User blog comment:Gavin The Otter/req 4 b-crat/@comment-27062334-20180215132227

From the limited information that I have seen, you are not fit for this position. You appear to have no ability to be unbiased and from my perspective, bias is something that many administrators seem to have, which I believe we don't need more of. You also claim to want this position to block users WHEN they break the rules, not IF they break the rules. That wording is a red flag. While blocking is a part of the admin's tools, it should never be the focus of an administrator. Blocking is meant to be a last resort, which the rules themselves do not promote. In the thread, "unban me", you used the word, "disabilities", which to some is correct, but then again, those are the ones who don't have autism, which shows you are, to a degree, insensitive to those with autism. In the same thread, you incorrectly stated a fact, the one about Einstein having autism, in reality he may have had autism, not that he did, which shows that you do not double check your facts, which I believe every admin should be able to do. We also don't need more admins who only make small changes. If you aren't going to use all your tools and you focus on the tool that has the most destruction, blocking, then you should most definitely not be having this right. In the thread, "A Pal for Gary gallery arrangements", you used the "eye for an eye" logic on Jensonk and if you wish to use the response, "Well, he deserved it", then you most certainly are not fit for this position as no admin should feel that revenge of any kind is okay.