User:GlassCobra/ACE2008

As I place votes for the various candidates this year, I note that I do not hold myself to seven votes, as others do. I feel that expressing support or opposition for each candidate above and beyond the seven seats that will be filled is important; if the seven candidates that I find most suitable do not end up being the ones chosen, is my vote then completely disregarded? As an extension of this, users that support only their seven and then actually oppose all the others is even more inappropriate, as it actually damages the chances of other worthy candidates. I would also like to take this time to opine on various other criteria that I have seen in use by other editors:

1. An imagined requisite of adminship. While it is certainly preferable to have a proven measure of trust from the community, being an admin in and of itself is not and should not be a requirement for running for ArbCom. We have exemplary users (this year, namely, The Fat Man Who Never Came Back) who have simply chosen not to run for the mop, and to penalize them so, especially with haughty and condescending statements like "user is not even an admin," is insulting and unnecessary. However, this is not to say that several failed RfAs should not count against a candidate, as proven lack of trust is obviously a negative factor.
2. Opposing other running candidates. Hopefully we're all above pettiness, especially in important elections like this. If a candidate has a serious concern about another candidate, they should be free to voice it, as long as other candidates are free to do the same if they feel it is necessary. Potential Arbs absolutely should care who they serve with.
3. The "too many hats" school of thought espoused by some users. The thought of a "career mandarin" on Wikipedia is all but ridiculous; while power hunger is a somewhat legitimate concern when running for adminship, people who are already admins and bureaucrats know that this is a tireless, thankless job. The fact that they are willing to stand up and volunteer to shoulder extra responsibility for this community should be lauded, not punished or ridiculed. One of our current Arbitrators, Deskana, holds just about every flag there is, and does a fantastic job with all his responsibilities, while still managing to contribute to the encyclopedia occasionally as well. I see absolutely no reason why this could not be the case with other candidates.

Elements of this page were stolen from the voter guides authored by east718, MBisanz and Lar, though this table was done manually. All statistics are accurate as of December 3, 2008. I reserve the right to revisit and change my votes as necessary until the end of the voting period. I am also open to questions about any of my opinions or votes, and am very much open to being convinced. I welcome any and all discussion.

Username	Statement	Edit Count	Member Since	Userrights/Titles	RFX	RFC/RFAR	Thoughts	Vote
AnthonyQBachler (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion	412	Sep 15 2003				Not an admin, low edit count; been around for a while, but not enough general experience to show readiness and suitability for such an important position. RL qualifications are impressive, though.	Oppose
BillMasen (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion	1175	Jun 8 2005				Not an admin, but has the right idea about what ArbCom seems to entail and need. Not enough general experience with the community at large as demonstrated by somewhat low edit count. Looking forward to future participation from this user.	Oppose
Carcharoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion	45056	Jan 8 2005	(13)	Admin	Matthew Hoffman; Betacommand 2	Respected member of the community, has impressed me with his well thought out and insightful analyses of situations. Seems neutral and dispassionate.	Support
Casliber (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion	45063	May 5 2006	(20)	Admin		Fair-minded and competent user, has always clearly explained his reasoning, especially at RfA, where we cross paths most frequently. I do note the concerns of the opposers regarding potential loss of content; hopefully Cas will keep up his high-quality article work.	Support
Charles Matthews (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion	166849	Feb 25 2002	(57) (30)	Admin ArbCom '04 ArbCom '06	Carl Hewitt; Matthew Hoffman; Slrubenstein 2	A self-proclaimed "backroom boy" in an era when openness and transparancy is crucial for ArbCom. Some varying concerns listed by other opposers and others with guides, and the overall need for new faces and new outlooks.	Oppose
Cool Hand Luke (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	10577	Feb 7 2004	(49)	Admin	Mantanmoreland	Commendable tenure, candidate statement and answers to questions were impressive.	Support
Coren (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	11656	May 27 2003	(12) (6) (7)	Admin Admin 2 Admin 3 BAG	Sadi Carnot	Indisposable help to the community at large with contributions like CorenSearchBot; reasonable and shows good judgment by and large. Passionate about one of the most contentious areas of the wiki and one that appears before ArbCom often, science/ pseudoscience. ArbCom clerking a big plus as well.	Support
Dream Focus (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion	739	Jul 18 2006				Not an admin, not enough general experience. As per statement, seems to be a little too content-oriented; ArbCom does not adjudicate content disputes.	Oppose
Fish and karate (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	27310	Mar 31 2005	(32)	Admin Admin ArbCom Crat		Formerly known as Proto and Neil, I've been a fan of his for a while. I don't like the "career mandarin" opposers, but the OTRS removal over postings on Wikipedia Review makes me very uncomfortable. Unfortunately, I'm just not sure he's got the necessary stability for an Arb.	Weak Oppose
George The Dragon (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion	4791	Jan 30 2006	(8)	Admin		Not an admin, somewhat controversial user. Seems to be using candidacy to make a POINT about Jimbo being the one with the final say. No thanks.	Oppose
Gwen Gale (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion	28984	Nov 23 2006	(5)	Admin Admin 2	Wilkes, Wyss and Onefortyone	Withdrew. Would have opposed, though; heavy-handed admin with cloudy past does not a good Arbitrator make.
Hemlock Martinis (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	13488	Apr 3 2006	(19)	Admin ArbCom '07		No pressing concerns, favorable statement, would rather have this user than some others.	Support
Jayvdb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	32162	Sep 5 2004	(14) (1) (6)	Admin		Level-headed and sensible user, recently trusted with oversight. Clerking a big plus as well.	Support
Jdforrester (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion	15931	Feb 27 2003	(65) (23) (30)	Admin ArbCom '04 ArbCom '06	Giano	I have a great level of respect for this user, a founder and member of the original ArbCom; however, the times are desperate enough and we really need new blood.	Weak Oppose
Jehochman (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	20890	March 22 2005	(13)	Admin	COFS; Sadi Carnot; Durova; Zeraeph; Matthew Hoffman; Waterboarding; Franco-Mongol Alliance; Tango; Slrubenstein 2; Cold fusion	Long-standing user, lots of relevant previous ArbCom case experience. I acknowledge concerns of opposers, particularly an overly combative approach and overconcentration on process, but this candidate is more suitable than some others that are running.	Support
Justice America (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion	202	Jun 12 2008				Not an admin, low edit count, recent join date suggests little familiarity with the community at large. Username also makes me a tad uncomfortable.	Oppose
Kmweber (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion voter guide	6514	May 8 2004	(10)	Admin	Kmweber; Kmweber 2	Shameless troll, refuses to answer questions from colleagues, yet is currently harrassing opposers on IRC asking why they 'hate wikipedia', because he is 'entitled to know'. Completely inaccurate view about what Wikipedia needs and deserves, ego the size of a city; the quintessential example of WP:POINT.	Strong Oppose
Lankiveil (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion	9354	Aug 12 2004	(3)	Admin		Impressive track record. Would certainly prefer this candidate to some others running.	Support
Lifebaka (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion	9899	Jan 21 2007	(5)	Admin		Outsider status is a general plus in a time when new blood is sorely needed; however, not enough general experience with ArbCom processes.	Weak Oppose
Privatemusings (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion voter guide	4645	Sep 23 2007			Privatemusings; Privatemusings	Also known as BigOleBarry, Littlevixensharpears, Nowthennowthenurrgeurrgeurrg, Petesmiles, Privatemusing, Purples, Thepmaccount, Why oh why not?. Formerly sitebanned for failing to exercise due care while editing sensitive BLPs. Serious past drama involving ArbCom, recent sanctions very much too fresh to ignore, recent behavior warranting a new RFC not exactly a boost in confidence.	Oppose
Risker (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	10517	Dec 27 2005	(6)	Admin		Exceptional candidate. Impressive answers and work both in the main and project spaces.	Support
User:Daniel/Admin-bureaucrat	statement questions discussion voter guide	64165	Nov 15 2005	(21) (4) (2) (9)	Admin Crat		Rlevse has proven time and again that he is one of our most competent and trusted users, having been promoted to bureaucrat and checkuser within the past few months. I've had the pleasure of working and interacting with him both on and off-wiki, and can say with confidence that he will make a fantastic Arb. His answers to the questions and candidate statement, as well as outstanding work in the mainspace, are testaments to this. Clerk experience invaluable.	Support
RMHED (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion	13217	Feb 8 2006		Admin Admin 2		Not an admin, two failed RfAs show plainly why this user does not have the community's trust.	Oppose
Roger Davies (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion	19905	Sep 17 2005	(9)	Admin		Impressive mainspace credentials, MilHist lead coordinator a plus. Seems to have a good head on his shoulders. Would prefer over other candidates running.	Support
Sam Korn (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	21500	Oct 8 2004	(43) (34) (30) (38)	Admin MedCom ArbCom '06		Withdrew. Not sure which way I would have voted, the candidate was out before I did my analyses.
