ArbCom nominations begin, Two weeks left to draft Wesley Options

One question that springs to mind for me is: "Would you accept appointment by Jimbo if you were not one of the top candidates (that is, someone else was passed over so that you could be appointed)?" Actually, that's a good question for all ArbCom candidates, but I dare not ask it lest I be accused of not having adequately informed myself before commenting.

Now asked. Whether it stays live is another matter, but in the current climate IMO it's a damn good no-right-answer question.

His bid for arbcom is being sabotaged.

I like privatemusings. I really do. But he had basically no chance of winning anyway.

I get that his opponents might say "look, there's an RFC about you!" but they can already say, "look, you were blocked by ArbCom less than a year a go, and Jimbo personally said he hopes the community doesn't make such a poor choice!"

I honestly think ArbCom elections are not on many of these people's minds.

Hey, look! White cat is in the running! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arb...ments#White_Cat

I guess last year wasn't bad enough: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arb.../Vote/White_Cat

So who's going to do worse? White Cat or Privatemusings? Or Justice America? I don't really care who wins - I mean, I do care, but I care more that people who aren't competent or disagree with my principles don't get on. In other words, I'd easily take more than five of the folks who have already submitted their names, and aside from Rlevse, I'm not hell-bent on any of them. But for entertainment value, picking up the bottom of the barrel should be fun.

Jehochman would be a more interesting pick than Rlevse. For those who still think Arbcom worth something.

"Would you accept appointment by Jimbo if you were not one of the top candidates (that is, someone else was passed over so that you could be appointed)?"

If I'm not one of the top 8 candidates, I don't think I would be appointed ANYWAY, but there would have to be a real good reason for someone else to be passed over for me to accept.

"Would you accept appointment by Jimbo if you were not one of the top candidates (that is, someone else was passed over so that you could be appointed)?"

If I'm not one of the top 8 candidates, I don't think I would be appointed ANYWAY, but there would have to be a real good reason for someone else to be passed over for me to accept.

Let's say you're in ninth place, and Privatemusings is in seventh place. Jimbo won't appoint Privatemusings, so he excludes him from the list and you therefore move up to eighth place. How would you react in that scenario?

I like Privatemusings, first off. Do I think he has the werewithal to be an arbitrator, however? No. In that case, I'd probably ask to be placed in the one year tranche so that the community may judge in a year or not whether I should continue as an arbitrator.

I like Privatemusings, first off. Do I think he has the werewithal to be an arbitrator, however? No. In that case, I'd probably ask to be placed in the one year tranche so that the community may judge in a year or not whether I should continue as an arbitrator.

So the answer is yes, you would accept the appointment. All right. Another question: how do you feel about the arbitration restrictions I've been subjected to for the last three years? If elected, you'll have to deal with that issue, so I'd like to know where you stand.

I like Privatemusings, first off. Do I think he has the werewithal to be an arbitrator, however? No. In that case, I'd probably ask to be placed in the one year tranche so that the community may judge in a year or not whether I should continue as an arbitrator.

So the answer is yes, you would accept the appointment. All right. Another question: how do you feel about the arbitration restrictions I've been subjected to for the last three years? If elected, you'll have to deal with that issue, so I'd like to know where you stand.

Hey Everyking, why aren't you running? I bet you could beat Jforrester

I like Privatemusings, first off. Do I think he has the werewithal to be an arbitrator, however? No. In that case, I'd probably ask to be placed in the one year tranche so that the community may judge in a year or not whether I should continue as an arbitrator.

So the answer is yes, you would accept the appointment. All right. Another question: how do you feel about the arbitration restrictions I've been subjected to for the last three years? If elected, you'll have to deal with that issue, so I'd like to know where you stand.

Hey Everyking, why aren't you running? I bet you could beat Jforrester

Several reasons: I don't think I'd have a realistic chance of winning; I'm almost certain Jimbo would refuse to appoint me even if I did win; and I think ArbCom candidates should be current administrators, at least as a general rule.

