Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2019/Candidates/Thryduulf

Going to support
I don't like being called "disgusting" as much as anyone else, but I find the answers to the other questions (not just mine, but also Gerda's, 28byte's, Peacemaker67's and Rschen7754's) very strong. Emphasizing the fact that private evidence exists in the FRAM case, assuming that the WMF did act in what they felt was reasonable (meshes very well with WP:AGF), disapproving of Floquenbeam's revert because Floquenbeam didn't have access to the private evidence, etc - these all positions that mesh very well with my own. I grant that not everyone will agree with these positions, but I view that as a big part of the reason we have elections - to elect arbitrators whose views reflect the voter's own views. I'm going to support. Good luck! Banedon (talk) 00:41, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * My experience is that Thryduulf always makes his case with well-reasoned arguments presented in a polite manner after proper consideration, with full understanding of the relevant facts and the policies that apply; and as such, he has my respect even when our views disagree completely. Sideways713 (talk) 18:14, 26 November 2019 (UTC)