Jump to content

User:Sohom Datta/votes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is just a dump of the way I voted in the Arbcom elections and why I did so. These are just my personal opinions :) You should do your own research and not listen to me.

2023

[edit]
  • Aoidh - Red X symbolN Oppose - Elected as an admin in March 2023, not really all that experienced from an adminning POV. Maybe next year :)
  • Cayabi - Green checkmarkY Support - Previous arbitrator, no issues with a new term
  • Firefly - Green checkmarkY Support - Previous clerk, familiar with arbcom/DR procedures, nothing bad here
  • HJ Mitchell - Green checkmarkY Support - Contributions are content heavy, but they have been an admin for a fairly long time, and that itself counts as DR experience, nothing to give me pause.
  • Maxim - Green checkmarkY Support - Previous arb, no issues with new term
  • Robert McClenon - Gray equals sign= Neutral - They have really good (and I mean really really good, better than many other admins) understanding of the DR procedures. However, the fact that they are not an admin (which is unexplored territory imo for arbcom) and have failed to pass an RFA despite multiple tries gives me pause. In addition to this, their answer to the questions gives off a bit of "to the letter" vibes which I'm unsure would be good in an arbcom-like setting.
  • Sdrqaz - Green checkmarkY Weak support - Bit of a meh here, contributions are content heavy, admin in 2022 which is not that long ago, but again nothing against some new blood and they don't seem to have anything bad going for them.
  • ToBeFree - Green checkmarkY Support - Previous clerk, familiar with arbcom/DR procedure, nothing to give me pause
  • Z1720 - Red X symbolN Oppose - Really great content contributions, but basically only that, I don't see a lot of DR experience which imo counts as a big no-no especially for positions like arbcom
  • Wugapodes - Gray equals sign= Neutral - Former arbitrator with an otherwise good track record. However, concerns have been brought up about their participation in the Poland case (which are coroborated by their answer to Q6) that they were overly scholastic and went too deep into the subject matter. This gives me pause from enthusiastically supporting.