One question that springs to mind for me is: "Would you accept appointment by Jimbo if you were not one of the top candidates (that is, someone else was passed over so that you could be appointed)?" Actually, that's a good question for all ArbCom candidates, but I dare not ask it lest I be accused of not having adequately informed myself before commenting.

Now asked. Whether it stays live is another matter, but in the current climate IMO it's a damn good no-right-answer question.

Thanks, ED! (And I don´t see any reason to vote for anybody who doesn´t answer the question )

everyking: I will be upfront: I'm not aware of the situation where you were sanctioned, and I'm not going to say something on a situation where I know nothing. I can promise a review, but I cannot promise that I'll see it one way or another.

everyking: I will be upfront: I'm not aware of the situation where you were sanctioned, and I'm not going to say something on a situation where I know nothing. I can promise a review, but I cannot promise that I'll see it one way or another.

If elected, you'll have to form an opinion on it, won't you? So why put it off? If you give me an answer prior to the election, that will help me make an informed judgment regarding your candidacy. Last year, I foolishly voted for some people who ended up supporting my sanctions, and you can see why I wouldn't want to make that mistake again.

…I'm almost certain Jimbo would refuse to appoint me even if I did win…

It would be a wonderful to force his hand, though. As it is now, he's able to deter perhaps a half-dozen people this way without even once having to take the hit to his reputation which would follow - and the reputation of the Arb-elect denied would transcend that of a mere arbitrator.

I like Privatemusings, first off. Do I think he has the werewithal to be an arbitrator, however? No. In that case, I'd probably ask to be placed in the one year tranche so that the community may judge in a year or not whether I should continue as an arbitrator.

heh! well I'm a little surprised, to be honest, Foz :-) - I look forward to chatting a bit about this one if you're up for the voice thing at some point....

I know this election is (currently) considered to be a sort of advisory process.. but I really don't think it should be, and it continues to raise my eyebrow a bit that others don't find this a little more remarkable.

You're asking people to vote for you, whilst also stating that if the wrong people (or person!) receive more support you'd be cool ignoring the vote because obviously those voting.. um.. made a mistake?

ps. the chances of my wherewithal being put to the test seem slim, but given your refusal to comment above on matters you don't feel well informed about, I'm also curious as to the basis for your comment - I was under the impression that we didn't really know each other :-)

(although I'm sure we've 'met' somewhere?) PM.

ps. Vote me! :-)

This post has been edited by privatemusings: Tue 11th November 2008, 8:28am

One question that springs to mind for me is: "Would you accept appointment by Jimbo if you were not one of the top candidates (that is, someone else was passed over so that you could be appointed)?" Actually, that's a good question for all ArbCom candidates, but I dare not ask it lest I be accused of not having adequately informed myself before commenting.

Could SirFozzie, Neil, and anyone else running please answer the question I presented above?

My answer: I don't think it's likely, as anyone likely to be passed over by Jimbo would probably have had enough things thrown at them through questions and voting to cause them to exit the "chosen few" before that situation arose.

Jimbo has the power - for better or worse - to pass on anyone he doesn't consider suitable. As those spots have to be filled, the next person down the list is the obvious choice. If it happens to be me, then so be it. I really don't think it's going to happen, though.

Could SirFozzie, Neil, and anyone else running please answer the question I presented above?

That's a tough question to ask the candidates. Even though I don't agree with the way Jimbo is running this ArbCom election, I don't think I would hold it against one of the candidates if they accepted an appointment after a higher vote-getter was disqualified by Jimbo. All the candidates want to make a difference by getting onto the ArbCom. If someone ahead of them is disqualified, even if its done unfairly by Jimbo or anyone else, that doesn't necessarily mean that the next candidate in line did anything wrong or cheated in any way.

This post has been edited by Cla68: Tue 11th November 2008, 12:40pm

Could SirFozzie, Neil, and anyone else running please answer the question I presented above?

That's a tough question to ask the candidates. Even though I don't agree with the way Jimbo is running this ArbCom election, I don't think I would hold it against one of the candidates if they accepted an appointment after a higher vote-getter was disqualified by Jimbo. All the candidates want to make a difference by getting onto the ArbCom. If someone ahead of them is disqualified, even if its done unfairly by Jimbo or anyone else, that doesn't necessarily mean that the next candidate in line did anything wrong or cheated in any way.

