User:Giraffer/ACE2021

I don't pretend to have been around for long, or to be particularly experienced, but I hope this page can serve as something of an informative tool for voters. Feel free to drop any comments or suggestions on the talk page. Thanks, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:54, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

{{legend|#9F9|Permission currently held}} {{legend|#F99|Permission not held, nor previously}} {{legend|#ffff90|Permission previously held, resigned in good faith or removed for inactivity}}

{{legend|orchid|Permission previously held, resigned under a cloud or removed for cause}}

Worm That Turned
Re-running incumbent, drafter on cases RHaworth & Motorsports

Worm That Turned is running for re-election as an incumbent arbitrator, for a third consecutive term and fourth overall. First appointed an Oversighter in 2012 and elected as an arbitrator from 2013-14 and 2018-present, he is undoubtedly familiar with the requirements and tools of functionaries, as well as ArbCom's role in privacy-related matters. This may be important, since only two other incumbent arbitrators (Beeblebrox & KrakatoaKatie) have continuously held functionary positions for more than five years. Furthermore, in his past two elections (2017 & 2019) he received 70 and 76% support respectively, making him an uncontroversial candidate as far as ArbCom elections go.

While a vote for WTT isn't a vote for new blood, his six years on the committee would mean that he would likely bring his institutional knowledge into the 2022 iteration, generating continuity and working from experience in addition to policy.

Beeblebrox
Re-running incumbent, drafter on the case Iranian politics

Another incumbent seeking re-election, Beeblebrox is another tenured administrator and functionary who has served on the committee in 2014 and from 2020 to present. In their candidate statement they highlight their willingness to admit and resolve their mistakes, and their low tolerance for disruption to the project – the former of which is definitely an essential quality. This year Beeblebrox has been active in the appeals process and helped establish a statistics page on ArbCom appeals, while remaining active onwiki both in arbitration space and elsewhere with approximately 6200 edits in 2020 & 2021. In cases they tend to vote in line with the committee consensus, and have casted no dissenting votes in site ban or desysop remedies since the beginning of their current term.

Beeblebrox is also active on Wikipediocracy, and this led to a WT:ARBN request and RfC by to prevent arbitrators from discussing ongoing arbitration matters in offwiki forums.

Overall, Beeblebrox is a candidate familiar with ArbCom, functionary work, and the activity required for both. As such, electing Beeblebrox to the 2022 ArbCom would ensure that they are able to carry on assisting with the committee's workload, and that they can continue to draw from their functionary experience to help the committee in a variety of ways.

Banedon
New non-admin candidate

The first candidate this year who isn't an incumbent (and also not an administrator), Banedon is a new face at ArbCom elections. In their candidate statement, they say that the focus of the committee should be justice, that cases filed by uninvolved parties should be declined, and that cases should be named similar to court cases, titled in the format: Filing party(ies) vs. Defendant(s). Banedon also believes that "Because justice comes first, Arbcom should be structured more like a legal process and less like a community dispute resolution process.", and that "if necessary I will approach WP:LAW for help in crafting a fair process. Justice comes first." The desire expressed here to directly invoke change differs considerably from the two other candidates, both of whom wish to continue to work as they have for two years.

Banedon has never run for adminship, and they have minimal participation in arbitration or administrative matters, with 48 edits to ARC, 48 to WT:ARBN, 36 to ARCA, 10 to AE, although they have been active in previous ArbCom elections. Banedon has 12 and 9 edits to ANI and AN respectively, and they appear to have never filed a sockpuppet investigation or reported a user for vandalism. They also include links to two threads they started on WT:ARBN (1), (2), where they reiterate their view of ArbCom as a legal process: "I envisage arbitration as similar to law [...] There is no chance of an actual trial".

Banedon is definitely an outsider and their candidate platform of change and an increase in legal-style processes is unconventional, however given some of the dissatisfaction with ArbCom as a process this may prove to be an appealing notion.

Wugapodes
New admin candidate

Wugapodes is the first non-incumbent sysop candidate to run this year. They have been an administrator since January 2020, where one of their co-nominators (then an incumbent arbitrator) stated the following: "I initially asked Wugapodes to run as a non-administrator candidate in the most recent arbitration committee elections, as they have shown themselves to be soundly in touch with the project's goals and ideals through their contributions to policy/guideline, dispute resolution, and other community discussions." Wugapodes' name never made the ballot, but they did pass their RfA 158/1/2.

Their candidate statement focuses on three main points: their three-part decision making process when taking sysop (and potentially arb) actions, their experience in other areas of Wiki(m/p)edia, and their experiences in the free-culture movement and how they would use this to facilitate greater Enwiki integration with other wikis. This last point is perhaps the most unique – other projects and languages are rapidly growing, and recent events have necessitated coordination across ArbComs and wikis more than ever before. Wugapodes has also demonstrated their skills in closing discussions and determining consensus, most recently in their closes of phase 1 of the 2021 RfA Reform process, and the latest ARS ANI thread. Last September they also closed the Kiev/Kyiv move request.

