Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2020/Candidates/Bradv/Questions

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

Per WP:ACERFC2020, starting this year there is a limit of two questions per editor for each candidate. You may also ask a reasonable number of follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked.

Question from MJL

 * No follow-ups needed! I was more concerned with the process rather than the merits of the appeal, and you answered my question well beyond my expectations. Much appreciated, &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 18:16, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No follow-ups needed! I was more concerned with the process rather than the merits of the appeal, and you answered my question well beyond my expectations. Much appreciated, &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 18:16, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Questions from Nosebagbear

 * This question is exempt from the two-question limit per Special:PermanentLink/990845973. Mz7 (talk) 00:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * This question is exempt from the two-question limit per Special:PermanentLink/990845973. Mz7 (talk) 00:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * This question is exempt from the two-question limit per Special:PermanentLink/990845973. Mz7 (talk) 00:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * This question is exempt from the two-question limit per Special:PermanentLink/990845973. Mz7 (talk) 00:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Question from Gerda

 * For a quick glance, see here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * For a quick glance, see here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Question from Natureium

 * And it's no longer a red link. has taken it upon themself to create the page, with a joke that measures up to the quality one might expect from a bunch of stuffy arbs. Good job. –  bradv  🍁  20:18, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * And it's no longer a red link. has taken it upon themself to create the page, with a joke that measures up to the quality one might expect from a bunch of stuffy arbs. Good job. –  bradv  🍁  20:18, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Questions from Kudpung
I'm asking all  candidates the same questions.


 * Thank you for your answers. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:24, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Questions from A7V2
I am asking the same questions to all candidates.

Questions from Atsme

 * , thank you for your responses. You said, No, administrators who work in arbitration enforcement areas are not authorized to act "unilaterally". It appears either you or I have misunderstood the enforcement procedures at Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions wherein it specifically states: Administrators do not need explicit consensus to enforce arbitration decisions and can always act unilaterally.  Atsme 💬 📧 13:05, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I took your usage of the word to mean that administrators weren't responsible for their actions and could act with impunity, or in your words "with more authority than ArbCom". But yes, the policy does say "unilaterally", meaning that administrators can act without checking with anyone first. A better term for this is probably "first-mover advantage", as the administrator who acts first in a situation has the advantage, and another administrator who disagrees has a much bigger hurdle to climb ("clear and substantial consensus") in order to overturn that action. That is something that I would like to see addressed with DS reform. – bradv  🍁  16:25, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , thank you for your responses. You said, No, administrators who work in arbitration enforcement areas are not authorized to act "unilaterally". It appears either you or I have misunderstood the enforcement procedures at Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions wherein it specifically states: Administrators do not need explicit consensus to enforce arbitration decisions and can always act unilaterally.  Atsme 💬 📧 13:05, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I took your usage of the word to mean that administrators weren't responsible for their actions and could act with impunity, or in your words "with more authority than ArbCom". But yes, the policy does say "unilaterally", meaning that administrators can act without checking with anyone first. A better term for this is probably "first-mover advantage", as the administrator who acts first in a situation has the advantage, and another administrator who disagrees has a much bigger hurdle to climb ("clear and substantial consensus") in order to overturn that action. That is something that I would like to see addressed with DS reform. – bradv  🍁  16:25, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Questions from StraussInTheHouse
While retention of productive editors and administrators is rightly considered important for the continuation of the project, the conduct of all editors, especially trusted users such as administrators is also rightly considered important for the retention of other users. I consider these two issues which are, unfortunately, often intertwined to be the most pressing types of issues to the project which ArbCom tends to deal with. I am therefore asking all of the candidates the same questions irrespective of whether they are a former Arbitrator. Many thanks and all the best with the election!  SITH   (talk)   11:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you for your responses to both questions and the broad note in Q1. I've now had chance to review your comments on each case, I'm satisfied that no follow-up questions are required on my part.  Regards,   SITH   (talk)   11:27, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you for your responses to both questions and the broad note in Q1. I've now had chance to review your comments on each case, I'm satisfied that no follow-up questions are required on my part.  Regards,   SITH   (talk)   11:27, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you for your responses to both questions and the broad note in Q1. I've now had chance to review your comments on each case, I'm satisfied that no follow-up questions are required on my part.  Regards,   SITH   (talk)   11:27, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Questions from The Land




Question from Instant Comma

 * Thank you! Instant Comma (talk) 20:00, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Instant Comma (talk) 20:00, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Questions from Robert McClenon
Being asked of all candidates