User:SirFozzie/ACE2013

Candidates

 * Candidates self-nominated from November 10–19, 2013. Voting will be from November 25 – December 8.


 * 1)  • questions
 * Support. Nothing from their past, their contributions, or their statement makes me think about opposing. I like the fact that he's been involved in contentious areas previously and been willing to stand their ground and explain, which is not always the easiest thing to do when folks are upset.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Support. Current arb, had no negative interactions when I was on the Committee.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Oppose . After thinking about it, the combination of issues with a publicly undeclared account (too much potential for trouble to happen should the accounts be linked) and other issues pushed me over to oppose.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Slight oppose. I have concerns from his statement that would lead to unproductive confrontations and continue the divisiveness that has marked recent Committees.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Likely Support. I liked their answer to my question on defining civility and how to deal with incivility coming from otherwise good content contributors. I do have concerns that they're running more to keep others out then a thought that they could do the job.. I've seen more then one arb in such case get elected and then start to burnout once in the job
 * 1)  • questions
 * Candidate has withdrawn (was support)
 * 1)  • questions
 * Strongest Possible Oppose. Let's see, a positive, he was an arbitrator in 2004, but since then he's had advanced permissions removed under a cloud, and recently was the focus of an arbitration case which found fault with his conduct. Combined with his statement that he's only running because "ArbCom is wrong".. and attempting to drag ArbCom through the mud in his statement.... in my opinion re-electing DG would be the worst possible outcome from this election.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Oppose. Concerns about activity level and some things from the past.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Support. Find their statement and focus on what issues they consider important to be well stated.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Reluctant Oppose. Has been inactive for a while, otherwise I would probably lean support here.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Support After thinking about it for more than a little bit, I decided the lack of DR work would help them, not hinder them, and their answers were good.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Candidate has withdrawn. (was oppose, but congratulations on being a valiant return triple crown winner :))
 * 1)  • questions
 * Oppose. Have concerns that juggling real life and Arb will lead to burnout (they've already said that they will be likely taking a long break as part of their term if elected)
 * 1)  • questions
 * Oppose. . Given pie as a consolation for not being supported ;)
 * 1)  • questions
 * Has withdrawn.
 * 1)  • questions
 * SlightOppose. ... a good content creator (and the Committee can always use more) but after reviewing the whole nine yards, decided I could not support.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Support. Familiar with the Committee's procedures, identified weak spots from last years run, and has made changes.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Support. . After thinking about it for a while, I have to say that the Committee can use at least one or two very blunt, straightforward arbs. Answers were good.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Support. Familiar with advanced permissions (both OS/CU), and their statement is good. Like the emphasis on BLP and whenever possible, not doing harm.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Oppose. I have problems with several parts of his statement, and do not think they would be a good arbitrator
 * 1)  • questions
 * Support. No concerns with his statement, good answers to his questions..
 * 1)  • questions
 * Support. The thoroughness of their answers and the viewpoints they bring are good.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Support. I've worked with Roger for my three years on the Committee.. we didn't always see eye to eye on issues, but other than one fairly major blow up via email (which was resolved with amicable discussion), working with Roger has been a real positive.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Previously known as
 * Candidate has withdrawn Was oppose.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Support. Very good experience in AE, which is all the trouble of the Arbitration Committee without any of the "benefits". No concerns here.
 * 1)  • questions
 * Oppose. We need a Devil's Advocate on Wikipedia, just not on the Committee with TDA's past