Nominations closed Options

[Casliber]

Yeah, I am here he is me, I am him, we too are one....

.....everyking, I thought you would have noticed another inclusionist as they are as rare as hen's teeth at AfD ( I think apart from us, Alansohn, and DGG and...)

Nuts, erm, my userpage lists most of the stuff I have been doing on WP, and SandyGeorgia asked me and a few other FA writers to do something for the signpost (hang on, I will rummage round for the link in a few min...)

[One]

That leaves the following fifteen names. I project that the seven top names, and at least nine of the top ten, will be on this list.

I believe Charles Matthews is also competitive. He's gotten praise here.[1][2][3] Content contributor. Not a statement on the candidate either way, just an observation about his competitive electability.

If it weren't for legal and ethical problems, I would cover as much of PM's 12-to-1 as he'd allow, especially as he seemed to be offering a trifecta to the sixth place (and only two possibilities for the seventh). Such a bet should accurately have a payout in the hundreds.

[Kurt M. Weber]

It might be useful to list the folks who realistically have no shot.

Joke nominations:
Kmweber

My candidacy is most assuredly quite serious.

Your classification of me as someone who "realistically [has] no shot" is probably correct, but that doesn't make it a joke.

This post has been edited by Kurt M. Weber: Tue 25th November 2008, 3:20pm

[Lar]

If it weren't for legal and ethical problems, I would cover as much of PM's 12-to-1 as he'd allow, especially as he seemed to be offering a trifecta to the sixth place (and only two possibilities for the seventh). Such a bet should accurately have a payout in the hundreds.

... or thousands. Which is why I covered it. And in offering to cover it, warned him I'd be lobbying for a different outcome... he sent me the funds anyway. Sucker. Assuming the payment clears (not yet a foregone conclusion), you just don't MAKE easier money than that.

Now, on the other hand, PM thinks his odds improved a lot with his platform planks being revealed... I happen to agree. I think they got better by at least 3 orders of magnitude... all the way to 1:1,000,000,000 or so. One or two of those planks actually aren't cockamamie ideas.

If anyone is foolish enough to offer 1:1,000,000 odds on PM getting elected. I've got a buck I'll put down against a payout of a million , just for the humor value. But I ain't holding my breath. (you'd probably need to get the million to Obesity, my designated escrow agent, just to be unfair, since I didn't send my 150 to him to cover PM, LOL)

(as a note, this is why I am a LP member... not because they win elections, but because their ideas sometimes have some small influence for the better)

[JoseClutch]

If it weren't for legal and ethical problems, I would cover as much of PM's 12-to-1 as he'd allow, especially as he seemed to be offering a trifecta to the sixth place (and only two possibilities for the seventh). Such a bet should accurately have a payout in the hundreds.

... or thousands. Which is why I covered it. And in offering to cover it, warned him I'd be lobbying for a different outcome... he sent me the funds anyway. Sucker. Assuming the payment clears (not yet a foregone conclusion), you just don't MAKE easier money than that.

Now, on the other hand, PM thinks his odds improved a lot with his platform planks being revealed... I happen to agree. I think they got better by at least 3 orders of magnitude... all the way to 1:1,000,000,000 or so. One or two of those planks actually aren't cockamamie ideas.

If anyone is foolish enough to offer 1:1,000,000 odds on PM getting elected. I've got a buck I'll put down against a payout of a million , just for the humor value. But I ain't holding my breath. (you'd probably need to get the million to Obesity, my designated escrow agent, just to be unfair, since I didn't send my 150 to him to cover PM, LOL)

(as a note, this is why I am a LP member... not because they win elections, but because their ideas sometimes have some small influence for the better)

Lar

There is no way Private Musings' odds are bad at the billion to one level. The odds of enough other candidates withdrawing or being run over by buses gives him a better chance than that. The "probably not" candidates still have something like a ~0.1% change of getting elected. Even PrivateMusings, Kmweber and them have to be at the >0.001% of getting elected.

[Random832]

There is no way Private Musings' odds are bad at the billion to one level. The odds of enough other candidates withdrawing or being run over by buses gives him a better chance than that.

Those wouldn't necessarily contribute to PM's chances of winning, depending on how winning is defined - "finishing no worse than 7th" is one definition, yes, but "finishing no worse than 7th, getting more supports than opposes, and not being vetoed by Jimbo" is one that's perhaps a closer model of reality.

[SirFozzie]

Of being a top seven vote getter maybe. but considering Jimbo decides who iz and who izznt, I think I'll take Lar's side on that.

[The Wales Hunter]

Joke nominations:
George the Dragon
Kmweber
The Fat Man Who Never Came Back

Having contested elections in the real world, I would suggest there is no such thing as a "joke" nomination, especially given the current opinion sections of the community has of the ArbCom right now.

A real improvement requires real changes to the system, and that's something the three of us would bring to the table. Many of the other candidates are just copies of the same.

[Jaranda]

Two editors, myself included already withdrew, Hersford is the other one.

[One]

I assumed all bets would be for finishing in the top 7 with more than 50%. Betting does not normally take into account acts of God(king).

The 50% criteria absolutely kills Kurt's chances--if he were the last candidate standing, he would just get more opposition votes.

