User talk:MBisanz/ACE2008

Neat!

We should have confirmed URLs for the confirmed folks. rootology (C)(T) 23:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, since I don't like linking to WR from my userspace and since some were said in other off wiki pages, I think we can just trust our own word that these people are running. MBisanz ^talk 23:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, no problem. I love the silly season. rootology (C)(T) 23:16, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do feel free to update it though as you hear stuff, you seem to have a keen eye for the happenings of the wiki. MBisanz ^talk 08:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You win, Daniel convinced me to add notes to the declines. MBisanz ^talk 18:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No aka!

'Zilla not known as little 'shonen! Confusing statement, please remove! 'Zilla very independent, please see link here. Remove false claim or little user blocked per WP:NPA and No Legal Threats! bishzilla _ROARR!! 23:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Little Matt cowers before the big angry 'zilla. MBisanz ^talk 18:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Information

Any user who is considering running for the Arbitration Committee, and is likely to be a plausible candidate for the community, and who wants to discuss Arbcom or any related matters in private to be better prepared (for example, to gain an understanding of some aspects, or check some assumptions and facts before or after deciding), is welcome to contact me for the purpose.

FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 18:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FT2, would you be able to crosspost this message to other more widely-watched pages (the election talk page, and perhaps WP:AN?) Thanks. -- how do you turn this on 18:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not tracking the election especially. However it is a serious thought; please repost it in full where you think it will do some good. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 22:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. Kirill ^(prof) 23:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Is the 'two chocolate cakes a week for the first month of Arbitratorship' rumour true?" Daniel (talk) 00:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, no; due to budget cuts, we have been forced to scale back our compensation package to one plain pound cake every two weeks. Kirill ^(prof) 01:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Economic decline taking its toll, I guess. What's next, the custom-printed stationery? :) Daniel (talk) 01:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) :::But I plan to offer a motion to bring the arbitrators back to our accustomed level of feed and drink by scaling back the clerks' budget instead. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

orly. Daniel (talk) 01:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, I'm bailing out at the right moment! :-) — Coren ^(talk) 02:39, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. FloNight ♥♥♥ 18:02, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. Same here...YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 04:13, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added you to the list of "Arb's willing to take enquiries and dispense advice", YellowMonkey. Anthøny (talk) 12:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kate's tools for each candidate

Probably should be on the official candidacy page if they're not already, such as this, plus here. People have lost elections before for inactivity/insufficient activity being cited for the reason. rootology (C)(T) 03:43, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mathbot generates a nicely formatted table for such things and did vote counting in the last election, I wonder if its creator could help here. MBisanz ^talk 03:46, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The edits/admin actions over time would be the big thing, I think. How many did you average combined over the past 6 months? 12 months? 24 months? Some people will argue that someone not involved shouldn't be an arb. rootology (C)(T) 04:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, we could probably toss a wikitable together with SQL and Kate's tools. Would we want just edits and admin actions at the 6, 12, and 24 month marks or some other degree of detail. MBisanz ^talk 13:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there was an easy way to pull the activity of previous/current arbs that are running in relation to how often they voted on cases, I'd say that, but beyond direct links to the query results like the Kate's tools, metric-wise I was thinking the broad overview of the rolling averages would be most useful. Some people are going to say, "He can't be an arb, not enough article work," but not everyone will. I was thinking it would be more helpful for more people to just show how active they were on average over certain time periods. I'd probably say 3 months before November 2008, 6, 12, 18, 24 would be pretty fair as a very visible barometer. rootology (C)(T) 13:11, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I looked around but I couldnt find stufff about voter eligibility. How do I know if I can vote? AlioTheFool (talk) 16:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed criteria are located at WP:ACE2008. If you were registered on or before 1 November, and had more than 150 mainspace edits at that time, then you can vote. Unfortunately, it looks like you're a few short this time around (per [1]) - but you can still express your opinion and participate in discussions with/about the candidates, if you like. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 16:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Too bad. I looked around earlier and didnt find it. Else I might have contributed more because I want to vote. AlioTheFool (talk) 17:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We took most of last year's election process and simply crossed out 2007 and added in 2008, but there was some discussion about changing the voter requirements; I think the consensus to keep last years requirements (which these are)did not firm up until early October. For editors who don't log in all that often, you're right - it might not be enough time. The upshot is that you're well on your way to being qualified for the next election, if and when! In any event, your interest in the process is appreciated. UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 18:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quite so, yes. I reiterate Ultra's comments, and express my apologies to you, Alio, that you aren't able to vote this year. You are, of course, still welcome to participate in the candidate discussion pages, themselves accessible through the automatic links on each candidate statement. Best, AGK 19:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Formally declining

Hi, it's been surprising (and more than a bit humorous) to get listed at your page, but with WikiVoices getting set to do candidate interviews it's time to put the rumors to rest. Please move the Wiki Witch down to 'formally declined' before flying monkeys show up with banana and coconut cream pies. Those little critters are trained to be sociable, but they also have good throwing arms. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 23:09, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/?diff=prev&oldid=250979948.
Heh, okay, I've updated the list to reflect your recently-confirmed status. Perhaps next year? ;)
AGK 23:13, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per: WR

What is per WR? =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:26, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This website. Davewild (talk) 08:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People were suggesting that I was going to run, so I had to put a stop to the nonsense and say over there that I wasn't running. (I should really note that I only have an account on that website to defend my actions when they're under the spotlight, I haven't once commented on anyone or anything else (that's actually one of my personal hates about people that contribute to both WP and WR)). Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 19:03, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering...

...why you listed me as a "possible" candidate for the Arbitrary Committee? Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 18:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well you did run for the Board and have been vocal wrt ArbCom, so it seems in the realm of speculative possibility. MBisanz ^talk 18:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I hadn't even considered it until now. It seems you've unleashed a monster... :D Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 18:16, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! Democracy! Or at least Something! MBisanz ^talk 18:19, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Color

Hey, could you tone down the three colors a bit like pastel tone? Reading your opinion with the color is quite making my eyes hurt.--Caspian blue 01:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, could you make the green background color lighter? It is difficult to tell from the read for those with bad color sight. --Apoc2400 (talk) 10:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, could someone who is better skilled at this make the change? Any green and any red will do. MBisanz ^talk 13:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try #D2F6D2 for your green and #F48084 for your red. AGK 21:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]