User:Jehochman/ACE2019

I’ve run in the distant past and know it is hard to stand for an election. Thank you to all the candidates for offering your services. After another decade of experience, I realize I would not be a good fit for the job. Please don’t feel discouraged if I don’t support you.

This guide format was copied from another editor who is skilled at making guides.


 * • statement • questions
 * Yes. Thank you for running.  We need more people like this in leadership roles.  Excellent statement.


 * • statement • questions
 * Good statement because they have experience and correct priorities and they already have OS right that’s normally given to arbitrators. I would support.


 * • statement • questions
 * Worm has been responsive to questions and attempted to do thorough analysis of difficult cases. This year the Committee has demonstrated poor judgement.  I do not blame Worm for this, and am thinking whether it's more important to have healthy turnover (which suggests opposing all the incumbents running for re-election) or better to have the known quantity (an above average arbitrator).

I would support.


 * • statement • questions
 * Great editor. I’m not sure the arbitrator role is the right fit.


 * • statement • questions
 * I have a favorable impression of Casliber. Having served in the past, we know what to expect from him. On the other hand, we need some turnover, so I will have to see how many other candidates I'm supporting and prioritize.


 * • statement • questions
 * Experienced user. I have no memory of them ever showing less than good judgement, so I have no reason not to support.  Great answer to my question.


 * • statement • questions
 * Has served as an arbitration clerk and seems to have good judgment. On the other hand, I have not been that fond of most arbitration clerks who then run for the Committee (NYB being the main exception) because it shows a desire for power, which I dislike.  However, that's not a strong enough reason to oppose.


 * • statement • questions
 * Thank you for offering to serve. I think you are qualified but may have less experience than other candidates. My evaluation is “on the bubble”.


 * • statement • questions
 * Read their statement. First choice.


 * • statement • questions
 * Generally I have had a positive view of KrakatoaKatie. As I suggested in Worm's section above, I am unsure whether to vote for the known quantity or to vote for change, because ArbCom has performed poorly during the last year.  I will vote for her.


 * • statement • questions
 * Unsure. Leaning against on my theory that Arbs and Crats should be disjoint sets of people. But, I think I'll make an exception because the user gave a strong answer to my question and seems qualified, and adds geographic diversity.


 * • statement • questions
 * A professional lawyer and a legendary arbitrator. Just who we need to set things right.  I especially like his empathy and desire to see the good in people.


 * • statement • questions
 * A wise and empathetic user who would be excellent on the Committee again.


 * • statement • questions
 * I like TRM but his demeanor is not ideal for serving as arbitrator. I think it shows bad judgement to run in an election and at the same time publish a voter guide, User:The Rambling Man/Arbcom voting guide.  Please choose one or the other, or else I must oppose.


 * • statement • questions
 * A past arbitrator who has not left a negative impression. I may need to refresh my memory.


 * • statement • questions
 * Sound judgment and past arbitrator, as far as I remember.


 * • statement • questions
 * Newcoming to ArbCom. I need to check their views to see if I would support.  Yes, I would.


 * • statement • questions
 * I disliked when bureaucrats run for ArbCom. It seems like hat collecting.  We need to distribute power in as many different people as we can.


 * • statement • questions
 * This editor has left no impression on me. This turns out to be a good thing.  They've been around a very long time.  I would support.


 * • statement • questions
 * Smart editor with lots of life experience. Also provides geographic diversity.  I think they would resist groupthink and they have not been an arbitrator before, and show no signs of unhealthy desire for power.  I would probably support.


 * • statement • questions
 * I'm of the opinion that anybody elected to ArbCom who isn't an administrator would easily pass RfA and should thus be given sysop rights upon election. I am not sure this candidate has sufficient clue.  I'll have to review their record.


 * • statement • questions
 * I don't remember them at all. Seems like I would at least remain neutral if not support.