Who gets the WR endorsement for Arbcom09, Could be the kiss of death? Options

[Doc glasgow]

OK, there's going to be lots of useless exit polls, so let's get in first with our pre-poll.

The winner gets a lovely "endorsed by Wikipedia Review" banner (yet to be designed) to put on their nomination. Should be worth a few votes to them.

[Sarcasticidealist]

I have to say, Doc, when I saw the topic "Who gets the WR endorsement for Arbcom09" pop up with your name as the most recent contributor, I assumed that some Wikipedia fanboy had started the thread and you'd retorted by dourly asking them to focus on something more consequential.

Still, what fun! But are radio button polls the only format supported by this site?

[Doc glasgow]

I have to say, Doc, when I saw the topic "Who gets the WR endorsement for Arbcom09" pop up with your name as the most recent contributor, I assumed that some Wikipedia fanboy had started the thread and you'd retorted by dourly asking them to focus on something more consequential.

Still, what fun! But are radio button polls the only format supported by this site?

The whole wikipedia/anti-wikipedia thing is about fun. I no longer take any of it seriously - except where it has negative consequences on real live people.

[cyofee]

I'm voting for Cla68, with several accounts.

I hope he'll desysop SlimVirgin for good.

This post has been edited by cyofee: Mon 30th November 2009, 7:59pm

[Jon Awbrey]

OK, there's going to be lots of useless exit polls, so let's get in first with our pre-poll.

The winner gets a lovely "endorsed by Wikipedia Review" banner (yet to be designed) to put on their nomination. Should be worth a few votes to them.

People who live in Glaswikian houses shouldn't throw scones …

Ja Ja

[Doc glasgow]

Still, what fun! But are radio button polls the only format supported by this site?

Yes, 'tis a pity we can't have a multi-option mimic of the arbcom poll

[CharlotteWebb]

Still, what fun! But are radio button polls the only format supported by this site?

Yes, 'tis a pity we can't have a multi-option mimic of the arbcom poll

I guess you could re-do with buttons for each candidate in a separate section e.g.

Kurt Weber
[x] support
[   ] oppose

Or maybe just "not support" if the actual ballot has no "oppose" option, shrug.

[Somey]

Still, what fun! But are radio button polls the only format supported by this site?

We tried TV buttons for a while, but people kept demanding that we give them a "remote."

One of these days we'll have to properly upgrade this site... I think the latest version allows for things like that, though I could be mistaken.

[RDH(Ghost In The Machine)]

Kurt Weber, obviously.
He is the only one who openly promises to try and bring down the attrocity monstrosity from the inside if elected.
All hail the "Anti-Bauder"

[EricBarbour]

I'd prefer to see RMHED in there.

He's the only one who is honest. He'll just party.
And let the whole ugly mess fall into ruin. Hah.

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Mon 30th November 2009, 9:00pm

[Kurt M. Weber]

Hey, I'm in second place!

[Eva Destruction]

Assuming they're telling the truth about electing eight people, vote AGK, Bauder, Hersfold, Secret, Seddon, Shell Kinney, Unomi and Connelly. An Arbcom with a clear majority of undoubted nutjobs will hasten the day in which what laughably passes for a Wikipedia governance process chokes on its own vomit, and the WMF is forced to bite the bullet and replace the ridiculous psuedo-masonic hierarchy with a properly constituted board of governors.

[Sarcasticidealist]

Assuming they're telling the truth about electing eight people, vote AGK, Bauder, Hersfold, Secret, Seddon, Shell Kinney, Unomi and Connelly.

Any chance you'd explain your "endorsements" of AGK, Hersfold, and Seddon? I don't know much about any of them, and am still considering whether to support them.

Also, by your criteria why not Kurt or RMHED (the second of whom seem pretty intelligent, but also doesn't seem likely to facilitate effective conflict resolution)?

[GlassBeadGame]

I'd vote for Steve Smith (WR's Sarcasticidealist.) He's pro-Wikipedian but he thinks better than rest of this rabble. Someday he'll flip sides and become a critic. I've noticed that being on ArbCom has had an effect One too. Mostly in tone and mostly taking form of impatience. He could eventually get things right too. I'll bet half of PETA once worked in meat packing.

But I can't vote. I haven't touched Wikipedia in well over a year.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

I guess you could re-do with buttons for each candidate in a separate section e.g.

Kurt Weber
[x] support
[   ] oppose

Or maybe just "not support" if the actual ballot has no "oppose" option, shrug.

Trying to devise a workable poll with this software is a headache. Kirill wasn't my first choice, but I wish I could have voted for him as a secondary option, as he seems semi-reasonable. There ought to be an option as well to have Fred Bauder exiled to ED.

[Eva Destruction]

Assuming they're telling the truth about electing eight people, vote AGK, Bauder, Hersfold, Secret, Seddon, Shell Kinney, Unomi and Connelly.

Any chance you'd explain your "endorsements" of AGK, Hersfold, and Seddon? I don't know much about any of them, and am still considering whether to support them.

Also, by your criteria why not Kurt or RMHED (the second of whom seem pretty intelligent, but also doesn't seem likely to facilitate effective conflict resolution)?

AGK is a reincarnation of Anthony cfc (T-C-L-K-R-D) , and I can't do better at summing up the problem than the oppose section of his RFA did. Sure, it was two years ago, but I see no evidence that this isn't the latest manifestation of the same "I want every job going because I'm so important" shtick.

Hersfold may be great for all I know; what I do know is that when I was on Wikipedia I got around a lot, and never once saw him in any context other than throwing himself into an argument regardless of whether it related to him in any way.

Regarding Seddon, I direct you to toolserver, and once you've looked at that, give me your opinion whether this is someone likely to defuse drama. Besides, this is someone taking the process so seriously that at the time of writing, he hasn't bothered to answer a single question.

No point voting for Kurt and RHMED other than the lulz value of seeing them top the poll (don't worry, I'm doing my damndest to get them there; Horsey, Undertow, Peter, you might want to join me in this one). Even if they win, Jimbo will just veto them.

[everyking]

Having been repeatedly burned by voting for bad candidates in the past, my support votes this year will be based strictly on clear pledges made by the candidates. Candidates can receive my support by making pledges on one of two issues: they can pledge to conduct all or nearly all of their arbitration-related deliberations on-wiki and to promote ArbCom transparency in general, or they can pledge to help me get my own case reviewed and my restrictions lifted. AGK made a transparently-related pledge, so I'm planning to vote for him. As far as I know, no other candidate has made a pledge on either of the issues, so I will vote for none of them unless they do.

I'd vote for Steve Smith (WR's Sarcasticidealist.) He's pro-Wikipedian but he thinks better than rest of this rabble. Someday he'll flip sides and become a critic. I've noticed that being on ArbCom has had an effect One too. Mostly in tone and mostly taking form of impatience. He could eventually get things right too. I'll bet half of PETA once worked in meat packing.

One/CHL is one of the saddest cases I've seen. He was a promising candidate, but as an arbitrator, he's ceased to represent any sort of critical or reformist perspective. Do you suppose being on the secret mailing list has done that to him? Special privileges can have that effect on people...when you get special privileges, it's easy to start thinking that things really aren't so bad after all, and people need to stop whining.

[Kurt M. Weber]

why not Kurt or RMHED (the second of whom seem pretty intelligent

(emphasis mine)

Excuse me?

[Sarcasticidealist]

Excuse me?

Apologies - I did not intend to imply that you were stupid, though your interpretation otherwise was a reasonable one. What I meant was that it is patently obvious why somebody aiming to have ArbCom "choke on its own vomit" would want to vote for you, but that my listing of RMHED in the same category might require elaboration. A better wording would have been "Also, by your criteria why not Kurt (who's clearly a maniac) or RMHED (who seems pretty intelligent, but also doesn't seem likely to facilitate effective conflict resolution)?"

This post has been edited by Sarcasticidealist: Tue 1st December 2009, 3:05am

[Obesity]

Assuming they're telling the truth about electing eight people, vote AGK, Bauder, Hersfold, Secret, Seddon, Shell Kinney, Unomi and Connelly. An Arbcom with a clear majority of undoubted nutjobs will hasten the day in which what laughably passes for a Wikipedia governance process chokes on its own vomit, and the WMF is forced to bite the bullet and replace the ridiculous psuedo-masonic hierarchy with a properly constituted board of governors.

Yes. See my thread from last year.