[accepted] t3rnary

Deleted a few posts not because they were bad (@startselect3 & @kedram, you both made some good points), but in an attempt to reduce the off-topic. I'll try to address all concerns here so we can leave this and get back to the matter of t3rnary being fit in the communities' eyes to admin or not.

I required explanation for the -1 because, quite simply, if there's a reason someone should be considered unfit for the position I want to know about it. We want the dirt on people if it's relevant to them being capable/incapable of carrying out the role of admin appropriately. So in that sense downvotes carry a lot more weight than upvotes and hence require a higher level of explanation. A +1 without explanation can generally be read as "nice person, don't know of any poor behaviour", which is helpful information; a -1 without explanation, otoh, can mean either "I dislike them" or "I dislike them, j/k", neither of which is particularly helpful bc neither gives us any concrete info (or even, at the very least, the concrete absence of [negative] info like the +1 does).

I apologise if I came across as a badmin, not my intent, but when dealing with the (reasonably weighty, I hope you'll agree) matter of handing out power and oversight of official servers, I can't afford to pussy-foot around potential black-marks against candidates' names. This has nothing to do with how I think of t3rnary, one way or the other, and everything to do with wanting --no, needing-- everything to be crystal clear re: whether he's a suitable candidate for the position.

 

+1 good listener

 

Another guy who has 2 accounts? I'm inclined to accept. Please first post here - CLICK!

 

Yeah. Locked.