User:WereSpielChequers/ACE2015
 | These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
Disclaimer: These are my personal voting intentions. You may have very different assumptions and criteria for arbcom.
Context
[edit]Whilst the norm is to elect half of Arbcom each year, resignations increase that and on this occasion we are electing 9 of the 15. Those who value continuity and experience on Arbcom will doubtless give the benefit of the doubt to arbs who stand again. However if you share my dismay at many of Arbcom's decisions you will take this as an opportunity to change more than a third of the committee in one hit.
I'm conscious that we are electing a committee and not an individual, individual committee members may lack some of the skills that most of the committee need, and I'm less worried about that than a committee member who has made or supported poor Arbcom decisions.
I've been a regular at the London meetup for many years, have attended five wikimanias and spent two years on staff at Wikimedia UK. In the course of that I have met at least four of the candidates, in at least one case that significantly sways my vote.
Arbcom is an unusual organisation with an increasingly important role. It can imperfectly be compared to many things, my preferred analogy is with the bouncers for the first village pub on the moon. On the one hand they are just the bouncers for a village pub, being fair and chucking out the right people is a lesser consideration, they are there to throw out enough of the troubled and the troubling for the pub to be full but not too raucous. On the other hand they are the de facto court of appeal and probation service for a high profile global website, the issues they deal with will include complex intercultural disputes, and some of their decisions can cause global opprobrium. Despite best efforts not all their attempts to untie Gordian knots will be achieved without the use of sharp objects. So I'm looking for Arb candidates who can move the committee from its rough and ready past to something more sophisticated, candidates who are aware of the problems of off wiki sites organising to achieve particular results here; Candidates with experience of working across cultures; candidates who understand that "may" does not mean "must".
One particular issue that Arbcom has to wrestle with is the gender gap and related issues of misogyny on the internet. Voters who haven't been following the issue at all might find it useful to read Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-10-21/Editorial, and especially its talkpage and the article it mentions. My take on that saga was that Gamaliel has his heart in the right place, but doesn't have the skills to evaluate evidence that I would look for in an Arbcom member. Opabinia Regulis by contrast came across well in that saga. My feelings are more mixed about Thryduulf, the Lightbreather case which inspired that series of articles was one of the most frustrating cases of the last year. A key element of contention was whether the evidence linking the offwiki account that created attack porn about Lightbreather on an offwiki site to a specific Wikipedia account was robust or not. I haven't seen that evidence, some experienced editors such as SlimVirgin believe that the evidence was compelling, the consensus of the functionaries was that it wasn't. Individual voters will have to make up their mind whether to trust the current arbs such as Thryduulf that the evidence was insufficient, or to share the outrage of editors such as Gamaliel that the arbs failed to be convinced by evidence that some found convincing. Given the disquiet, my suggestion was that they appoint a group of editors to look at that evidence again and report back on it. One of the reasons why I will be voting neutral on Thrydduulf is that he and his colleagues lacked the nouse to agree that this was a necessary solution to the impasse.
Candidates
[edit]- Callanecc (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Support Based on reading the question section
- Casliber (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Drmies (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Gamaliel (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
Oppose. I'm not confident that this editors ability to evaluate evidence is at a level neded of arbcom members.
- GorillaWarfare (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
Support. Not happy with all her decisions as Arb, but overall rather more than a net positive
- Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Former admin was admonished by ArbCom in 2011, and in 2012, was desysopped by ArbCom. A featured article writer with whom I have had some positive encounters on Wiki. Will reread that Arbcom case before I decide whether to support
- Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Support Based on reading the Q&A
- Keilana (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Support. I've met Keilana briefly at Wikimania and encountered her through the wikipedia weekly. Lots of Clue, delighted to see her standing
- Kelapstick (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Kevin Gorman (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Kirill Lokshin (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Oppose Previous arbitrator, not greatly active of late, very unimpressed both with his recent (and quickly reversed) block of Eric Corbett and his subsequent explanation for that block.
- Kudpung (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Support I've had several conversation with Kudpung off wiki and collaborated with him in various things on wiki. We often disagree, but I greatly respect his experience and judgment. I think he would be a huge asset for Arbcom.
- LFaraone (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Oppose. Current arbitrator, running for re-election. Not happy with his votes on multiple cases
- Mahensingha (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- MarkBernstein (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- NE Ent (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Opabinia regalis (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Support
- Rich Farmbrough (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Support I've met Rich several times at meetups and worked with him on User:WereSpielChequers/image_adding, unfortunately the list there is getting a bit stale due to Arbcom problems. Rich has administrator experience and knows how Arbcom can muck things up; Was de-sysopped by ArbCom in 2012, in a case about his use of automation, I think his perspective and unfailing civility and good humour would be of huge value to Arbcom.
- Thryduulf (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Abstain This is a difficult one for me, on the one hand I know Thryduulf well through the UK chapter and London meetups, on the other hand he has been in some dodgy Arbcom decisions
- Timtrent (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
- Wildthing61476 (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
Withdrawn
[edit]# Salvidrim! (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
# AKS.9955 (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
# Samtar (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • statement • questions
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
Category:Wikipedia Arbitration Committee Elections 2015 voter guides