Also, by answering this question with a hard "no," it basically guarantees that Jimbo will not ask you to fill the last spot. The point of refusing is to protest Jimbo's discretion. If Jimbo knows you're just going to protest, he'll just look elsewhere to fill the last spot. In fact, I think everyking's question has just destroyed everyone's chance to protest in this way.

At any rate, in the past he hasn't moved down to the next-highest, he's moved down to the highest former arbitrators with more than 50%. Consider that when voting for former arbitrators.


James F. did answer rootology's rather pointed question about this incident:

The Arbitrator in question was, of course, me. I'm not sure what further comment I can usefully give; I absolutely regret the concern raised through my being as honest as I was, and would chose to express my concerns differently if I were faced with the same situation again, but I cannot withdraw my edits in any meaningful way, so they remain.

Regret the concern...raised through being honest...would express concerns differently next time. Hmm.

Well, I do respect James for being straightforward in the past, and I also appreciate that he would not want an arbitrator unsupported by the community. He's at least got that right, although I still don't understand his apparent feelings toward Cla68.

This post has been edited by One: Wed 12th November 2008, 5:19am

Could SirFozzie, Neil, and anyone else running please answer the question I presented above?

That's a tough question to ask the candidates. Even though I don't agree with the way Jimbo is running this ArbCom election, I don't think I would hold it against one of the candidates if they accepted an appointment after a higher vote-getter was disqualified by Jimbo. All the candidates want to make a difference by getting onto the ArbCom. If someone ahead of them is disqualified, even if its done unfairly by Jimbo or anyone else, that doesn't necessarily mean that the next candidate in line did anything wrong or cheated in any way.

Yeah, it is a hard question. But the candidates should be asked hard questions, reams of them, as long as ArbCom has this kind of power.

That is not to say there is necessarily a right or wrong answer to this question.

Also, by answering this question with a hard "no," it basically guarantees that Jimbo will not ask you to fill the last spot. The point of refusing is to protest Jimbo's discretion. If Jimbo knows you're just going to protest, he'll just look elsewhere to fill the last spot. In fact, I think everyking's question has just destroyed everyone's chance to protest in this way.

Take this game to its logical conclusion. If everyone felt strongly about this issue (I do) they would vote for any candidate who protested Jimbo's discretion, and not for any candidate who did not. That would place Jimbo in the absurd position of having to pass over popular candidates in favour of also-rans, which the community would not tolerate.

If no one feels strongly about the issue, however, it would be grossly damaging to protest Jimbo's discretion.

So, like all political choices, it is up to the candidate to gauge the popular mood on this issue. It is also up to the populace to ensure the candidates are aware of the strength of feeling over it.

Also, by answering this question with a hard "no," it basically guarantees that Jimbo will not ask you to fill the last spot. The point of refusing is to protest Jimbo's discretion. If Jimbo knows you're just going to protest, he'll just look elsewhere to fill the last spot. In fact, I think everyking's question has just destroyed everyone's chance to protest in this way.

Take this game to its logical conclusion. If everyone felt strongly about this issue (I do) they would vote for any candidate who protested Jimbo's discretion, and not for any candidate who did not. That would place Jimbo in the absurd position of having to pass over popular candidates in favour of also-rans, which the community would not tolerate.

That's a good point. Voters could make this a requisite single issue. I'm a little surprised by SirFozzie's answer myself, which amounts to "I don't oppose Jimbo's unilateral acts when I agree with Jimbo." The whole point of the question makes candidates evaluate whether they actually oppose Jimbo's hand in selection, or if they think he's right about being a necessary check against bad candidates.


In other news, Charles Matthews now also seeks re-election. He cites his backslapping work in the BADSITES ArbCom, but doesn't provide a link. Here it is. It does indeed look like the work of compromise...

This post has been edited by One: Tue 11th November 2008, 7:04pm