Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2019/Candidates/Kudpung/Questions

Individual questions
Add your questions below the line using the following markup:

Question from SQL

 * 1) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:56, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Question from Praxidicae

 * 1) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Questions from Leaky caldron
Yes, of course. There was an extended discussion about issues which were raised in the course of that election. There are a couple in particular where you expressed considerable concern (for example voter guides and the mass-mailing) and appeared at the time to be enthusiastic about reform:.
 * Thank you for reminding me of those two posts. It will encourage any curious potential voters at this election who are reading this, to look at them and understand that I haven't changed my views at all but that I did not in any way propose any suggestions for reform. Those comments were talk page comments and have no official bearing on the course of that election, but to be honest with you, I'm not a very good speech writer but seeing them today, I'm quite proud of what I said. Where I'm naturally disappointed however, is that like at RfA, the community is not prepared to propose and discuss any changes, so in the following 12 months 'they didn't get it right' - and they still haven't. And I don't see what it has to do with my candidature here and now. All I have said today is that I am not running on a platform for restructuring Arbcom from within. Those who got themselves elected on that basis, didn't last long. I have finished with changing things on Wikipedia. I've had some success, but what will change one way or another after this election, is where I will work in future on or for Wikipedia. I might go back to doing more outreach in Thai schools and colleges, for example. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:50, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Recalling a candidate's previous statements is precisely in scope and there is no "statute of limitations". You frequently draw reference to a seminal piece of work on RfA which you completed many years ago. If a candidate applying for high office has previously expressed a desire to change the franchise and campaign methods, it is legitimate, regardless what you did or didn't do then or intend or do not to intend to do now. It paints a picture of consistency, accuracy, reasoning & resolve. As does my next question.....

Thanks. Your edit summary states "last reply". Does that mean you decline to answer further questions?

Question from Gerda

 * Thank you, and sorry for the torture ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and sorry for the torture ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and sorry for the torture ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and sorry for the torture ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Question from Carrite

 * Thank you. Carrite (talk) 21:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Carrite (talk) 21:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Question from Banedon






Question from WBG
Thanks, in advance, for your answers. &#x222F; WBG converse 09:21, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Question from WereSpielChequers

 * Thanks, I'm very happy with that answer.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  04:52, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'm very happy with that answer.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  04:52, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Questions from Cassianto

 * You may think you're being big, brave and justifiably outspoken against a productive, blocked editor by calling them "a troll", but that is not the kind of behaviour that is becoming of an arbitrator. They are unable to answer for themselves and it is cowardly behaviour, on your part, knowing that they can't reply to your PA. It is a subjective view that Eric is "a troll" and it is not calling a "spade a spade"; it is being unnessersarily provocative.  Cassianto Talk  22:44, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I did not call Eric Corbett a troll. Whatever I think about him, I keep my thoughts to myself. If you are confusing the issue with a certain Dr Horncastle, may be our potential voters should read this. - all the way through to the bottom of the page I think you ought to consider retracting that claim before people reading this believe you.  Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:43, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes you did. Horncastle was a sock of Eric's, or do you now not believe that to be true?  Cassianto Talk  08:30, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes you did. Horncastle was a sock of Eric's, or do you now not believe that to be true?  Cassianto Talk  08:30, 15 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't know what the law is in Thailand, but in the U.K., and you'll know this, being an ex-pat, the term is fairly obvious. For there to be a harassment there needs to be an understanding by the harasser that they know, or ought to know, that their conduct is harassing, and that that harassing occurs on at least two occasions. Your link, for those who wish to read it, shows you being confronted about your personal attack against Eric Corbett, and then you banning me from your talk page when I dare to confront you about it.  As you told me to leave, I did, but had the "good grace" to offer you a right of reply in my talk page, which you ignored. At no point did you tell me you didn't wish to engage with me, only to leave your talk page.  So I'm confused as to what you found to be harassing?  That is not how to do debate. That is not how to build bridges.  That is the shutting down of legitimate debate and the burning of a bridge when the going gets tough. That is not the kind of behaviour that is becoming of an arbitrator, is it?   Cassianto Talk  22:44, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Where I live is none of your business here and is entirely irrelevant. You had to be asked twice to leave the thread you started with a clear personal attack - and were asked politely each time. You quite deliberately attempted to fan the flames by coming back again. What I did was to legitimately close the discussion and walk away, leaving you to enjoy a last word behind my back somewhere else. Now please try not to use ACE question time as a platform to continue your grievances. Being a prolific FA contributor is not a free pass to be uncivil, make personal attacks, and distort the facts. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:48, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Let me remind you that anything you decide to put up on your user page is my business, together with the businesses of the countless others who click onto your page. If you don't want such information spoken about then don't put it up on your user page, it really is very simple.  And it takes me, a mere minion, to advice an administrator and potential Arbitrator this? There you go again, diffs of these "personal attacks" please? Or is this your cryptic way of telling me that this conversation is now over? All you have to do is say and without making such allegations.   Cassianto Talk  08:30, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Let me remind you of a few sentences (among many others) that you may have seen somewhere: combative and incendiary behavior, failing to disengage, Personal attacks or harassment. Or perhaps you would care to explain what the real axe is here, given the context, that you are trying to grind through question time at ACE. Is it something to do with the owner of the longest block log in history for incivility which users here will read with astonishment ?  Now have we finished here?  Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:32, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The only thing that is astonishing, Mr Kudpung, is your double standards, which the same people (here) will be able to see. Still not answering my questions.  Not surprisingly, I'll be opposing your candidacy. Good day!   Cassianto Talk  17:16, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The only thing that is astonishing, Mr Kudpung, is your double standards, which the same people (here) will be able to see. Still not answering my questions.  Not surprisingly, I'll be opposing your candidacy. Good day!   Cassianto Talk  17:16, 16 November 2019 (UTC)


