Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2018/Candidates/GorillaWarfare

GorillaWarfare
I shall be voting for this candidate because she’s been around long enough to know what’s what and is one of the few people with arbcom experience who has, to date, not made an idiot of herself. So better the devil you know! Giano   (talk) 22:14, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you! GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:17, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Support

 * Support: The candidate statement is candid and shows that making mistakes can be a learning process and positive. I submit that if we breath air we are prone to mistakes. An issue begins with an inability to own up to mistakes or to correct them then or going forward. I would not see a benefit of an actual "uncontroversial" member of ArbCom. To me the purpose of ArbCom is to get to the bottom of an issue presented (not remedied by the normal process) and find a solution to the betterment of Wikipedia. "Sometimes" what may be considered controversial may actually be "a voice of reason" and I feel I have been on that boat before. I think diversity is important as well as a voice to "fight against the gender gap issue on Wikipedia". Being a "feminist" is her self-description but as a woman a goal of making "Wikipedia a welcoming and safe place for non-men to contribute" is a commendable purpose and goal. I saw an instance where the candidate used recuse, just because of a possible hint of COI, even when it likely would not have been contested. That shows sound judgement. Thank you for past service and a desire to continue. Otr500 (talk) 19:31, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Suppport: Based on her answers to my questions 9 through 11, I see a real commitment to putting in the hard work of reviewing the literature and the diffs (rather than, say, relying on testimony of friendly editors one trusts) that is required to properly weigh the evidence at hand and make the most informed decision.  --David Tornheim (talk) 01:57, 2 December 2018 (UTC)