James Forrester, I don't know the history- why shouldn't I vote for him? Options

[wikiwhistle]

Please could tell me something about the past of jpgordon on wiki, what has he done over the years which you disapprove of? Anything in particular? I mean in the past. I know what he's been upto in the last couple of weeks, and have found that for an arb, he has personality.

[Alex]

James is a good editor and friendly person whom I've met on several occasions. I have no reason to believe he would make a bad arbitrator.

[One]

James is a good editor and friendly person whom I've met on several occasions. I have no reason to believe he would make a bad arbitrator.

You dinged me for suggesting, as James F. does, that RfB-style checkuser elections might not be a good idea--we even cited the same counterexample (Cato).

This post has been edited by One: Sat 29th November 2008, 9:43pm

[Alex]

James is a good editor and friendly person whom I've met on several occasions. I have no reason to believe he would make a bad arbitrator.

You dinged me for suggesting, as James F. does, that RfB-style checkuser elections might not be a good idea--we even cited the same counterexample (Cato).

Well there's a good reason. Thanks for the heads up :-)

James is a good editor and friendly person whom I've met on several occasions. I have no reason to believe he would make a bad arbitrator.

James is a good editor? really? How did you come to that conclusion? James goes for months at a time without creating content. This has been true for years.

When was the last time you wrote an article? And when was it mandatory to edit every hour of every day for nearly six years? Unlike some people around these parts, he does things off-wiki as well, and is allowed to take breaks.

[Pumpkin Muffins]

James is a good editor and friendly person whom I've met on several occasions. I have no reason to believe he would make a bad arbitrator.

James is a good editor? really? How did you come to that conclusion? James goes for months at a time without creating content. This has been true for years.

When was the last time you wrote an article? And when was it mandatory to edit every hour of every day for nearly six years? Unlike some people around these parts, he does things off-wiki as well, and is allowed to take breaks.

1) You didn't answer my question. You said that James was a good editor. How did you come to that conclusion? I'm giving you another chance here, Alex, to be taken as something other than a joke, if you can answer the question that is.

2) This is an encyclopedia writing project. Someone who comes to the project and hangs out and doesn't create any content is generally here for the wrong reasons. Editors, especially those in positions of power and authority need to have their hearts aligned with the the goals of the project, otherwise they tend to do more harm than good. Creating content is, in my opinion and experience, the most reliable indicator of an editor's intentions and value. After years of observation, when I see someone doing something so incredably stupid that it causes me to look at their contribution history, I generally find a lack of content creation.

3) Even though I'm disgusted with the project and its leadership, I can't help but create something very good about once a month, even if it's only a nice illustration.

This post has been edited by Pumpkin Muffins: Sat 29th November 2008, 10:13pm

[Alex]

James is a good editor and friendly person whom I've met on several occasions. I have no reason to believe he would make a bad arbitrator.

James is a good editor? really? How did you come to that conclusion? James goes for months at a time without creating content. This has been true for years.

When was the last time you wrote an article? And when was it mandatory to edit every hour of every day for nearly six years? Unlike some people around these parts, he does things off-wiki as well, and is allowed to take breaks.

1) You didn't answer my question. You said that James was a good editor. How did you come to that conclusion? I'm giving you another chance here, Alex, to be taken as something other than a joke, if you can answer the question that is.

2) This is an encyclopedia writing project. Someone who comes to the project and hangs out and doesn't create any content is generally here for the wrong reasons. Editors, especially those in positions of power and authority need to have their hearts aligned with the the goals of the project, otherwise they tend to do more harm than good. Creating content is, in my opinion and experience, the most reliable indicator of an editor's intentions and value. After years of observation, when I see someone doing something so incredably stupid that it causes me to look at their contribution history, I generally find a lack of content creation.

3) Even though I'm disgusted with the project and its leadership, I can't help but create something very good about once a month, even if it's only a nice illustration.

I come to that conclusion because he's not a bad one. Therefore he must be good. By the way, you're the joke around here, not me. Better get used to it.

[Pumpkin Muffins]

I come to that conclusion because he's not a bad one. Therefore he must be good. By the way, you're the joke around here, not me. Better get used to it.

Ya, right, and James is a good editor, despite the fact that he isn't. Any other reality corrections you'd like to make, Alex?

-edit-

Ok, this is starting to make sense now. You're the artist formerly known as Majorly, aren't you? I've put your quote in my sig, next to my old avatar where it fits right in.

This post has been edited by Pumpkin Muffins: Sat 29th November 2008, 10:45pm

[Alex]

I come to that conclusion because he's not a bad one. Therefore he must be good. By the way, you're the joke around here, not me. Better get used to it.

Ya, right, and James is a good editor, despite the fact that he isn't. Any other reality corrections you'd like to make, Alex?

-edit-

Ok, this is starting to make sense now. You're the artist formerly known as Majorly, aren't you? I've put your quote in my sig, next to my old avatar where it fits right in.

Oh, you only just found out? It's old news. Really, your arguments astound me.

I'm honoured you thought of me when thinking of what quotes to include for your messageboard sig too. So kind of you.

[Doc glasgow]

I'm a JamesF fan. I find myself normally in agreement with him, and having an old-hand about who remembers what wikipedia is all about is certainly useful.

However, he's not about. He's too busy and has become too remote for wikipedia - he can't really know what's going on. I'm rather amazed he's standing again, and regrettably suspect he'll bomb as a candidate.

My support, if at all, will be lukewarm.