Board Thread:False Info and Speculative Discussion/@comment-27547895-20160201202203/@comment-27547895-20160212174546

Paul.rea wrote: Except that's not what you're actually asking for.

HolyDrumstick wrote: Because the last thread became such a mess, I'm posting this for people to vote ONLY.

Please do not discuss Paul, your issues with him, or his activity as admin, here. Do that in the other thread, please. This thread is only to vote.

I believe we need to reduce the number of admin to three. I believe Paul should remain as admin, and then the community should select two additional admin. After all three admin are in position, issues should be resolved by their vote, should they arrise.

Speaking of trying to throw people off... Actually, THIS is you trying to throw people off. Again. This is NOT what the current vote is for. Current Voting Thread.

This is not what the current vote is about. I'm just going to copy and paste from where I addressed this attempted manipulation, last time:

"That was actually revised. The current voting thread, is a different vote.

I would have stuck with voting in one admin. The above was the result of you promoting someone immediately after this discussion began, in secret.

The newest voting thread is revised to promoting two admin and keeping current admin, in response to the fit you threw over me suggesting removing inactive admin. Though I was aware that all your threats were fairly empty, I felt that a compromise could be made.

Everyone is free to double check that, themselves.

Cheers."

And later I pointed out:

"Yeah, I've factored in the admin votes. (I actually encouraged Paul to vote, at one point, on his wall. That's another place he was adamant about keeping inactive admin.)

And no offense to you, about removing your admin status. I was only suggesting such due to inactivity. I actually voted to keep Dry63, the admin Paul promoted in secret, after the first revision.

When Paul insisted on keeping the inactive admin, I revised the vote again when I made a new thread because people were derailing it.

But, that's not the story Paul wants to tell. Which is kind of one of the things I was referring to regarding manipulation. Clever manipulation is still manipulation."

So....what were you saying, again?