I support deleting the first two in the list as well as the last one.
Neutral - I've had certain personal issues with her recently, and whiIe I believe these have been resolved, I think this puts me in a position where I'm not really able to vote in a non-biased way. So I think I'll vote neutral.
TheKorraFanatic - Strong Support
South Ferry - Strong Support
As the bureaucrats of TDL, they are important staff members and a core part of the wiki and the RP, so they should definitely stay.
C.Syde65 - Weak Support
While I'm aware of some issues here and there, I don't think they are serious enough to warrant his removal. Though he doesn't usually participate in the RP, he's good at doing maintenance and cleanup on the wiki.
EarthlingnAkumi - Support
Nothing to see here right now.
Downtown Freezy - Oppose
When Downtown Freezy applied for chat mod, I voted weak oppose. Since he has become chat mod, he has been called out multiple times for saying things that aren't appropriate for chat. This is not the behavior that a chat moderator should exhibit, so I'm voting oppose.
Oppose - I think 2 weeks is too long, especially since most votes take less than a week. Plus, as South said, they can be extended to 2 weeks if necessary, just as they can be closed early if the result is clear. Also, I don't see any reason to close them at night instead of during the day.
Weak Oppose - I do agree with others' opinions that he has potential, but I think the behavior issues brought up don't make him a suitable chat mod at the current time. This is highlighted by the fact that I was one of the few staff members to witness an example of the above behavior firsthand.
FalcoLombardi99: Remove. He isn't very active in chat or on the wiki, and also supports his own removal.
All others: Support. I can't think of any reasons to remove any of the other staff members.
I nominate Jamesb1, since he has returned from his hiatus, been coming to chat regularly, and has shown positive behavior essentially all of the time.
Support - I feel like the old proposal could turn away users who simply don't feel like editing, like users who'd prefer to just chat.
Support - In fact, the previous proposal technically closed as invalid, and it was never really strictly enforced anyway.
To add to this, like Mess, I was also not in chat for the discussion about adding more staff members, but this doesn't give me any reason to think that we do not need any more staff.
Support - Same reasons that Korra gave.
Oppose - At his current levels of experience and activity, I don't think he is qualified for the role.
Neutral - While I acknowledge the above comments, I'm not sure if we really need another bureaucrat. We already have two bureaucrats, is there a reason we'd want to have a third one? But then again, I'm not really sure, which is why I voted neutral.
Oppose - I don't think you really have enough experience yet to become a chat moderator.
I voted oppose.
Support - In general, bureaucrat rights aren't needed too often here, and should be used carefully and only after discussions, so having less bureaucrats may be better. However, they now can also be useful if you want to add a bot flag to your account in order to make repetitive edits without flooding the Recent Changes.
Support - for reasons listed above.