Election results, Voting has begun Options

[Kato]

I noticed something on the talk page of Rlevse's election page:

I have recused myself for voting for Rlevse due almost fully to my extensive prior involvement with him. We converse frequently on ArbCom Clerking and administrator matters, and I would probably agree that he is as much a friend as a colleague. (Offering my support to him, therefore, could be easily coloured as cronyism, which would reflect poorly on his candidacy as well as on me.) I do wish to note for the record my agreement with what seems to be the consensus of a sizable majority of the community: Rlevse would make a very good Arbitrator, and is an excellent choice this election. Good luck, Rlevse. AGK 20:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

It really struck me how rare this kind of self-aware, honorable behavior was on Wikipedia. Which is rather like that discussion I had with Brad about the conspicuous lack of resignations that go on among the power seekers at WP compared to the real world. So if David Gerard screws up and bans half of Utah by mistake, he carries on with impunity and without apology. Meanwhile, the dysfunctional community takes any opportunity to pile on and indulge in the most naked display of cronyism since the days of the Medicis in Florence. So I just thought that stance by AGK showed an uncharacteristic flourish of class for a Wikipedian.

[Sarcasticidealist]

Out of curiosity, would you consider AGK's "recusal" necessary of this was a secret ballot? I don't disagree with your criticisms of the lack of accountability for fuckups at Wikipedia, but I've never seen it suggested that you should recuse yourself from elections if a friend's running. If AGK's personal ethical code demands it, then power to him for doing it, but I don't think it was necessary.

[Eppur si muove]

the conspicuous lack of resignations that go on among the power seekers at WP compared to the real world.

Whilst I support your desire for more honourable behaviour from the Wiki powers that be, I find your description of the real world strange coming from someone who lives in New Labour Britain. Have I got that wrong?

[Kato]

the conspicuous lack of resignations that go on among the power seekers at WP compared to the real world.

Whilst I support your desire for more honourable behaviour from the Wiki powers that be, I find your description of the real world strange coming from someone who lives in New Labour Britain. Have I got that wrong?

Well I suppose I was thinking more about media people like Greg Dyke and Lesley Douglas than New Labourites like Peter Mandelson, who has resigned three times only to return each time. There have still been serial resignations under New Labour, the most admirable being Robin Cook - and the most unseemly by Tony Blair who should done it much earlier. The funniest resignation may be Plaid Cymru Welsh minister Rhodri Glyn Thomas, who resigned because he walked into a bar with a lit cigar, and also according to the BBC "considered his position unsustainable following an earlier gaffe when he named the wrong winner of a book prize"!

Anyway, my point is that Checkusers, Arbitrators and Admins generally don't give up their tools even after they've been publicly found to have misused them. Nor do many hardcore Wikipediots decline the offer of exploiting hideous cronyism or blatant conflicts of interest whenever they can. This was a rare surprise.

[Steve Crossin]

I noticed something on the talk page of Rlevse's election page:

I have recused myself for voting for Rlevse due almost fully to my extensive prior involvement with him. We converse frequently on ArbCom Clerking and administrator matters, and I would probably agree that he is as much a friend as a colleague. (Offering my support to him, therefore, could be easily coloured as cronyism, which would reflect poorly on his candidacy as well as on me.) I do wish to note for the record my agreement with what seems to be the consensus of a sizable majority of the community: Rlevse would make a very good Arbitrator, and is an excellent choice this election. Good luck, Rlevse. AGK 20:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

It really struck me how rare this kind of self-aware, honorable behavior was on Wikipedia. Which is rather like that discussion I had with Brad about the conspicuous lack of resignations that go on among the power seekers at WP compared to the real world. So if David Gerard screws up and bans half of Utah by mistake, he carries on with impunity and without apology. Meanwhile, the dysfunctional community takes any opportunity to pile on and indulge in the most naked display of cronyism since the days of the Medicis in Florence. So I just thought that stance by AGK showed an uncharacteristic flourish of class for a Wikipedian.

I've always looked up to AGK on Wikipedia. He's one of the Wikipedians I trust the most. Whether he had to do what he did or not, it, I think it was an honorable thing to do.

[The Wales Hunter]

the conspicuous lack of resignations that go on among the power seekers at WP compared to the real world.

Whilst I support your desire for more honourable behaviour from the Wiki powers that be, I find your description of the real world strange coming from someone who lives in New Labour Britain. Have I got that wrong?

Well I suppose I was thinking more about media people like Greg Dyke and Lesley Douglas than New Labourites like Peter Mandelson, who has resigned three times only to return each time. There have still been serial resignations under New Labour, the most admirable being Robin Cook - and the most unseemly by Tony Blair who should done it much earlier. The funniest resignation may be Plaid Cymru Welsh minister Rhodri Glyn Thomas, who resigned because he walked into a bar with a lit cigar, and also according to the BBC "considered his position unsustainable following an earlier gaffe when he named the wrong winner of a book prize"!

Anyway, my point is that Checkusers, Arbitrators and Admins generally don't give up their tools even after they've been publicly found to have misused them. Nor do many hardcore Wikipediots decline the offer of exploiting hideous cronyism or blatant conflicts of interest whenever they can. This was a rare surprise.

This may need splitting, but just a very quick comment.

One thing that has struck me under New Labour is how civil servants are now named, shamed and expected to resign. The age-old tradition was for the Minister to take the blame if something went wrong in his department, but this motley lot just blame the officials and get them to quit. Perhaps one of the more dishonourable developments since that sad day in May 1997.

[Eppur si muove]

Well I suppose I was thinking more about media people like Greg Dyke and Lesley Douglas than New Labourites like Peter Mandelson, who has resigned three times only to return each time. There have still been serial resignations under New Labour, the most admirable being Robin Cook - and the most unseemly by Tony Blair who should done it much earlier. The funniest resignation may be Plaid Cymru Welsh minister Rhodri Glyn Thomas, who resigned because he walked into a bar with a lit cigar, and also according to the BBC "considered his position unsustainable following an earlier gaffe when he named the wrong winner of a book prize"!

Anyway, my point is that Checkusers, Arbitrators and Admins generally don't give up their tools even after they've been publicly found to have misused them. Nor do many hardcore Wikipediots decline the offer of exploiting hideous cronyism or blatant conflicts of interest whenever they can. This was a rare surprise.

I think Douglas jumped before she was pushed. Paul Gambaccini was doing the media round putting the blame fairly and squarely at her door. I think he said he had warned her against hiring Brand. There were also stories that she had moved away several producers who had tried to edit Brand's show during its run time. I think with the pack baying for blood, then Thompson or the BBC Trust would have sacked her.
But I suppose your point would be that Jimmy Wales doesn't get put in the same position as Thompson and the BBC Trust were in very often and therefore it is very rare that any strong action is taken in Wikipedia or that people feel obliged to ackowledge their mistakes.

[everyking]

I suppose I should update this thread with a note that voting has now closed and the seven winning candidates are Casliber, Risker, Roger Davies, Cool Hand Luke, Rlevse, Jayvdb, and Vassyana, in that order.

How does everyone feel about these results? I'm pretty satisfied with how things turned out. While I only have a definitively positive opinion about one of the seven (CHL), none of the others have given me any particular reason to think they won't perform well, and I'm optimistic that we're going to see a much improved ArbCom.

[Anonymous editor]

could've been worse. Obviously not all of them are perfect or even desirable, but given the candidates, I couldn't have expected a much better result.

The candidates I really objected to will not be appointed.

Going by percentages, the top 5 differentiated themselves, but Vassyana, Jayvb, Carcharoth, and Wizardman were pretty tightly bunched.

Lifebaka received 116 votes, Laniveil 117.

This post has been edited by Anonymous editor: Mon 15th December 2008, 5:46am

[Viridae]

I suppose I should update this thread with a note that voting has now closed and the seven winning candidates are Casliber, Risker, Roger Davies, Cool Hand Luke, Rlevse, Jayvdb, and Vassyana, in that order.

How does everyone feel about these results? I'm pretty satisfied with how things turned out. While I only have a definitively positive opinion about one of the seven (CHL), none of the others have given me any particular reason to think they won't perform well, and I'm optimistic that we're going to see a much improved ArbCom.

CHL had my strong support, no huge issues with most the others except to say that Vassyana is apparently a Prem Rawat Kool Aid drinker which is a pretty big negative IMO. Jayvdb I was going to support wholeheartedly but some things like not answering all the questions right until the end and some charges of being inclined to favour his friends in disputes while trying to keep the appearance of being neutral stopped me from doing so. SirFozzie and The Fat Man I also supported strongly but neither of them made the cut. The only other support I gave was for Kurt - for the lulz.

[SDJ]

could've been worse. Obviously not all of them are perfect or even desirable, but given the candidates, I couldn't have expected a much better result.

The candidates I really objected to will not be appointed.

Going by percentages, the top 5 differentiated themselves, but Vassyana, Jayvb, Carcharoth, and Wizardman were pretty tightly bunched.

Lifebaka received 116 votes, Laniveil 117.

I don't know that Vassyana should be appointed. S/he finished 7th in the %support metric by a mere 0.9% over Carcharoth. In the other 2 measurable metrics (raw support and net support), Vass didn't even finish 8th. S/he was all the way back in 9th in those, while Carch was the clear #7 in both. If this were the BCS (I know, it's not, it's the JWCS), Carch would be the clear choice.

[Casliber]

could've been worse. Obviously not all of them are perfect or even desirable, but given the candidates, I couldn't have expected a much better result.

The candidates I really objected to will not be appointed.

Going by percentages, the top 5 differentiated themselves, but Vassyana, Jayvb, Carcharoth, and Wizardman were pretty tightly bunched.

Lifebaka received 116 votes, Laniveil 117.

I don't know that Vassyana should be appointed. S/he finished 7th in the %support metric by a mere 0.9% over Carcharoth. In the other 2 measurable metrics (raw support and net support), Vass didn't even finish 8th. S/he was all the way back in 9th in those, while Carch was the clear #7 in both. If this were the BCS (I know, it's not, it's the JWCS), Carch would be the clear choice.

Who knows, I suggested to Jimbo that maybe appointing an extra arb or two maybe a good idea if the results were close...

[Proabivouac]

CHL had my strong support, no huge issues with most the others except to say tat Vassyana is apparently a Prem Rawat Kool Aid drinker which is a pretty big negative IMO.

Wait until you try to track down all his aliases (e.g. "Gregori Kampf"). Then tell me how strange this is.

No one asked the most obvious question:

"Who are you?"

[Kato]

No one asked the most obvious question:

"Who are you?"

That was in Lar's questions.

e) Do you openly acknowledge your real identity? Should all Arbitrators openly acknowledge their real identity? Why or why not? If you are currently pseudonymous, do you plan to disclose it if elected? (this is somewhat different than Thatcher's 1C in that it's more extensive)

No, but I would reveal my real name if elected and it is clearly desired by the community. I am considering revealing my real name regardless. I do not believe it should be a requirement for arbs to reveal their personal identity. The vast majority of people on the project are normal everyday people. ArbCom work exposes arbs to a lot of potential harassment and serious threats. I would not be comfortable with forcing someone in that position to reveal their private information.

[Steve Crossin]

I suppose I should update this thread with a note that voting has now closed and the seven winning candidates are Casliber, Risker, Roger Davies, Cool Hand Luke, Rlevse, Jayvdb, and Vassyana, in that order.

How does everyone feel about these results? I'm pretty satisfied with how things turned out. While I only have a definitively positive opinion about one of the seven (CHL), none of the others have given me any particular reason to think they won't perform well, and I'm optimistic that we're going to see a much improved ArbCom.

CHL had my strong support, no huge issues with most the others except to say that Vassyana is apparently a Prem Rawat Kool Aid drinker which is a pretty big negative IMO.<snip>

I had no idea who Casilber, Risker, or Cool Hand Luke was before this election. I'd never heard of them before, so really can't say how I feel about them. Heard of Jayvdb, never interacted with them. As for Rlevse and Vassyana, I know both of them reasonably well (Vassyana even more so). They've both got good heads on their shoulders. I disagree that Vassyana is a "Prem Rawat Kool Aid drinker". I managed to dig this up and I think that it was more an issue of wanting a pair of fresh eyes rather than "OMG he's biased etc". And if Vass is a prem rawat kool aid drinker....what does that make me?



This post has been edited by Steve Crossin: Mon 15th December 2008, 1:23pm

[wikiwhistle]

could've been worse. Obviously not all of them are perfect or even desirable, but given the candidates, I couldn't have expected a much better result.

The candidates I really objected to will not be appointed.

Going by percentages, the top 5 differentiated themselves, but Vassyana, Jayvb, Carcharoth, and Wizardman were pretty tightly bunched.

Lifebaka received 116 votes, Laniveil 117.

I don't know that Vassyana should be appointed. S/he finished 7th in the %support metric by a mere 0.9% over Carcharoth. In the other 2 measurable metrics (raw support and net support), Vass didn't even finish 8th. S/he was all the way back in 9th in those, while Carch was the clear #7 in both. If this were the BCS (I know, it's not, it's the JWCS), Carch would be the clear choice.

You again lol. What about raw oppose and net oppose? And 0.9 percent is nearly a whole percent ahead.

[Kato]

And if Vass is a prem rawat kool aid drinker....what does that make me?

I dunno. An owl?

[Steve Crossin]

And if Vass is a prem rawat kool aid drinker....what does that make me?

I dunno. An owl?

My avatar is NOT a personal photo

[Gold heart]

And if Vass is a prem rawat kool aid drinker....what does that make me?

I dunno. An owl?

My avatar is NOT a personal photo

Impersonal then?

[The Wales Hunter]

And if Vass is a prem rawat kool aid drinker....what does that make me?

Someone who uses a screen name that looks like a real name but is actually a fake name?