Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fram 2

[JuiceBeetle]

Not much interesting. Something to chew on:

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=10758&start=0#p251562
Usually, I don't like a mess of co-noms, as it does look as if the voters are being steam-rolled: unfair on the candidate, sure, but the multi-noms read like an instruction to the GroupThink, and the communitas is just there to RubberStamp.
...
Remember, this is not a RfA (Request for Adminship); this is a RfA (Refute fucking trust And safety)

Agree on 1st, idiot anarchist in 2nd.

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=10758&start=50#p251649
I think the bleeding will stop at around 60%, and starts to bounce back afterwards. In either case, this is a win-win situation; Fram as an admin or Fram not as an admin are both net positive IMO
...
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=10758&start=0#p251626
Any predictions for final tally? Considering Fram doesn't try to be hero and doesn't network, I am doubtful the support vote will exceed 325, with considerable more opposes.
I am calling 309-140-20... and the 'crat discussion will be yet again entertaining to watch, with some of them likely discounting votes that talks too much about T&S, ArbCom and process, rather than Fram as an admin

Well...
Getting closer:

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=10758&start=50#p251691
Stranger things have happened; Fram is not the type of person that would just withdraw. I don't think it will fall below 52% (Hawkeye7 3); I expect it to end up around 60%.

It was (90/90) at one point. That's 50%

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=10758&p=251774#p251709
Lot of strange bedfellows Carrite has now. If I woke up and found myself in bed with Peter Ex-man, Gamaliel, and the others that have been mentioned, I'd bolt as fast as my legs could carry me.

10920 playing the "not part of the cabal" card, and other shills/mobs/minions of the cabal also kicking Tim.

Vig occasionally trying some ideological nonsense, that might work in a different topic.

[Anyone]

09H30 BANGKOK TIME

98:95

Things seem to have stalled a bit.

[Anyone]

09H50 BANGKOK TIME

98:99

Wow! Just wow.

[JuiceBeetle]

Below 50% for the first time. Note: report tool missing one Support vote.
https://tools.wmflabs.org/apersonbot/vote-history/?page=WP:Requests_for_adminship/Fram+2

[JuiceBeetle]

Sitush shining his genius:

Actually, I think the crats should consider discounting all oppose !votes from people known to be associated with the WMF or WMDC because they're tantamount to being canvassed. The WMF/WMDC bods operate as a collective (hence their press releases etc) and have a long record of using relatively obscure backchannels such as mailing lists and IRC. -- Sitush 02:51, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

What about the 28 support votes within the first hour, Situ baby, if your concern in canvassing?
No problem, he must have made this comment in good faith, that's what he is known for.

Sitush tries to disenfranchise Wikimedia DC / WMF, but Carcharoth (former Arbitrator) play bigger, and tried to disenfranchise all Arbitrators:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bureaucrats%27_noticeboard&oldid=917906673#Arbitrators_participating_in_RfAs_following_desysoppings
the thought occurred to me (prompted by an arb saying explicitly that they intended to !vote in any such RfA) that in cases where arbitrators have voted to desysop an admin or (ahem) voted to maintain a 'desysop' (those following along will know what that means, but best to keep this general), is it left to individual arbitrators (indeed even ex-arbs) on whether to !vote in an RfA run by an editor who asks the community for the bit back, or is there some etiquette where this is best avoided?

"Fair play"? Desperate?

[Anyone]

Graaf Statler: This is the Fram RfA topic. Do you have a problem with discussing Fram? Should we post aimless rants as you do, instead?
You find these off-topic comments in the JuiceBeetle stomping thread

Yes, this topic needs to be kept spam-free.

I am terribly sorry that I was late to the party. My support was drafted in advance of the RfA and was intended to be at least within one of the first 5 votes. However, due to my time zone, by the time I woke up at 5AM his morning many votes had been cast so my vote will have lost a lot of its impact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fram&diff=prev&oldid=918087677

He must go to bed very early. He's in the same time zone as me.

[JuiceBeetle]

This is worth sharing... conspiracy theorists, prepare your tinfoil-hats!

[Anyone]

10H45 BANGKOK TIME

99:100

The 100th oppose was inspired yet again by Drmies.

[JuiceBeetle]

A weak attempt at manipulation / brain washing by fellow wikipediocrat:

An oppose vote under these circumstances is the raising of an unclean hand. Opposing the WMF's actions and opposing Fram's RFA here are mutually exclusive.

In a binary world, it is.

[JuiceBeetle]

What are the chances