User talk:Johnleemk/December 2004 Arbcom Election

Johnleemk,

The Reithy case you refer to is a little too black-and-white to provide insight into how you would conduct yourself.

How about the arbitration case involving Shorne? Do you agree or disagree that his actions warrant blocks or a ban?

For example, would you have blocked Shorne from editing communism-related articles for the length of the arbitration proceedings?

If the other arbitrators were discussing whether to ban him for a few months, how would you respond?

A case that is not so cut-and-dried can reveal a lot about the character of the individuals who are given authority to make decisions about such a case.

You state that you are not part of the insider crowd, so I'm curious to see if you would rule any differently than the current committee.

Since you are not on the Arbitration Committee, you can offer your opinion without affecting the fairness of those proceedings.

Thanks for running for election. I appreciate having more choices from which to choose.

Cheers,

--DV 00:56, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Well, first I must admit that having tracked the development of the Arbcom elections, I don't have a very favourable view of Shorne &mdash; at best, he's a rung or two above Reithy, IMO. Having examined the evidence, I definitely feel Shorne deserved a temporary injunction banning him from editing communism-related articles. The final decision I would support would be to ban him from editing communism-related articles for three months and to place him on revert parole (although if the ratification vote on 3RR passes, that wouldn't be necessary). I think a complete ban would be too much. Thanks for your query. Johnleemk | Talk 06:30, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)