Tags stuff for speedy deletion, patrols Recent Changes, performs other fun administrivia. Chats onna IRC channel. Second-spiffiest user page I've ever seen (next to User:Angela's). Has a sense of humor humour. Claims to have been here since 3 April with 2600-2800 edits. - Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 14:08, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Er, well, I was surprised by Fennec's nomination, but... pleasantly, I suppose. Thanks, and I accept your nomination for the Presidency of the United States of America! blankfaze | •• | •• 14:54, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

For the record, I've never made a single biased or POV edit, IMO. I've never touched an article with a religious topic. I try to be NPOV at all times. And I always, always abide by consensuses here on WP, even if I don't agree with them. blankfaze | •• | •• 17:05, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Support

1. Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 14:08, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
2. Neutrality 14:30, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
3. Keep. Er, wait… —Lady Lysiŋe Ikiŋsile | Talk 14:44, 2004 Jun 29 (UTC)
4. SkArcher 15:54, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
5. Mike H 16:41, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC)
6. Sometimes a fish is just a fish. In any case, we have many admins with strong personal views about both politics and religion. The important thing is that they respect the NPOV policy and not use their position to promote their viewpoint or suppress opposing views. I don't believe Blankfaze will do this, so I support. -- Michael Snow 16:59, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
7. If we asked our admins not to have opinions--or even not to make them clear--I can think of dozens who wouldn't be admins any more. Blankfaze has always behaved well in his interactions with me, and would make a good admin. [[User:Meelar| Meelar (talk)]] 18:58, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
8. Fredrik | talk 21:56, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
9. David Gerard 23:08, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC) - despite the fish (formerly Danzig).
10. Good nomination - Tεx τ urε 23:18, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
11. older≠ wiser 23:25, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
12. Merovingian✍ Talk 05:35, Jun 30, 2004 (UTC)
13. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:39, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
14. Lst 27 18:03, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
15. H. CHENEY 19:22, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
16. Hope you like this support ;-P [[User:Sverdrup| User:Sverdrup]] 19:30, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
17. Michael Warren | Talk 22:53, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
18. Support Secretlondon 23:33, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
19. Woggly 11:54, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
20. Seth Ilys 04:55, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
21. Chris 73 | Talk 04:59, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
22. Danny 05:05, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
23. 172 07:31, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
24. Cecropia | Talk 04:46, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
25. Because of the fish :D. We need people working on this to not take everything so seriously, we are creating an encyclopedia, but none of blankface's edits are biased and his parody is quite amusing. Just read the comments. Never mind. Strong support nonetheless. Aaron Hill 11:46, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
26. Rhymeless 09:17, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
27. jengod 00:52, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
28. Blankfaze, you're an excellent fellow, and you'll make a good sysop. By the way, I'm Vasco on IRC. DO'Иeil 13:44, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Not yet enough experience here yet for me to get a full picture of how said user reacts in various situations. Kingturtle 17:28, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)
2. Blank is a good contributor, but he's been here less than three months - this is premature. I think I'll support if he is nominated later. →Raul654 00:53, Jul 3, 2004 (UTC)
   • Well, as of today, I've been here precisely three months. I respect your vote, I just thought I should point that out. blankfaze | •• | •• 07:01, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Acegikmo1 19:55, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC). This user seems like he'd make an excellent administrator. However, I concerned about the user's defensiveness with regard to religion, and therefore must agree with Raul and Kingturtue's comments.

Comments:

• Actually has exactly 2,762 edits [1] —Lady Lysiŋe Ikiŋsile | Talk 15:03, 2004 Jun 29 (UTC)

• Sadly, I Oppose. Blankfaze's apparent hostility to Christianity and ridicule of a Christian symbol (the Fish) on his user page suggest a current lack of maturity in dealings with the diverse community Wikipedia represents. Since I am bound to be asked, I am unchurched personally, and consider myself a freethinker. If I were forced to subscribe to the tenets of a faith, I would probably have to look toward Bahai in that it attempts to respect the validity of all religions, races and peoples. Cecropia | Talk 15:32, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Whoa, no offense, Cecropia, but you're waaaaaaaaaaay wrong here. First of all, I have no hostility towards Christianity at all. I think religion is a great thing for a great many people. I DO have a problem with it playing such a prominent role in my nation's highest office, because not everyone in my country is a Christian. That is all you can read into that. I have no beef with Christianity. Second of all, the fish has NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING to do with Christianity. At all. It's the logo/mascot/symbol for my band The Milky Ways. The description text clearly says "blankfaze's avatar" ... His name is Fishy and it's just a dead stick-figure fish. It has NOTHING to do with Christianity. So, I respect your vote to oppose, but I want you to know that you're off-base on that. blankfaze | •• | •• 15:45, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Blankfaze, you insensitive clod!!! I'm going to beat you up for that "warmongering tyrant" bit! <boof! pow!>
      However, I fail to see how this reflects on his suitability for adminship. Perhaps if you'd care to point out him adding POV to an article of some sort, Cecropia, you'd have a case... - Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 15:57, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • A fair enough explanation. Objection withdrawn, though I think you'll now have to deal with fish supporters. -- Cecropia | Talk 16:34, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
      • Thank you, and I apologise for getting so heated, but I take accusations like that rather to heart. Ikes! Fish supporters! I forgot all about them!!! blankfaze | •• | •• 16:50, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • THAT IS A GROSS NATIONAL INSULT AGAINST FISH (formerly Danzig) - David Gerard 23:08, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

• (previous on opposing) I have to confess i am a bit distressed by the amounts of bolds and screaming used to respond to a perfectly well balanced comment on an opposing vote. Muriel G 16:02, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I understand. Ordinarily, this would not be the case, but his comment was so unbalanced and just... off-base... that it really offended me. I pride myself on my tolerance and acceptance, and for someone to accuse me of being some sort of anti-Christian bigot... just... really offends me. blankfaze | •• | •• 16:06, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • You shouldnt be offended. Anyway, i am removing this to comments, because i have really nothing against you personally. Muriel G 16:09, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
      • I shouldn't be offended if someone accuses me of being intolerant? Well, I'm sorry, but I am. blankfaze | •• | •• 16:14, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I think this was intended as emphasis rather than screaming and is quite reasonable given the accusations… —Lady Lysiŋe Ikiŋsile | Talk 16:10, 2004 Jun 29 (UTC)
    • Thank you for that kind observation, Lysine. blankfaze | •• | •• 16:14, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

• I too would have been offended if someone made assumptions based on a picture of a fish. However think on this - It is quite possible that Cecropia was joking! theresa knott 16:20, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

• • Jokes are usually funny, though, innit? Mike H 14:56, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)

• He really does strive for excellence in whatever he does, and has helped me, on multiple occasions, in cleaning up not only articles devoted to our hometown, but to more diverse exploits as well. His user page is evidence of that. Mike H 16:41, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC)