Withdrawing this request. Sorry for stirring up drama. Razorflame 01:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi all. I would like to propose to the community that Coppertwig's bureaucrat bit be taken away from him. His actions over the past week or so has been very concerning towards me and is definitely not something that I would like to see from a bureaucrat. This shows ownership and a lack of knowledge about the policies and deeply concerns me. After a remark like that, I am surprised that nobody else suggested his removal from bureaucrat before I did. That is deeply problematic. This also shows a lack of maturity and also concerns me. I definitely do not want to have someone who does things like this as a bureaucrat on this project. Sorry, but that is my opinion. Razorflame 00:45, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
I strongly support the removal of the bit as per the differences that I provided. Razorflame 00:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
#Weak Support Coppertwig, I'm quite sorry. You're a great guy, but after your actions I don't know if I can trust you are a bureaucrat. Shapiros10(talk) 00:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
I oppose the removal of the flag. While I don't necessarily agree with the actions he has done recently, I trust Coppertwig and believe he has done a fine job as a bureaucrat. Maximillion Pegasus 01:00, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Strong Oppose – though it is obvious that he should have not !voted and closed the request, it is not something to de'crat over. I fully trust him. If he wants to step down, that is one thing, but there is no need for this. TheAEtalk 01:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
If it isn't something to de'crat over, what is? Razorflame 01:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Abuse of the tool, and breaking of all trust. He has done neither. TheAEtalk 01:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
He has done the breaking of trust. He has broken my trust in him. Therefore, that is why I requested decratship here. Razorflame 01:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I disagree and continue to disagree with Coppertwig's decision not to close the RfB, and as proved by later events, that caused some issues. That said, he's been a darn good bureaucrat since he was voted in, and I don't feel this one mistake (yes, one mistake) is a good reason to decrat. Too hasty. No, I don't support a decrat, and will only support when there's a pattern of poor judgemen, which so far there isn't. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:45, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Weak Oppose Very tough. After careful thought, I think that your recent behavior shows that you see things as "for yourself". But, I think it's been too few instances to do something this drastic. Shapiros10(talk) 01:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
I don't think this is the right way to do this. I think that first, you need to talk with me on my user talk page. People should not be voting in a process like this without first listening to what I have to say.
I don't think I'm going to answer this here. Please talk to me on my user talk page. We can talk about any problems. After that, then maybe it will be time to have a vote like this.
I was going to set up a way of doing things like wikipedia:en:User:Lar/Accountability, maybe not exactly the same. I was thinking about that weeks ago, and didn't have time yet. But, I still want to follow something like that: it might not be exactly the same. But, it says nothing about having a vote like this without talking with me first.
That would be to ask me to resign. If it's a vote that stewards will look after, I don't know what the rules are for that. Maybe you're allowed to do that without discussing it with me first. I don't know. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 01:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Actually, this is part of being bold. This is definitely the appropriate way to do this and I shouldn't even need to bring something like this up with you on your talk page first. You are still only worrying about yourself and not the Wikiquote as a whole. Sorry, but this solidifies my support of your removal of the 'crat flag. Razorflame 01:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
OK, maybe we can discuss like this, but I don't feel good about it. I still would like people to talk to me on user talk. I would like it better that way. I might not think that this vote counts as the RfC Lar talks about, (especially votes before a reasonable amount of discussion) so I might not decide to resign because of this vote, though as I say a steward might count it.
Razorflame, you said: "shows ownership and a lack of knowledge about the policies". Please tell me which policies and which parts of them you mean. Please explain how that shows ownership: I said "I suggest". When I say "suggest", I mean something gentle. I think all users can suggest things, and all users can give opinions on the suggestions. You said "This also shows a lack of maturity and also concerns me". Please explain what problems you see with that. Also, please read what I said when I accepted the nomination to be a bureaucrat. If you had read that during my RfB, would you have opposed my RfB? How many people would have opposed? But, the users who were here and voted in my RfB at that time supported my RfB. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 01:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Speedy delete this page, or at least gain a consensus to do the same. This was a not so well thought out plan, executed poorly, and serves no purposes. If its not to be deleted, than thats fine too. Its just a suggestion. Synergy 02:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. I would like this page to be speedily deleted as it was highly embarassing of me to have done this. I have learnt my lesson and now wish to clean the slate. Thanks, Razorflame 05:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
I think this page should be kept, regardless of how embarrassing it is – it is an important part of our history (which is why user_talk pages are kept). This should be archived, though, providing Razor, you want that. Good night, TheAEtalk 05:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Doesn't matter to me. I still feel like I've shot myself in the foot and might have ruined my chances to become an administrator here. Do what you want to the page. I don't mind either way. Razorflame 21:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
This discussion is finished. Please do not change it. You can add comments in another part.