User:DC/ACE2010

I think arbcom needs a few fresh faces. Currently, the "newest" member of arbcom has been on Wikipedia since early 2007. These elections offer a chance for newer users and perhaps a non-admin (gasp!) to make the cut. I'm also looking for candidates who tend to think abusive admins go unpunished too often, and would hold them accountable.

This isn't to say all current arbs should be voted out. Or that you should only support newer users. Arbcom needs a balance, and there are a few outstanding sitting arbs who deserve re-election.

=Candidates=

{{TOCRIGHT}}

Unless any other committee members resign, there will be 12 seats filled by this election (nine to full two year terms, and two to fill one year terms left by resignations).

Strong article writer, which is a big plus. Like his answers to the questions also.

A fresh face, something arbcom could use more of. I Read through her RFA from last month and found no obvious faults. Deals with copyright issues, which is a plus. And she's a trained archeologist, how many of those do we have on arbcom?

Great answers to the questions. I like the idea of not hearing evidence in private. And his statement that "we are dealing with people writing an online encyclopedia not attempting to bring down the Third Reich" gives a refreshing sense of perspective.

I like his answers to the questions, especially 4 and 7. Admins do need to be held to a higher standard, and MZMcBride got away with a slap on the wrist. And while Harej might not be the most active user, inactivity shouldn't be confused with inability.

Strong article writer. Arbcom needs members who understand the content processes since most dispute arise from content issues.

I originally had opposed for strategic reasons, moved to support to fill out my slate of 12.

I had a very limited interaction in the past with him, and he seemed knowledgeable. Also a well respected editor, got an amazing amount of support when he ran in 2007. Nothing he's done since makes him undeserving of another term on the committee. And I found [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Newyorkbrad&oldid=397230032#Compare_and_contrast this] to be a good thing.

From what I've seen his work is solid. Experience as a mediator and with arbcom enforcement are both pluses.

I originally had opposed for strategic reasons, moved to support to fill out my slate of 12.

I supported him last time, I see no reason not to do so again.

His work during his previous term on the committee seems good. I like his desire to keep evidence pages in check.

Read through is RFB from June, and found nothing significant. Also, he's the only bureaucrat running this year.

The events that led to his resignation are enough to preclude him from serving as an arbitrator again. See this discussion.

Mostly a strategic oppose, but I'm just not too thrilled with his answers to the questions.

Mostly strategic.

Another arbitrator who resigned due to a controversy. Given the power committee members have, I believe there should be a one-strike rule where if you mess up enough to resign, you shouldn't be re-elected.

Well this isn't good.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User:Off2riorob Block log] is too problematic. And his edit warring on his arbcom question page is just childish, as is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Off2riorob&oldid=398518359#Worthless_thirteen_min_block_from_user_Courcelles this response] to him being blocked for it.

Opposed her last year. This year's oppose is mostly based on my desire to balance out the committee, and I like SirFozzie and NYB more.

{{User:DC/Talk}}

{{ACE2010}}

Category:Wikipedia Arbitration Committee Elections 2010 voter guides