User talk:Lar/ArbCom2007/Giano

Nicely Argued
I just thought I would run through the points you made, and, yes, I concur with all. I can think of a couple of others; some other arbiters are going to need to look at their reasoning and sharpen up their considerations, and, chiefly, that Jimbo/The Trustees will need to re-evaluate their relationship with the community if Giano does get sufficient vote/percentage. It would be a mistake to over-ride the wishes of the community precisely because Giano is known to ruffle feathers; that is why people are voting for him. LessHeard vanU 00:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Me too. Nice essay. Carcharoth 09:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, glad you guys liked it. It seems to be having some good effect. Oh, and did I mention I'm running for Steward? I forget. :) But I'll say this, if you lot want to use my talk (sub)page for your nefarious purposes, you can darn well put up with campaign ads on it, so there. ++Lar: t/c 05:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I noticed, and I voted for you, although I am not entirely sure what the suffrage is there. I think it is related to the home project, no? In which case my vote should count just fine. Risker 05:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it should, and thanks. 3 month old userid on some WMF wiki and crosslinked to show it's you, I believe... ++Lar: t/c 05:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Non-serious thread

 *  (split off from the serious section above) 

For the record, at the time of writing it looks as though Giano will be the second candidate (after Newyorkbrad) to break through the WP:100 barrier, probably closely followed by Deskana. Unfortunately, Giano is also getting a fair number of opposes (third highest number of opposes, and second highest numbers of supports). Carcharoth (talk) 05:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * And in the latest news, Giano sailed comfortably through the WP:100 barrier, while Raul is close behind and Deskana seems to have slowed somewhat. In the overall votes column, Giano is trying manfully to overhaul Newyorkbrad. In terms of stability of vote, it looks like Sam Blacketer could be affected most by developments over the next few days, with only 46 votes in total. Everyone has at least one support, while the only remaining vacancy is the oppose box for Newyorkbrad. Will anyone dare to break the streak? Who will get the coveted WP:200 vote? Stay tuned! Carcharoth 08:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Manfully? Risker 09:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * That gave you a mental image? I don't want to ask! :-) It merely means trying as hard as you can. Given that a zero can be talked up in many different way, thank your lucky stars I didn't type something like "the only hole left unfilled is Newyorkbrad's oppose column". Oops. That's a double double entendre! Carcharoth 09:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the early trend has six green candidates floating to the top, 5 yellow candidates caught midway, and the rest of the red chaff drifting to the bottom of the barrel (no offense to anyone). If that trend continues, the next two weeks could be rather boring. I wonder if the 2006 ArbCom elections were decided in the first 9 hours? More interesting is speculations on the number of ArbCom seats up for grabs. Is it only 5, or could it be as many as 8 (extending all tranches to six seats)? Carcharoth 09:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I think Giano's is the only candidature that has the potential for repeated raises and falls of percentages, barring one of the more steady support gathering candidates doing something stupid. The people with the obvious reasons to support and oppose are already in, and doubtless giving their reasons why to any unsolicited requests for clarification and comment from undecided potential voters, and I think there is likely to be blocks of support or oppose as different interest groups come to their conclusions rather than steady voting patterns. One thing is for certain, there will be no "following the herd" voting in this matter - which basically reflects the man himself.LessHeard vanU 13:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Possibly. Though I think the general trend once the initial surge is over is for the votes to split evenly and thus everyone drifts slowly downwards. It's just who drifts downwards the slowest or the least that matters. As for Swingometer, both those pics are copyright, unfortunately. Carcharoth 14:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The interesting thing about the total number of votes is that Giano has remained consistently high in terms of the number of total votes. He and Newyorkbrad are way out in front in that respect. Nearly every voter is adding an opinion to those two candidacies - the two big issues of the election: (a) the expected large show of support for Newyorkbrad; and (b) the drama surrounding Giano's actions during the Durova incident. There is, however, a small core of voters, around 20, who have voted on Newyorkbrad, but not on Giano. Those 20 wouldn't be enough to swing things, as the solid block opposing Giano is now enough to keep his percentage low. At the moment he would need an extra 100 supports and no opposes to climb up to 75%. In contrast, someone like Shell Kinney 'only' needs an extra 40 supports and no opposes to climb to 75%. Carcharoth 15:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'm obviously not quite as steeped in Wikipedia history as others. So tell me...the last two years, what was the effect of total number of votes (not percentage, total number) on the Arbcom appointments? If a person gets 80% support but only 50 votes, has that person still been appointed? I seem to recall that all the successful candidates had at least 125-150 total votes, but perhaps I am deluded. And so what else is new? Risker 15:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * See here for last year's result. Carcharoth 15:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, very interesting. Lowest successful total vote was 211 (jpgordon), the highest was 293 (Uninvited Company), and the highest total vote was CSCWEM at 403, more than 100 votes more than any other candidate. Hmmm...wonder if we are seeing a clown-like effect here.  Risker 16:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Can't sleep, Giano will eat me? Ral315 — (Voting) 17:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I definitely need to "hang out" with this bunch more often ;-) Risker 18:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

who are these riff-raff and why wasn't I notified?
What the heck! Apparently I forgot to put this page on watch! Or maybe it's the 3500 other pages I have on watch that made this one fall off my radar. Here a spirited conversation filled with bon mots, double entendres, and various and sundry other things has gotten off to a rousing start on one of my own pages and I didn't even know! OK then, carry on. ++Lar: t/c 05:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * You also missed the fun-filled accusations of bestiality against FT2. Electoral politics at its finest, that. ZZ Claims~ Evidence 18:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * what page was THAT on ?? ++Lar: t/c 20:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)