Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Vote/Misza13

Support

 * 1) – Gurch (talk) 00:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs (st47) 00:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Snowolf  How can I help? 00:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Ρх₥α 00:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5)  Grace notes T § 00:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) &mdash;Elipongo (Talk contribs) 00:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7)  Baka  man  01:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8)  SQL Query me!  01:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) -Royalguard11 (T·R!) 02:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Alex 'fus 'co5  02:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) &lt; DREAMAFTER &gt; &lt; TALK &gt; 02:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Great user. Acalamari 02:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) · AndonicO Talk 03:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Hús  ö nd  03:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) -- Cobi(t 03:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) RyanGerbil10 (Говорить!) 05:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) Seems reasonable.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 07:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 18)  Miranda  08:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 19) Not as much relevant experience as some of the other candidates, but Misza13 can be trusted to work well on the Arbitration Committee. Angela. 10:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 20) Good enough for Angela is good enough for me. Stifle (talk) 12:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 21) Rami R 13:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 22) Addhoc 14:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 23) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] KTC 14:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 24) [[Image:Yes check.svg|15px]] Support Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 16:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 25) support --Rocksanddirt 18:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 26) Strong support NHRHS2010  talk  20:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 27) I would trust him with my life. Well, perhaps not my life, but at least a finger or two. Regards, &mdash;Cel es tianpower háblame 21:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 28) Would bring an interesting perspective to ArbCom. WjBscribe 23:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 29) Full support βcommand 00:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 30) Reasonable and fair. --  Where  01:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 31) Strong support. Good luck! Marlith   T / C  04:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 32) -- Y not? 16:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 33) Jon Harald Søby 19:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 34) --Docg 11:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 35) Terence (talk) 17:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 36) Support pruthvi (talk) 20:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 37) Support Rjgodoy (talk) 05:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 38) Suupport as reasonable. Bearian (talk) 21:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 39) Strong Support A great, trustworthy user. Best of luck. -  Billy- talk  18:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 40) Support wbfergus undefinedTalk 21:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 41) Support seems level-headed and trustworthy. JERRY talk contribs 01:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 42) Support--Hillock65 (talk) 23:35, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 43) Support Sarah 23:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Oppose--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 00:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Rschen7754 (T C) 00:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Anthøny  00:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Good guy, but all I see is vandal fighting and deletions, not of Arbcom experience This is a Secret account 00:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) <font face="verdana" color="grey">Qst 00:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Chaz Beckett 00:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) <small style="background:#ccc;border:#000 1px solid;padding:0 3px 1px 4px;white-space:nowrap;"><font color="#000">spryde  | <font color="#000">talk  00:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose Not rounded; not much editing. (my fuller vote explanations) -- Jd2718 00:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Rjd0060 00:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 10)  --W.marsh 00:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Nishkid64 (talk) 00:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Nufy8 00:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) <small style="background:#fff;border:#090 1px solid;color:#000;padding:0px 3px 1px 4px;white-space:nowrap">east<big style="color:#090">. 718 at 00:33, December 3, 2007
 * 14) Nope.  <font color="#FA8605">ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 00:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) - <font color="#0000cd">auburn <font color="#EF6521">pilot  talk  00:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) Too much of a jump up. Prodego  talk 00:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) --Agüeybaná 01:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 18) A fine user, but doesn't seem like much of the right kind of experience for this —Random832 01:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 19)  —  master son T - C 01:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 20) Not quite, sorry. --Core<font color="#457541">desat 01:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 21) Needs more experience beyond the technical. --<font color="7F007F">Rodhullandemu  (please reply here - contribs) 02:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 22) Mike H. Celebrating three years of being hotter than Paris 02:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 23) Too new. Maybe in a year? Zocky | picture popups 02:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 24) Too new, I'm afraid. Maybe next year. Rebecca 02:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 25)  krimpet  ⟲  02:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 26) Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 03:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 27)  M er cury    03:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 28) Shalom (Hello • Peace) 03:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 29) Oppose -Dureo 04:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 30) ~ Riana ⁂  04:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 31) JayHenry 04:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 32)  Spebi  05:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 33) <font color="#CC0018">T <font color="#0000C0">M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 06:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 34) Crockspot 08:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 35) No real insight into his judgment. Shem(talk) 09:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 36) His bot can't arbitrate for him.  Neil   ☎  10:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 37) Oppose Good guy, but his talents don't seem suited to this task. Xoloz 13:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 38) Oppose Needs more people-interaction and editing skills for Arbcom position. <font color="007FFF">Mattisse  14:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 39) Ral315 — (Voting) 16:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 40) Oppose Edivorce 17:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 41) Great admin, but not experienced in dispute resolution.  Wizardman  18:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 42) Davewild 19:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 43) Strong Oppose per his behaviour on Kelly Martin's RfA. It's not the fact that he supported her - some good editors, such as Moreschi and Riana, also supported. It's the fact that he accused the 100+ opposers of opposing over "nothing". Kelly Martin was viciously uncivil to a number of users and nearly drove them away from the project, abused her positions of power frequently, and generally was one of the worst disasters ever to befall this wiki. I am worried about the judgment of anyone who can't see that. This wouldn't be a sufficient reason to oppose an RfA, nor even an RfB; but an arbitrator requires an exceptionally high level of judgment and discernment, which I do not believe that Misza possesses. WaltonOne 19:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 44) Oppose Ripberger 20:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 45) Weak Oppose - as per Mattisse..-- Cometstyles 20:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 46) Oppose - Some experience in dispute resolution would be nice, even if it's just a little bit. You seem like a decent enough candidate otherwise, though. -- Schneelocke 21:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 47) Oppose Shot info 23:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 48) Oppose per Wizardman and Schneelocke. Needs at lease some dispute resolution, but otherwise is a great admin. <font color="#FF0000">N <font color="#0000FF">F <font color="#808000">24 (radio me!) 23:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 49) Oppose Did not reply to request to provide examples for good work. Arbitrators should back up their claims with links. &mdash; Sebastian 00:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 50) EconomistBR 00:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 51) oppose how could he automate Arbcom? Also if he was really into the Kelly Martin RfA, when the rest of the wiki gave a vast consensus against it, then his views are unlikely to reflect the community's at times. Me  rk  i  n  s  m  um  02:47, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 52) Oppose Atropos 05:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 53) Oppose as per Walton. Xdenizen 06:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 54) Oppose per answer to my question. This user focuses on the technical aspect of Wikipedia, which, according to him, will not help him in ArbCom. I think that the editor wants to be a checkuser, not really an ArbCom member. User:Krator (t c) 11:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 55) - <font face="Trebuchet MS">Zeibura (Talk) 22:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 56) Michael Snow (talk) 23:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 57) Oppose Chardish (talk) 02:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 58) Oppose. When the user comes up with a technical replacement/augmentation for arbcom, I'll consider supporting, otherwise I'm not sure how this candidate can help the current situation. Viriditas 03:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 59) Weakly opposing all but the 10 candidates I'd explicitly like to see on Arbcom to double the power of my vote. --<font color="#330000">M <font color="#334400">P <font color="#338800">er <font color="#33cc00">el 04:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 60)  W/mint <sup style="color:#2a6e6b;">-Talk-  07:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 61) Oppose. Wetman (talk) 09:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 62) Mailer Diablo (talk) 15:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 63) Oppose.Sweetfirsttouch (talk) 17:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 64) Oppose per content-free answer to NPOV/SPOV question. Skinwalker (talk) 18:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 65) Oppose - The arbcom is evil, so any candidate who chooses to participate in it in any manner shows poor judgment. Gentgeen (talk) 03:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 66) Oppose, a very technically minded person in the group would be good, but a candidate would need to already be actively experienced in assisting Arbcom to be considered primarily for that reason. John Vandenberg (talk) 04:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 67) Oppose does not seem to understand the subtleties involved in making this open-source encyclopedia project work. ScienceApologist (talk) 16:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 68) ˉˉanetode╦╩ 01:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 69) Weak oppose, your skills are better suited to other areas of the project. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 08:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 70) Oppose per Tito. -- Graham 87 06:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 71) Sorry but vandal-fighters have their place, but Arbcomm isn't it.  Good guy though.  ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 21:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 72) Oppose - might be very good, but lack of relevant experience in building consensus makes it impossible to tell. Warofdreams talk 19:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 73) Though happy to work with you. Dekimasu<small style="color:darkgreen;">よ!  04:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 74) Oppose Luqman Skye (talk) 07:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 75) Great user, but I'm not convinced he'd make a good arbitrator. Stick to what you're good at. the wub "?!"  17:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 76) Mike R (talk) 20:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 77) Oppose --Pixelface (talk) 03:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 78) Sorry, but I agree with Matisse and Xoloz here. Sjakkalle (Check!)  14:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 79) Oppose <font color="#ff004f">S<font color="#ff001f">a<font color="#ff1000">u<font color="#ff4000">d<font color="#ff6000">a d e 7  22:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 80) Oppose per Xoloz. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 06:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 81) Oppose per Titoxd. Carcharoth (talk) 13:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 82)  Maxim (talk)  00:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 83) Oppose good skills, just not in the area of ArbCom. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 01:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 84) Oppose. A fine editor who is lacking experience in the key area of dispute resolution. --Muchness (talk) 00:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 85) Oppose. Gen. von Klinkerhoffen (talk) 01:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 86) Oppose, don't feel you are right for this job at this time. — <font color="#FF9933" face="monotype">xaosflux  <font color="#00FF00">Talk 15:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 87) Oppose. --JWSchmidt (talk) 20:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * 88) Oppose (Sorry. :/) experience seems to0 limited. deeceevoice (talk) 23:26, 16 December 2007 (UTC)