While Wugapodes does not have much experience in arbitration-related matters, with only 6 edits to ARCA and 5 to AE, they have filed a handful of sockpuppetry investigations, and served as reserve commissioner for the 2020 Arbitration Committee election.

On the whole, Wugapodes is a unique candidate, and despite not having much experience in arbitration related matters, they possess other skills and knowledge that would be of use to the committee regardless.

Donald Albury
New admin candidate

Donald Albury is running for ArbCom this year, to bring their skills and principles to the committee. Having toyed with the idea of putting themselves forward previously, in response to a question on their motivations for running, they stated Albury has previously been a member of VRT (formerly OTRS) and helped out with the Wikipedia Education Program, giving him experience with privacy and the outward-facing areas of the project. He is a content creator, with over 60% of edits to mainspace and 302 articles created, and says in his nomination that he enjoys gnoming. He also states that he shies away from conflict and that the assumption of good faith (until proven otherwise), cooperation, and civility are vital to the improvement of the encyclopedia. He is also willing to be held accountable and self-reflect, for example in this AN thread.

However, Donald Albury has almost no experience with arbitration, with two case workshop edits from 2007 and three ARC edits in total. He has only ever filed four sockpuppet investigations, and from what I could see he does not frequently determine consensus. That said, he is distinctly not a career Wikipedian, and holds the project's best interests at heart. While his outsider status to arbitration may be unpopular with some, administrative tenure without involvement in arbitration is uncommon, and may be popular with voters.

Opabinia regalis
Re-running former arbitrator

After two years off of the committee, Opabinia regalis is running for a third ArbCom term (having previously served from 2016-2019). She emphasizes that she tends to be on the lenient side, for example opposing The Rambling Man's desysop (a then-passing remedy which was made moot by his resignation before the conclusion of the case), abstaining on Salvidrim!'s desysop, and supporting the restoration of Fram's administrator tools. Opabinia also states As the only (publicly declared) female candidate, she offers a unique insight into women's perspectives in an ArbCom which is predominantly male.

However since the expiration of her term, she has only made 1109 edits – although this is something she acknowledges in her statement.

Opabinia regalis would bring arbitration experience and knowledge to the committee, having served through arguably one of its most tumultuous years (2019). As a woman, she may be able to offer additional insight into certain matters, and improve the committee's equality. However, she is lenient on desysoppings – much more than some of her former colleagues – thrice being a dissenting vote in the proposed decision, although given some of the recent controversy surrounding the 2020-21 desysoppings this may be an appealing quality in a candidate.

Cabayi
New admin candidate

Cabayi is running for ArbCom this year, not on platform of reform or change, (which they believe should be orchestrated by the community if desired), but on their low tolerance of WP:NOTHERE users, and desire to ensure the self-governance of the project, and isn't overly influenced by the WMF. Their statement is brief, and in the opening section they highlight their experience as an SPI clerk (31 months), and 20 month experience as a sysop and VRT agent (RfA passed with 87%: 133/20/5, March 2020). They were unsuccessful in the 2020 functionary appointments, but continued to serve SPI in their capacity as a adminclerk nonetheless. Advanced knowledge of socking and abuse is useful, as the committee frequently deals with unblock requests from sockpuppeteers.

Arbitration is an area in which Cabayi lacks experience, with only seven ARC edits, three AE edits, and no logged action in either, so joining the committee may be a learning curve. At 20 months their adminship tenure is the shortest of the candidates this year, although their non-admin work as an SPI clerk may account for some experience outside of holding the tools themselves.

In conclusion, Cabayi is an administrator who if elected would work to ensure that disruptive users and sockpuppeteers are kept away from the project, and that the Enwiki community can continue to (largely) self-govern. While they lack the relevant arbitration experience and would be entering their term as a newcomer to the field, that is not to say that they could not learn it.

Guerillero
Re-running former arbitrator

Having previously served as an arbitrator from 2015-2016, Guerillero is offering to serve again for the 2022-2023 tranche. He ran unsuccessfully in 2020, however he obtained the necessary support for a two-year term. Despite not having as much committee experience as other candidates, he is very familiar with working at AE and ARCA as a regular admin, with 210 and 163 edits to them respectively. His statement mentions this, and also that he wishes to participate in the Discretionary Sanctions (DS) review. Guerillero is also experienced as a CheckUser, having retained the permission from his time as an arbitrator. Experience with CheckUser is listed on Barkeep49's election notes as a "useful attribute", given the large number of CheckUser-block appeals the committee deals with. Guerillero would likely be an asset in this regard, especially when the committee is set to lose.

Guerillero has been largely inactive this year, with just over 275 edits since May, although they acknowledge this in their statement and pledge to be able to serve as an arbitrator in full activity. In August, he did not recuse on the (ultimately declined) BrownHairedGirl case request, and pre-emptively warned participants of his dim view of incivility, although I am unsure of whether his comment was pertaining to the specific case he would have clerked, or his attitude as a clerk in general.

Overall, Guerillero is a candidate who would ensure that the DS review is completed, and use his experience in arbitration-space to assist with this. His experience as a CheckUser would also allow him to assist with the auditing and unblocking side of the committee, as well as assist functionaries where needed. However, his activity in the past 6 months is significantly lower than many other candidates, and this may dissuade voters, especially when the committee requires continuous attention.

Izno
New admin candidate

Izno is running for ArbCom this year "with trepidation". Their statement gives the impression that they are largely running to increase the pool of candidates, but they offer their skills as a (real-world) engineer to help the committee develop creative solutions to the problems they may face. As an interface admin, Izno is highly competent technically, and the flag requires strong levels of carefulness and thoroughness, since a minor mistake could break part of the site.

Aside from their participation in the Magioladitis case, they do not have any arbitration or dispute resolution experience, and they are not a member of any privacy-focused teams such as VRT or Oversight, although they have filed a handful of sockpuppetry cases.

On the whole, Izno is a strong outsider to arbitration, and while their technical skills do not translate into arbitration ones, they may be helpful nonetheless. Izno is eminently trustworthy as an interface administrator, and their willingness to design creative solutions to the committee's problems is an interesting and relatively uncommon platform.

Thryduulf
Re-running former arbitrator

The only other non-arbitrator functionary to run for ArbCom this year, Thryduulf is a highly tenured user and administrator who seeks his second term on the committee, having served a one-year one in 2015. His statement focuses on his administrative philosophy – the the reader comes first, the writer second, and the rest (behind-the-scenes editors) third, and that he believes and that  Despite being a longstanding functionary, his statement makes no mention of privacy or functionary matters, opting to focus on dispute resolution and his desire to make arbitration cases more timely.

Thryduulf voted "strong delete" in the COI templates TfD earlier this year, expressing some unconventional views during the discussion 1, 2, 3 (which was ultimately closed as keep). While he believes that protecting the encyclopedia is the main priority, only 21.5% of his edits are to mainspace, although he has written a featured list. Without commenting on the merits of either questions or the manner in which they were asked, his response to Fram's question was unambiguously personalizing, and he stated in response to Gerda's question (asking whether he would have recused on the RexxS case) that As I have worked closely with RexxS on multiple occasions and consider him a friend in real life, I would have recused from that case (unless RexxS asked me not to, I remember him saying something to that effect at an Oxford meetup but whether it was in this context I don't recall). He appears to be suggesting that he may not recuse if asked to by RexxS, which would have been in violation of arbitration policy.

If elected, Thryduulf would work to ensure that the readers and content creators are able to use the site effectively. He believes that an abundance of positive contributions to the encyclopedia does not absolve someone of responsibility for their actions, and he is willing to sanction experienced users if it is in the interest of the encyclopedia.

While his administrative philosophy is not unique, in a arbitration context it is unusual. His views expressed in the COI TfD are also unconventional, and given that ArbCom on occasion deal with undisclosed paid editors, his alternate views on how we respond to them may be of interest to voters.

Enterprisey
New admin candidate

A perennial in anyone's, Enterprisey is a technical editor who is running for ArbCom on the basis of applying their skills and experience to the arbitration process. Their statement makes minimal reference to their technical work (both as a script developer and an interface administrator) and focuses much more on what then envision a good arbitrator to be like – namely strong communication, empathy, humility, and self-awareness. In their statement they explain that they believe long-term users who repeatedly violate the civility policy are a net negative, but that more creative solutions should be employed to allow them to continue editing whilst solving any issues. Enterprisey also believes that the committee should take a stronger position on harassment, and educate the community on common methods of manipulation. They remain committed to continuing their recent efforts to improve Wikipedia's workflow and recent changes patrolling & newcomer experiences.

Enterprisey has never edited an arbitration page outside of their own candidacies both in 2021 and in 2019, except to fix minor technical issues (3 edits total). They have minimal experience with sockpuppetry (4 lifetime edits to SPI related pages), and are not a member of any privacy-concerned teams, such as VRT or Oversight.

On the whole, Enterprisey is a candidate coming from a unique background, wanting to help with arbitration business. They highlight the qualities they deem important, and while their behavior on the project largely supports this, their comments on arbitration specifically are unsupported by their lack of participation in the area. Enterprisey will have a learning curve, should they get elected, but their origins in an unrelated field may give them an outsider's perspective which many re-running or long-term incumbent arbitrators will/do not have.

Results analysis

 * In general, the community voted for new members from a variety of backgrounds.
 * Of the five former & incumbent arbitrators who ran, two didn't get in – whereas of the six non-arbitrator candidates, five were elected.
 * While the two most supported candidates were former arbitrators, the above statistic shows that prior committee experience in no way guaranteed (re-)election.
 * Uncontroversial candidates did well – the three candidates with the most neutral votes were all elected.
 * There was confidence in the successful candidates, with all of them comfortably achieving the 60% support required for a two-year term.
 * Discussion doesn't always help, as the two candidates with no discussion were both elected, whereas the candidates with longer discussions tended to not do as well (WTT being a notable exception).

Finally, a large thank you to everyone who put themselves forward. Regardless of success, it's great to see people offering to server the community in a greater capacity, and I think that the high number of elected candidates who were reluctant to sign up at first (and therefore not motivated by a personal desire) will help the 2022 committee arbitrate exceptionally fairly and free of individual motivations.