Support Croat Canuck 02:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    Support -- Dogbreathcanada 02:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    • Dogbreathcanada does not have suffrage; his first edit was at 19:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC) and he had only 144 edits as of 00:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC). — Cryptic (talk) 04:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

24. Support -- Arwel ( talk) 02:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
25. Support rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 02:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
26. Support -- Palpatine 02:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
27. Support. Seems youthfully idealistic.-- ragesoss 03:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
28. Support. - Mys e kurity 03:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
29. Support Wile E. Heresiarch 04:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
30. Fine Broken S 04:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
31. Support Crotalus horridus ( TALK • CONTRIBS) 04:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
32. — Charles P.  (Mirv) 04:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
33. Support freestylefrappe 04:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
34. uh-huh Grutness... wha? 04:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
35. Support -- cj | talk 05:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
36. Support Chick Bowen 05:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
37. Support. android 79 06:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
38. Support — Catherine\ ^talk 06:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
39. Support. -- Angr ( tɔk) 06:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
40. Support. jni 07:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
41. Support -- Wetman 07:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
42. Support — Locke Cole • t • c 07:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
43. Support Donar Reiskoffer 07:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
44. Support. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
45. Support -- Mihai - ^talk 08:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
46. Support Djnjwd 08:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
47. Support why? ++ Lar: t/ c 09:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
48. Support - Ban e s 09:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
49. Support -- Urthogie 10:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
50. Support - Szvest 10:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC) ^{Wiki me up™} reply
51. Support -- Deepak| वार्ता 10:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
52. Support -- Nick Boalch ^?!? 11:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
53. Support -- Meursault2004 11:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
54. Support Martin 12:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
55. Support -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
56. Support. Wizzy… ☎ 12:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
57. — Nightstallion (?) 12:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
58. Support been aware of Mero since he founded AIW. Would be a good candidate.   ALKIVAR ™ 13:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
59. Support Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
60. Support mint-choc chip ice cream. -- Cel e stianpower ^háblame 13:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
61. Support Brookie :) - a collector of little round things! ^(Talk!) 13:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
62. Support per Quadell. Tom e r ^talk 13:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
63. Support.  Grue  13:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
64. Support would bea trustworthy and excellent member. We'd be missing out if we didn't elect him. Gator (talk) 14:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
65. Support. the wub "?!" ^{RFR - a good idea?}
66. Support -- kingboyk 15:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
67. Support --  Alfakim --  talk  15:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
68. Support Gryffindor 16:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
69. Rock solid support.— Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 16:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
70. Support dab (ᛏ) 17:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
71. Support -- Ferkelparade π 17:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
72. Support -- Rhion 18:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
73. Support — Eoghanacht ^talk 18:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
74. Support Question. Xoloz 18:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
75. Support. Terra Green 20:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
76. Support Absolutely. — BorgHunter ( talk) 20:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
77. Support. — Quarl ^{( talk)} 2006-01-09 20:28 Z
78. Support. Candidate statement is ideal definition of what an Arbcom member should aspire to. ➨ ❝ R E DVERS ❞ 22:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
79. Support Sceptr e ^{( Talk)} 22:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
80. Support Daniel11
81. Support. Opposing votes don't convince me at all. -- Ghirla | talk 23:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
82. Support. Wally 00:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
83. Support. Bishonen | talk 00:49, 10 January 2006 (UTC). reply
84. support BL kiss the lizard 01:23, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
85. Support Maltmomma ^(chat) 01:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
86. Support for belief that IAR is largely inapplicable to admin actions. — Simetrical ( talk •  contribs) 02:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
87. Support – Abe Dashiell ^{( t/ c)} 05:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
88. Support -- Delirium 10:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
89. Support -- Neigel von Teighen 13:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
90. Support -- Reflex Reaction ( talk)• 16:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
91. Support, and damn the agecountitis. Ral315 (talk) 19:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
92. Support. Need a bit more of this fellow. Lincher 20:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
93. Support. Seems good. -- G Rutter 20:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
94. Support David Hoag 01:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
95. Support (Note: Vote only reflects suitability of candidate to the role, and does not reflect overall contributions or personally.) - Mailer Diablo 01:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
96. Support-- MONGO 04:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
97. Support Segv11 ^{( talk/ contribs)} 06:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
98. Support -- Woggly 08:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
99. -- Bhadani 09:45, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
100. Support-- R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 11:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
101. Support veteran __earth 11:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
102. I think my vote should count as I registered in August under User:Arnie587 but lost my password. Arniep 18:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply

     Support Arniep 14:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply

     • Arniep does not have suffrage; he registered at 19:07, 7 October 2005 (UTC). ( caveats) — Cryptic (talk) 15:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
       • Reinstated vote, a constructive user shouldnt be denied vote due to losing a password. For the record Arniep has 4310 total edits + Arnie587 had 1262 total edits, for a combined total of 5572 edits and a first edit date of F2005-08-08 00:38:43.   ALKIVAR ™ 12:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply

103. Tony Sidaway| Talk 15:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
104. Support. – BCorr| Брайен 17:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
105. - Vote Signed By: Chazz- Place comments here
106. Support. BD2412 T 21:55, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
107. Support. Experienced and civil. Zocky
108. Support Dr. B 17:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
109. Support – AB C D ^e ✉ 18:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
110. Support Job e 6 19:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
111. Support - experienced, constructive criticism of ArbCom. -- NorkNork 21:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
112. Support --  Guðsþegn –  U T C E – 05:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC) reply
113. Support - Liberatore( T) 12:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC) reply
114. Support. Thryduulf 21:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC) reply
115. Support, a user whom I trust in this position -- Francs 2000 23:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC) reply
116. Support —the preceding unsigned comment is by Rohirok ( talk •  contribs) 02:28, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
117. Support Ruy Lopez 05:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
118. Strong Support Merovingian is one of five editors whom I originally chose to observe when I was studying how to effectively, efficiently, and fairly contribute to Wikipedia. He continues to impress me. If I could vote twice here, I would do so.→ P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 08:53, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
119. Support Good Chap -- Mononoke 10:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
120. Support. User:Noisy | Talk 12:45, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
121. Support. from what I saw of his contribs, they looked good —the preceding unsigned comment is by Lee S. Svoboda ( talk •  contribs) 17:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
122. Support Tom Harrison ^Talk 18:41, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
123. Support Mr. Know-It-All 22:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
124. Support. *drew 03:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
125. Support. ( SEWilco 03:42, 15 January 2006 (UTC)) reply
126. Support. Chooserr 05:06, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
127. Support. But please don't feel bound by precedents of the Arbcom (as per Bill of Rights). -- Adrian Buehlmann 12:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
128. support Kingturtle 21:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
129. support Daniel Quinlan 22:10, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
130. Support. Neutrality ^talk 22:16, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
131. Support; As above. -- Дрakюлa ^Talk 07:07, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply
132. Support. -- WB 12:22, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply
133. Support - David Gerard 16:22, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply
134. Support. Youngamerican 18:05, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply
135. Support. — Lowellian ( reply) 19:02, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply
136. Support. | Klaw ¡digame! 21:52, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply
137. Support — Phil | Talk 10:47, 17 January 2006 (UTC) reply
138. Support. PedanticallySpeaking 16:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC) reply
139. Support Tuohirulla 23:11, 18 January 2006 (UTC) reply
140. support -- Astrokey44| talk 05:01, 19 January 2006 (UTC) reply
141. Support -- Loopy ^e 05:29, 19 January 2006 (UTC) reply
142. Support. The Singing Badger 02:04, 20 January 2006 (UTC) reply
143. Support jnothman ^talk 03:42, 20 January 2006 (UTC) reply
144. Support Secretlondon 16:12, 20 January 2006 (UTC) reply
145. Support wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 20:42, 20 January 2006 (UTC) reply
146. Support Someones life 23:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC) reply
147. Support. Deb 10:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC) reply
148. Support, sounds good, same age. Though something's nagging me, don't know what. -- AySz88^ - ^ 04:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply
149. Support ~ leif ☺ _{( talk)} 04:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply
150. Support I like his "Move the Goods" aproach Carptrash 05:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply
151. Of course. Mero will make a great Arbitrator. Very good man. encephalon 19:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply
152. Support Alex43223 20:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply
153. Cheerful support. +sj + 22:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply

1. Michael Snow 00:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
2. Zach ^{(Smack Back) Fair use policy} 00:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
3. User seems to nice for the job. RfA votes too lenient imo. Voice of All ^{T| @| ESP} 00:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
4. Oppose inexperience. David | explanation | Talk 00:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
5. Oppose. Ambi 00:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
6. Cryptic (talk) 00:28, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
7. Oppose. Carbonite | Talk 01:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
8. -- Run e Welsh | ταλκ 01:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
9. Oppose -- Angelo 01:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
10. Oppose -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
11. Oppose — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 02:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
12. Oppose -- Dlyons493 Talk 02:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
13. Oppose. Endorsing Kelly Martin in the current circumstances doesn't suggest an arbiter who will be fair. Grace Note 03:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
14. Good editor, but reluctantly must oppose given unblocking of 3RR violators without communication with blocking admin. Jonathunder 03:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
15. Oppose. -- Viriditas 04:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
16. Oppose Per Voice of AllT. Also too young. 172 04:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
17. Oppose Fred Bauder 04:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
18. Oppose -- Daniel 04:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
19. Bobet 05:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
20. Oppose -- Tabor 05:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
21. Oppose Hamster Sandwich 05:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
22. Oppose platform, inexperience --- Charles Stewart 08:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
23. Oppose warpozio 08:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
24. Oppose. -- Kefalonia 09:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
25. Weak Oppose. Well respected wikiContributor but I disagree with some parts of platform. -- Michalis Famelis 09:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
26. Weak oppose, per Michalis: I like the candidate but I have to disagree some parts of the platform. Elle _{vécu heureuse} ^{à jamais} ( Be eudaimonic!) 10:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
27. Oppose Repeatedly unblocked an individual who had been fairly blocked for 3RR violations without knowing the 3RR policy, without reading the policy, without asking someone else about the policy, and without even consulting with the admins who had blocked the individual. This shows recklessness and disregard for the way things should work. I'm unclear on other actions of this individual, which might be good, but these actions were completely out of line for any admin, let alone someone who wants to be on ArbCom. DreamGuy 10:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
28. Oppose, his judgment is not always sound. R adiant _>|< 14:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
29. Hipocrite - «Talk» 15:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
30. Oppose -- Thorri 16:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
31. Oppose - Ziggur 17:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
32. Oppose as Natalinasmpf. I like some of his proposals, but elements of his track record push me just into opposition. -- It's-is-not-a-genitive 21:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
33. Oppose too inconsistent ℬastique▼ ^parℓer♥ ^voir♑ 21:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
34. Oppose due to all above. Turnstep 22:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
35. Oppose. siafu 22:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
36. Splash ^talk 23:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
37. Oppose. Divisive, polarizing, confrontational, etc. Avriette 23:28, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
38. Oppose-- Doc ^ask? 01:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
39. Oppose. per Michalis.-- cjllw | TALK 02:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
40. Weak oppose. older≠ wiser 02:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
41. Reluctant oppose, per DreamGuy. Also, about a month ago he permanently blocked a user for linkspam (per another editor's request) when that user had never been warned. I like Mero, though; maybe next year if he shows more consistency. -- Idont Havaname ( Talk) 04:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
42. Oppose. Gazpacho 05:36, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
43. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 12:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
44. Oppose — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 17:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
45. Weak oppose. I like him, but repeatedly unblocking a 3RR violator without consultation is just wrong. ~~ N ( t/ c) 01:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
46. Weak oppose. Sorry, but 17 is really young for something like this. howch e ng { chat} 18:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
47. Weak Oppose, great editor, lacks judgment for this role. HGB 19:02, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
48. Oppose. Candidate does not adequately address the nature of arbitration in their candidate statement. In ignorance: I must oppose. With so many candidates, the statement is the extent to which I can engage in becoming an informed voter. Any candidate so contemptuous of the demos as to make it difficult for me to become an informed voter: I must oppose, it bodes poorly for their capacity to take on social responsibility. Fifelfoo 22:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
49. Reluctantly Oppose, very experienced, but, however, noting DreamGuy's reservations, I must also note my reservations. — Ian Manka ^{Questions? Talk to me!} 00:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
50. Oppose. enochlau ( talk) 05:10, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
51. Oppose. -- Masssiveego 07:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
52. Oppose — Laura Scudder ☎ 16:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
53. Oppose KTC 20:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
54. Oppose-- A Y Arktos 20:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
55. Oppose. Supports the Bill of Rights. -- Carnildo 05:27, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
56. Oppose - seems too inexperienced. -- Pierremenard 18:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
57. Oppose. Legitimate concerns have been raised in the opposition comments. Velvetsmog 23:46, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
58. Oppose, too many userboxes. Alphax 13:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC) reply
59. Oppose. maclean25 00:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
60. Oppose, inexperienced, lacks judgement. - ulayiti (talk) 13:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
61. Oppose poor judgement & handles criticism badly Derex 17:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
62. -- Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
63. Oppose -- Davidpdx 10:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
64. Strong oppose. Continues to support a very controversial ex-arbitrator that has offended an amazingly large chunk of the community. -- Victim of signature fascism | help remove biblecruft 18:50, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
65. Oppose. Preaky 23:03, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
66. Reluctant oppose. I'm not sure about whether community removal mid-term is a good idea. Superm401 | Talk 23:24, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
67. Oppose, reluctantly. Too many question marks for me (though I don't believe Mero's youth should be an issue) -- Masonpatriot 05:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply
68. Oppose Pete.Hurd 07:05, 17 January 2006 (UTC) reply
69. Oppose Sunray 08:47, 17 January 2006 (UTC) reply
70. Oppose -- Lumijaguaari (моє обговорення) 20:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Neofelis Nebulosa ( talk •  contribs) .
71. Strong Oppose I'm one of the people who has been offended (per -Ril) Cynical 22:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC) reply
72. Weak Oppose — heart seems to be in the right place, but too many questionable judgements. Perhaps with a bit more seasoning? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 06:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC) reply
73. Oppose. Valmi ✒ 07:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC) reply
74. Oppose Flcelloguy ( A note?) 02:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply
75. Oppose. Nominated an abbrasive editor for adminship, even though that editor has almost made more edits to personal user page than to the Wiki itself. Bad judgement. -- Ec5618 13:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply
76. Oppose -- Grouse 16:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply
77. Oppose CDThieme 23:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply