Voting begins, Giano isn't going down in flames !! Options

[Castle Rock]

Already an inpouring of votes and Giano is already being opposed fairly quickly despite support from multiple arbs and checkusers. Interesting. I think the arbs are just token voting to make it look like they weren't trying to sink Giano's candidacy at all.

Oppose, sorry. I was all set to support, but Giano's refusal to accept policy on posting of private email, coupled with the appearance of grudge-bearing agains certain individuals, means I cannot have confidence in Giano maintaining the requisite level of discretion as an Arbitrator. Guy (Help!) 00:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Bit rich coming from the guy who betrayed Privatemusing, don'tcha think?

To most amusing thing is the amount of support Ryan Postlethwaite is getting. I love that Wikipedians think that people like him are suitable for running a top ten website.

Funny Moe Epsilon voted against Giano with a "Hell No" comment citing his block log.

Hell No This user has been blocked for revert warring, being incivil, personal attacks and for violating people's users privacy. The day he's on the Arbitration Committee as a trusted user, I quit in protest. — Save_Us_229 02:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

His sock puppet doesn't have voting rights as it was created several days too late and nobodies pointed it out yet. Anyhow the day that he leaves the project and actually means it is the day "I quit in protest."

[badlydrawnjeff]

Is there beside the drama serounding him some reasons to want Giano as an arbitrator. His answers are articulate but I am wondering what does he have to offer. Just wondering.

His commitment to the project knows no bounds, and he's obviously not tied to any specific group or clique other than other editors.

In a way, he's the PERFECT Arb.

[GlassBeadGame]

Is there beside the drama serounding him some reasons to want Giano as an arbitrator. His answers are articulate but I am wondering what does he have to offer. Just wondering.

His commitment to the project knows no bounds, and he's obviously not tied to any specific group or clique other than other editors.

In a way, he's the PERFECT Arb.

Oh, screw that. He is unacceptable to Mr. Wales and will force Wales to either not appoint him and suffer outrage or accept the humiliation of appointing him.

[tarantino]

Lol! Fred Bauder has voted in opposition to Raul654, a current arbitrator. That'll be awkward.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=175384352

A ha ha ha! He's also Mercury's only supporter so far!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=175385454

And now Mercury's gone.

Mercury@en.wiki
I request removal of access.

* Language Code: en
* local confirmation
* en:User:Mercury

Thank you. Mercury 04:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[Firsfron of Ronchester]

Mercury has deleted his user and talk pages, I assume because of the sound drubbing he received in the election.

[thekohser]

And now Mercury's gone.

Mercury@en.wiki
I request removal of access.

* Language Code: en
* local confirmation
* en:User:Mercury

Thank you. Mercury 04:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Why couldn't he also take the Guy he worked so closely with?

Seriously, isn't it about time Chapman quits the project (again)?

Greg

This post has been edited by thekohser: Mon 3rd December 2007, 5:09am

[Jonny Cache]

Seriously, isn't it about time Chapman quits the project (again)?

Greg

No, No, No, Not That!

The fact that a loose canon like Guy Chapman is still running around loose in Wikipedia is the clearest and most concentrated proof we have that Wikipedia has no policies at all — except perhaps for WP:GIPAS (Guy Is Pissed At Somebody). Without him, we'd have to bust our brows beating the bushes for highly complex and widely distributed data to prove the irredeemable corruption of the system. That'd be work, and not nearly so entertaining. But GC epitomizes all that in one convenient, compact package.

GC is kinda like Wikipedia Dehydrated™.

Jonny

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache: Mon 3rd December 2007, 5:28am

[Aloft]

Will Beback is taking a beating as well. People are aware of his, shall we say, selective policy enforcement.

Plus, check out this gem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=175394299

Will Beback? No, Youwont. --Mike H.

[Aloft]

Pilotguy decided that he's going to leave too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=175061213

[Somey]

And now Mercury's gone.

Mercury@en.wiki
I request removal of access.

Jeez, what is this guy thinking? The voting goes on for two more weeks! Anything can happen - he could have a late surge, call in a few favors, maybe get a push from one of the other admins... any kind of last-minute show of support, and who knows - his support votes could actually go into double-digits!

I'm tellin' ya, the kids these days, where's the resiliency? There's just no heart there, somehow.

