Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Candidate statements/White Cat/actual statement

White Cat

 * 1) Why do you even bother to run?
 * 2) *I am more than dissatisfied with how arbcom is unable to solve complex problems. Many people to date said this... I know all too well. But complaining alone never fixes problems. Arbcom has been broken nearly as long as I have been on this site.
 * 3) Why are you running even though "you know you will not win"?
 * 4) *I am more than aware that I have a less than ideal wiki-resume on the site so I do feel my wiki-resume is a lot weaker than some/most of the other candidates running along with me. Skimming through the initial list, some of the other candidates happened to be seasoned arbcomers running for reelection. You sometimes need a fresh approach to fix something that is broken. I hope to be that approach.
 * 5) Are you running for the title "arbitrator"?
 * 6) *I am completely uninterested in the title business (of any kind), I am a qualified engineer, why the heck would I care about a title on a website? It's not like this is something you put on your resume nor is it relevant in any circles outside of en.wikipedia.
 * 7) Why are you running even though you aren't an admin!?
 * 8) *I do not understand why people make a big deal of adminship on this site. Adminship is nothing remarkable, really. Especially on en.wikipedia adminship became a popularity contest rather than a mean to give an extra tool to good and responsible users. People will oppose your candidacy even over something as irrelevant as your political beliefs. And it is not like I can't be an admin, sure I can. I could create a sockpuppet account, avoid controversy (mindlessly revert vandalism) for about two to three months and people will probably line up to support such a candidacy. I feel such a thing would be dishonest. I am who I am and I'd rather be weighted on my past mistakes rather than an empty sheet of paper I provided by cheating the system.
 * 9) What was that CSI idea?
 * 10) *Most of you probably do not realize it, but among the reasons why arbcom is so broken is the motivation of people collecting evidence. In general we expect the "victims" of a disagreement to collect and present evidence. Of course by very definition each of these people are more interested in defending themselves and incriminating the other side. Evidence gathered like that will suffer heavily from conflicts of interest. Ideally we want truly uninvolved third parties with no vested interests to collect and analyze evidence and present the finished version to arbcom. Whether or not I get elected to be an arbitrator, this idea is something I hope to develop and promote. Arbitrator experience would of course help develop such an idea.
 * 11) You were "yelling" at an arbitrator a few days ago... What's up with that? You do not seem to keep your cool at hard times...
 * 12) *You know... After dealing with the same problem for nearly your entire wiki-service for about four years, things start to get under your skin. Particularly if arbcom isn't willing to hear your appeals yet is willing to hear the appeal of the indef blocked person. Some arbitrators shell themselves in a protected veil and avoid all contact with the "outside world", or at least go out of their way to give that impression. That tends to annoy people while perhaps it helps arbitrators keep a good PR. I hope to change that.
 * 13) Do you seriously believe anyone will read this before voting?
 * 14) *I do hope so... I believe anyone voting in an arbcom election without reading individual statements is ultimately harming the site more so than your average vandal. Evidently you would not be reading this had you fit that criteria.


 * Questions for the candidate
 * Discuss the candidate
 * Discuss the candidate