That said, Kurt's desire to destroy ArbCom is sincere, and I'm not sure it's a good idea to try to sort "joke" from non-joke candidacies. The Fat Man is not certainly not running a joke campaign in my view, and I think some might wonder whether Trojanpony is by the username alone. Making these value judgments serves no purpose.

This post has been edited by One: Tue 25th November 2008, 5:31pm

[Jaranda]

That leaves the following fifteen names. I project that the seven top names, and at least nine of the top ten, will be on this list.

I believe Charles Matthews is also competitive. He's gotten praise here.[1][2][3] Content contributor. Not a statement on the candidate either way, just an observation about his competitive electability.

If it weren't for legal and ethical problems, I would cover as much of PM's 12-to-1 as he'd allow, especially as he seemed to be offering a trifecta to the sixth place (and only two possibilities for the seventh). Such a bet should accurately have a payout in the hundreds.

Charles Matthews is the most likely of the two standing candidates to win.

Also note I'm most likely to do a detailed subpage describing all the candidates and why I'm voting for them or not.

This post has been edited by Jaranda: Tue 25th November 2008, 4:47pm

[Newyorkbrad]

I assumed all bets would be for finishing in the top 7 with more than 50%. Betting does not normally take into account acts of God(king).

The 50% criteria absolutely kills Kurt's chances--if he were the last candidate standing, he would just get more opposition votes.

That said, Kurt's desire to destroy ArbCom is sincere, and I'm not sure it's a good idea to try to sort "joke" from non-joke candidacies. The Fat Man is not certainly not running a joke campaign in my view, and I think some might wonder whether Trojanpony is by the username alone. Making this value judgments serves no purpose.

Any remaining sense that Kurt was running a sincere campaign for reform is, to my mind at least, negated by his answer to Rootology's question on his question page on-wiki.

[The Wales Hunter]

On a different note, I'd argue that all candidates should make a full disclosure of their real life identity and background before even standing.

Is it not farcical that an election is being held for wacky screen names?

[One]

Any remaining sense that Kurt was running a sincere campaign for reform is, to my mind at least, negated by his answer to Rootology's question on his question page on-wiki.

Well, in fairness I don't think he ever intended reform so much as harm. I'm surprised he answered it. Obesity once doubted Kurt was a "troll" because he supposedly believes what he says. At this point, there can be no doubt.

[JoseClutch]

Of being a top seven vote getter maybe. but considering Jimbo decides who iz and who izznt, I think I'll take Lar's side on that.

Odds that Jimbo dies in the next month are much, much higher than a billion to one.

On a different note, I'd argue that all candidates should make a full disclosure of their real life identity and background before even standing.

Is it not farcical that an election is being held for wacky screen names?

Wacky screen names voting for wacky screen names seems exactly right to me.

[Kelly Martin]

The Fat Man is not certainly not running a joke campaign in my view, and I think some might wonder whether Trojanpony is by the username alone.

I've never considered The Fat Man's campaign as a "joke"; he has always seemed quite serious (aside from his username) and forthright in his criticisms. The only reason people consider him a joke is the username and the fact that his viewpoints are so discordant with the party line.

Any remaining sense that Kurt was running a sincere campaign for reform is, to my mind at least, negated by his answer to Rootology's question on his question page on-wiki.

Kurt's campaign is serious only in Kurtworld, and the intersection of Kurtworld and the real world is very minimal indeed.

[JoseClutch]

The Fat Man is not certainly not running a joke campaign in my view, and I think some might wonder whether Trojanpony is by the username alone.

I've never considered The Fat Man's campaign as a "joke"; he has always seemed quite serious (aside from his username) and forthright in his criticisms. The only reason people consider him a joke is the username and the fact that his viewpoints are so discordant with the party line.

"Joke" here is used to mean "has no chance of winning", not "candidate is not serious".

[Kurt M. Weber]

I assumed all bets would be for finishing in the top 7 with more than 50%. Betting does not normally take into account acts of God(king).

The 50% criteria absolutely kills Kurt's chances--if he were the last candidate standing, he would just get more opposition votes.

That said, Kurt's desire to destroy ArbCom is sincere, and I'm not sure it's a good idea to try to sort "joke" from non-joke candidacies. The Fat Man is not certainly not running a joke campaign in my view, and I think some might wonder whether Trojanpony is by the username alone. Making this value judgments serves no purpose.

Any remaining sense that Kurt was running a sincere campaign for reform is, to my mind at least, negated by his answer to Rootology's question on his question page on-wiki.

Oh, I'm quite sincere in my aims.

Making jokes during a campaign does not make the campaign itself a joke.

You would do well to learn the difference.

[One]

"Joke" here is used to mean "has no chance of winning", not "candidate is not serious".

That might be true for some people, but that definition is unfamiliar to me. And also to Shalom, apparently. "Joke" is one subheading of Shalom's list of "folks who realistically have no shot."

My modest point is that it's probably not worthwhile to label candidate intentions.

[JoseClutch]

"Joke" here is used to mean "has no chance of winning", not "candidate is not serious".

That might be true for some people, but that definition is unfamiliar to me. And also to Shalom, apparently. "Joke" is one subheading of Shalom's list of "folks who realistically have no shot."

My modest point is that it's probably not worthwhile to label candidate intentions.

I do not mean it *should* be used that way. But that is pretty clearly what it means to call The Fat Man a "joke" candidate, for instance.