Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Simeon

Simeon
Simeon has been quietly working away on articles, policies and categories. As far as I can tell, he has remained calm in debates and gets along well with the rest of the community. I think he would make an excellent admin.--Eloquence 11:12, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose Having been an administrator before with CNN in a very active live chat, and being responsible for training other Chat Cops, one thing about Simeon has saddened me: I don't believe he knows that what he is doing is wrong.

Either that or he has no concern about getting away with doing questionable things.

The third possibility concerns a man's ethics, and I don't know him, and no one knows me, well enough to take that into account.

I have only had two experiences with Simeon since coming onboard a few short weeks back. Both experiences were very negative, although I was the first to say the last one was a mistake. Simeon had simply gone into a story being edited by me and pasted his comments over the top. Then when I asked him nicely not to do that and to please wait, Simeon went into MIRC and cried on some shoulders. He greeted my arrival at MIRC with a WTF WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT...remember that Simeon?

And his name had not even been brought into the discussion!!

All I could think was, that if the shoe fit, Simeon was certainly tying the laces already!

So my objection to Simeon and my request for others is--take a look underneath the mask. There you might find a different Simeon. One who is biding his time waiting for the chance to use newfound Admin powers to bully people.

Look under that mask for the '''WTF!!! Simeon'''. I think he goes out of control quite easily and then tries to make believe it was "just a joke." (remember you said that, too...Simeon?)

I strongly oppose Simeon for any adminship until some more time passes and these issues resolve themselves. There are many people who do edits and quietly help out and are not admins. As DV and others have said before, we may not need any more admins now.

A day or two ago I would have had a very neutral attitude about Simeon regardless of his blow up in MIRC or our first unhappy encounter. But I read somewhere, "Know a man by his acts." And now I must ask that his nomination be reconsidered. --HiFlyer 15:47, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC) --HiFlyer 22:14, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral please change my vote in the interest of community unity. Let's shake and make it work, Simmo.


 * support; When perusing his user page links, his dedication to the online collaboration process comes through loud and clear. Paulrevere2005 12:31, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support; same reasons as eloquence. ~The bellman | Smile  14:20, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support We don't really need admins now, but assuming my crazy prophecies are fulfilled we will need several dozen! → CGorman (Talk)  14:30, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Crazy? Since when has scheming for world domination been crazy? Have faith man. ~The bellman | Smile  11:32, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose, nothing personal, I just think we have plenty of admins already and not every good editor needs to be an admin. Dan100 (Talk) 17:35, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * comment; nothing personal, but as recently as March 31st., Dan100 inserted onto this page "I'd like my adminship"; so,if Dan100 thought more admins were needed 3 days ago,perhaps he was correct then. Paulrevere2005 02:37, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I have to point out that I find this reasoning not actionable. I think actionable reasons (e.g. reasons pertaining to the user's behavior, or duration of stay) should be brought up to oppose any adminship.--Eloquence 03:01, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * As Jimbo says (although in reference to the 'pedia rather than wikinews) adminship is no big deal. It's not some secret society that has any great power. Anything that an admin can do can be undone. The only reason that everyone doesnt have admin powers is cause they could be abused by vandals or misused by newbies. Really its just a couple more tabs at the top of the page, which in time of emergency (such as an attack by vandals) it is good to have as many trusted users as possible to have. If there isnt much admin work to go around and lots of admins, all the better since that means that we arent likely to see the kind of exushtion that some admins on the 'pedia feel. ~The bellman | Smile  03:20, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * OK, well I accept on this basis ;) Thanks for the nice comments. - Simeon 09:21, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Support Excellent reporter, editor, with a knack for witty headlines. - Amgine 03:30, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. In light of The bellman's convincing argument in support of this nomination, I am moved to support Simeon for Administrator, even though I agree with Dan100's assessment that we have enough of 'em. It also doesn't hurt that Eloquence was the one who made the nomination. I trust Simeon to do the right thing. &mdash; DV 13:10, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support - Need admins who are awake when Europe and the Americas are sleeping. :-) -- Davodd | Talk 04:55, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * And when the other token aussie admin is sleeping because of his strange sleeping habits... :P ~The bellman | Smile  06:39, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Good thinking Davodd... but I never sleep! → CGorman (Talk)  20:30, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * By checking my history, it seems I only sleep during work hours. -- Davodd | Talk 06:43, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support Need admins 24/7 these days. - Amgine 21:04, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)