RuneScape:Requests for adminship/InstantWinston

InstantWinston
''I, InstantWinston, accept this nomination for adminship. I have read the policies concerning administrators. I realize that this nomination may fail. If I do get community consensus, I promise not to abuse my powers because I realize that this is a serious offence and if the community finds that I have done so, my powers will be revoked and in extreme cases I could be given a community ban. Signed,.

Discussion
InstantWinston (Cashman286) has been here for well over a year as Cashman, his old account. On Cashman, he had rollback rights and made good use of them. He then decided that he wanted to just "start all over" with a new wiki account, as Cashman was the target of much hatred. Cashman was stripped of his rollback rights and they were transfered to InstantWinston, with which he still makes good use of. Cashman was put aside in his previous five nominations because of his lack of edits. Many users failed to see his love of the community and his willingness to contribute to it. Cash and a few other users got into "arguements" (if you know what I mean) about a year ago this time and most of the users on the wiki seemed to side against Cashman. Cash is a great person always willing to help and I hope some of you will see through his mere 300 mainspace edits as Cashman and his even less impressive 35 mainspace edits as InstantWinston. Good luck Cash, I think you deserve it. (Btw someone please fix this temp it's screwed up). 14:45, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose Virtually no main space edits (most of his edits are to his own pages). The fact the he want to be a admin so bad "for people to respect him" says alot about his character. Time should not be a factor his adminship considering he took 6 month off of that "almost 1 year" period Cheers! Atlandy 14:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

That is counted off already, actually. I'd have been here for 1 year and about 4 months otherwise. And who said I wanted it for respect? You really haven't been active in the community unless to oppose me, in my eyes... 14:59, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment - But over time he as accumulated many edits, and him sticking with the wiki shows his dedication to it. Remember, edits aren't everything, and it's the quality of edits. Although most of his edits are to his user page (which I see nothing wrong with) he does make a few helpful edits every day or two, reverting vandalism and reverting discussions after being deleted. 15:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment The respect comment was made to me ingame. When his previous admins have failed, I suggested a more subtle approach in becoming an admin, not just waiting a few months and trying again. As soon as he "came back" to the wiki, he asked Ilyas to nominate him, once again relying on the "I've been here long enough" factor, not look at all the things I have done. Adminship should be given to active users that make contributions to help the wiki Cheers! Atlandy 15:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment - He asked me about a month and a half ago to nominate him and I kept telling him to wait and to accumulate more edits in that time. I am not relying on the "I've been here long enough" factor. If you take the time to read my reasoning for nominating him (and please fix the template if you can, I tried closing it but it deletes my reasoning) then you should have looked at the links I gave. If you want to look at his lack of edits and leave everything else he's done, well, then perhaps you shouldn't even be here. When giving your opinion on whether or whether not someone should be a sysop you should take into consideration everything they've done, and Cashman has made enough edits to prove his loyalty. And please don't say his nominations are only relying on time, because they're not. Time is infact a huge factor. By having been here for a year and a half and having still edited (although not much) during that time, Cash has shown that he is loyal to the wiki and will stick with it, even after the arguements last year around this time. 15:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - Personally, I think that if someone chooses to create a new profile to have a fresh start, they definitely should not expect people to take their contributions under another profile into consideration. Therefore, I say that you are too new, have not really made many significant contributions to mainspace articles, and haven't had a very consistent presence here.

If you want me to consider Cashman's history, well, things start looking worse. You did seem to consistently want to get sysop because it was the popular thing at the time. Instead of taking people's advice, you simply ran again immediately after a clearly failed attempt. It still seems like the only reason you want sysop now is because you haven't been able to get it in the past, and honestly, that seems to me to be the biggest motivation for you creating InstantWinston. All in all, I think you don't understand that sysop is not for the benefit of you, it's for the benefit of the wiki. I haven't really seen in the past, and continue to not see, how your sysop will benefit us.

I do however like having you around. If you want my vote, concentrate on continuing to revert vandalism, make meaningful edits, contribute a lot to community discussions/processes, and wait for someone to nominate you (without having to ask them to). 14:57, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I made this account because I hate being called Cashman =P. 15:08, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - There have been a few points raised with which I agree but rather than parrot them, I'd raise two questions: why should admin rights be given to someone who has not shown a large need for them (I've only seen a handful of vandalism reverts on both accounts and haven't seen one instance of putting something up for deletion) and more importantly, why do you keep trying to be an administator (this is the sixth time, correct?)? -- 22:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll answer your questions. 1) What are you talking about? I've put things up for deletion plenty of times; you just haven't noticed because the pages I put the speedy deletion tags on have been deleted, along with my edit. I'd block vandals if needed, and try and mediate any conflicts between users. 2) I keep trying to be an admin because I keep failing. If I didn't fail, I wouldn't try again. Am I not right there? You can't just expect me to never try again after a failed attempt, no matter how many times it's happened. I'll just work hard to edit, revert vandalism, and keep a place in the community and then try again. It's not like I'll be the next Shadowdancer...I mean honestly, what would make me having administrative rights so BAD for the wiki? The only changes that could come are positive, because there's one more person to keep an eye on the wiki.

Secondly, the only person with a fair view here is Endasil, in my opinion. Atlandy has had a bias against me for as long as I can remember (personally, I think it has to do with age, and how he's "always right" in a discussion that he's conflicting with me in because he's like 14 years older than me), and Diberville hasn't seen everything I've done due to him being much newer to the wiki than me. Endasil gave good reasons to oppose, and constructive criticism.

Finally, I've decided to do just what I said before. Since you all obviously don't want me to be an admin (at the moment or ever, that is open for discussion), I will withdraw and just work harder. Even though it will probably fail, you all can expect to see this RFA re-opened in the fall. This RFA is officially over before it has a chance to get ugly. 19:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

'''Closed. The candidate has withdrawn.''' 19:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)