Your status as an assistant has come into question regarding several comments users have made in regards to your behavior and actions. While some comment people find offensive in which I see as neutral, there still exists other comments that you have made that have concerned other users. You have been warned about this in the past on several occasions, including recently by me. You have been reported through the user report form through this as well.
We are going to have a discussion in regards to your future as an assistant. You have three options:
1) Resign. If you feel things will not go your way in keeping your position, you have the right to resign and reflect upon your actions to do better in the future.
2) Write up a defense. If you want to keep your position, you can write up a defense. You will have seven (7) days to do so. Once you do, the discussion will begin on Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 8:30 p.m., eastern time. You can post your defense here or e-mail me at email@example.com
3) Do nothing. If you do nothing, the discussion will be posted, without your defense, on Tuesday, July 5, 2016 at 8:30 p.m., eastern time.
You have made great contributions, it's just that users are concerned and upset by your comments, whether or not they are well-intended. Please let me know what you want to do as soon as possible.
1. It would depend on how much you are spamming the comments section.
2. Technically, I cannot block you because I'm not an administrator or bureaucrat which means I don't have the ability to block a user.
You need to have patience. It takes me more than a few second to upload a picture. I cannot upload pictures at your speed. You need to have patience for me to upload pictures to a gallery without immeaditly deleting it.
It's not a matter of uploading the image(s), it's more of if your actually using the gallery formatting rules. Stop putting the "Sleepy Time" episode template because it doesn't belong in that kind of gallery. Only character images belong in a character gallery.
1. I guess your right because that comment about not having 500 edits was discouraging to Cc1612, the user who made that blog. I just wrote that comment for irony because that the blog was talking about the user having 250 edits and I said 500 would be good which twice the amount (250 x 2 = 500).
2. I have nothing to do with that sockpuppet user related thread and never had anything friendly to say about it. This is probably why I should not have got involved with it. QuackersClocks was just trying desperately to be back on the wiki.
3. I just thought that blog had an unfitting title for what it was talking about and I suggested a way to make too more juicy.
4. I intended for this comment to be encouraging. In this blog, Cc1612 was talking about having 300 edits and said that he accidentally deleted all the content on his userpage. He then stated that he was working on fixing it. The comment I posted there was telling him to keep working on his userpage since he wants to fix it.