Arbcom Elections 2008 Options

Official link: Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008

List or arbiters whose terms expire:
1. Blnguyen
2. Charles Matthews
3. James F.
4. Morven
5. Thebainer

Expiring arbiters who have said they will not seek re-election:
(Please reply with others who have said as much, I'll update this top level post)
1. Morven (here)

Expiring arbiters who have previously won re-election:
(Please reply with others who have pulled this off, I'll update this top level post)
1. ?

Number of open seats (normal): 5, plus one extra open one since Paul August retired, for 6 total. Paul's spot is only good to December 2009, when he would have expired anyway. The others are currently set to be the normal 3 years.

This post has been edited by Rootology:

Expiring arbiters who have said they will not seek re-election:
(Please reply with others who have said as much, I'll update this top level post)
1. Morven

What pleasant news that we shall finally we shall be rid of this intolerably corrupt cronyist.

I can already think of who will be running, and I can already see the opposes I will write. Goody! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

(Well, I never got very far supporting everything, so I don't have much to lose...)

Surely none of them could be re-elected, and I hope they'll save us the trouble by simply not running. I want to see someone run on a platform of holding meaningful votes on public proposals during ArbCom cases, to facilitate quick and transparent decision-making, instead of this secretive elitist business of reaching a consensus behind closed doors (even if that takes six months). Even better--a candidate who announces that they will not participate on the ArbCom mailing list at all, or only when sensitive, privacy related issues need to be discussed, and will instead do all of their discussion on-wiki.

Who all are eligible?

Surely none of them could be re-elected, and I hope they'll save us the trouble by simply not running. I want to see someone run on a platform of holding meaningful votes on public proposals during ArbCom cases, to facilitate quick and transparent decision-making, instead of this secretive elitist business of reaching a consensus behind closed doors (even if that takes six months). Even better--a candidate who announces that they will not participate on the ArbCom mailing list at all, or only when sensitive, privacy related issues need to be discussed, and will instead do all of their discussion on-wiki.

Of those ending their terms, I'd probably only be able to support Charles Matthews with confidence. The rest are either too busy elsewhere, or unsuitable.

I wouldn't support any if those if they did decide to run - CM may be the best of a bad bunch, but in this case, that's not saying anything.

James F., Morven and Thebainer will certainly not be missed for even a millisecond.

I could vote for Thebainer, but definitely not for James F or Charles. Does Blnguyen even participate in Arbcom anymore?

Does Blnguyen even participate in Arbcom anymore?

He was never overly excessive in arbitration (spends his time writing articles... zomg).

I would have thought it was fairly evident that he won't run again...

This post has been edited by maiawatatos:

I wouldn't support any if those if they did decide to run - CM may be the best of a bad bunch, but in this case, that's not saying anything.

James F., Morven and Thebainer will certainly not be missed for even a millisecond.

I have met Charles and James in real life, and think both of them would be fine. However, James is way too busy with other stuff to get my vote.

Number of open seats (normal): 5, plus one extra open one since Paul August retired, for 6 total. Paul's spot is only good to December 2009, when he would have expired anyway. The others are currently set to be the normal 3 years.

Gee, I didn't realize Paul August was to expire in December 2009! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

Since when can Election Stewards predict death? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ph34r.gif)

Charles Matthews was of course responsible for Poetlister's first unblock.

James F., Morven and Thebainer will certainly not be missed for even a millisecond.

I nominate Morven's wife Alana Brown to take his place on ArbCom:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/morven/sets/371552/

Charles Matthews was of course responsible for Poetlister's first unblock.

This is interesting. Can you share a link?

This post has been edited by Proabivouac:

James F., Morven and Thebainer will certainly not be missed for even a millisecond.

I nominate Morven's wife Alana Brown to take his place on ArbCom:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/morven/sets/371552/

Charles Matthews was of course responsible for Poetlister's first unblock.

This is interesting. Can you share a link?

22:55, 31 January 2006 Charles Matthews (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Poetlister (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (try again; discussed with blocking admin David Gerard by email)

James F., Morven and Thebainer will certainly not be missed for even a millisecond.

I nominate Morven's wife Alana Brown to take his place on ArbCom:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/morven/sets/371552/

Can we please not have random nasty pot shots at completely uninvolved and unrelated people?

UninvitedCompany has been inactive for several months. His seat will probably be replaced as was done with Flcelloguy.

I am thinking of running. I can't do worse than last time.

I will wait and see who else runs, though, as if there's some good candidates I won't bother.

I am thinking of running. I can't do worse than last time.

I will wait and see who else runs, though, as if there's some good candidates I won't bother.

LOL @ the opposes. "You must be this tall to ride the Hitler mobile". Priceless.

I predict WJBScribe and AGK will run, as well as maybe Rlevse. I'm looking forward to seeing who the obvious fail candidates are going to be.

Ryan Postlethwaite will be running, I believe.

Particularly after his RFB failed, Ryan has been getting more involved in the Mediation Committee, ramped up his attempts to be involved in making community proposals (such as the latest Betacommand one), and has been advocating various changes to how candidates are selected on the 2008 elections discussion page.

I predict WJBScribe and AGK will run, as well as maybe Rlevse. I'm looking forward to seeing who the obvious fail candidates are going to be.

The defeat of WJBscribe should be priority number one to anyone who'd like to see a clean Wikipedia.


http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=19025
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15343
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=17490

I predict WJBScribe and AGK will run, as well as maybe Rlevse. I'm looking forward to seeing who the obvious fail candidates are going to be.

The defeat of WJBscribe should be priority number one to anyone who'd like to see a clean Wikipedia.


http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=19025
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15343
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=17490

Of course, my comment should not necessarily be taken as supportive of any of the people I mentioned. My speculation is based on the fact that people who run for bureaucrat and succeed tend to do well in elections (like Essjay and Deskana). Anyone who has been promoted to bureaucrat recently has a good chance of succeeding.

It's all academic really, as the arbitration committee are an inherently corrupt, incompetent and useless institution that could be replaced by a computer that randomly generates decisions (and it'd probably make a better job of it). What can I say, it's fun to watch. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ph34r.gif)

Ryan Postlethwaite will be running, I believe.

God, not again. He nominates himself for everything. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/huh.gif) I wish he'd get the picture already (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

This post has been edited by KamrynMatika:

It's all academic really, as the arbitration committee are an inherently corrupt, incompetent and useless institution that could be replaced by a computer that randomly generates decisions (and it'd probably make a better job of it).

I don't think it quite academic: while ArbCom is manifestly incapable of performing its supposed function of dispute resolution, it succeeds in harassing its enemies (e.g. Giano) while protecting its friends (e.g. JzG, Elonka.)

This post has been edited by Proabivouac:

I am thinking of running. I can't do worse than last time.

I will wait and see who else runs, though, as if there's some good candidates I won't bother.

I was going to ask if you would run. But I think it takes a degree of superiority complex to be an arb, and some of the people who might stand will probably have The Edge on you when it comes to that. You need to work harder at projecting Unwarranted Self- Importance (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

I predict WJBScribe and AGK will run, as well as maybe Rlevse. I'm looking forward to seeing who the obvious fail candidates are going to be.

Will the panties have "Nonvocalscream for Arbcom' on them this year?(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

What do people think of Jehochman as an arb?

I don't know him that well but he comes from some sort of legal background, and contributes under his real name.

This post has been edited by wikiwhistle:

James F., Morven and Thebainer will certainly not be missed for even a millisecond.

I nominate Morven's wife Alana Brown to take his place on ArbCom:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/morven/sets/371552/

Can we please not have random nasty pot shots at completely uninvolved and unrelated people?

It does at least speak to the notion of "Could you imagine an Encyclopedia Britannica editor taking someone sporting this level of personal character to the company holiday dinner?"

There is a huge difference between the interests (Pokemon, hogtie, Harry Potter, etc.) and outward "I'm here to be me, not to conform to any boring standards of Western civilization" attitudes that pervade Wikipedia, and the traditional professional interests (13th century philosophy, the Congress of Vienna, quasars, General Cable Corporation, etc.), meticulousness, and conformist attitudes that would pervade any PUBLISHED general encyclopedia.

I'm just sayin'...

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

What do people think of Jehochman as an arb?

I don't know him that well but he comes from some sort of legal background, and contributes under his real name.

I'm sure that he'll get Durova's vote!

(that said, he wouldn't be a bad choice, considering....)

I'll be very surprised if Moreschi doesn't throw his hat in this time, since he's been so active in various cases involving "fringe theories"....

What do people think of Jehochman as an arb?

I don't know him that well but he comes from some sort of legal background, and contributes under his real name.

He doesn't sound very legally-oriented to me at all.

+++++++++++++++

Jonathan Hochman
A graduate of Yale University with two degrees in Computer Science, Hochman's credentials include:

Qualified Google Advertising Professional
Yahoo Search Marketing Ambassador
Microsoft adExcellence Member
Search Engine Marketing Professionals Organization (SEMPO) member firm
Search Engine Marketing New England (SEMNE) member firm
Search Engine Strategies conference speaker
Search Marketing Expo conference speaker
High Rankings SEO Forum moderator
Organization of Independent Software Vendors member

In 1990 Hochman set up a consulting practice in New York City, focusing on international business development. For more than a decade he represented Russian clients in both import and export transactions with the United States, Europe and Asia. He also built web sites for clients . In 2004 he launched Hochman Consultants, a firm that specializes in Internet marketing, search engine optimization, and pay-per-click advertising.

+++++++++++++++

One time, though, when he saw that I posted something here about something that Orbitz was trying to do on Wikipedia, he jumped to conclusions and announced on Wikipedia that I was "deeply involved" with my supposed "client", Orbitz. To his credit, I was able to rein in his hyperactive imagination with just one phone call.

Overall, I think he's an okay guy, but I do wonder about how his business stays successful, what with all his Wikipediaing all the time.

I have met Charles and James in real life, and think both of them would be fine. However, James is way too busy with other stuff to get my vote.

Yes, way too busy being an absent monarch on IRC and not running Wikimedia UK into the ground. He's a power seeker. Wikipedia should cut him loose and let him dedicate his time to seeking the level of his incompetency within Her Majesty's Government.

I do wonder about how his business stays successful, what with all his Wikipediaing all the time.

Did you just answer your own question there? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

This is interesting. Can you share a link?

So you know absolutely nothing about the history of Poetlister and her blocks?

The defeat of WJBscribe should be priority number one to anyone who'd like to see a clean Wikipedia.

I'm surprised and pleased to see you say that; I thought you agreed with him on a few things. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

There is a huge difference between the interests (Pokemon, hogtie, Harry Potter, etc.) and outward "I'm here to be me, not to conform to any boring standards of Western civilization" attitudes that pervade Wikipedia, and the traditional professional interests (13th century philosophy, the Congress of Vienna, quasars, General Cable Corporation, etc.), meticulousness, and conformist attitudes that would pervade any PUBLISHED general encyclopedia.

What's wrong with hogties? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

This post has been edited by Taxwoman:

James F., Morven and Thebainer will certainly not be missed for even a millisecond.

I nominate Morven's wife Alana Brown to take his place on ArbCom:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/morven/sets/371552/

Can we please not have random nasty pot shots at completely uninvolved and unrelated people?

It does at least speak to the notion of "Could you imagine an Encyclopedia Britannica editor taking someone sporting this level of personal character to the company holiday dinner?"

No, it really doesn't...

It's just mean busting on people that don't look like the fake middle-America Abercrombie & Fitch-look that society seems to hold to be true for this country. Who cares what people look like? Society as a whole absolutely is NOT defined by the mores and values of white middle America and thankfully never ever will be.





Can Mods please aggressively police this thread by splitting off stuff whenever it gets into pointless sniping about people's appearances of all things, and the inevitable "Free Poetlister" history lessons (sorry, Taxwoman)

This post has been edited by Rootology:

Ryan Postlethwaite will be running, I believe.

Particularly after his RFB failed, Ryan has been getting more involved in the Mediation Committee, ramped up his attempts to be involved in making community proposals (such as the latest Betacommand one), and has been advocating various changes to how candidates are selected on the 2008 elections discussion page.

Yeah, Postlethwaite will be running. It is impossible to believe otherwise. If there were a public vote on his checkuser application where he got slaughtered he might not, but it is private so he will not know (and if he is approved, then definitely).

I am pretty sure MBisanz will too, he has been pretty clearly powermongering.

I am not sure who else. Kmweber, probably, although Kurt can be a realist, so maybe not.

I would vote for Jehochman. Absolutely. He is not, as far as I can tell, anyone's bitch. But I would probably vote for Durova, so my opinion may not be reflective of anything.

Ryan Postlethwaite will be running, I believe.

Particularly after his RFB failed, Ryan has been getting more involved in the Mediation Committee, ramped up his attempts to be involved in making community proposals (such as the latest Betacommand one), and has been advocating various changes to how candidates are selected on the 2008 elections discussion page.

Actually Neil, I'm not even considering running. I don't think I'd be that good at it, and I don't think I'd be able to give it the time it requires. I haven't stepped up my participation in MedCom - I've been active in it since I joined last September.

Ryan Postlethwaite will be running, I believe.

Particularly after his RFB failed, Ryan has been getting more involved in the Mediation Committee, ramped up his attempts to be involved in making community proposals (such as the latest Betacommand one), and has been advocating various changes to how candidates are selected on the 2008 elections discussion page.

Actually Neil, I'm not even considering running. I don't think I'd be that good at it, and I don't think I'd be able to give it the time it requires. I haven't stepped up my participation in MedCom - I've been active in it since I joined last September.

Yes, that's what I said. More involved in MedCom. I thought you were a cert to run. That's too bad.

Ryan Postlethwaite will be running, I believe.

Particularly after his RFB failed, Ryan has been getting more involved in the Mediation Committee, ramped up his attempts to be involved in making community proposals (such as the latest Betacommand one), and has been advocating various changes to how candidates are selected on the 2008 elections discussion page.

Actually Neil, I'm not even considering running. I don't think I'd be that good at it, and I don't think I'd be able to give it the time it requires. I haven't stepped up my participation in MedCom - I've been active in it since I joined last September.

Yes, that's what I said. More involved in MedCom. I thought you were a cert to run. That's too bad.

I also find this particularly surprising. Ryan's actions have all suggested he would do such a thing.

Official link: Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008

List or arbiters whose terms expire:
1. Blnguyen
2. Charles Matthews
3. James F.
4. Morven
5. Thebainer

Expiring arbiters who have said they will not seek re-election:
(Please reply with others who have said as much, I'll update this top level post)
1. Morven (here)

Expiring arbiters who have previously won re-election:
(Please reply with others who have pulled this off, I'll update this top level post)
1. ?

Number of open seats (normal): 5, plus one extra open one since Paul August retired, for 6 total. Paul's spot is only good to December 2009, when he would have expired anyway. The others are currently set to be the normal 3 years.

I heard a rumor that Bishzilla is running.

There is a huge difference between the interests (Pokemon, hogtie, Harry Potter, etc.) and outward "I'm here to be me, not to conform to any boring standards of Western civilization" attitudes that pervade Wikipedia, and the traditional professional interests (13th century philosophy, the Congress of Vienna, quasars, General Cable Corporation, etc.), meticulousness, and conformist attitudes that would pervade any PUBLISHED general encyclopedia.

I'm just sayin'...

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

From what I know of professors etc these days, they're very liberal and get upto all sorts in their spare time. They might not always flaunt it, but nowadays I doubt anyone's sexual or subcultural proclivities would get them kicked out of academia, unless they're illegal.

And some of my knowledge is of a Classics department (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Official link: Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008

List or arbiters whose terms expire:
1. Blnguyen
2. Charles Matthews
3. James F.
4. Morven
5. Thebainer

Expiring arbiters who have said they will not seek re-election:
(Please reply with others who have said as much, I'll update this top level post)
1. Morven (here)

Expiring arbiters who have previously won re-election:
(Please reply with others who have pulled this off, I'll update this top level post)
1. ?

Number of open seats (normal): 5, plus one extra open one since Paul August retired, for 6 total. Paul's spot is only good to December 2009, when he would have expired anyway. The others are currently set to be the normal 3 years.

I heard a rumor that Bishzilla is running.

Bish in any format of grammar has infinitely more clue than half the Arbitration Committee and it's founder COMBINED. Sadly, since she's also prone to speaking her mind clearly, I'm sure some/most useless trolls will see her as 1) an uppity woman; 2) an uppity editor; 3) clearly incompatible with being an Arb because she's willing to do the right things.

I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

What do people think of Jehochman as an arb?

I don't know him that well but he comes from some sort of legal background, and contributes under his real name.

He doesn't sound very legally-oriented to me at all.

I was just going on what he mentioned in passing on his talk page to someone.

diff
"Observers will draw their own conclusions. (Note: I did attend law school, (wikilink:Columbia_Law_School) and am familiar with the concepts."

Bish in any format of grammar has infinitely more clue than half the Arbitration Committee and it's founder COMBINED. Sadly, since she's also prone to speaking her mind clearly, I'm sure some/most useless trolls will see her as 1) an uppity woman; 2) an uppity editor; 3) clearly incompatible with being an Arb because she's willing to do the right things.

I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

Looking forward to her candidates statement.

There is a huge difference between the interests (Pokemon, hogtie, Harry Potter, etc.) and outward "I'm here to be me, not to conform to any boring standards of Western civilization" attitudes that pervade Wikipedia, and the traditional professional interests (13th century philosophy, the Congress of Vienna, quasars, General Cable Corporation, etc.), meticulousness, and conformist attitudes that would pervade any PUBLISHED general encyclopedia.

I'm just sayin'...

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

From what I know of professors etc these days, they're very liberal and get upto all sorts in their spare time. They might not always flaunt it, but nowadays I doubt anyone's sexual or subcultural proclivities would get them kicked out of academia, unless they're illegal.

And some of my knowledge is of a Classics department (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Exactly. How people dress and what they do in their "extracurriculars" is utterly irrelevant to life and business in 99% of the cases out there. I'm sure if you're director level or higher at some multinational or plain large corporations, it may play a role, but 99% of the world is not that. Bucking the trends of society and being contrary to society is always that should be lauded, not lambasted. Nearly all the great thinkers, leaders, and people that worked to change society for the better were "different" and "contrary".

Let's see.... Jesus, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Elvis, the American Revolutionaries, Galileo, Newton, Darwin, Warhol...

What do people think of Jehochman as an arb?

I don't know him that well but he comes from some sort of legal background, and contributes under his real name.

He doesn't sound very legally-oriented to me at all.

I was just going on what he mentioned in passing on his talk page to someone.

diff
"Observers will draw their own conclusions. (Note: I did attend law school, (wikilink:Columbia_Law_School) and am familiar with the concepts."

Jon is an extremely multi-talented individual who I would also support in a moment's notice. He came off as a cabalist at first, a bit, but when push came to shove so far from what I've seen he's consistently tried it looks to do the right things, and doesn't appear to be afraid to stick a big middle finger of dissent up when it needs to be done. Yes, he was on the wrong side in some things (bits of that Durova/!! mess), but let's be honest: even Durova in some areas has mellowed out and started to be a bold one.

This post has been edited by Rootology:

Bish in any format of grammar has infinitely more clue than half the Arbitration Committee and it's founder COMBINED. Sadly, since she's also prone to speaking her mind clearly, I'm sure some/most useless trolls will see her as 1) an uppity woman; 2) an uppity editor; 3) clearly incompatible with being an Arb because she's willing to do the right things.

I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

Me too. Ironically in the circumstances, I think she is human. Arbs in recent times have not appeared human. If she were to win, the arbcom would be being honest about the fact that some of them are illuminati reptilian humanoids. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

This post has been edited by wikiwhistle:

Ryan Postlethwaite will be running, I believe.

Particularly after his RFB failed, Ryan has been getting more involved in the Mediation Committee, ramped up his attempts to be involved in making community proposals (such as the latest Betacommand one), and has been advocating various changes to how candidates are selected on the 2008 elections discussion page.

Actually Neil, I'm not even considering running. I don't think I'd be that good at it, and I don't think I'd be able to give it the time it requires. I haven't stepped up my participation in MedCom - I've been active in it since I joined last September.

Yes, that's what I said. More involved in MedCom. I thought you were a cert to run. That's too bad.

I also find this particularly surprising. Ryan's actions have all suggested he would do such a thing.

God knows why, but I enjoy getting involved with community proposals. I don't think I'm that far off the mark with the proposals I make, but if anyone expressed concern about them I'd happily step away from it. I also enjoy being part of MedCom - it can be quite fulfilling sitting down with a bunch of users who obviously have issues about each other and leading the discussion so they agree on a suitable compromise.

I don't really thing that activity in mediation is a good marker for someone wanting to be on ArbCom. Arbitrators and mediators need very different skills and whilst some are transferable, the key ones (arbitrators rule on conduct, mediatiors take neutral side throughout) are very much different. Some have made the change successfully, but I don't think it's easy for everyone.

In my opinion, the best arbitrators are the ones that have stayed out of the politics completely, and have instead shown good judgement in their article editing and background discussion work.

In my opinion, the best arbitrators are the ones that have stayed out of the politics completely, and have instead shown good judgement in their article editing and background discussion work.

Surprisingly enough, I think this is more or less correct.

Of course, those who are wise enough to stay out of politics are probably wise enough not to run for Arbcom.

Of course, those who are wise enough to stay out of politics are probably wise enough not to run for Arbcom.

Or at least lack the requisite interest in being a social director to run for ArbCom. This is actually part of the motivation behind my jury proposal from however long back; there are a good supply of people who have the necessary intellect and skills to make good decisions on such disputes, but are not asked to make them because they simply don't show an interest in doing. I suspect many of them would, if asked to do so from time to time, be quite competent at rendering beneficial decisions -- but if you asked them to do it all the time would run screaming for the hills.

Ryan Postlethwaite will be running, I believe.

Particularly after his RFB failed, Ryan has been getting more involved in the Mediation Committee, ramped up his attempts to be involved in making community proposals (such as the latest Betacommand one), and has been advocating various changes to how candidates are selected on the 2008 elections discussion page.

Actually Neil, I'm not even considering running. I don't think I'd be that good at it, and I don't think I'd be able to give it the time it requires. I haven't stepped up my participation in MedCom - I've been active in it since I joined last September.

Time? What time? How much time does it take to make a non-decision decision? Not much, surely. Besides, you should have any number of "clerks" (i.e., wiki-slaves) to help you out with the details.

Or maybe it isn't an issue of time. Maybe more of an issue of seeming "humble" or "reluctant", a la Octavian. The gods prosper you, O Wiki-Caesar!

The ArbCom elections shouldn't be as important as they seem to be currently. The ArbCom should be only one of several committees involved in governing Wikipedia, along with a policy committee and a final content-decision body.

I think a jury system for user conduct issues, as Kelly suggests, could work. I've suggested using the same kind of system for RfA's so that they can't be tainted by cabalism, but I think I got that idea from Kelly's blog.

Who cares what people look like?

About 95% of employers, for one.

Look, your appendix is inflamed, it will rupture in the next 4 minutes, but at least you're in the Emergency Room. Two doctors walk in your room. One looks like me. The other looks like Alana Brown. They say, in unison, "Rootology, you must choose which of us two shall perform your appendectomy."

Who do you choose?

Who cares what people look like?

About 95% of employers, for one.

Look, your appendix is inflamed, it will rupture in the next 4 minutes, but at least you're in the Emergency Room. Two doctors walk in your room. One looks like me. The other looks like Alana Brown. They say, in unison, "Rootology, you must choose which of us two shall perform your appendectomy."

Who do you choose?

95% of employers in what area? Back down to that city vs. country bit, again, that you and I keep poking each other about. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif) But that's apples and oranges and won't get settled.

Assuming they're both doctors, I'd go with Alana (I have no idea who this is but I assume she's punk rock based on a few searches) based on the fact that she would be more likely to be daring enough to take a risk to save my life if things went south. I'd generally prefer to bet on the creative driven types, if I had to choose. But that's me.

Who cares what people look like?

About 95% of employers, for one.

Look, your appendix is inflamed, it will rupture in the next 4 minutes, but at least you're in the Emergency Room. Two doctors walk in your room. One looks like me. The other looks like Alana Brown. They say, in unison, "Rootology, you must choose which of us two shall perform your appendectomy."

Who do you choose?

Yeah, it is the same when you have to chose between a man and a women for the same job - it is the only time you have consider that hiring the one with the biggest tits might not be the best method.

Official link: Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008

List or arbiters whose terms expire:
1. Blnguyen
2. Charles Matthews
3. James F.
4. Morven
5. Thebainer

Expiring arbiters who have said they will not seek re-election:
(Please reply with others who have said as much, I'll update this top level post)
1. Morven (here)

Expiring arbiters who have previously won re-election:
(Please reply with others who have pulled this off, I'll update this top level post)
1. ?

Number of open seats (normal): 5, plus one extra open one since Paul August retired, for 6 total. Paul's spot is only good to December 2009, when he would have expired anyway. The others are currently set to be the normal 3 years.

Geogre says here that JamesF is re-running but not sure where he got that information from.

Bish in any format of grammar has infinitely more clue than half the Arbitration Committee and it's founder COMBINED. Sadly, since she's also prone to speaking her mind clearly, I'm sure some/most useless trolls will see her as 1) an uppity woman; 2) an uppity editor; 3) clearly incompatible with being an Arb because she's willing to do the right things.

I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

Me too. Ironically in the circumstances, I think she is human. Arbs in recent times have not appeared human. If she were to win, the arbcom would be being honest about the fact that some of them are illuminati reptilian humanoids. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

The only candidate other than Giano (can he be bothered to run again? - I doubt he will get the support he did previously; there is something of a whiff of the puritan about him, which is fine by me, but may have eroded some of the liberal wishy washy support) that I would vote for. Every knee jerk oppose would likely recruit two supporters.

Last time, in protest at Jimbo's veto, I only voted the once. This time I will oppose as I feel appropriate.

Assuming they're both doctors, I'd go with Alana...

I admire your thinking.

But, I assure you, if we took a truly random sample of 1,000 world citizens and presented them with the exact same case study (I'm imagining at least a half-dozen pairwise control photo sorts, with Alana and me as the "ringer" test case), the large majority (dare I say, at least 800?) would not select Alana to perform their emergency, but routine, surgery.

If you have $100,000 lying around, I think we could run this study across n=50 in each of 20 different countries. I'd be willing to wager up to $1,000 with "800" as the over/under, me taking the over.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Bish in any format of grammar has infinitely more clue than half the Arbitration Committee and it's founder COMBINED. Sadly, since she's also prone to speaking her mind clearly, I'm sure some/most useless trolls will see her as 1) an uppity woman; 2) an uppity editor; 3) clearly incompatible with being an Arb because she's willing to do the right things.

I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

Me too. Ironically in the circumstances, I think she is human. Arbs in recent times have not appeared human. If she were to win, the arbcom would be being honest about the fact that some of them are illuminati reptilian humanoids. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

The only candidate other than Giano (can he be bothered to run again? - I doubt he will get the support he did previously; there is something of a whiff of the puritan about him, which is fine by me, but may have eroded some of the liberal wishy washy support) that I would vote for. Every knee jerk oppose would likely recruit two supporters.

Last time, in protest at Jimbo's veto, I only voted the once. This time I will oppose as I feel appropriate.

Giano might run, and do better than before. The "anti-Giano" Cabal is not very powerful these days.

The only candidate other than Giano (can he be bothered to run again? - I doubt he will get the support he did previously; there is something of a whiff of the puritan about him, which is fine by me, but may have eroded some of the liberal wishy washy support) that I would vote for. Every knee jerk oppose would likely recruit two supporters.

Last time, in protest at Jimbo's veto, I only voted the once. This time I will oppose as I feel appropriate.

If no other really good candidates run, I may end up only voting for Giano and Bish(onen|zilla) alongside you.

Ryan Postlethwaite will be running, I believe.

Particularly after his RFB failed, Ryan has been getting more involved in the Mediation Committee, ramped up his attempts to be involved in making community proposals (such as the latest Betacommand one), and has been advocating various changes to how candidates are selected on the 2008 elections discussion page.

