The Elder Scrolls Wiki:Administrators/Reevals of inactive sysops 2014

{| class="collapsible collapsed" width="100%" style="border:2px solid white; background:#000000; -moz-border-radius:12px;" ! Re evals of staff

Mbjones90
Inactive sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Largely inactive, does next to nothing, hasn't done much since getting the position, I don't believe he should remain an Administrator. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Was only made a sysop during the time when the various TES wiki's (OblivioWiki for example) were merged into this one. After that, he disappeared, there is zero reason he continues to have a flag, he shows no vested interested in this wiki. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Another inactive Admin, it's pointless to have Admins who have not edited for large periods to time, to keep the tools. The site doesn't gain anything. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Inactive since 2011, no point in keeping admin rights. 00:20, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Three years of inactivity says he is done, he can talk about getting he rights back should he return.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Same reasons as those above me.  Some Assembly Required! 02:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Such a long inactive period. No point in dressing the skeletons with armor if they aren't coming back to life, is there? 02:25, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral
I am voting neutral for a reason here. Not because I am not apposed to the removal, but because his appointment was one of the conditions back in 2011 when we merged with OblivioWiki. If the community votes to remove him, though, well... I tend to agree here. He's really not coming back. Timeoin•Say G'Day•View my work 12:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Annonnimus
Inactive sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Largely inactive, does next to nothing, hasn't done much since getting the position, I don't believe he should remain an Administrator. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Despite the log in showing he keeps logging into Wikia, he does not edit here and there is no reason for him to continue being a sysop on the wiki if he can't be bothered to come here. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Inactive, we don't need these users with tools. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Inactive since 2012, no point in keeping admin rights. 00:20, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

two years of inactivity says he is done, he can talk about getting he rights back should he return.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Same reasons as those above me.  Some Assembly Required! 02:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Not even Potema could resurrect those guys' activity, and they should have been demotted long ago, which is also for how long they've been inactive. 03:05, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

HaLo2FrEeEk
Inactive sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Largely inactive, does next to nothing, hasn't done much since getting the position, I don't believe he should remain an Administrator. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Is mostly inactive, doesn't do anything to the wiki, no reason for him to be a sysop. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Been inactive for too long, doesn't need to be an Admin on here, as with the others. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Inactive since 2012, no point in keeping admin rights. 00:20, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

two years of inactivity says he is done, he can talk about getting he rights back should he return.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Same reasons as those above me.  Some Assembly Required! 02:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

It is time to unfit the fossils from the Merethic Era, long gone and slumbering. 02:52, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Zluhcs
Inactive sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
Largely inactive, does next to nothing, hasn't done much since getting the position, I don't believe he should remain an Administrator. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 22:50, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

He made a random edit to his userpage a few days ago, but that won't save him from the fact he does not do a thing for this wiki, no reason he should be a sysop any longer. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 23:02, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Has been inactive since 2013, has one edit in this whole year. No point in keeping the admin flag. 00:20, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Same reasons as those above me.  Some Assembly Required! 02:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral
He is inactive, but I heard he is in the Navy now, so I might not want to be in support of his rights being removed just right now. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Like Grams, Schulz has real life matters getting in front of his online life. It wouldn't be nice to return after some crappy years serving then finding out your work was forsaken because of it. 02:54, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Comment
-Before I say yes or no, can we confirm if he is currently deployed? I would hate to say no while he is gone.Cheatcodechamp (talk) 02:42, September 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * According to Anubis he is from Norway. Military service there is only mandatory for a few months (I think it was 8.5 or something like that.). He was already in said mandatory service when he first joined the wiki. He has since willingly joined the Navy and if he was deployed somewhere it was due to his decision for enlisting. Unlike GramsJ his reason for being inactive wasn't because of an uncontrollable source, he chose the Navy.  17:16, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

GramsJ
Inactive sysop 22:12, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

Support
In light of this user's situation, he/she deserves the right to be inactive to deal with said issue. Leniensy is given from me, and should be from all you To Hell With God (talk) 23:15, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

This user is sick, and therefor I feel doesn't deserve to get there rights removed. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name     23:21, September 12, 2014 (UTC)

She has more important things to concern herself with then this wiki, & I won't be holding that against her for it. Unlike Harold I'm not a heartless prick, & I understand that editing on a wiki isn't the most important thing in life, so she has my full support. Note: As if Harold can judge anybody, he only spams the RP board & his 800 edits are all completely minor, where Grams J here has done more then Harold ever has & ever will despite her being inactive for two years. Ȼǿᵰᵮẽᵲ ₲ħǿśᵵ Ⱥᵰᵾᵬĭᵴ  Đẽẽᵭᵴ 00:25, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