Shell Kinney (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion	28429	Jun 10 2005	(36) (11)	Admin ArbCom '07 MedCom	Pseudoscience	Formerly known as Jareth. Having a rough time quantifying this vote; I just get poor vibes, and the statement is a little lacking.	Oppose
SirFozzie (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	6864	Feb 1 2006	(17)	Admin	BooyakaDell; Great Irish Famine; The Troubles; R. fiend; Mantanmoreland; Mantanmoreland; William M. Connolley	Decent statement and answers to questions, and Fozzie's generally got a good head about things, but I was very turned off by his announcement that he wants to try to have elections every six or eight months; that strikes me as quite a lot of wasted time.	Oppose
The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion	6758	May 29 2006	(10)			Also known as The Fat Man Who Left but Returned a Short While Later. TFMWNCB has been around for a long time and has proven his dedication through eloquent arguments and insightful statements. I was disappointed to see accusations of a joke nom among the other opposers, I think the candidate is serious, and may actually be a good fit. I was very torn about my vote, and may yet revisit it.	Oppose
Trojanpony (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion	207	Dec 6 2005				Not an admin, low edit count. Insufficicent statement and answers to the questions.	Oppose
Vassyana (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	11478	Oct 16 2005	(18) (18)	Admin MedCom		Haven't had a lot of interactions with this candidate, but MedCom work looks good. Would doubtless be better suited than some others that are running.	Weak Support
White Cat (talk · contribs)	statement questions discussion	45472	Feb 4 2005		MedCom Admin Admin 2 Admin 3 Admin 4 ArbCom '07	Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek; Cool Cat; Fadix; Moby Dick; Episodes and characters	Formerly known as Cool Cat and Coolcat. Unsatisfactory answers to questions, being the subject of multiple RFCs and ArbCom cases suggests an exceedingly inappropriate temperament for an Arb.	Oppose
WilyD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion	17980	Sep 30 2005	(18)	Admin	Sarah Palin protection wheel war	Very concerned about the forcefulness of this candidate. While I do agree that the current ArbCom seems content to just issue warnings and findings of fact, sanctions in every case is not the answer.	Oppose
Wizardman (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)	statement questions discussion voter guide	53571	Mar 9 2006	(22) (7)	Admin ArbCom '07 Crat MedCom		Active MedCom member, fine answers to questions. Wizardman's been making a good name for himself, especially in the past couple months (see the Ginger Jolie AFD/DRV). I've got a couple small nagging concerns about his workload, but I like him and I gave him a WTHN support.	Support
User:Daniel/Admin-bureaucrat	statement questions discussion	34606	Nov 20 2006	(20) (12) (18)	Admin MedCom Crat	Bluemarine; Franco-Mongol Alliance	Concerns raised by opposers weren't enough to balance out Will's positive MedCom work and evident trust from the community. Also wasn't swayed by "hat collecting" opposes. May not be the best running, but far from the worst.	Support