These criteria are adapted from those used by Alison ( talk · contribs), who, through her persistent kindness and level-headedness, has often provided me with an example to follow in the execution of the administrator's role.
The following is intended as a guide to one possible process with which I will readily cooperate if a reconfirmation of my adminship status is ever necessary.
Any three editors in good standing [1] may request that I stand for reconfirmation on my talk page. I respectfully ask that, if any user feels this is necessary, a detailed rationale of what they find objectionable in my behavior and/or any specific actions they find unacceptable be provided. If it is determined by more than five editors in good standing [1] (or more than two-thirds of the eligible [1] participants in the discussion, whichever is greater) that the recall process is being initiated in bad faith, then it may be nullified.
Upon acknowledging the recall request, I will analyze the rationale provided. In the event that I agree with the rationale, I will immediately request removal of my sysop privileges and waive the remainder of the recall process. Otherwise, I will:
Should the outcome of the RFC involve removal of my sysop privileges, I will not pursue another Request for Adminship for at least six months from the date when my sysop access was removed, unless I am nominated by an administrator. I will not accept such a nomination less than 30 days after my sysop access has been removed.
These provisions will remain valid even if CAT:AOR is deleted; renamed; or superseded by any process, unless I find its replacement to be more efficient or streamlined than this "guide" or decide to opt-out before any action is taken.