Yeah, Postlethwaite will be running. It is impossible to believe otherwise. If there were a public vote on his checkuser application where he got slaughtered he might not, but it is private so he will not know (and if he is approved, then definitely).

I am pretty sure MBisanz will too, he has been pretty clearly powermongering.

I am not sure who else. Kmweber, probably, although Kurt can be a realist, so maybe not.

I would vote for Jehochman. Absolutely. He is not, as far as I can tell, anyone's bitch. But I would probably vote for Durova, so my opinion may not be reflective of anything.

As I think I've said in at least two places now, I will not be running in the Arbcom elections. I have been doing a fair amount of template work and other gnome-like tasks and decided some time ago against running. Thanks for thinking of me though. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

I've been asked to run for ArbCom, but I feel I do my best work as an armchair quarterback, criticizing others while I sit at home and get fat. I'm one of Teddy Roosevelt's "cold and timid souls who know neither victory or defeat."

Plus... no one but a handful of smartasses and groupies would vote for me, so it would be little more than a minor sideshow like Endless Dan's candidacy last year.

What do people think of Jehochman as an arb?

I'd vote for him in a second.

Tough and clear-thinking people are rare but not impossible to find. The real question is... would he show up for work?

That's the chief complaint I have about the current lot of layabouts.

My predictions for people who will run:

1. James F will run again and lose. The current stigma around sitting arbiters, and especially him for refusing to loosen his iron grip on IRC matters is going to be his downfall, combined with his inactivity in general. If inactivity killed Raul, who is infinitely more popular, active in general and powerful than James, James has zero chance of re-election.

2. Mbisanz. The easy choice, and would likely be a very active arbiter. Flip a coin if he wins. If he doesn't win this year, he will next year or the year after. Keep running, Matt. I have a feeling when it comes down he'd be one of the better arbs, in that he doesn't seem to tolerate bullshit now. Whether that is good or bad will depend on which side of a fight you're on. Seems to be willing to take on politically powerful stuff, so he could be a dark horse white knight.

Matt has corrected me--and I did see his post above! Like I told Swat on Meta a while back, did I mention I'm psychic? No? Maybe? OK, maybe I'm a crap psychic...

3. Jehochman. I think he will win, but it will be close, and he won't be one of the clear run-away winners. Another possible white knight, who seems to be uninterested in the real political power games.

4. Ryan Postlewaite would have a decent to lower chance of winning if he ran (which is way better than most people). He says here he won't run. But we'll see!

5. Moreschi--wouldn't win if he ran, but I can see him tossing his hat in. People would be all "redirect to [[Clown]]" over civility stuff, but he'd be an ass-kicking arbiter. Whether that is good or bad will depend on which side of a fight you're on.

6. WJBscribe. And I think he'll win. Not much to be said. He'll win.

7. Thebainer. Gut feeling he'll run again. Of the current arbs, he's probably the ONLY one with a full shot to win, since he keeps his head down and just works and doesn't visibly (that I've ever noticed) take part in stupid politics.

8. Charles Matthews. I don't know if he's sick of it yet, but I suspect as well Charles will run again, but I think too many people perceive him as a cabalist in the shadow of Mantanmoreland-Gerard-Weiss et al. It will kill his chances.

9. Swatjester. Might be a close win, but I think he'd get it. Too popular, too visible, in too many places, and many people view Swat as a good guy (I do, too, which I'm sure someone will flame him over). I don't think that stupid fight earlier from this earlier on RFAR will matter at all. Especially since the other guy--I can't even remember his name, demonstrating the lack of relevance--is blocked for legal threats.

10. AGK/Anthony: A long standing Clerk, I think he would be a near shoo-in.

11. Thatcher. I think Thatcher would win, if not as insanely overwhelmingly as Brad did, but close to that.

12. Bishonen. She would make a fiery, glorious, Wrath of God Bishzilla arb, who would clean up a lot of bullshit. Sadly, I think the residual fallout from the fall of Sidaway and his endless harassment of her will end up leading to her not winning. Too many people want to get back at Giano, her, and George for having the stones to stand up to the useless middle managers that think they run Wikipedia.

13. Kurt. I mean, c'mon. Kurt is like Nader. He's always in the running!

Incoming Arb class quick guesses today:

1. Thatcher
2. WJBscribe
3. Jehochman
4. Swatjester
5. Anthony
6. Mbisanz

This post has been edited by Rootology:

How has SWATjester's status improved since last year? (And yes, I likewise suspect he'll run again).

Incoming Arb class quick guesses today:

1. Thatcher
2. WJBscribe
3. Jehochman
4. Swatjester
5. Anthony
6. Mbisanz

dark horse guesses?

<edit>
Damn, Wikipedia is awsome

This post has been edited by Pumpkin Muffins:

Horrible article.


I think I would vote for thatcher and possibly jehochman, out of those mentioned so far. IMO, swatjester on arbcom would massively damage WP.

As I think I've said in at least two places now, I will not be running in the Arbcom elections. I have been doing a fair amount of template work and other gnome-like tasks and decided some time ago against running. Thanks for thinking of me though. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Don't forget all the time spent egregiously trolling my Wikipedia Talk page!

How has SWATjester's status improved since last year? (And yes, I likewise suspect he'll run again).

Gut feeling.

dark horse guesses?

<edit>
Damn, Wikipedia is awsome

English is fun. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

How has SWATjester's status improved since last year? (And yes, I likewise suspect he'll run again).

Gut feeling.

I've see how he acted on 'simple' wikipedia (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif) He was somewhat heavy handed in his approach.

Incoming Arb class quick guesses today:

1. Thatcher
2. WJBscribe
3. Jehochman
4. Swatjester
5. Anthony
6. Mbisanz

dark horse guesses?

<edit>
Damn, Wikipedia is awsome

I've missed something- has MBianz said he won't stand?

I've missed something- has MBianz said he won't stand?

Yeah (thank God), earlier in this thread. A page or two back.

Wow. If Root's proposed candidate list was the final candidate list (minus those who've definitely said they're not running as I type this), I'd be willing to support... three people there.

Wow. If Root's proposed candidate list was the final candidate list (minus those who've definitely said they're not running as I type this), I'd be willing to support... three people there.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/sad.gif) I could support maybe one.

Incoming Arb class quick guesses today:

1. Thatcher
2. WJBscribe
3. Jehochman
4. Swatjester
5. Anthony
6. Mbisanz

dark horse guesses?

<edit>
Damn, Wikipedia is awsome

There is one I can think of.

Thatcher is not the best pick in my opinion. He seemed ok at first, but then I've noticed some decisions he made that were off, which made situations worse. He lacks in critical thinking. Other than that, I have nothing against him.

I could support two people on that list, probably. Maybe. I'll probably be opposing most people.

Thatcher got mad at me for revealing the RickK/Zoe coherence on WR and then got madder at me for refusing to tell him the common password. He doesn't get that people you treat like shit are not going to bend over backwards to help you. As far as I can tell he's still addicted to the kool-aid.

Swatjester is a gung-ho fascist with an over-inflated opinion of his own competence. He has even less capacity for finesse or subtlety than I do, and would be even more of a disaster as an arbitrator than he has been as an admin and OTRS volunteer.

Yes
Jehochman
AGK

Probably Yes
Thatcher
Bishzilla
Giano

Not sure
WJB

Not in a million years
Swatjester


This post has been edited by SomeRandomAdmin:

Swatjester is a gung-ho fascist with an over-inflated opinion of his own competence. He has even less capacity for finesse or subtlety than I do, and would be even more of a disaster as an arbitrator than he has been as an admin and OTRS volunteer.

And he's a law student but doesn't even understand the definition of the word 'hypocrite', even when it's explained to him. So much for lawyers using language as thier tool. Oh well, it doesn't matter, his family is rich, he'll never have to worry about anything.

I'm looking forward to seeing who the obvious fail candidates are going to be.

Hey I should run! That'll be a laugh and a half. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)



*Edit: added an emoticon in case anyone actually takes this seriously.

This post has been edited by Alex:

Not sure
WJB

Shell Kinney might run again; if so this would make two inveterate Elonka meatpuppets running for ArbCom, as if the current crop weren't biased enough.

Thatcher is not the best pick in my opinion.

There are a good few people a lot worse than Thatcher. (I hope that's not damning with faint praise.)

Thatcher got mad at me for revealing the RickK/Zoe coherence on WR and then got madder at me for refusing to tell him the common password. He doesn't get that people you treat like shit are not going to bend over backwards to help you. As far as I can tell he's still addicted to the kool-aid.

It may be fair to say that Thatcher has swallowed the kool-aid, however, since the Mantanmoreland case, it seems that he's started at least to question some of its ingredients. I'm aware that he regularly reads the Wikipedia Review, for example. Thatcher is not corrupt and, I believe, tries to be fair, which is more than one can say for many or most current Arbitrators. Ideally, the Committee would be abolished, the sooner, the bettter, but supposing it's still around, I'm inclined to support him.

He could be (I'm not saying he is, just a hypothetical here) the very best candidate that WP could ever hope to field; fearless, fair, polite and astute... but there is no way I could ever put a tick in a box next to the name "Thatcher". An instance of a real life bias effecting a WP decision, and I am unable to overcome it.

He could be (I'm not saying he is, just a hypothetical here) the very best candidate that WP could ever hope to field; fearless, fair, polite and astute... but there is no way I could ever put a tick in a box next to the name "Thatcher". An instance of a real life bias effecting a WP decision, and I am unable to overcome it.

I completely disagree. My experience of Thatcher has been less than pleasant. Plus he barely edits the encyclopedia, and appears to exists on Wikipedia simply to fight sockpuppets and make smart-ass comments on the admin noticeboards. My vote will be "Hell no".

I think Thatcher is the best name listed so far. He'd be a good sock puppet sniffer, I think. He would be interested in the sockpuppet evidence against FeloniousMonk, for example.

Some people here probably dislike him because his name comes up so often when trying to use Tor, but I count that as a virtue. The extension should be tweaked for en.wp, so that Tor is hard blocked by default. Until then, Thatcher's getting it covered one IP at a time.

He's been gaming to get on to Arbcom since near the day he joined. Now he's got the checkuser toy, and spends his existence on Wikipedia playing with that, no doubt he's won a few friends. No doubt he'll run, and pass, but I think he's a bad choice.

He could be (I'm not saying he is, just a hypothetical here) the very best candidate that WP could ever hope to field; fearless, fair, polite and astute... but there is no way I could ever put a tick in a box next to the name "Thatcher". An instance of a real life bias effecting a WP decision, and I am unable to overcome it.

What is it that makes you unable to tick?

Personally, I found Thatcher conceded too much to the "fringe" side of a debate I was in, he also doesn't seem very friendly but that's just what I personally like in people.

He could be (I'm not saying he is, just a hypothetical here) the very best candidate that WP could ever hope to field; fearless, fair, polite and astute... but there is no way I could ever put a tick in a box next to the name "Thatcher". An instance of a real life bias effecting a WP decision, and I am unable to overcome it.

What is it that makes you unable to tick?

Personally, I found Thatcher conceded too much to the "fringe" side of a debate I was in, he also doesn't seem very friendly but that's just what I personally like in people.

I agree that he's very unfriendly.

I think LHVU is referring to him sharing the name with a famous British politician, who was big in the 1980s.

Yes, I have a similar problem as LHvU, actually.

I think LHVU is referring to him sharing the name with a famous British politician, who was big in the 1980s.

Lol true! Well numerologists do say one's name effects what one is like. Margaret Thatcher has dementia now of course.

But Lessie, does this mean you wouldn't drink scrumptious Thatcher's cider?

Yes, I have a similar problem as LHvU, actually.

I didn't understand it when LHvU said it either. Is this a conflict of interest thing (which would make you a saint among Wikipedians for abstaining), or is it a symbolic protest of ArbCom itself?

Yes, I have a similar problem as LHvU, actually.

I didn't understand it when LHvU said it either. Is this a conflict of interest thing (which would make you a saint among Wikipedians for abstaining), or is it a symbolic protest of ArbCom itself?

I think they just mean they would find it hard to tick a box and vote for "Thatcher" (i.e. Margaret Thatcher (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) )

It would be like if there was an admin called Regan or Clinton, or whatever, and those political figures were your particular figures of hatred for years. But I thing LessH was joking about being unable to vote for that reason. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

I didn't understand it when LHvU said it either. Is this a conflict of interest thing (which would make you a saint among Wikipedians for abstaining), or is it a symbolic protest of ArbCom itself?

No, it's just that they can't bring themselves to vote for someone called Thatcher because they detest Margaret Thatcher.

Thatcher is not the best pick in my opinion.

There are a good few people a lot worse than Thatcher. (I hope that's not damning with faint praise.)

I'm still nominating Allison, Lar, and SlimVirgin.

I'm still nominating Allison, Lar, and SlimVirgin.

I would love Alison to run but I don't thing she'd be up for it. If SV wanted to be an Arb I think she would've tried by now.

I'm still nominating Allison, Lar, and SlimVirgin.

I would love Alison to run but I don't thing she'd be up for it. If SV wanted to be an Arb I think she would've tried by now.

If SV doesn't run, then Allison and Lar need not apply either. It would only be worthwhile if all of them go for it.

I'm still nominating Allison, Lar, and SlimVirgin.

I would love Alison to run but I don't thing she'd be up for it. If SV wanted to be an Arb I think she would've tried by now.

If SV doesn't run, then Allison and Lar need not apply either. It would only be worthwhile if all of them go for it.

And all got in. That would be a laugh.

WJBscribe and Rlevse will be elected if they run. I'm not confident about anyone else, though I personally would support a whole bunch of others.

Edit: Thatcher will probably make it too.

This post has been edited by Shalom:

WJBscribe and Rlevse will be elected if they run. I'm not confident about anyone else, though I personally would support a whole bunch of others.

Edit: Thatcher will probably make it too.

Probably. I would probably vote for WJBscribe and Rlevse.

I am hoping people are not putting too much hope into the next round of elections. Many of Arbcom's problems come about from its vary nature and not because of who is elected.

Then lets hope someone exciting goes in to change it. I know one person I've talked to has said he's think about putting his name in; if he does, it will cause more panic among the kabal than an affectionate porcupine in a nudist colony.

Then lets hope someone exciting goes in to change it. I know one person I've talked to has said he's think about putting his name in; if he does, it will cause more panic among the kabal than an affectionate porcupine in a nudist colony.

With three year terms, regardless of who gets elected there is a high degree of probability he will eventually "go native", go along with the majority, and enjoy his new unanswerable power. Absolute power corrupts.

Trust me; not this guy. If there was a god of individuality, it would be him. Heck, he does believe he's a god. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

Trust me; not this guy. If there was a god of individuality, it would be him. Heck, he does believe he's a god. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

If there is any project which is in need of a messiah to lead the project to the promised land it is Wikipedia. And, in a project such as Wikipedia it may actually be possible for a messianic person to reform Wikipedia.

...That is if Jimbo does not have him crucified first.

I think Thatcher is the best name listed so far. He'd be a good sock puppet sniffer, I think. He would be interested in the sockpuppet evidence against FeloniousMonk, for example.

Some people here probably dislike him because his name comes up so often when trying to use Tor, but I count that as a virtue. The extension should be tweaked for en.wp, so that Tor is hard blocked by default. Until then, Thatcher's getting it covered one IP at a time.

I've come to see that Thatcher is fair in his own way, but he goes along with traditional ArbCom thinking, which is precisely the opposite of what is needed.

I think Thatcher is the best name listed so far. He'd be a good sock puppet sniffer, I think. He would be interested in the sockpuppet evidence against FeloniousMonk, for example.

Some people here probably dislike him because his name comes up so often when trying to use Tor, but I count that as a virtue. The extension should be tweaked for en.wp, so that Tor is hard blocked by default. Until then, Thatcher's getting it covered one IP at a time.

I've come to see that Thatcher is fair in his own way, but he goes along with traditional ArbCom thinking, which is precisely the opposite of what is needed.

I think that's a good assessment. Most likely he's reading this thread and will take it to heart.

Margaret Thatcher has dementia now of course.

What you mean, "now"?

If SV wanted to be an Arb I think she would've tried by now.

I think she prefers to act through surrogates. Will Beback would have been ideal for her purposes, but he has failed twice. Despite his best efforts, his inherent creepiness is hard to mask.

Margaret Thatcher has dementia now of course.

What you mean, "now"?

Is that another cryptic LaRouche reference?

With three year terms, regardless of who gets elected there is a high degree of probability he will eventually "go native", go along with the majority, and enjoy his new unanswerable power. Absolute power corrupts.

You're right. Arbitrators are the most powerful users on the project. They are indeed unanswerable to anyone, and by default are right.

Then lets hope someone exciting goes in to change it. I know one person I've talked to has said he's think about putting his name in; if he does, it will cause more panic among the kabal than an affectionate porcupine in a nudist colony.

With three year terms, regardless of who gets elected there is a high degree of probability he will eventually "go native", go along with the majority, and enjoy his new unanswerable power. Absolute power corrupts.

In theory you think it would be the opposite. With absolute power and a real long term, arbcom users could become radically individualist and vote however they feel. (After all, Ted Kennedy's never gonna vote pro-life even if Americans lean more that way)

In practice though, it's obvious that it's starts to shape as you say. The Warren court of the 60s, Souter and Kennedy's shifts toward more liberal tendencies, it's the dynamic of a group. ArbCom is certainly not the only group body that has an issue like that, far from it.

I guess that's why James' edit summary intrigued me. If you feel otherwise, then make a proposal stating such. Maybe there's something going on that called for unanimity, which is why he didn't. That's just me though, thinking out loud. All I can say is these elections will be very intriguing. There's no one obvious top contender like last year.

With three year terms, regardless of who gets elected there is a high degree of probability he will eventually "go native", go along with the majority, and enjoy his new unanswerable power. Absolute power corrupts.

You're right. Arbitrators are the most powerful users on the project. They are indeed unanswerable to anyone, and by default are right.

Indeed. I quote directly from Jimbo's talk page today: "I would personally desysop any admin or group of admins seeking to defy the ArbCom, because the ArbCom is a valid part of our longstanding traditions."

With three year terms, regardless of who gets elected there is a high degree of probability he will eventually "go native", go along with the majority, and enjoy his new unanswerable power. Absolute power corrupts.

You're right. Arbitrators are the most powerful users on the project. They are indeed unanswerable to anyone, and by default are right.

Indeed. I quote directly from Jimbo's talk page today: "I would personally desysop any admin or group of admins seeking to defy the ArbCom, because the ArbCom is a valid part of our longstanding traditions."

He can't get everyone. if there is enough momentum enwp could oust arbcom easily enough - either by completely ignoring it or simply deleting it.

He can't get everyone. if there is enough momentum enwp could oust arbcom easily enough - either by completely ignoring it or simply deleting it.

All those admins and editors in good standing who have had enough of Jimbo and have had enough of the do-nothing ArbCom, I strongly encourage that NOW IS THE TIME to put it to the test. Go ahead, get yourself banned by Jimbo. At some point it will become a publicity nightmare, he will lose (big time), and you can all get your bits back, or just start over with a new account and probably have them back in a few months' time.

JUST DO IT !

Indeed. I quote directly from Jimbo's talk page today: "I would personally desysop any admin or group of admins seeking to defy the ArbCom, because the ArbCom is a valid part of our longstanding traditions."

Well, there goes my hope of ever regaining my sysop bit. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

On the plus side, if Jimmy starts thinking he still owns Wikipedia and bans any admins that challenge the authority he's basically abdicated to go run Wikia, it will nicely lower RFA standards and desysopping standards to be reasonable.

On the plus side, if Jimmy starts thinking he still owns Wikipedia and bans any admins that challenge the authority he's basically abdicated to go run Wikia, it will nicely lower RFA standards and desysopping standards to be reasonable.

And he'll be admitting he's in charge and have to take responsibility for content.

All those admins and editors in good standing who have had enough of Jimbo and have had enough of the do-nothing ArbCom, I strongly encourage that NOW IS THE TIME to put it to the test. Go ahead, get yourself banned by Jimbo. At some point it will become a publicity nightmare, he will lose (big time), and you can all get your bits back, or just start over with a new account and probably have them back in a few months' time.

JUST DO IT !

It will only be a publicity nightmare for those actively following developments on WP. Those passive consumers who simply come along to use WP as their source of knowledge will not notice a thing.

Most Soviet plebs were unaware of the officers' purges - why would this be any different?

It will only be a publicity nightmare for those actively following developments on WP. Those passive consumers who simply come along to use WP as their source of knowledge will not notice a thing.

Most Soviet plebs were unaware of the officers' purges - why would this be any different?

Yeah, just like the Essjay thing never rose to the level of "publicity nightmare". I mean, it never got legs outside of the usual "WP following" media sources, did it?

Yeah, just like the Essjay thing never rose to the level of "publicity nightmare". I mean, it never got legs outside of the usual "WP following" media sources, did it?

But how many of casual readers (and to some extent, contributors) of WP even know about it? I didn't until about a year after the fact, and that was only when I was actively looking for any skeletons in WP's cupboard.

I've been hoping for a while that Jehochman would have a go at it. I'd also be likely to support Alanyst, Lar, and Cool Hand Luke, none of whom I believe have yet been mentioned in this thread (these are just people I'm hoping will run, though, not people who I believe will). It's also possible that I'm overlooking some unsavoury aspect to their histories, but hopefully an Arb Comm candidacy would bring such an aspect to the surface and allow me to revise my opinion.

Of all people who could probably win, I think Lar would be one of my top choices. I reckon he'd take a beating for posting here, but he's already a highly trusted user, and I suspect the ArbCom will vindicate him.

Of all people who could probably win, I think Lar would be one of my top choices. I reckon he'd take a beating for posting here, but he's already a highly trusted user, and I suspect the ArbCom will vindicate him.

Isn't there a view that a steward shouldn't be on ArbCom?

Of all people who could probably win, I think Lar would be one of my top choices. I reckon he'd take a beating for posting here, but he's already a highly trusted user, and I suspect the ArbCom will vindicate him.

Isn't there a view that a steward shouldn't be on ArbCom?

Not that I know of, but Stewards are prohibited by Steward policies (which trump local policies, even Jimmy policies--Jimmy is a slave to the Foundation as he has no legal business ownership claim to it) from using Steward powers on their "home" wiki. Lar can never perform Steward functions to my knowledge on en.wikipedia.org, but can anywhere else.

Which does bring up an interesting question of Jimmy is tolerated to use his Steward powers on en.wikipedia, which is clearly his home wiki.

Which does bring up an interesting question of Jimmy is tolerated to use his Steward powers on en.wikipedia, which is clearly his home wiki.

Jimmy is exempt from all rules. How hard is that to understand?

Lar can never perform Steward functions to my knowledge on en.wikipedia.org, but can anywhere else.

The policy says, "Stewards should not change rights on the projects which they are primarily active with their steward tools, unless the subject requested it themselves. It is better to leave such cases to neutral stewards. This also applies to members of local arbitration committees."

This rule doesn't not appear to be taken very seriously; Lar himself has been known to ignore it a few times.

Yeah, just like the Essjay thing never rose to the level of "publicity nightmare". I mean, it never got legs outside of the usual "WP following" media sources, did it?

But how many of casual readers (and to some extent, contributors) of WP even know about it? I didn't until about a year after the fact, and that was only when I was actively looking for any skeletons in WP's cupboard.

A recent survey demonstrated that 56.4% of casual readers of Wikipedia were able to identify as True that "A college dropout once portrayed himself on Wikipedia as a college professor, while rising to the rank of Administrator on the site". A full 7.9% were able to identify him by name as either "Essjay" or as "Ryan Jordan". Among regular contributors to the encyclopedia, 94.1% identified the statement as "True", and 61.4% were able to name the perpetrator.

This was a proprietary study, though, so I'm not at liberty to release the raw data, or the study sponsor to you.

Additional note: this information, while a complete and utter fabrication, is no less credible than your survey that included one data point.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

Greg

Yeah, just like the Essjay thing never rose to the level of "publicity nightmare". I mean, it never got legs outside of the usual "WP following" media sources, did it?

But how many of casual readers (and to some extent, contributors) of WP even know about it? I didn't until about a year after the fact, and that was only when I was actively looking for any skeletons in WP's cupboard.

I was a quite "casual" reader/contributer of WP (certainly by SV standards) when the Essjay scandal occurred. I found out about it first "on-wiki", which led me to seek further information "off-wiki", including this site (Shock! Horror!). I wasn't "actively looking for any skeletons in WP's cupboard", either. Once I realized the implications of the scandal (almost instantly), I also realized I had no further business on WP.

I've presented my idea for all open seats on the election talk page. This is a really crucial reform; if the ArbCom's lethargy and distance from the community can be traced at least in part to long terms and special appointments, there is every reason to expect that the ArbCom following a full election would be substantially more receptive and responsive to the community and substantially more energetic.

A recent survey demonstrated that 56.4% of casual readers of Wikipedia were able to identify as True that "A college dropout once portrayed himself on Wikipedia as a college professor, while rising to the rank of Administrator on the site". A full 7.9% were able to identify him by name as either "Essjay" or as "Ryan Jordan". Among regular contributors to the encyclopedia, 94.1% identified the statement as "True", and 61.4% were able to name the perpetrator.

This was a proprietary study, though, so I'm not at liberty to release the raw data, or the study sponsor to you.

Additional note: this information, while a complete and utter fabrication, is no less credible than your survey that included one data point.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif) Greg

Wow. Sorry but without more information, your study is worthless.

Methodology? Sample size? Definition of casual? Credibility of statisticians? What were the control questions?

And leaving all that aside. If I ask a sample is statement x true or false, and they have no idea, then statistically 50% will guess true and 50% false. So that 56% said true is totally unremarkable. Your 7.9% I'd suspect are the wikipedia regulars who were caught up in the sampling.

Truly unremarkable if the survey is competent at all.

A recent survey demonstrated that 56.4% of casual readers of Wikipedia were able to identify as True that "A college dropout once portrayed himself on Wikipedia as a college professor, while rising to the rank of Administrator on the site". A full 7.9% were able to identify him by name as either "Essjay" or as "Ryan Jordan". Among regular contributors to the encyclopedia, 94.1% identified the statement as "True", and 61.4% were able to name the perpetrator.

This was a proprietary study, though, so I'm not at liberty to release the raw data, or the study sponsor to you.

Additional note: this information, while a complete and utter fabrication, is no less credible than your survey that included one data point.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif) Greg

Wow. Sorry but without more information, your study is worthless.

Methodology? Sample size? Definition of casual? Credibility of statisticians? What were the control questions?

And leaving all that aside. If I ask a sample is statement x true or false, and they have no idea, then statistically 50% will guess true and 50% false. So that 56% said true is totally unremarkable. Your 7.9% I'd suspect are the wikipedia regulars who were caught up in the sampling.

Truly unremarkable if the survey is competent at all.

You did read what he wrote didn't you? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)

Yeah, just like the Essjay thing never rose to the level of "publicity nightmare". I mean, it never got legs outside of the usual "WP following" media sources, did it?

But how many of casual readers (and to some extent, contributors) of WP even know about it? I didn't until about a year after the fact, and that was only when I was actively looking for any skeletons in WP's cupboard.

I was a quite "casual" reader/contributer of WP (certainly by SV standards) when the Essjay scandal occurred. I found out about it first "on-wiki", which led me to seek further information "off-wiki", including this site (Shock! Horror!). I wasn't "actively looking for any skeletons in WP's cupboard", either. Once I realized the implications of the scandal (almost instantly), I also realized I had no further business on WP.

Well said, at that.

I'm told by a statistician (NO) that you need a stratified random sample so you get a fair mix of different types of article.

MBisanz says my proposal to have all open seats wouldn't be fair to the arbitrators with long terms. But doesn't the ArbCom itself reject the notion of fairness? Haven't they said that they consider not what is fair, but what is best for the encyclopedia?

A recent survey demonstrated that 56.4% of casual readers of Wikipedia were able to identify as True that "A college dropout once portrayed himself on Wikipedia as a college professor, ... Additional note: this information, while a complete and utter fabrication, is no less credible than your survey that included one data point.

Wow. Sorry but without more information, your study is worthless.....

You did read what he wrote didn't you? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)

Heh. Clearly not. I suppose this is mmu;dr -- mind made up; didn't read.

MBisanz says my proposal to have all open seats wouldn't be fair to the arbitrators with long terms. But doesn't the ArbCom itself reject the notion of fairness? Haven't they said that they consider not what is fair, but what is best for the encyclopedia?

Fairness is a privilege which must be earned.

MBisanz says my proposal to have all open seats wouldn't be fair to the arbitrators with long terms. But doesn't the ArbCom itself reject the notion of fairness? Haven't they said that they consider not what is fair, but what is best for the encyclopedia?

Fairness is a privilege which must be earned.

As is respect.

MBisanz says my proposal to have all open seats wouldn't be fair to the arbitrators with long terms. But doesn't the ArbCom itself reject the notion of fairness? Haven't they said that they consider not what is fair, but what is best for the encyclopedia?

Fairness is a privilege which must be earned.

Maybe the arbitrators have earned the right to fair treatment, but the community and its individual editors have not.

New York Brad has objected on the grounds that shorting terms would be: "perceived infringements on judicial independence". ... well, of course, that is the reason for the proposed change. Rather than Arbcom being unanswerable, their actions should be supported by the community.

This post has been edited by ThurstonHowell3rd:

New York Brad has objected on the grounds that shorting terms would be: "perceived infringements on judicial independence". ... well, of course, that is the reason for the proposed change. Rather than Arbcom being unanswerable their actions should be supported by the community.

Another wannabee judge slumming as an Arbitrator?

New York Brad has objected on the grounds that shorting terms would be: "perceived infringements on judicial independence". ... well, of course, that is the reason for the proposed change. Rather than Arbcom being unanswerable, their actions should be supported by the community.

I anticipated and addressed this objection in my colloquy on-wiki with Everyking, q.v.

New York Brad has objected on the grounds that shorting terms would be: "perceived infringements on judicial independence". ... well, of course, that is the reason for the proposed change. Rather than Arbcom being unanswerable their actions should be supported by the community.

Another wannabee judge slumming as an Arbitrator?

Making you....what? Robert Bork?

New York Brad has objected on the grounds that shorting terms would be: "perceived infringements on judicial independence". ... well, of course, that is the reason for the proposed change. Rather than Arbcom being unanswerable their actions should be supported by the community.

Another wannabee judge slumming as an Arbitrator?

I'm not sure whom the word "another" in that comment refers to (nor am I sure that it would productive for me to ask).

In real life I've never even considered seeking a judgeship, but my work as a WP arbitrator has given me some valuable insights into how real-world judges -- particularly judges of multi-judge courts -- go about deciding cases.

Wikipedia arbitration is not a truly "judicial" function -- even making the loose analogy invites allegations of aggrandizement, though I'm hardly the first to do so -- but there are certainly parallels between the models (compare the last principle in RfAr/Mantanmoreland).

New York Brad has objected on the grounds that shorting terms would be: "perceived infringements on judicial independence". ... well, of course, that is the reason for the proposed change. Rather than Arbcom being unanswerable their actions should be supported by the community.

Another wannabee judge slumming as an Arbitrator?

I'm not sure whom the word "another" in that comment refers to (nor am I sure that it would productive for me to ask).

In real life I've never even considered seeking a judgeship, but my work as a WP arbitrator has given me some valuable insights into how real-world judges -- particularly judges of multi-judge courts -- go about deciding cases.

Wikipedia arbitration is not a truly "judicial" function -- even making the loose analogy invites allegations of aggrandizement, though I'm hardly the first to do so -- but there are certainly parallels between the models (compare the last principle in RfAr/Mantanmoreland).

Brad, with all due respect, I think you should be wary of seeing things from your standpoint as an arbitrator rather than from the standpoint of the community. You are supporting long terms and "judicial independence", things that lead to a distant relationship between the ArbCom and the community and a tendency on the part of the ArbCom to act without consideration for the community's wishes. The ArbCom functions as an elite center of power that does its decision-making in secret and often produces rulings that are deeply unsatisfying to the community. From my perspective as a member of the community, that is all crystal clear and severely problematic.

New York Brad has objected on the grounds that shorting terms would be: "perceived infringements on judicial independence". ... well, of course, that is the reason for the proposed change. Rather than Arbcom being unanswerable, their actions should be supported by the community.

I anticipated and addressed this objection in my colloquy on-wiki with Everyking, q.v.

There would seem to be a conflict of interest for a sitting Arbcom member to be arguing against the reduction in his own term of service.

New York Brad has objected on the grounds that shorting terms would be: "perceived infringements on judicial independence". ... well, of course, that is the reason for the proposed change. Rather than Arbcom being unanswerable, their actions should be supported by the community.

I anticipated and addressed this objection in my colloquy on-wiki with Everyking, q.v.

There would seem to be a conflict of interest for a sitting Arbcom member to be arguing against the reduction in his own term of service.

They can argue all they like - indeed its useful to know what they think in the matter. Its only a conflict of interest if they make the decision.

TheKohser, my business stays successful because I have a team of project managers and developers who handle most routine client tasks. I sit here waiting for the phone to ring, to take care of new clients, or help existing clients. High availability differentiates me from competitors who are hard to reach. While waiting for those calls, I answer email, do the work I need to do, and edit Wikipedia during the spare cycles. Many of my peers do a lot of blogging. I do Wikipedia instead.

As for the legal mind, I did attend a year at Columbia Law School, but quit because I didn't like it. I occasionally serve as an expert witness, so I have had a bit of courtroom and deposition experience.

This post has been edited by Jehochman:

TheKohser, my business stays successful because I have a team of project managers and developers who handle most routine client tasks. I sit here waiting for the phone to ring, to take care of new clients, or help existing clients. High availability differentiates me from competitors who are hard to reach. While waiting for those calls, I answer email, do the work I need to do, and edit Wikipedia during the spare cycles. Many of my peers do a lot of blogging. I do Wikipedia instead.

As for the legal mind, I did attend a year at Columbia Law School, but quit because I didn't like it. I occasionally serve as an expert witness, so I have had a bit of courtroom and deposition experience.

Took you long enough to answer.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)

Doh! I wasn't paying attention.

If we're still tracking candidates, SirFozzie's announced (and has earned an immediate rebuke from Giano, who in turn was reprimanded by Tznkai...but I guess that's the way the whole durned Wikipedia comedy keeps perpetuatin' itself...)

Update: Boy am I behind the times: here's the comprehensive who's who of confirmed and potential candidates.

This post has been edited by sarcasticidealist:

Update: Boy am I behind the times: here's the comprehensive who's who of confirmed and potential candidates.

How did he make this list? Anything is "possible," right? Does that mean these are people MBisanz would not be surprised about. Kmweber? And "likely" according to what source? And what the hell is this one editorial comment doing here?

Let me put up some early support for the Fat Man.

This post has been edited by One:

here's the comprehensive who's who of confirmed and potential candidates.

How incredibly depressing. There are a few candidates that might be worth supporting, but most are people who've harmed the project.

If either WJBscribe or Shell Kinney are elected, we can look forward to three years of Elonka as untouchable. WJBscribe has also shilled and lied for FT2.

How did he make this list? Anything is "possible," right? Does that mean these are people MBisanz would not be surprised about. Kmweber? And "likely" according to what source?

From what I can tell, the confirmeds are actually confirmed (same with the "definitely nots"). The rest does seem to be somewhat speculative.

And what the hell is this one editorial comment doing here?

Unless I'm mistaken (which I may well be), Ms. De Burgh is actually Giano, and the candidacy there is a joke of some kind.

Let me put up some early support for the Fat Man.

The fat man has denied on numerous occasions that he will run, and I see no reason to doubt him (indeed, on anything!).

MBisanz's list of candidates (actual and likely) looks quite good (excluding Forrester, who has only a snowball's chance at re-election). This election is looking more promising than any past election. Just imagine if my proposal for all open seats had gone through--we'd be looking at something like a revolution! But seven seats (that's right, isn't it?), if they all go to good candidates, will be sufficient for major change.

I note that "Bishzilla", a joke alternate account of Bishonen, is included in the list. This should not be considered a serious candidacy and should not be allowed. I also note that "Bishzilla" is somehow an administrator, which means that Bishonen is operating multiple admin accounts, and my understanding is that multiple admin accounts aren't allowed.

This post has been edited by everyking:

I also note that "Bishzilla" is somehow an administrator, which means that Bishonen is operating multiple admin accounts,

Nope - Bishonen isn't an admin. From what I can tell, Bishzilla's the main account.

Of all people who could probably win, I think Lar would be one of my top choices. I reckon he'd take a beating for posting here, but he's already a highly trusted user, and I suspect the ArbCom will vindicate him.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mad.gif) No. We throw rotting fruit at Lar on WR for his singleminded defence of Wikipedia! (Is it too late for that?)

Anyway, into the tank with Lar. Swim with the Virgin.

(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/sharktank.jpg)

I note that "Bishzilla", a joke alternate account of Bishonen, is included in the list. This should not be considered a serious candidacy and should not be allowed. I also note that "Bishzilla" is somehow an administrator, which means that Bishonen is operating multiple admin accounts, and my understanding is that multiple admin accounts aren't allowed.

Actually, only Bishzilla has admin rights.

I also note that "Bishzilla" is somehow an administrator, which means that Bishonen is operating multiple admin accounts,

Nope - Bishonen isn't an admin. From what I can tell, Bishzilla's the main account.

Bishonen is the main account, and is the one that communicates like a normal human being. "Bishzilla" was created so that Bishonen could write in a comically threatening tone about eating other editors for breakfast, burning them alive, and so on. Again, not an acceptable candidacy.

MBisanz's list of candidates (actual and likely) looks quite good (excluding Forrester, who has only a snowball's chance at re-election). This election is looking more promising than any past election. Just imagine if my proposal for all open seats had gone through--we'd be looking at something like a revolution! But seven seats (that's right, isn't it?), if they all go to good candidates, will be sufficient for major change.

I note that "Bishzilla", a joke alternate account of Bishonen, is included in the list. This should not be considered a serious candidacy and should not be allowed. I also note that "Bishzilla" is somehow an administrator, which means that Bishonen is operating multiple admin accounts, and my understanding is that multiple admin accounts aren't allowed.

Bishonen had the admin bit transferred to Bishzilla.

In the 'confirmed running' section, James Forrester is the most dangerous.

I note that "Bishzilla", a joke alternate account of Bishonen, is included in the list. This should not be considered a serious candidacy and should not be allowed. I also note that "Bishzilla" is somehow an administrator, which means that Bishonen is operating multiple admin accounts, and my understanding is that multiple admin accounts aren't allowed.

Actually, only Bishzilla has admin rights.

And considering the Trogdorian/Godzilla-ish way in which WP is administrated, that's probably appropriate. Baniate and burniate. Don't think too hard.

(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/Bishzilla_blink.gif)

Bishonen is the main account, and is the one that communicates like a normal human being. "Bishzilla" was created so that Bishonen could write in a comically threatening tone about eating other editors for breakfast, burning them alive, and so on. Again, not an acceptable candidacy.

Her candidacy would be far stronger if she ran under the Bishonen account.

Bishonen is the main account, and is the one that communicates like a normal human being. "Bishzilla" was created so that Bishonen could write in a comically threatening tone about eating other editors for breakfast, burning them alive, and so on. Again, not an acceptable candidacy.

Why not? It's perfectly honest, normal Wikipedian admin behavior.

Or must you have children running this place childishly AND pretend to be adults, too? And maybe they want medals, barnstars, and (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wub.gif)

Her candidacy would be far stronger if she ran under the Bishonen account.

Well, not much stronger.

If we're still tracking candidates, SirFozzie's announced (and has earned an immediate rebuke from Giano, who in turn was reprimanded by Tznkai...but I guess that's the way the whole durned Wikipedia comedy keeps perpetuatin' itself...)

Update: Boy am I behind the times: here's the comprehensive who's who of confirmed and potential candidates.

I've had a few pmails on all this and peeps are asking if I'm going to run for ArbCom.

Answer: no (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)

I wish I could run for a seat, but I just don't have the spare time necessary to give the position the attention it deserves.

I just don't have the spare time necessary to give the position the attention it deserves.

you'd fit right in with the incumbents then...


Arbcom as it is, is irrelevant. It's an opaque roadblock put up by a delusionally self-important Jimbo Squad of part-time lightweights.

The WP community abides.

Time and time again the community has to come back after a flaccid, paralyzed, impotent arbcom fails to do anything that provides any service to wikpedia and do the right thing.

Arbcom - ignore it. It's ignoring you.

Didn't Durova promise to only stay on for one year if elected to Arbcom? I don't see the harm in just going for a year.

It would be better if there were just a small number (like four) of arbs handling one case from beginning to end before taking on another case, instead of relying on all the arbs to handle all the cases all the time.

It would be better if there were just a small number (like four) of arbs handling one case from beginning to end before taking on another case, instead of relying on all the arbs to handle all the cases all the time.

Heck, it'd be better if there were only one arbitrator, as long as he or she could be unseated. Then we would at least have someone to credit or blame.

As it is, I think the most important thing to ask here is that each member of the committee stand for reelection this December, regardless of their "tranches." The Arbitration Committee has lost the confidence of Wikipedia's volunteers and critics alike. These terms were set by someone and can be reset; there is nothing sacred about them. Anyone who wants real reform should start there.

As it is, I think the most important thing to ask here is that each member of the committee stand for reelection this December, regardless of their "tranches." The Arbitration Committee has lost the confidence of Wikipedia's volunteers and critics alike. These terms were set by someone and can be reset; there is nothing sacred about them. Anyone who wants real reform should start there.

I already proposed that on WP, and my proposal was shot down.

This post has been edited by everyking:

I already proposed that on WP, and my proposal was shot down.

"Shot down" by what, four people? What we really need here isn't a discussion, but a petition. Any threaded discussion will be manipulated by people with an interest in sabotaging or foreclosing it.

We don't need "institutional memory"; it has never been demonstrated that this has helped anything

Couldn't agree more.

Nah, the idea idea is patently unfair to people like NYB, Flo, Jpgordon, and Kirill, among others who have done excellent jobs as arbitrators and should not be forced to re-run before their term is up.

This from people who emphasize that Wikipedia doesn't do fairness and isn't a system of law! Who cares if it's "fair" to the arbitrators? Most of them don't care if they're fair to others. Some of them should be happy they're not blocked or banned.

(p.s. NewYorkBrad would win reelection anyhow.)


I'd also like to clarify: whether the "tranche" system is inherently flawed or not is utterly beside the point. Volunteers and critics alike have lost confidence in this Arbitration Committee. What is most immediately needed is not any particular policy change, but a motion of no confidence.

As it is, I think the most important thing to ask here is that each member of the committee stand for reelection this December, regardless of their "tranches." The Arbitration Committee has lost the confidence of Wikipedia's volunteers and critics alike. These terms were set by someone and can be reset; there is nothing sacred about them. Anyone who wants real reform should start there.

I already proposed that on WP, and my proposal was shot down.

Can't we add some proposals for vote onto the ArbCom election, kind of like they do in the US (I don't know if they do this elsewhere or not) in which they add bond issues and new laws to election ballots for people to vote on? If there isn't anything saying that we can't do this, then I think we should do it during this election- give people some ArbCom reform proposals to vote on, such as term reductions, etc.

Bishonen is the main account, and is the one that communicates like a normal human being. "Bishzilla" was created so that Bishonen could write in a comically threatening tone about eating other editors for breakfast, burning them alive, and so on. Again, not an acceptable candidacy.

Her candidacy would be far stronger if she ran under the Bishonen account.

Correct. Bishonen is incredibly good, but as you imply, joking need to be set aside in matters such as this. Especially in Wikipedia of course, which lacks any noticeable sense of humour.

[edit] I note the following extraordinary comment on Giano's talk page by Scribe. "It is this use of blocks to stifle criticism that troubles me most about "civility blocks". " Since when has the use of blocks as criticism - as well as the use of the oversight/deletion function, on which I still have some interesting unpublished emails from Scribe - every troubled this man?

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)h please. I note the additional comment in the block log: "Will unblock upon user's commitement to refactor/remove offending statements". I am sorry but [[User talk:SirFozzie#Your Arbcom Manifesto]] contains no comment so terrible that a user must be blocked should they refuse it. It is this use of blocks to stifle criticism that troubles me most about "civility blocks". Giano's comment to SirFozzie are harshly worded but it is content (not the contributor) that is described as "bolox" and Giano makes it clear why he believes the content to be inaccurate. I find it particularly worrying when we are talking about a statement of candidature for approaching ArbCom elections - are we really saying that if someone feels such a statement is misleading, they cannot call it rubbish due to our civility policies? Oh, what an interesting election that would prove to be... <strong style="font-variant:small-caps">[[User:WJBscribe|WJBscribe]] [[User talk:WJBscribe|(talk)]]</strong> 23:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=242611418

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

MBisanz has compiled a list of all the people who are confirmed and likely to run: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MBisanz/ACE2008

Confirmed:

Aaron Brenneman
Bishzilla
Coren
Hersfold
Jdforrester
Jehochman
SirFozzie
Wizardman

Likely:

Carcharoth
Catherine de Burgh
Fish and karate
Gwen Gale
Rlevse
The Fat Man Who Never Came Back
WJBscribe

Nice to see that J D "FeloniousMonk's contributions are worth more than Cla68's" Forrester is going to be in the running. I never had a chance to oppose him with a nasty comment before.

I never had a chance to oppose him with a nasty comment before.

Please don't (the nasty comment that is, you can oppose whoever you like). Two wrongs don't make a right.

I could go and say who I'll be supporting or opposing, but it would spoil the surprise. I'll let everyone into a secret though, I'll be opposing most people. It's a pretty poor selection this year, I must say.

It's a pretty poor selection this year, I must say.

The individuals in the race don't matter. Whoever is hand-picked for the job, they'll still be Jimbo's pet chimps. Arbcom elections are a pretend vote for a pretend court.

It's a pretty poor selection this year, I must say.

The individuals in the race don't matter. Whoever is hand-picked for the job, they'll still be Jimbo's pet chimps. Arbcom elections are a pretend vote for a pretend court.

Last time Jimbo appointed someone was in February 2007, when he appointed Mackensen to replace Dmcdevit, and Essjay as an extra. Mackensen had previously been on ArbCom, and resigned in good standing. Prior to that, was September 2005. I doubt he'll be doing it again.

It's a pretty poor selection this year, I must say.

The individuals in the race don't matter. Whoever is hand-picked for the job, they'll still be Jimbo's pet chimps. Arbcom elections are a pretend vote for a pretend court.

Last time Jimbo appointed someone was in February 2007, when he appointed Mackensen to replace Dmcdevit, and Essjay as an extra. Mackensen had previously been on ArbCom, and resigned in good standing. Prior to that, was September 2005. I doubt he'll be doing it again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arb...tions#Elections

"Since then, Arbitrators have been appointed based on the results of advisory elections held annually. Jimbo does not consider himself bound by the results of the elections, but generally has appointed Arbitrators from among the candidates with the highest percentage of positive votes (Jimmy has stated he will not appoint someone having under 50% support)."

Are you saying that page is inaccurate?

It's a pretty poor selection this year, I must say.

The individuals in the race don't matter. Whoever is hand-picked for the job, they'll still be Jimbo's pet chimps. Arbcom elections are a pretend vote for a pretend court.

Last time Jimbo appointed someone was in February 2007, when he appointed Mackensen to replace Dmcdevit, and Essjay as an extra. Mackensen had previously been on ArbCom, and resigned in good standing. Prior to that, was September 2005. I doubt he'll be doing it again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arb...tions#Elections

"Since then, Arbitrators have been appointed based on the results of advisory elections held annually. Jimbo does not consider himself bound by the results of the elections, but generally has appointed Arbitrators from among the candidates with the highest percentage of positive votes (Jimmy has stated he will not appoint someone having under 50% support)."

Are you saying that page is inaccurate?

If Jimbo's appointments accurately reflect the results of the election, then those appointed arbitrators are not automatically "Jimbo's pet chimps".

It's a pretty poor selection this year, I must say.

The individuals in the race don't matter. Whoever is hand-picked for the job, they'll still be Jimbo's pet chimps. Arbcom elections are a pretend vote for a pretend court.

Last time Jimbo appointed someone was in February 2007, when he appointed Mackensen to replace Dmcdevit, and Essjay as an extra. Mackensen had previously been on ArbCom, and resigned in good standing. Prior to that, was September 2005. I doubt he'll be doing it again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arb...tions#Elections

"Since then, Arbitrators have been appointed based on the results of advisory elections held annually. Jimbo does not consider himself bound by the results of the elections, but generally has appointed Arbitrators from among the candidates with the highest percentage of positive votes (Jimmy has stated he will not appoint someone having under 50% support)."

Are you saying that page is inaccurate?

If Jimbo's appointments accurately reflect the results of the election, then those appointed arbitrators are not automatically "Jimbo's pet chimps".

Sure they are. Anyone who might actually want to rock the wikiboat would be excluded.

"Arbcom" is just another map in the game of wikipedia. It has a symbolic role for the serfs, but its actual role is extremely limited. It's composition is irrelevant - any random group of labourers will be as effective as any other.

Sure they are. Anyone who might actually want to rock the wikiboat would be excluded.

Do you have any evidence to that effect, or is it an as-yet untested hypothesis? Not that there's anything wrong with as-yet untested hypotheses - I express quite a few of them around here - but they should be recognized as what they are.

It's a pretty poor selection this year, I must say.

The individuals in the race don't matter. Whoever is hand-picked for the job, they'll still be Jimbo's pet chimps. Arbcom elections are a pretend vote for a pretend court.

Last time Jimbo appointed someone was in February 2007, when he appointed Mackensen to replace Dmcdevit, and Essjay as an extra. Mackensen had previously been on ArbCom, and resigned in good standing. Prior to that, was September 2005. I doubt he'll be doing it again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arb...tions#Elections

"Since then, Arbitrators have been appointed based on the results of advisory elections held annually. Jimbo does not consider himself bound by the results of the elections, but generally has appointed Arbitrators from among the candidates with the highest percentage of positive votes (Jimmy has stated he will not appoint someone having under 50% support)."

Are you saying that page is inaccurate?

If Jimbo's appointments accurately reflect the results of the election, then those appointed arbitrators are not automatically "Jimbo's pet chimps".

Sure they are. Anyone who might actually want to rock the wikiboat would be excluded.

"Arbcom" is just another map in the game of wikipedia. It has a symbolic role for the serfs, but its actual role is extremely limited. It's composition is irrelevant - any random group of labourers will be as effective as any other.

While I abhor Jimbo's insistence on appointing arbitrators himself, there is no reason to think he would deliberately skip over a dissenting candidate who was appropriately placed on the results list, even if he might want to. The furthest he has gone in the past is to expand the ArbCom to justify including loyalists further down the list. Furthermore, realistically speaking, he couldn't exclude a dissenting candidate if the candidate was appropriately placed--it would be disastrous for Jimbo's political standing in the community. Nor does it make any sense to suggest that a dissenting candidate would transform to become a "pet chimp" simply because Jimbo made the formal appointment in recognition of the community's mandate.

To suggest that the composition of the ArbCom is irrelevant is simply ludicrous--in the context of Wikipolitics, nothing is more important than the composition of the ArbCom. It's only irrelevant if you think Wikipedia itself is irrelevant, and therefore whatever future direction the project takes is inconsequential.

This post has been edited by everyking:

I agree with your entire first paragraph. I have a couple of quibbles with the second.

To suggest that the composition of the ArbCom is irrelevant is simply ludicrous--in the context of Wikipolitics, nothing is more important than the composition of the ArbCom.

I would argue that the behaviour of the WMF Board is more important, but this depends on your definition of Wikipolitics (though even under a narrow definition, I'd argue that the behaviour of the WMF Board ought to be more important than the composition of Arb Comm).

It's only irrelevant if you think Wikipedia itself is irrelevant, and therefore whatever future direction the project takes is inconsequential.

It's quite possible to believe, as I think many do here, that Wikipedia is relevant but that Wikipolitics, even broadly-defined, are not. I think that's the view of the faction that believes that Wikipedia is beyond hope, but that it's too harmful to be ignored.

Re: Anyone who might rock the wikiboat...

Jimbo said if anyone retired mid-year this year, he would replace them from someone who got at least 50% in the 2007 election. Jimbo didn't keep his word. (Is anyone surprised?) Newyorkbrad retired and UninvitedCompany lapsed into real life, but Jimbo left their seats vacant until NYB returned and UC formally resigned. Anyway, he said anyone who got 50%, and he explicitly included Giano in that list.

This post has been edited by Shalom:

Re: Anyone who might rock the wikiboat...

Jimbo said if anyone retired mid-year this year, he would replace them from someone who got at least 50% in the 2007 election. Jimbo didn't keep his word. (Is anyone surprised?) Newyorkbrad retired and UninvitedCompany lapsed into real life, but Jimbo left their seats vacant until NYB returned and UC formally resigned. Anyway, he said anyone who got 50%, and he explicitly included Giano in that list.

Where did he say this?

Paul August also resigned, remember. NYB was gone from the end of April until August; Paul left in August, and UC in September. There's no point really in replacing Paul and UC, since it's so late on in the year, and I think everyone knew NYB's departure was only temporary.

Re: Anyone who might rock the wikiboat...

Jimbo said if anyone retired mid-year this year, he would replace them from someone who got at least 50% in the 2007 election. Jimbo didn't keep his word. (Is anyone surprised?) Newyorkbrad retired and UninvitedCompany lapsed into real life, but Jimbo left their seats vacant until NYB returned and UC formally resigned. Anyway, he said anyone who got 50%, and he explicitly included Giano in that list.

Where did he say this?

Paul August also resigned, remember. NYB was gone from the end of April until August; Paul left in August, and UC in September. There's no point really in replacing Paul and UC, since it's so late on in the year, and I think everyone knew NYB's departure was only temporary.

At this point I agree that it's not worth it to replace UC and PA before the elections. It wasn't obvious to me that NYB was coming back, though maybe it was obvious to everyone else - it certainly wasn't publicly spoken of that way.

Jimbo said it in his announcement of his December 2007 selections, reported in the Signpost. Look in the Signpost archives for December 2007.

Jimbo said if anyone retired mid-year this year, he would replace them from someone who got at least 50% in the 2007 election. Jimbo didn't keep his word.

He probably just didn't notice that Arb Comm was depleted.

Sure they are. Anyone who might actually want to rock the wikiboat would be excluded.

Do you have any evidence to that effect, or is it an as-yet untested hypothesis? Not that there's anything wrong with as-yet untested hypotheses - I express quite a few of them around here - but they should be recognized as what they are.

I was going to present the current arbcom as exhibit A, but I see Shalom has already done that quite nicely. I may be inclined to collect examples of arbs-toeing-the-line here as we go along.

To suggest that the composition of the ArbCom is irrelevant is simply ludicrous--in the context of Wikipolitics, nothing is more important than the composition of the ArbCom. It's only irrelevant if you think Wikipedia itself is irrelevant, and therefore whatever future direction the project takes is inconsequential.

That's assuming the body actually influences the "future direction of the project". It doesn't. It makes relatively inconsistent decisions on the banning-and-reverting - as you say, "wikipolitics" - but does not substantially influence goals and methods.

Re: Anyone who might rock the wikiboat...

Jimbo said if anyone retired mid-year this year, he would replace them from someone who got at least 50% in the 2007 election. Jimbo didn't keep his word. (Is anyone surprised?) Newyorkbrad retired and UninvitedCompany lapsed into real life, but Jimbo left their seats vacant until NYB returned and UC formally resigned. Anyway, he said anyone who got 50%, and he explicitly included Giano in that list.

Where did he say this?

Here, for those with short memories. Also of interest in that writeup is the way term lengths and composition of the body are chopped and changed at will.

I was going to present the current arbcom as exhibit A, but I see Shalom has already done that quite nicely. I may be inclined to collect examples of arbs-toeing-the-line here as we go along.

Hey, you're moving the target. I'm not asking you to provide evidence that Arbs toe the line, I'm asking you to provide evidence that "Anyone who might actually want to rock the wikiboat would be excluded" even if they won the election.

I was going to present the current arbcom as exhibit A, but I see Shalom has already done that quite nicely. I may be inclined to collect examples of arbs-toeing-the-line here as we go along.

Hey, you're moving the target. I'm not asking you to provide evidence that Arbs toe the line, I'm asking you to provide evidence that "Anyone who might actually want to rock the wikiboat would be excluded" even if they won the election.

See first sentence.

I'm with Sarcasticidealist here. I think I intended the opposite of what Useonceanddestroy is interpreting of me -- namely, Jimbo might well appoint someone whose views he personally does not agree with. The main problem for someone hell-bent on rocking the wiki-boat, to use that odd metaphor, is to win the election from the community. When I think of who is likely to make it into Arbcom, I think of people who have not been involved on the protagonist level in edit wars, but may have tried to resolve them and succeeded, or are involved in sockpuppet investigations and block/unblock requests of established users. Anyone who has a realistic shot at making Arbcom has to fit into the institutional framework.

I think Jimbo's relative lack of involvement at this stage is advantageous in that he's not likely to reject any candidate by virtue of disliking that candidate. He dislikes certain people, to be sure, but he won't care enough to keep them off Arbcom. At least, that's what I'm hoping.

Hmm, no one has commented that Jimbo has extended the term of Thebainer. He also reminds us that he retains a monarch's veto if the community does not select a "good, safe, and trusted appointment." Long-time admin Duk had this to say about Jimbo's sense of trustworthiness:

The most unsound appointments, in my opinion, such as Kelly Martin's and Essjay's, were appointments made by you without the input of the community. As far as judging the 'soundness' of appointments, Jimbo, I suggest you leave it to the community. --Duk 23:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I think this poor track record might actually explain why Jimbo declined to fill any seats this year. I once read a daily newspaper which refused to issue political endorsements because the editor recommended Nixon in 1972.

Lar also posits an interesting theory:

It has been said that the Queen of England can overrule Parliament... once. After that she would no longer be Queen. Whether matters here are analogous or not, I cannot say, but I suspect they might be. ++Lar: t/c 04:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

This post has been edited by One:

Hmm, no one has commented that Jimbo has extended the term of Thebainer. He also reminds us that he retains a monarch's veto if the community does not select a "good, safe, and trusted appointment." Long-time admin Duk had this to say about Jimbo's sense of trustworthiness:

The most unsound appointments, in my opinion, such as Kelly Martin's and Essjay's, were appointments made by you without the input of the community. As far as judging the 'soundness' of appointments, Jimbo, I suggest you leave it to the community. --Duk 23:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I think this poor track record might actually explain why Jimbo declined to fill any seats this year. I once read a daily newspaper which refused to issue political endorsements because the editor recommended Nixon in 1972.

Lar also posits an interesting theory:

It has been said that the Queen of England can overrule Parliament... once. After that she would no longer be Queen. Whether matters here are analogous or not, I cannot say, but I suspect they might be. ++Lar: t/c 04:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I can't think of a single appointment by Jimbo that was a good one to be honest. Kelly Martin and Essjay were a disaster for a start.

I'm not bothered that thebainer gets another year. FloNight's term was extended last year for two extra years in the same manner, and nobody batted an eyelash as far as I can recall.

I do object strongly against Jimbo arrogating to himself power to overrule the community's preference in the ArbCom elections. There's a severe difference between extending the term of a sitting arbitrator who hasn't served a full term, versus hypothetically refusing to appoint a candidate with consensus because Jimbo doesn't like him or her. As with many issues, I agree with Sarcasticidealist in that discussion thread.

I can't think of a single appointment by Jimbo that was a good one to be honest. Kelly Martin and Essjay were a disaster for a start.

Yes, my appointment was a disaster because I wasn't interested in playing the SlimVirgin Game. My stock started falling after I questioned Mel Etitis' conduct as an administrator; you can guess what was behind that.

It's my considered opinion that any "outsider" who managed to get elected would be appointed, then harassed to death by the rest of the loyalists until they either converted or resigned in disgust.

This post has been edited by Kelly Martin:

Jimbo explains why the WMF board doesn't take over his role on enwp and confirms the important role that ex-Arbs (except Kelly Martin, I imagine) play:

Well, but the board is clearly the wrong institution for this. The board is not, and should not be, focused on the detailed governance of the community of the English language Wikipedia. The board is tasked with governance and oversight of a global charity, and quite properly for a number of reasons prefer to stay out of these kinds of debates. It strikes me as unlikely these days that I would act in any, shall we say, interesting ways, without first consulting and getting approval from the majority of the Arbs and ex-Arbs. Of course, in theory, this too can be problematic, as giving the existing ArbCom a say over the next ArbCom poses some (mostly theoretical) difficulties. In any event, I propose that we continue to evolve slowly and thoughtfully over time.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:08, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Meanwhile, Cirt is asking a line of Socratic questions, trying to understand why discretionary selection is good and necessary.

This post has been edited by One:

Meanwhile, Cirt is asking a line of Socratic questions, trying to understand why discretionary selection is good and necessary.

"shoot that troll on sight!" - Jimmy says

My stock started falling after I questioned Mel Etitis' conduct as an administrator; you can guess what was behind that.

Well, it takes courage to stand out from the 'crowd', and sometimes the price can be high. I think WP will eventually implode because of the distinct lack self-honesty amongst almost all the admins. Sad really! ~~~~

I think WP will eventually implode because of the distinct lack self-honesty amongst almost all the admins. Sad really! ~~~~

Did you mean to sign with 4 tildes?(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) ~~~~

I think WP will eventually implode because of the distinct lack self-honesty amongst almost all the admins. Sad really! ~~~~

Did you mean to sign with 4 tildes?(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) ~~~~

Second sign of madness, so I hear.

I think WP will eventually implode because of the distinct lack self-honesty amongst almost all the admins. Sad really! ~~~~

Did you mean to sign with 4 tildes?(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) ~~~~

Well, I have to be honest with you wikiwhistle. My bad, my bad, my bad!!! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif) Two hours sleep last evening does that wacko Wikipedian stuff to people. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

Well, I have to be honest with you wikiwhistle. My bad, my bad, my bad!!! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif) Two hours sleep last evening does that wacko Wikipedian stuff to people. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

That's ok lol I bet a lot of people have done it on various forums. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Strange for someone who claims not to have edited WP for 3 months or something though. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

This post has been edited by wikiwhistle:

Well, I have to be honest with you wikiwhistle. My bad, my bad, my bad!!! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif) Two hours sleep last evening does that wacko Wikipedian stuff to people. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

That's ok lol I bet a lot of people have done it. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Well, don't tell a 'certain admin' about it, or she'll see it as evidence of socking! These admins pick up on the most bizarrest of things, suspicious lot!! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/huh.gif)

Jimbo now says that new Arbitrators must be approved by current and former members of the Committee…

“I will not appoint anyone who is not supported by the existing Arbs and Arbs Emeritus.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=247483118

…with Thomas H. Larsen, Giano, Jehochman, SlimVirgin and Cla68 dissenting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#G.27day

This post has been edited by Proabivouac:

Jimbo now says that new Arbitrators must be approved by current and former members of the Committee…

“I will not appoint anyone who is not supported by the existing Arbs and Arbs Emeritus.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=247483118

…with Thomas H. Larsen, Giano, Jehochman, SlimVirgin and Cla68 dissenting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#G.27day

I'm not sure anyone likes this particular idea, but hey, what can we do?

Jimbo now says that new Arbitrators must be approved by current and former members of the Committee…

“I will not appoint anyone who is not supported by the existing Arbs and Arbs Emeritus.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=247483118

…with Thomas H. Larsen, Giano, Jehochman, SlimVirgin and Cla68 dissenting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#G.27day

This will only serve to intensify the insular nature of ArbCom.

I have no idea what the philosophy is here. It's not a power grab for him, because he's actually relinquishing some power here, he's just doing it badly. It looks like he's trying to accumulate courtiers - only thing is, Jimbo, constitutional monarchs don't generally have those.

It's actually almost as though he's so resistant to a nice, straightforward method of arb selection that he's deliberately making it as chaotic as possible to prove that the wonderful anarchic Wikipedia spirit is still alive.

I think WP will eventually implode because of the distinct lack self-honesty amongst almost all the admins. Sad really! ~~~~

Did you mean to sign with 4 tildes?(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) ~~~~

Second sign of madness, so I hear.

Drunken editors bluepencil the their love letters (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wub.gif); Wikipedians sign them with tildes ~~~~.

A tail behind, a trunk in front,
Complete the usual elephant.
The tail in front, the trunk behind,
Is what you very seldom find.

If you for specimens should hunt
With trunks behind and tails in front,
That hunt would occupy you long
The force of habit is so strong.


--A.E. Housman

I have no idea what the philosophy is here.

Privatemusings asked if Jimbo would appoint him if he won the election:

...and finally - if I were to run, and poll strongly enough, would you have any objection to my serving on the committee? Privatemusings (talk) 04:40, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Jimbo's statement here echos last year's situation with Giano:

I would be strongly disinclined to appoint anyone who has been reprimanded by the ArbCom less than a year ago for sockpuppeting and inappropriate BLP editing.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 15:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

So The Arbitrators can disqualify anyone's candidacy simply by placing them under sanction - and we already know that contributors can be sanctioned merely for criticizing them (= "incivility" and "disruption").

Jimbo now says that new Arbitrators must be approved by current and former members of the Committee…

“I will not appoint anyone who is not supported by the existing Arbs and Arbs Emeritus.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=247483118

…with Thomas H. Larsen, Giano, Jehochman, SlimVirgin and Cla68 dissenting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#G.27day

I wonder if he'll ask for my opinion in this matter.

So The Arbitrators can disqualify anyone's candidacy simply by placing them under sanction - and we already know that contributors can be sanctioned merely for criticizing them (= "incivility" and "disruption").

They don't even need to do that; they just need to tell Jimbo not to appoint them. It's absurd.

Jimbo now says that new Arbitrators must be approved by current and former members of the Committee…

“I will not appoint anyone who is not supported by the existing Arbs and Arbs Emeritus.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=247483118

…with Thomas H. Larsen, Giano, Jehochman, SlimVirgin and Cla68 dissenting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#G.27day

I'm not sure anyone likes this particular idea, but hey, what can we do?

A self-perpetuating College of Cardinals, with Jimbo as Pope for life. Indeed, what can you do?

I have some ideas about the WMF board, though, which holds the real power. These guys aren't rich enough to stand up to a determined foundation takeover bribe, in which some larger entity like the Gates Foundation or the Alfred P. Sloan foundation decides to take an interest in WMF and offers to buy its way into a controlling position with enough new board members to get their way, with the existing board members stipended as part of the deal. You think they're going to say no? Jimbo will vote against it, but he's probably the only one who will.

I wonder if he'll ask for my opinion in this matter.

I should think so - you're in good standing on Wikipedia, right?

This post has been edited by sarcasticidealist:

I wonder if he'll ask for my opinion in this matter.

I should think so - you're in good standing on Wikipedia, right?

Hard to say. Supposedly, I'm still living "under a cloud" (whatever that means). The fact that I'm not permitted to request adminship at will, and that I've subsequently failed an RFA, would be proof to most Wikiweenians that I'm not "in good standing". And I'm sure in Jimbo's mind, "enemy of Wikipedia" is inconsistent with "Arbitrator Emeritus", and it's plainly obvious that Jimmy has me firmly pegged in the former slot in his mind.

I wonder if he'll ask for my opinion in this matter.

I should think so - you're in good standing on Wikipedia, right?

Hard to say. Supposedly, I'm still living "under a cloud" (whatever that means). The fact that I'm not permitted to request adminship at will, and that I've subsequently failed an RFA, would be proof to most Wikiweenians that I'm not "in good standing". And I'm sure in Jimbo's mind, "enemy of Wikipedia" is inconsistent with "Arbitrator Emeritus", and it's plainly obvious that Jimmy has me firmly pegged in the former slot in his mind.

Are you on arbcom-l mailing list?

The fact that I'm not permitted to request adminship at will,

Wait, you're not? When did that happen?

Are you on arbcom-l mailing list?

Of course not. Why would I want to be on that?

The fact that I'm not permitted to request adminship at will,

Wait, you're not? When did that happen?

By that I meant that my adminship cannot be reinstated on request; I have to go through RFA if I were to go insane all of a sudden and decide that for some benighted reason I wanted to be a WIkipoopia admin again.

Are you on arbcom-l mailing list?

Of course not. Why would I want to be on that?

All the juicy gossip for a start!

All the juicy gossip for a start!

And what use would that be, again?

Are you on arbcom-l mailing list?

Of course not. Why would I want to be on that?

Someone's got to keep an eye on them, that's for sure.

Remember a few days ago when FT2 said that Arbitrators were the wisest Wikipedians? Remember how someone here asked "well why not allow them to choose their own successors?"

Well...

All the juicy gossip for a start!

And what use would that be, again?

It would extremely useful to some of us, myself in particular. Why not disclose some of the old mailing list discussion? As I recall, you were on the mailing list up to late 2006.

Remember a few days ago when FT2 said that Arbitrators were the wisest Wikipedians? Remember how someone here asked "well why not allow them to choose their own successors?"

Well...

... You mean Jimbo reads this site? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

It would extremely useful to some of us, myself in particular. Why not disclose some of the old mailing list discussion? As I recall, you were on the mailing list up to late 2006.

There really isn't that much worth disclosing. The only thread of interest that I can think of was when I challenged Jay on his use of oversight to make SlimVirgin's "SlimV" account disappear. Everyone except Sannse defended Jay.

Remember a few days ago when FT2 said that Arbitrators were the wisest Wikipedians? Remember how someone here asked "well why not allow them to choose their own successors?"

Well...

... You mean Jimbo reads this site? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

Reminds me of this: http://xkcd.com/481/

About a week later youtube implemented the "read your comment back to you" feature.

Remember a few days ago when FT2 said that Arbitrators were the wisest Wikipedians? Remember how someone here asked "well why not allow them to choose their own successors?"

Well...

