QUOTE(everyking @ Tue 2nd December 2008, 10:43pm)
My personal rule of thumb is that if my opinion on someone is more or less neutral, I will abstain from voting unless they are standing in the way of someone who I support, in which case I will oppose them. Such is the case for Vassyana, for example--I don't feel strongly about that candidate, but there are some excellent candidates just a few percentage points behind.
I definitely understand why you would do this. It shows that ArbCom elections are prone to strategic gamesmanship. I'm all in favor of open voting for transparency, but the downside is that people vote strategically instead of voting for the best candidates. I also think the personal attacks against some of the candidates are way over the top. On balance, for drama reduction purposes, I would support a system more similar to Special:Boardvote. I think this question has been brought up already but has not gotten a full range of opinions.
Edit: Actually, I just changed my mind. Special:Boardvote is prone to technical glitches (one of which I uncovered and reported this year on my meta account), and there's a benefit to maintaining tradition.
This post has been edited by Shalom: