User:William M. Connolley/arbcomm work page

This is a page for me to make notes about the arbcomm elections, keep track of my votes, write at tedious length about my own uninteresting opinions, you get the idea...

I've interacted with the arbcomm somewhat. I find a strong tendency to feel obliged to vote for people who voted how I wanted them too. I'd like to try and be more impartial.

However, having been involved in several cases, I also see how much stress they are, and I'm really not sure that some people are taking it as seriously as required (obviously some candidates are jokes, but thats another matter).

I'm quite keen on consistency. I'd like it to be true that those I support have voted support on others I support; and ditto for opposes.

I have great respect for some peoples judgement and will allow that to influence some votes.

This page is, obviously, incomplete.

Some I would oppose but there is no point: they are already strongly opposed. What a waste of time...

Criteria (under developement)
...which is where they will stay!


 * Experience: absolutely essential. Anyone with less than... oh... 1000 edits is not close. I would make it a requirement next time, just to stop people wasting their time.
 * Take account of the votes of people I respect/trust. Tricky, when they vote different ways...
 * Opposition to UBOR due to poisonned source
 * Whether "oppose" votes give any reasonable reason
 * Other vague criteria I can't put my finger on

Votes (new format...)
In an effort to keep track...

See also http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/arbcom and User:Mathbot/Results (or possibly in the other order...).

My compliments to those who have withdrawn after realising they lack support; an example to some others.

NP means no point voting. NP:TFE means had there been a point, I would have voted no just on # of edits.

If I've voted in a way you find odd, feel free to tell me. I may change my mind.


 * 1) Ajwebb O:TFE
 * 2) AntonioMartin O: oppose as per ambi - Bill of Rights
 * 3)  Aranda56
 * 4) Aytakin O:TFE
 * 5)  Blankfaze
 * 6) Charles_Matthews S: An old Go-playing friend of mine. I didn't vote for him last time, somewhat concerned by his ability to wind people up by accident by email (sorry Charles). But time passes, and I like his answers to the questions.
 * 7) Dbiv S: good answers; good edits
 * 8) DG NP:TFE
 * 9) Dmcdevit S: looks good
 * 10) Dogbreathcanada O:TFE
 * 11) DoctorMike NP:TFE
 * 12) Doktorbuk NP:TFE (OK, 1090)
 * 13) Edivorce TFE
 * 14) Emt147 NP:TFE
 * 15) Everyking O: too soft; perhaps influenced by his own arbcomm experiences; which are another reason to vote against
 * 16) Filiocht S: Statement+Qs; Bmills; against UBOR (but for UCoC :-
 * 17) Fred_Bauder S: A few issues, but generally happy.
 * 18) Golbez S: injunctions are more speed are well needed
 * 19) Guapovia O:TFE
 * 20) Ilyanep S: statement, questions
 * 21) Improv No vote: plausible, but didn't like what-to-do-with-arbcomm section
 * 22) Ingoolemo NP
 * 23) James_F. S
 * 24) Jayjg S
 * 25) Jpgordon S: attitude; votes
 * 26)  Jtkiefer
 * 27) Karmafist NP
 * 28)  Kelly_Martin
 * 29) Kim_Bruning S
 * 30) Kingturtle O: UBOR
 * 31) Kitch O:few edits; all minor. Seems not terribly serious. Questions.
 * 32) KyleHamilton NP: TFE
 * 33) LawAndOrder NP: TFE
 * 34) Luckyluke NP: TFE
 * 35) Luigi30 O: inexperience, questions
 * 36) Mackensen S: Somewhat unhappy about focus on admins, but otherwise good (also unhappy about who voted oppose)
 * 37) Magicalsaumy NP:TFE
 * 38) Mailer_diablo O: UBOR; weak
 * 39) Maywither NP:TFE (great statement though)
 * 40) Merovingian No vote: reluctantly: UBOR; slight concern re naiviety; otherwise good.
 * 41)  Mikkalai
 * 42) Mindspillage S: statement, questions, decisions (a bit late on some?)
 * 43) Morven S: known sensible
 * 44) Nandesuka S: We/I had a disagreement when we first met. He handled it well, and subsequently I've met him elsewhere with good results. One of those I could be expected to consider good, since he was "on my side", but he did his best under trying circumstances to be neutral.
 * 45) Netoholic O: looks like axegrinding; also his second point misunderstands (of course the result is binding and is enforced)
 * 46)  NSLE
 * 47) Phroziac No vote: The Mel Etitis thing; the questions (esp UBOR); otherwise OK but hard to judge
 * 48) PZFUN O: decent statement; probably a decent guy; but UBOR and UCoC
 * 49) Quaque NP: (also has few edits: 1.5k)
 * 50) Ral315 S: a bit young but sounds good; a slightly unclear vote; influenced by FB's vote
 * 51)  Redwolf24
 * 52) RomaC NP:TFE
 * 53) Ronline O: weak oppose. Supports UBOR.
 * 54) Rowlan NP:TFE
 * 55) Sam_Korn S: statement, questions, votes
 * 56) Sam_Spade O: UBOR; other votes (both S/O)
 * 57) Silverback No vote. Nearly voted oppose.
 * 58) SimonP S: questions
 * 59) Skyscrap27 NP:TFE
 * 60) Snowspinner S: somewhat alarmed by RFC3, but policy and Q's good; I remember him from various discussions well; harshness required
 * 61) Svartalf NP:TFE
 * 62) SVera1NY NP:TFE
 * 63) Terenceong1992 NP
 * 64)  Tony_Sidaway
 * 65) Trilemma NP:TFE
 * 66) Tznkai S: Only just enough edits, but otherwise looks good
 * 67) Ultraexactzz NP:TFE
 * 68)  Z.Spy