Board Thread:Voting/@comment-14310002-20160515132719/@comment-8161155-20160515230921

I refuse to simply accept the argument "abuse of power" as a reason for demotion. Like Tucker said, cite some specific examples.

In law, there is something called "double jeopardy", which means being tried again for something for which you were already tried and found innocent. In USA, this cannot happen unless new evidence is found.

Obviously, we aren't trying anyone for murder here, but I would suggest a similar rule: no demotion polls for the same user within six months of each other unless the user has done something particularly noteworthy during the time since the last demotion. This rule would prevent the tedious trying and retrying to demote admins and make good admins safer from temporary rage-fueled demotion attempts. The rule could also apply to renaming pages, infobox image replacements, etc.

And on Sandgar: personally, I oppose his adminship. However, the vote has shown support for it, so it is unfair for the few in power to withhold this from him on the basis of their opinion. I would be all in favor for an amendment to the admin-promoting rules to make the potential admin need a two-thirds majority vote or something, but it is not fair to apply this potential future rule to a past election.