Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2012/Candidates/Keilana

PumpkinSky RFA nomination
In her nomination statement at PumpkinSky's recent RFA, Keilana called PumpkinSky / Rlevse "one of the most stalwart, trusted members of the community." A non-trivial segment of the community disagreed. I question Keilana's capacity to assess others' trustworthiness. Townlake (talk) 02:59, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That's simply because you don't remember Rlevese's work on the wiki before he stopped editing with the account. He held many positions of trust in the community from administrator to arbitrator and discharged all those responsibilities diligently for many years. He even ran the "Awesome Wikipedian" system for a considerable length of time, which was a very effective way of recognising good things done by editors and the sort of kindness that is needed if we are to reverse the decline in editors that threatens us. So, no, I really don't agree that someone who does remember Rlevse from those times has any problem at all in assessing another editor's trustworthiness. You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but you will recognise that a much larger segment of the community won't agree with you. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:20, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Townlake, I saw your comment earlier, and as I'm one of the many who have quite lengthy experience of the contributions made by PumpkinSky/Rlevse over the past few years, I was wondering how to respond. And then I logged back in and saw RexxS's comment, which says it better than I could have done. If you could poll those who have known PumpkinSky/Rlevse and his contributions, I think you'd find overwhelming support for his honesty and integrity, and I think Keilana's judgment is spot on. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:32, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Voters can read the votes cast at the RFA linked above and make up their own minds. *shrug*. Townlake (talk) 18:36, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd just add that the RfA was recent, but Rlevse is not, and that around these parts a small amount of bad (judged by current standards when past standards were very different) can sadly outweigh an enormous amount of good. The single-point snapshot that is that RfA does not represent a summation of the opinions of all the people who have known Rlevse over the years. *meaningless dismissive gesture* -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:27, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You supported the RFA, so I'm not surprised you disagree with the result. Townlake (talk) 19:36, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You opposed the RFA, so I'm not surprised you agree with the result. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:47, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up, Townlake. I believe very strongly in the concept of "assume good faith" and try to do so with other users wherever possible. I do my best to remind myself that every editor here, regardless of how well I've gotten on with them, is a fellow human who I would treat kindly if I met them in real life. I stand by my belief that PumpkinSky has contributed high-quality edits and would have been a benefit to the project if he had the admin tools. I understand that others disagree and that's fine - dissent and diversity of opinion is necessary in a community like ours. I would like to reiterate that I would recuse in any case that involved people I am close to, as I would not be able to be neutral and unbiased. I hope that clarifies what my approach as an arbitrator would be for you. Keilana&#124;Parlez ici 19:54, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your response, and your reiteration of your intent to recuse in situations where your neutrality would be in question. While this doesn't totally remove my concerns, I should note in fairness that your nomination statement at that RFA was the most informative and honest of the four nomination statements offered. Townlake (talk) 20:04, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you; I'm glad I was able to assuage your concerns at least somewhat. Feel free to ask me anything if there's more you want clarified. Keilana&#124;Parlez ici 20:11, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Questions
Questions for Keilana

Kiefer .Wolfowitz  10:18, 5 December 2012 (UTC)