User:L235/ACE2024 questions

Questions for ACE candidates

I intend to ask some of the following questions at WP:ACE2024, and would encourage others to ask others:

1. In what ways is the current committee succeeding and failing in executing on its functions? Please identify how you would seek to improve upon the successes and failures.
2. Please identify one or more ways in which the processes of the committee should be improved.
3. Please identify a substantive decision of the committee that you disagreed with within the last 3 years, and explain why.
4. In recent years, a significant number of retiring arbitrators have also, shortly after the conclusion of their term on the committee, largely or entirely retired from contributing to the English Wikipedia as a whole. Why do you think this is, and does it point to a structural problem with the role of arbitrator?
5. Please describe the characteristics that you believe make for an effective arbitrator. Please describe the characteristics from that list that you possess, and identify the ones that you do not possess. (Please note that I think it is impossible for any one person to have all of the characteristics that would make for an ideal arbitrator; it would be surprising if you were unable to identify any such characteristics that you do not personally have.)
6. Please estimate the number of hours per week you currently expect to be able to devote to the role of arbitrator. A range of hours would also be helpful to hear, if you are unable to provide a single number.
7. Please describe what categories of the Committee's work you view yourself as most and least well suited to.
8. (for candidates who have not previously exercised a functionary tool:) A significant amount of the committee's work involves supervision of the functionary corps. In your judgment, what makes you qualified to undertake such work without first having been a functionary?
9. (for existing or former members of the committee:) What, in your experience, is the most pressing deficiency in the committee's workflows or processes? By workflow or process I specifically mean the technical and procedural infrastructure that facilitates the day-to-day functioning of the committee — for example, the email list.
   1. (possible:) From my observations, it seems fairly frequent that emails to the committee go unanswered or are left without substantive followup. Why do you think this is? Would you support a ticketing system to help handle the Committee's email workflow?
10. (for existing or former members of the committee:) Please describe your self-assessment of your successes and failures as a member of the committee.
11. Are there any circumstances, personal or otherwise, that might foreseeably cause you to be unable to complete your term?
12. Please describe what makes you feel (a) optimistic and (b) pessimistic about the future of the project.
13. Under what circumstances should the committee take action based on private submissions? Under what circumstances might it be appropriate for the committee to take action while explaining that it cannot explain the reasons for that action? What do you see as the obligation of the committee in transparency of its decision-making process?