Stewards/confirm/2010/Sj

logs: rights, globalauth, gblblock, gblrights, crosswiki logs & activity | translate: translation help, statement

• Reconfirm. —DerHexer (Talk) 00:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• confirm. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:25, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• we need him --Jan eissfeldt 00:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• basically inactive, --birdy geimfyglið _{(:> )=|} 01:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Thought leader despite less activity than I would prefer. Reconfirm. ++Lar: t/c 03:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Confirm. Pmlineditor ∞ 07:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

• Keep Keep --WizardOfOz ^talk 10:59, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Confirm of course --Church of emacs talk 12:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Confirm, though I would like to see more activity. --Erwin 13:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Confirm --Daniel Mayer (mav) 14:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• OK. Marcus Cyron 17:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Confirm --Mardetanha ^talk 18:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep.--Jusjih 04:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• keep, but I'd like to see more activity --FiliP ██ 11:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep Razor flame 07:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep --Jyothis 17:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• keep without a shadow of a doubt. my compliments with the way you succeed in combining wmf board-membership with stewardship! oscar 00:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep, we just need him-- ※(注記) JéRRy ┼ 雨雨 ※(注記) 16:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep really. bastique ^demandez! 16:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• keep, no fuss, quiet achiever. billinghurst sDrewth 14:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep, of course. --Philippe 00:21, 12 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Support Support. —Innv {ru-ws} 00:46, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
• Keep per Billinghurst; very well put, Billinghurst. :) Durova 19:45, 14 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Keep -FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:10, 14 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep. Kept the promise and became more active as a steward. Glad to see that :) --Millosh 13:50, 15 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep. No worries, Cirt (talk) 02:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]
• What is the point of this farce? The candidate has no respect for the community nor do his fellow stewards who interpreted two years of almost total inactivity as an irrelevant factor in the last two confirmations. This is insulting and ridiculous. --JayHenry 21:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

  Just a question: In which way low activity insults you or the community? —DerHexer (Talk) 22:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

  Well, perhaps he should have been removed per last time... I see that's a clear consensus to remove, but for some reason he wasn't. When the community elects you to do a job, it's only decent you do it. Sj did, for a while, but then got busy elsewhere and should really have handed the steward bit in a long time ago. Majorly talk 22:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

  We stewards talked about how to hande inactivities on steward-l but one steward ignored that and closed all confirmations. We apparently did not want to make trouble and accepted that; also because of being chronically understaffed. Kind regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

  You just answered your own question then about how this is a ridiculous and insulting farce of a process. --JayHenry 22:43, 20 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

  Well, I'd not call that insulting. And of course not all steward appreciated that behaviour as you assumed here. —DerHexer (Talk) 22:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

• Remove Remove Basically inactive, and has been since 2006 pretty much. Thanks for your hard work, but I think it's time to move on. Majorly talk 22:11, 20 February 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

• Steward confirmations 2010