Board Thread:Site Discussions/@comment-4533965-20140908212058/@comment-24137578-20140912070622

Pandoo wrote: BlueSpeeder wrote: Pandoo wrote: No, I'd rather have you set this nomination up again (I wouldn't since Metal hasn't taken any of his honest opposition advice to consideration), but as deseprate as you are, I think you should set it up. Users, both supporters and opposers can re justify, and strengthen there desicion with a proper reason rather than Kudos's, and if some minds have changes, reasons should be stated as well. Also, question. Why are you Metal's "spokesperson". Why are we not hearing a creek of a shoe from Metal publically? (In fact, I usually don't see him say anything outside the chat). Actually, it was more or less that I was going to have a vote on the community consensus change, not for another shot at Metal's nomination. As for me being his "spokesperson", he does not engage in conversations on threads unless necessary. Therefore, I am essentially his announcer outside of chat. I just think it'd be more fair and true to the rules if the nomination was set up again. In fact, you can even hold up a more convicing one than last time, I mean, if you wanna.

Ok, that's... weird. I want to hear from him at least, this makes him a bad choice of an admin to begin with.

I'm just saying Metal, if you're reading this, It'd be better to see how you would handle your nomination as admin (since it's about you), rather than Blue, so I can actually see the type of person you are handling this stuff. It's almost like you're hiding and throwing all the work on Blue. How is this not nessecary for you to engage in? Krazy agrees.