Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/Kevin Gorman/Statement

Kevin Gorman

 * Coordinator's note: This candidate has [ expressed] their wish to withdraw from the election; their name will not feature on the ballot.

When I nominated myself, there were less than 24 hours to go in the nom period, and only twelve candidates. I wanted to ensure that we had a solid arbcom, and was worried that we would have an insufficient candidate pool. Apparently, I should've waited longer before deciding to step up; we now have 26 candidates, including a lot who I think would make excellent arbitrators, like GorillaWarfare, NativeForeigner, and a host of others. As such, I'm happy to step down and withdraw my candidacy now that it is clear that we can end up with a solid arbcom from the other running candidates. For those that dropped me private notes, thanks for the kind words :)

I’m Kevin Gorman. I’ve been hanging around the projects for the last couple of years, and edited sporadically as an IP before that. I’ve done a lot of gnoming, and content creation-wise I’ve mostly focused on mushrooms and women philosophers. I’m a regional ambassador for the education program, and have done a lot of real-world outreach focused on the education program and gendergap issues. I’ve also previously been a communications intern for the Wikimedia Foundation, and later accepted a contract with the WMF to write a retrospective history of the Wikimedia Grants program. I am not an administrator; I realize that running for arb without having passed an RfA is unusual. That said, I believe my actions in other areas have demonstrated that I can be trusted to make solid decisions as an arbitrator.

I had not intended to run for arbcom until recently, but I am perturbed by the direction of some of arbcom’s recent decisions, as well as the relatively limited pool of candidates running. I am worried about the generally combative nature of many of ENWP’s forums, and believe that arbcom has the potential to shift our current atmosphere in a positive direction. I’m extremely concerned about ENWP’s ongoing problems with editor recruitment and retention, and believe that arbcom has the ability to make positive shifts in these areas through wise decisions. I believe that we have a duty to get BLPs as right as we can, since messing up how we handle BLPs can cause significant real-world harm to living people. Like several other candidates, I believe that encouraging a collegial, civil culture (in line with the five pillars,) is of significant import.

I strongly believe that arbcom decisions should be based on what is in the best interests of the project, and should be preventative rather than punitive in nature. If elected, I will lean heavily towards admonishments and warnings rather than blocks or bans except in cases where there is good reason to believe a block or ban is in the best interests of the project. I believe policy should be interpreted flexibly and contextually rather than considered set in stone. If sanctioning someone won’t present a benefit to the project as a whole, I would be disinclined to vote to sanction them, even if they’ve committed a technically sanctionable action.

I have one alternate account: User:Kevin (WMF). I’ve used this account in the past when I had an official affiliation with the Wikimedia Foundation; it will be permanently inactive unless I have an official affiliation with the WMF again at some point in the future. I’ve never gone through the normal formal identification process, but since I have been a WMF contractor in the past, they’re certainly aware of my real-world identity, and I’m willing to re-ID in whatever way is necessary.