Forum:Replacement of Admin Yazzy Dream/Voting

This forum will be used to vote for the new admin. Before we begin, there are a few rules: As a formality, candidates will be listed in alphabetical order, not in order of nomination. Voting will end on November 14, 2012 at 0:00 UTC.
 * To be eligible to vote, you must have been active for at least 6 months with 1000 edits.
 * Each person may only vote once.
 * Candidates are not allowed to vote for themselves but may still vote nonetheless.
 * Once cast, a vote may not be changed.
 * To vote, simply leave your signature under the name of the person you want.
 * Anyone who votes who is ineligible will have their vote removed.

LuffyPirateKing

 * 18:25, November 7, 2012 (UTC)
 * 22:39, November 7, 2012 (UTC)
 * 05:02, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

Pacifista15

 * 1)  22:58, November 7, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2)  01:24, November 8, 2012 (UTC) (good balance between work efficiency and PR)
 * 3)  03:13, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1)  03:13, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

Sff9

 * 1)  17:58, November 7, 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) User:X-RAPTOR 17:58, November 7, 2012 (UTC)
 * 3)  - We need someone who knows coding.
 * 4)  20:22, November 7, 2012 (UTC)
 * 5)  20:40, November 7, 2012 (UTC) (but this was a toss-up)
 * 6)  20:48, November 7, 2012 (UTC)
 * 7)  22:35, November 7, 2012 (UTC)Zori
 * 1)  22:35, November 7, 2012 (UTC)Zori
 * 1)  22:35, November 7, 2012 (UTC)Zori

Discussion
To be honest, I don't think the election will go on smoothly. There are stuff lacking, for example, the candidates must explain why we should vote for them, and what they would do if they are elected, instead of us all knowing nothing about the candidates and just voting blindly. Take the most recent US presidential race for example, have you seen any of the candidates not holding rallies and just letting the voters vote without them knowing anything? It's similar to this case, where we are about to choose our future "president" but no "rally" is held from any candidate. 05:14, November 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * Sounds like a good idea Evan but not sure if everyone will agree with it >_> thou of course they gotta offer something in-order to get something but still not sure. Plus, there is no-vote-change policy so whoever voted, thats it. Also campaign method is already denied by admins >_> 05:19, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * If it gets over and done with, it will go the exact definition of "smoothly" 05:29, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

Evan, did you know in the 1800's, the president didn't campaign? Either his supporters campaigned for him or people just went off of what they had heard about the person. 05:31, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

If you don't know who you're voting for, go look at their contributions and their talk page/profile. Do a little research and decide for yourself. No need to create controversy here. 05:35, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

That would be true if the nominees were unknown to the community and/or there being freshie voters in the play (because new votes will be floating and "up for grabs"). However the 4 nominees up there are already veterans and should no longer be a stranger to most of you. Therefore, you all should already know them well enough to know how they behave, what is their strength(s) and how they fit into the post, no?

Besides, the voters involved are also veteran / seniors in editing (referring to articles; I know I should not be the one to talk about this) due to the limitation of the edit count and time join. Thus there should be no votes made by any relatively new members who has yet know much about who's who around here. 05:37, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

No one campaigned the last time we did this and everything went smoothly, so why ruin a good thing? 06:02, November 8, 2012 (UTC)