User:Lar/ACE2009

Introduction
Herewith my thoughts on the 2009 ArbComm elections. I am now in the process of evaluating all candidates. If you have comments you are welcome to make them on either the talk page for this page, or on my main talk page. You should do your own research, don't go by what I think, but in case you were wondering what I thought, there you are.

This was generated and there may be some small bugs in the edit count link for people with spaces in their names, you'll have to fix them yourself.

Note: If you want to make one of these for yourself you're welcome to crib from this. I used a row template to help out. Technical issues with it should be raised on its talk page: User talk:Lar/ACE2009/row.

The Election and the process
Some thoughts on the overall election process, somewhat random.
 * First, (and I realise this may not be the populist view) I think the current (2009) arbcom is on balance the best one we've had yet. I think a lot of the credit for that goes to the increased structure and repeatability of processes that the committee has instituted. Just making sure that mail doesn't get lost, publishing a suggested agenda and time line, and other mundane things ... these all go a long way to making the committee and its proceedings "fairer". Wikipedia isn't intended to be fair, but making things fair when it doesn't stand in the way of doing the project is goodness. It helps morale and improves editor retention. I think a large part of the credit there goes to Kirill, and his loss hurts. So candidates that are likely to pick up where he and others left off are likely to get more favorable reviews from me, all else being equal, than those who think we can just wing it.


 * Second, I'm not really very invested in the discussions about how long terms will be. Seems to me that if terms are too long, arbs just up and quit, so the whole thing seems self regulating. But that said, the current apparent consensus outcome of two year terms and one election per year seems about right to me. Fixing the number of candidates in advance with no surprise appointments by Jimbo seems goodness as well.


 * Third, I remain convinced that BLPs are the single biggest problem facing the project and I intend to grade candidates on how I perceive their views on BLPs. ArbCom may not be able to directly mandate policy but I expect it to firmly speak out about the BLP problem and whenever it's a factor in the case, ensure that the findings do not punish those who work hard to alleviate it or reward those who do not. My questions from last year remain germane and I intend to ask them again (a modified version of them).

On the choices

 * First... these are my choices. Yours should be based on your own mind, but if I'm able to help, great. Also, although there are N slots, my final votes may support more, or less, than N people. If I support them, it means I'd be happy to see them on. So what's the difference between a support and a strong support or an oppose or a strong oppose? Just that the strongs are... well... more strongly felt, and I'd be more likely to actively try to sway you to agree with me, if we happened to meet over beers or whatever. But do as you like. The fate of the free world probably does NOT depend on this outcome.


 * Next: If you want to discuss or debate my choices with me, I'd be happy to do so, use the talk page of this page: User talk:Lar/ACE2009. This is in my userspace, and while all pages belong to the community, that means that the way I do things (for example, if you post it, it's staying... you can line it out but not edit it away once you said it) goes unless you successfully MFD this page. See the top of my talk page for that.

Currently Running
This analysis is preliminary. When it isn't I'll say so. ... I'm done unless something changes my mind. ++Lar: t/c 19:18, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Postscript
Thanks for reading this far, hope it was of some help to you…. Your mileage may vary… think for yourself! Comments welcomed (Use the talk page) but please remember WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Thanks!