 * You ask "what permission". Your position as an arbitrator. I'll give you one out of three at least, as the rest of this question has been answered satisfactorily. I just hope you stick to it if you get elected.   Cassianto Talk  22:44, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * You ask "what permission". Your position as an arbitrator. I'll give you one out of three at least, as the rest of this question has been answered satisfactorily. I just hope you stick to it if you get elected.   Cassianto Talk  22:44, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Question from Piotrus

 * Sorry about the syntax issue. I think the missing part is the |A= ? Hopefully it won't prove to be too much of a trouble. As for my paper, I thought it is open access (at least it shows for me and I don't think I am logged in). But you can always get a free copy through Library Genesis (I think it may also be on my academia.edu). Regarding other issues, thank you for your thoughtful reply. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:42, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , I will certainly try to get hold of your paper. It's a topic that does interest me. But I won't be spending $36 on it ;p) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:31, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Right. Neither would I. I again mention LG, where my paper is available. As as scholar I use LG quite often, since my university does not always subscribe to all databases, and if I wanted to pay for every paper that may be relevant to my research (most of the time you don't know if it is relevant or not until you at least skim through it, abstracts are rarely sufficient) I'd be penniless by the end of a semester... let me know if you  have any problems using LG, but it is really very simple, requires no registration, at best you need a captcha, and even that not always. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  01:30, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , thank you so much for the links. It was fascinating reading and confirmed a lot (but not all) of what I already assumed. The rest was essential new knowledge. It should be compulsory reading for prospective Arbcom candidates. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:08, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , thank you so much for the links. It was fascinating reading and confirmed a lot (but not all) of what I already assumed. The rest was essential new knowledge. It should be compulsory reading for prospective Arbcom candidates. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:08, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Question from GorillaWarfare



 * While I'm disappointed that you chose to double down on the odd claim that you're not referring to me (are the lights growing dim in here?) and not answer my question about the relevance of a woman's sexuality when she describes a man as misogynist, I do appreciate you answering at all. GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It depends which one of us is actually doubling down, doing the gaslighting (BTW a PA), and using ACE question time for rekindling an old feud which you started yourself at me out of the blue for doing nothing other than extending a hand of collegiality and defending a female colleague against misogyny, and don't seem to be able to get over it. It's a bit odd. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:04, 21 November 2019 (UTC)