Speaking of not having a heart, I'm glad to see JoshuaZ isn't doing so well, at least... Still, if we keep posting about these elections at this rate for the entire two weeks, we'll probably crash the database server.

[anthony]

Seriously, isn't it about time Chapman quits the project (again)?

I dunno, it's kind of convenient having the whole list of things which need to be reverted on Wikipedia all in one place. He's even admitted "I am here for some very limited purposes, because some people have asked me to help in some specific cases. I am prepared to do this."

Now if only someone could find a big enough IP address to pool to run an auto-revert bot from...

[badlydrawnjeff]

Pilotguy decided that he's going to leave too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=175061213

Good riddance to him. He was one of the IRC folk who tried to get me blocked back in the day, in fact helping craft the statement that started it all.

I'm glad he finally got his comeuppance, albeit a little late.

[Jonny Cache]

Seriously, isn't it about time Chapman quits the project (again)?

I dunno, it's kind of convenient having the whole list of things which need to be reverted on Wikipedia all in one place. He's even admitted "I am here for some very limited purposes, because some people have asked me to help in some specific cases. I am prepared to do this."

Now if only someone could find a big enough IP address to pool to run an auto-revert bot from …

Yes, I made the same observation above.

In GC — no, not that GC, the one who isn't sitting on his thumbs while this GC burns Rome — we have a Wikipediot Admin who breaks all the rules. Most of the others are far more special interest and certainly far subtler in their actions. If GC were gone we'd have to go back to saying things like Thing_1 broke This and Thing_2 broke That and so on down the list, but all we have to do now is point to GC and say, There He Goes Again!

To be fair, however, you would have to keep track of a couple of lists, the muster of dubious "contributions" above plus the All Logs List for JzG.

Jonny

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache: Mon 3rd December 2007, 12:57pm

[Moulton]

What a revoltin' development.

[wikiwhistle]

Mercury-

It's a bit cheeky that they have ensured his voting page has gone, as people had made perceptive comments about his behaviour and personality

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:AN#deleted...Com_voting_page

[Moulton]

If you're gonna appear in Web Side Story, you gotta learn to deal with that.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

Will Beback is taking a beating as well. People are aware of his, shall we say, selective policy enforcement.

Plus, check out this gem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=175394299

Will Beback? No, Youwont. --Mike H.

Yes! He's getting his ass kicked at a 2/1 ratio as of this morning, despite strong cabal support. Amazingly, SlimVirgin hasn't voted for him yet -- maybe she doesn't want to bet on a losing horse.

Last time, Will ran on a platform of "I fought Herschelkrustofsky." He dropped that plank, this time around. I don't know whether it helped or hurt his candidacy.

[Miltopia]

I can't believe Will Beback even ran. I also can't believe that anyone would support someone who would not be willing to edit unless they are an arbitrator.

[GlassBeadGame]

Here is a good page to view the real time election results at a glance.

I know it's in Mr. Wales hands to approve appointments, so Whimbo-Jimbo applies. But what is the usual decision rule for selecting who won the voting? Several seem possible:

• Most Support Votes.
• Most Support Votes with a majority (or other threshold) Supporting.
• Net Support Votes (Support - Oppose = Net.)
• Percentage of Support Votes without regard for absolute numbers.

Maybe one or two others I didn't think of off-hand. So what has been the practice?

[thekohser]

Here is a good page to view the real time election results at a glance.

I know it's in Mr. Wales hands to approve appointments, so Whimbo-Jimbo applies. But what is the usual decision rule for selecting who won the voting? Several seem possible:

• Most Support Votes.
• Most Support Votes with a majority (or other threshold) Supporting.
• Net Support Votes (Support - Oppose = Net.)
• Percentage of Support Votes without regard for absolute numbers.

Maybe one or two others I didn't think of off-hand. So what has been the practice?

If I were to do this, first I would establish a minimum number of votes to even qualify; eliminating the bottom 25th percentiles of vote-getters would be a decent threshold. Then, I would take each of your possible ranking criteria above, and I would sort them top-to-bottom, and assign the top 10 in each list -- 10 points to the top of the list, 9 points to the next person, 8 to the third, etc.

Then, tally the number of points that each candidate got across each voting criterion. The recommendation would be to take the top point tallies from this combined average. But, of course, we have to remember the Whimbo-Jimbo factor -- his last ArbCom appointment was a guy who lied to the New Yorker and left the project in disgrace.

Greg