My opinion on RFA

When I try to make my decision, I will always support until I see something that makes me sway my !vote to oppose.

RFA Standards

What it takes to have me "support" you as admin

Time

I do not expect 3 years of editing. I think that one of the main reasons that we are losing people who want to be an admin is that it takes too long to be one. But, you have to have at least 6 months of editing for me to vote for you.

Edits

I do not expect an admin to be great at everything on Wikipedia. What I do expect, though, is for an admin to be good at what they do. You have to be competent.

Admin Stuff

I do like to see some record at admin stuff, like AFD and the like. If you are good at resolving disputes, this will highly sway my vote towards support. I do not expect you to be amazing at admin stuff, but I do want a candidate to actually contribute in admin-related areas. If it's only sometimes, that's OK with me as long as you contribute.

Blocks

A block for more than a couple weeks is a deal-breaker for me, unless it is very, very old. Any block within a year of the RFA is an "oppose" for me, unless it is for a Wikibreak, less than 1 day, in the first month of being an editor, or in exceptional cases.

The Most Important Standard

My most important standard is that I do not have fixed RFA standards. Although this is a good idea to follow generally, I will not always follow it.