... You mean Jimbo reads this site? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

Jimbo specifically mentioned this site by name in his sex chat to Rachel Marsden. So he must read it when he can stand to. I personally think WR's proudest moment was acting then as what passes for a conscience, as Jimbo was deciding how to go about fixing up Rachel's bio in order to get-laid-in-a-worry-free-way ™. Of course, we ultimately had no effect (Jimbo's dick does NOT read WR) and of course, he did get caught. *

But it's the thought that counts.

--Milton

* N.B. Bunnyboiling bunnies don't need WR, WP, or even the internet to boil bunnies; they've been doing it back into recorded history, see Medea (and even the term is from Fatal Attraction, a film made in 1987 before the net came to the average person). The general bunnyboiling idea is that any man who has sex with a woman has thereby promised her his eternal soul. As in: "I let you into my bed, so now I OWN you." This is independent of the existence of children, promises, lost virginity, wasted time. For those women in whom this response is activated (and it is a minority, thank goodness) the corollary is that a woman scorned believes she has the right to hurt the man whose soul she believes she owns, in any way she sees fit. Men have their own version of this response, and (like everything else about men) it tends to be more physically violent. Again, thank goodness, it's far from universal. Biology (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif) Things will be so much nicer when we're fully in control of it.

Are you on arbcom-l mailing list?

Of course not. Why would I want to be on that?

What I mean is, that's made up of the beloved arbs and emeritus arbs to which Jimbo was probably refering. But you're right, he should ask your opinion on the candidates. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

The user formerly known as Neil has tossed his fish into the ring.

Sam Korn is also up.

Meanwhile, The Fat Man's campaign is languishing.

This post has been edited by One:

The user formerly known as Neil has [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AMBisanz%2FACE2008&diff=248169792&oldid=248048937]tossed his fish into the ring.[/url

]

Whatever happened to his vow on his user page- "I am trying to stop getting involved in behind-the-scenes rubbish, and now mainly edit articles."

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) That said, he might be a good candidate.

The Fat Man's campaign is languishing.

TFM doesn't know how to do things in moderation, bless him. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) Being silly is ok, but not quite all the time. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) I presume his candidacy is sort of tongue-in-cheek? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

I see Ryan Postlethwaite isn't running for once.

The user formerly known as Neil has tossed his fish into the ring.

So that would mean that, along with SirFozzie, we have two open members of the Review on the ballot?

The user formerly known as Neil has tossed his fish into the ring.

So that would mean that, along with SirFozzie, we have two open members of the Review on the ballot?

Wizardman, Jehochman, Bishonen and Aaron Brenneman all have accounts here in their name, although they admittedly don't post here very much.

The Fat Man's campaign is languishing.

TFM doesn't know how to do things in moderation, bless him.

That's why they call him the Fat Man.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) Being silly is ok, but not quite all the time. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) I presume his candidacy is sort of tongue-in-cheek? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

The Fat Man almost never does what he says he's going to do. He likes to tantalize but never actually delivers.

Besides, I can count on 2 hands and 2 feet the number of people who would consider voting for him (they would include family members and hangers-on, as well as some of the most influential editors on the project); however, most people have never heard of him, or see him for the non-contributing troll that he is.

Also, even if TFMWNCB won in a landslide, do you think that Jimbo and his cadre of mailing list puppets would even remotely consider granting him any privileges or responsibilities? Give me a break.

Giano--an actual content contributor, who is more widely known--has a much better chance, if you're into the "outsider" thing.

All that said, expect TFM to make some noise in December, even if he's not on the ballot.

This post has been edited by Obesity:

The user formerly known as Neil has tossed his fish into the ring.

So that would mean that, along with SirFozzie, we have two open members of the Review on the ballot?

Wizardman, Jehochman, Bishonen and Aaron Brenneman all have accounts here in their name, although they admittedly don't post here very much.

SirFozzie and I are openly "WR". Wizardman, Jehochman, Bishonen and Aaron Brenneman are "WR", but don't like to talk about it.

There are a lot of Arbs who are "WR", but only came out once they had been elected.

Sam Korn is also up.

I was under the impression that checkusers had to be eighteen and verified as such to the Foundation, but whilst checking Sam Korn out I realised that he's been a checkuser since 2006, at which time he was seventeen. Odd.

SirFozzie and I are openly "WR".

There is a rumor going around that you are also "Error59."

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=3363

Can we confirm that this is or isn't the case? (I havent' looked into it myself.)

Sam Korn is also up.

I was under the impression that checkusers had to be eighteen and verified as such to the Foundation, but whilst checking Sam Korn out I realised that he's been a checkuser since 2006, at which time he was seventeen. Odd.

The identification/age requirement was implemented in 2007.

Sam Korn is also up.

I was under the impression that checkusers had to be eighteen and verified as such to the Foundation, but whilst checking Sam Korn out I realised that he's been a checkuser since 2006, at which time he was seventeen. Odd.

Things were different back then, as they say. Perhaps since he was on ArbCom they didn't think before giving him the CU access (since the 18+ AC rule only came up at last year's elections, if I recall). Or maybe they're just lazy.

I'm kind of hurt nobody asked me! However, I'm also notorious for having a short temper and not giving two shits, so perhaps it's for the best. I'd yell at someone and make them cry or something.

SirFozzie and I are openly "WR".

There is a rumor going around that you are also "Error59."

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=3363

Can we confirm that this is or isn't the case? (I havent' looked into it myself.)

?! Not me.

I see Ryan Postlethwaite isn't running for once.

For once? I've only run once!

I see Ryan Postlethwaite isn't running for once.

For once? I've only run once!

You couldn't even win an RfB. What chance could you have at being elected arbitrator?

Then again, it may actually be easier to win an ArbCom election than an RfB. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

I see Ryan Postlethwaite isn't running for once.

For once? I've only run once!

You couldn't even win an RfB. What chance could you have at being elected arbitrator?

Then again, it may actually be easier to win an ArbCom election than an RfB. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

Ryan withdrew in the very early stages. He'd have passed if it was closed when he withdrew.

As for getting on to arbcom being easier, it is actually. You need 90% to "win" an RFB. To get onto Arbcom you just need to be part of the top however spaces there are.

Jpgordon is apparently resigning his seat.

Jpgordon is apparently resigning his seat.

It seems at the very least, terms should be reduced to 2 years (or perhaps 18 months, while maintaining three tranches). We tend to elect half of the spots each year anyway, when Jimbo doesn't re-up them. Very few people can take 3 years. SlimVirgin, Giano, and Everyking (among a diverse cross-section) all agree on this point.

Jpgordon is apparently resigning his seat.

Very good news. I was concerned that the ArbCom might not be so different in 2009 with Gordon still on it. His departure increases the odds that this election will mark a real transition.

Jpgordon is apparently resigning his seat.

Very good news. I was concerned that the ArbCom might not be so different in 2009 with Gordon still on it. His departure increases the odds that this election will mark a real transition.

What real transition, are you still naive to expect any real transition? The ArbCom will never be much different, because real changes are impossible.

The only changes you will have, is more articulate arbitrators like NYB who know how to write to gain more supports even thought the results of their actions will be identical. It's becoming just more sofisticated in silencing the critics by embelishing the package while the content remains identical.

Good news!

Good news!

I don't understand. He only listed himself as "possible."

Meanwhile, Privatemusings posted himself as "likely." I think that'll be an interesting issues campaign, although there's a very slim change of seating him as an Arb (even without ArbCom's veto).

Good news!

I don't understand. He only listed himself as "possible."

Well it's better than him not running. Casliber is better than any of the current confirmed candidates.

Good news!

I don't understand. He only listed himself as "possible."

Well it's better than him not running. Casliber is better than any of the current confirmed candidates.

I can't recall seeing him around. What are his views?

Well it's better than him not running. Casliber is better than any of the current confirmed candidates.

I can't recall seeing him around. What are his views?

He's the mushroom man (if memory serves)

Good news!

I don't understand. He only listed himself as "possible."

Well it's better than him not running. Casliber is better than any of the current confirmed candidates.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mad.gif)

Good news!

I don't understand. He only listed himself as "possible."

Well it's better than him not running. Casliber is better than any of the current confirmed candidates.

SCREW YUO GIGY I HATE YOURE FACE




(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

This post has been edited by Neil:

Well it's better than him not running. Casliber is better than any of the current confirmed candidates.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mad.gif)

Well it's better than him not running. Casliber is better than any of the current confirmed candidates.

SCREW YUO GIGY I HATE YOURE FACE




(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

Nawww. I was wondering how I should word that so I didn't piss off too many people (well, I was trying to piss Neil off, but other than that). There are other good candidates there too, but Cas is the least interested in drama and timewasting and most interested in writing one of them encyclopedia thingies.

Well it's better than him not running. Casliber is better than any of the current confirmed candidates.

I can't recall seeing him around. What are his views?

He's the mushroom man (if memory serves)

Mushrooms, dinosaurs, and assorted trivia.

I wish we could hit reboot and just replace them all except for Newyorkbrad

I wish we could hit reboot and just replace them all except for Newyorkbrad

I don't think NYB would manage on his own!

And they aren't all bad.

Cas is the least interested in drama and timewasting and most interested in writing one of them encyclopedia thingies.

So... an ArbCom member not interested in drama, that should be interesting! Why would we want to ruin his article writing skills by supporting him for ArbCom? Nice guy for sure, but not suited for ArbCom imo, much better doing what he's good at - Encyclopedia.

I wish we could hit reboot and just replace them all except for Newyorkbrad

And Kirill.

Cas is the least interested in drama and timewasting and most interested in writing one of them encyclopedia thingies.

So... an ArbCom member not interested in drama, that should be interesting! Why would we want to ruin his article writing skills by supporting him for ArbCom? Nice guy for sure, but not suited for ArbCom imo, much better doing what he's good at - Encyclopedia.

Actually, I've interacted with Casliber. I think he would be a good ArbCom member based on qualities besides his focus on the encyclopedia. That focus, however, ensures that he'll have good perspective. In total, I think it's a good package and hope he does run.

In general, though, I agree with you, Alex. Article writers are not necessarily the best arbitrators. If that were true, I think YellowMonkey and Charles Matthews (who seem to be the most article-focused Arbs) would be getting much more praise than NYB. Instead, they're out there doing what they love: writing articles.

Admins as a whole are not actually very dramatic. But the subset of admins we discuss here are. I suspect some attraction to controversy is required for arbitrators to stay glued to their task. Many of the best article writers (with outstanding exceptions like SG, Cla68, and Giano II) tend to avoid controversy because it gets in the way of their chosen hobby. I don't scorn them for that, but I think it's the reality.

Cas is the least interested in drama and timewasting and most interested in writing one of them encyclopedia thingies.

So... an ArbCom member not interested in drama, that should be interesting! Why would we want to ruin his article writing skills by supporting him for ArbCom? Nice guy for sure, but not suited for ArbCom imo, much better doing what he's good at - Encyclopedia.

In my opinion, this strategy hasn't worked so far...

Cas is the least interested in drama and timewasting and most interested in writing one of them encyclopedia thingies.

So... an ArbCom member not interested in drama, that should be interesting! Why would we want to ruin his article writing skills by supporting him for ArbCom? Nice guy for sure, but not suited for ArbCom imo, much better doing what he's good at - Encyclopedia.

In my opinion, this strategy hasn't worked so far...

I was musing on it but then was asked by privatemusings who I have met and had beers with, and then SandyGeorgia and Eusebeus concurred (!)

I guess what I thought I could offer is:

(1) tooling around FAC, GAN and several wikiprojects and watching alot of diffs I get an idea on how articles grow and the relative importance of contributions

(2) I am a psychiatrist by trade and a bit of a people watcher (including myself) and watching (and participating in) conflicts grow and resolve has been interesting. Furthermore, one of the main tenets of WP is collaborative editing and an ability to negotiate (i.e. a little bit more than just interact with) others, and I have seen and foretold (well, to myself anyway) several crash-and-burns, and have thought upon ways to promote certain editor's strengths rather than let them continue to wallow (?) and I may be able to input into arbcom like this WRT remedies etc.

(3) One thing about medicine and especially psychiatry is that treating yourself or family is not a good idea as you lose objectivity, thus if all candidates were elected on experience or having gone through the ranks as clerks etc., I'd be worried that objectivity would be lost when it came to any systemic analysis which may include behaviour of those close to or within arbcom etc. Thus it is a good idea that some come from outside the regulars. One reason I don't comment much is that often someone else has already said or observed what I wanted to say and by that time there is so much text I am loth to add any more to it as it is already at that tldr stage almost.
heck, I think I'll have to cut-and-paste this over there...

if all candidates were elected on experience or having gone through the ranks as clerks etc., I'd be worried that objectivity would be lost when it came to any systemic analysis which may include behaviour of those close to or within arbcom etc.

That's true, if they were actual family some of the higher-ups would be literally incestuous, and others are friends of theirs. Thus the more 'in' someone is with arbcom the harder it is for arbcom to say they've done anything wrong, and it becomes pretty impossible for them to rule on the behaviour of their friends. All of life is a popularity contest though, I suppose. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

...if they were actual family some of the higher-ups would be literally incestuous...

Not unless they were also having sex with each other, they wouldn't be.

</pedantic shitheadery>

...if they were actual family some of the higher-ups would be literally incestuous...

Not unless they were also having sex with each other, they wouldn't be.

</pedantic shitheadery>

Erm... your point being?

Erm... your point being?

That I'm a pedantic shithead who really dislikes misuse/overuse of the word "literally", primarily.

Erm... your point being?

That I'm a pedantic shithead who really dislikes misuse/overuse of the word "literally", primarily.

Please demonstrate any evidence you have that I overused the word 'literally'? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

This post has been edited by wikiwhistle:

Erm... your point being?

That I'm a pedantic shithead who really dislikes misuse/overuse of the word "literally", primarily.

Please demonstrate any evidence you have that I overused the word 'literally'? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

An often-commented on redundancy is the use of the word 'literally' - it is often used as more of a filler word (for emphasis I guess) rather than imparting any meaning. The point being if you removed it frm the original sentence, then no meaning would be lost or changed, hence it is a redundant adverb. 'Personally' is another one commonly cited as well for the same reasons. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Could proably add 'primarily' to that group as well (hence the quip above) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)