GramsJ has cancer, it would be insulting and very rude to remove her rights because of that. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 00:29, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Cancer is tough to deal with. This user and admin has been inactive probably due to fighting a tough battle.She should be able to keep her rights. When she returns I am sure she will get back into the swing of things. I say let her keep her rights until we know for sure if she is going to return or not.  revolveGirl God's Army 00:37, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

It would obviously make sense for her to be inactive due to the fact that she has cancer. Once she comes back, it would be a nice thing for her to see she still has her rights, and that she would continue doing her job. topkek (talk) 01:18, September 13, 2014 (UTC) I never saw her editing but, if she was an admin of thie wikia, it iis obviously because she deserves it. And, if we could at least do something to support her, it would be the least to do by letting her keeping her right.-- Emperor Jarjarkine    Senate Hall  01:45, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

I have always said real life comes first, I cannot oppose when real world issues are keeping them away.-Cheatcodechamp (talk) 01:56, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

I understand where Harold is coming from, but I genuinely believe this is one of those unique exceptions that should always take priority. Life does come first before Wikia, and her hard work and dedication should be recognized as we give her a chance to come back to our community. All I can do is wish a speedy recovery.  Some Assembly Required! 02:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

We should continue to give GramsJ a reason to win this thing. And she was a great admin when she was editing here. She had my support then, and she has my support now, too. Timeoin•Say G'Day•View my work 13:03, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Tim above, and even if she might never come back I will support to let her have the rights as a good gesture. 20:02, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

She didn't choose to become inactive, she was forced to by a very serious disease. It's not like she decided to just stop caring. Right now she most likely does not care about the wiki but that's probably because she's fighting for her life at the moment, and I hate to say this but a human's life is far more valuable than some website. --&#91;̲̅$̲̅(̲̅ ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°̲̅)̲̅$̲̅&#93; &#34;Get Vehkt M8&#34; -CHIM Shady &#91;̲̅$̲̅(̲̅ ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°̲̅)̲̅$̲̅&#93; (talk) 17:07, September 14, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose
This user being sick or not is irrelevant, she hasn't edited in almost two whole years. If she hasn't come back till now there is nothing pointing to her doing so in the near future. Therefore she doesn't need nor should have the admin flag. If you want to do something nice and show her you care and support her fight against the disease leave a message on her talk page or make a userbox on her profile. However, if in the future she does come back and contributes then we can give her back the admin position. 00:16, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Harold on this. It's terrible that GramsJ has cancer, but he/she's been inactive for over 2 years. If he/she comes back, fantastic, re-instate Admin rights. If not, remove. This is not insensitivity, it's practicality. It's not as though they're forever forbidden from becoming an Admin again.  DRAEVAN13  13:13, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral
I don't really feel like supporting her holding the rights just because she has cancer (yes, call me a heartless n'wah), but this also means she can make a comeback anytime, now. My ambivalence flourishes at those moments and I'm not sure I want to judge Gram's fate. 02:36, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Her inactivity bodes removal of rights, but leaving her with rights harms no one, for there is no shortage of rights. This is purely a moral dilemma and my biased decision would be let her keep the rights, in her honor. But I must vote appropriately.--Jacen Veron (talk) 14:36, September 16, 2014 (UTC)

Comment
Harold, you are the most insensitive user I have ever seen, would you like it if you had cancer and had your rights taken because of a re-evaluation? Of course not, show some respect to those who aren't so fortunate. --SuperSajuuk Talk Page 00:29, September 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * You don't know me Sajuuk, neither does Anubis. My grandfather had to fight two cancers for the past five years. I visited him in the hospital whenever I could before heading off to college. He beat both of them, but still suffers from severe diabetes. And for the record if I was in GramsJ's position I would be too busy dealing with my illness to care if I still had admin rights on a specific wiki or not, but that is just me. Like above this is my opinion and I am entitled to it like everyone else is.  01:15, September 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * Point being, if the user wants to come back, it might be insulting if we removed her rights because of something out of her control completely. So, that is why we think she deserves to keep her Sysop Tools on the wiki. — Walter White Walker  Say My Name   ''' 01:38, September 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * I hardly think that removing her rights, especially if we leave a heartfelt support message on her profile/talkpage, would cause her to be insulted. Though I didn't know her personally, but then again neither did a bunch of other users that voted above.  02:01, September 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * }