<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>Additional Google Community Administrator</title>
		<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/</link>
		<description>Attention:  Elliot Lee

We, the members of Google Community, are requesting that you appoint an additional administrator to help keep spam levels minimal.  We believe that adding an additional administrator to Google Community would allow quicker response times to bans for rule violators and spammers.

Sincerely, 
The Undersigned</description>
		<lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Feb 2005 07:0:20 CST</lastBuildDate>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<ttl>3</ttl>




		<item>
			<title>kishor kulkarni</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig459705</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>i do agree

</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Mandrake</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig443802</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I agree If Intelliot agrees we will have a poll.</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Paul123</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig443761</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I agree, the forums can get outta hand without a second dude to keep watch for the no0bs and $pammers.  Kool, I&amp;#39;m undersigned!</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Josh</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig442023</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I agree</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Mayank</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig441604</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I agree its time some burden should be taken of intelliot.</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>illya (putnik)</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig440865</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I think we could another admin on GC because there are so many spammers. The thing is, we need a responsible, active, commited and honest person to do this, because GC is a very important place for us all, and it is also widely used. We need this because intelliot is sometimes not able to be there and I think maybe we could have even more than 2 and have shifts or something like that. Yeah, those are my 2 cents.</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Kyle</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig439920</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I agree that we need another admin because it would help other administrators (most likely intelliot) save time for them. Another devout admin would help ensure that there will be no/ or most likely less spamming and more secure forums.</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Mike</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig439832</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I think one is needed too. There&amp;#39;s a lot of times when the boards are just bombarded with spam. Do it to it.</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Justin</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig439391</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I agree, I think their should be another administrator position on GC. It would have to be someone very trusted though. If you&amp;#39;ve ever been with xtreme-webhosting, you&amp;#39;ll know what I mean.</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>John</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig438346</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I do not care who it is, but i think it would be very helpul to put another admin on the site</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>jack</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig437632</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>i think randy should be the other admin</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Darren</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig437471</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I have to agree with you on this one Randy, I feel there is a need for an additional administrator or a super moderator as it does seem to happen quite often when we wait hours or days for a decision to be made on weaver we should ban someone or not.

You have my full support all the way</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Stuff2Do</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig436751</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>its true, elliot is not on a very lot, and if there were a crazed spammer on there the moderators can do nothing but sit back, having another admin i think would make it smoother, and easier, less spam etc etc, please make someone else an admin, i think theres one problem, WHO, so if you do, i think you put all the moderators names in a poll, and ask members to vote</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>James</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig436260</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>Hiya this will be a good idea because it will help Intelliot out by saving him time doing little stuff like banning and looking for spammers all the time when he can be doing better stuff to improve GC
-Myth</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Ashley</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig436247</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I believe this would be a good move for GC. Spammers seem to be coming in waves at the moment, and although we are okay at this minute (apart from some individuals) it is likely that there may be another wave soon. I think that this would be a good decision, and one Elliot must choose himself. GC will always be his, and a second admin wouldn&amp;#39;t take that away from him.</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Cat</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig436246</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I agree, we need another admin. (It would of cause be me! Joke) It would keep down the spamming</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Henrik</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig436150</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>There always seem to be spammers going round GC, and it takes quite a while for them to be banned. I feel that another admin would be good for GC.

-broken</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Stuck Fugu</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig436034</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>Ok i have nothing against intelliot, i just think he isnt on enough to make an adequate admin, so i think he needs to appoint  an admin</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Bill T.</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig435990</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I feel the same. I think GC needs another Admin to keep things in hand. Right now GC is crazy.

-microdude431</description>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Eric Straven</title>
			<link>http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/gcadmin/#sig435986</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:0:00 CST</pubDate>
			<description>I am going to sign this as I whole-heartedly agree. If Intelliot doesn&amp;#39;t have time to check &amp;quot;his GC today&amp;quot;, I think he should atleast appoint someone as an assistant administrator to carry out the necessary administrative responsibilities and other required activities(*ahem* ban spammers). If he doesn&amp;#39;t want to appoint anyone as an additional administrator, he should atleast give someone super moderator priveleges with the ability to ban.</description>
		</item>

	</channel>
</rss>