2009 ArbCom elections Options

[Newyorkbrad]

Should I run?

No.

If you wish, you should consider returning to Wikipedia at some point to contribute to article content, if you can do so in a collaborative fashion, but your participation in governance-related discussions was consistently unhelpful.

[everyking]

Should I run?

No.

If you wish, you should consider returning to Wikipedia at some point to contribute to article content, if you can do so in a collaborative fashion, but your participation in governance-related discussions was consistently unhelpful.

But that just means he'd fit right in with the rest of the ArbCom, right?

[A Horse With No Name]

Should I run?

No.

If you wish, you should consider returning to Wikipedia at some point to contribute to article content, if you can do so in a collaborative fashion, but your participation in governance-related discussions was consistently unhelpful.

Don't listen to him, Kurt! After Arbcom's utter lack of transparency, honesty and due process in the Law/TU and Eastern European mailing list debacles, and in view of the failed "reforms" (BASC, anyone?), it is time to have some new leadership.

[Kurt M. Weber]

but your participation in governance-related discussions was consistently unhelpful.

Why, because I didn't echo the corrupt groupthink?

[A Horse With No Name]

but your participation in governance-related discussions was consistently unhelpful.

Why, because I didn't echo the corrupt groupthink?

Kurt, if your account hasn't been disabled, go back and run.

[SB_Johnny]

It still needs to go.

Not by means of formal abolition, because that would imply that the process that brought into existence was legitimate in the first place, but by the community simply ignoring it.

Not likely.

"Should I run?"

Q.E.D.

This post has been edited by SB_Johnny: Sat 31st October 2009, 10:35pm

[Kelly Martin]

If you wish, you should consider returning to Wikipedia at some point to contribute to article content, if you can do so in a collaborative fashion, but your participation in governance-related discussions was consistently unhelpful.

It has yet to be demonstrated that it is possible to contribute to a governance discussion on Wikipedia in a manner that is actually helpful.

[EricBarbour]

If you wish, you should consider returning to Wikipedia at some point to contribute to article content, if you can do so in a collaborative fashion, but your participation in governance-related discussions was consistently unhelpful.

And in precisely what way has your presence on Arbcom improved that "encyclopedia", sir?
I'd like to see a list of your "major accomplishments", please.

[Shalom]

If you wish, you should consider returning to Wikipedia at some point to contribute to article content, if you can do so in a collaborative fashion, but your participation in governance-related discussions was consistently unhelpful.

And in precisely what way has your presence on Arbcom improved that "encyclopedia", sir?
I'd like to see a list of your "major accomplishments", please.

Hey, don't hate on Newyorkbrad. His article contributions are considerable, close to 100 as I recall, and he has acted as the primary author on some important ArbCom decisions. In the C68-FM-SV case, nobody seemed to know how to move forward until NYB came out of retirement and wrote a decision that everyone could agree with. (I would have written a slightly different decision, but I was of course biased and declared my opinion.) One of the problems with ArbCom, being a microcosm of Wikipedia's community, is a lack of leadership. Someone has to step up and do the unpleasant drudgery. Newyorkbrad has done that on enough occasions to earn my respect in the Wikipedia context. Having met him in person, I respect him in a real-world sense too -- and that's more important.

[everyking]

Hey, don't hate on Newyorkbrad. His article contributions are considerable, close to 100 as I recall, and he has acted as the primary author on some important ArbCom decisions. In the C68-FM-SV case, nobody seemed to know how to move forward until NYB came out of retirement and wrote a decision that everyone could agree with. (I would have written a slightly different decision, but I was of course biased and declared my opinion.) One of the problems with ArbCom, being a microcosm of Wikipedia's community, is a lack of leadership. Someone has to step up and do the unpleasant drudgery. Newyorkbrad has done that on enough occasions to earn my respect in the Wikipedia context. Having met him in person, I respect him in a real-world sense too -- and that's more important.

Ah yes, such "unpleasant drudgery" as upholding outrageous allegations against hard-working volunteers. Of course people poke fun at Weber's views, but if I'm forced to choose between a candidate who supports abolishing the ArbCom and a candidate who supports branding me as a dangerous stalker and harasser until the end of time, who do you think I'm going to pick?

[Happy drinker]

I really find the attacks on Brad impossible to fathom. He has been a model Wikipedian in every respect and was given an almost unanimous endorsement in the Arbcom elections. His superb performance on ArbCom has thoroughly justified that vote, has it not? We're lucky to have him.

[Mike H]

You still haven't absorbed the "you're not talking to a room full of sycophantic Wikipedia fans" memo yet, have you?

Not that I think Newyorkbrad is bad, I think he's quite good; but I do wonder if Happy drinker just doesn't get it as far as his "warm Wiki" tone is concerned, or just doesn't give a shit.

There are things I like about Wikipedia but a fair bit I don't like about it. Happy drinker, you do realize the place isn't sunshine and rainbows, right? Get with the damn program.

This post has been edited by Mike H: Sun 1st November 2009, 12:18pm

[Moulton]

It has yet to be demonstrated that it is possible to contribute to a governance discussion on Wikipedia in a manner that is actually helpful.

There are some notable parallels between the intractable problem of corruption in Afghanistan governance and the comparable problem of pervasive and persistent corruption in WP governance.

There are just too many people who prefer to engage in corrupt practices rather than pursue the ethical stance.

Traditionally, throughout the annals of human history, the ethical actor in the polisphere has been dealt with harshly by the mindless mob.

[Doc glasgow]

My fantasy arbcom:

1. Kelly Martin
2. Everyking
3. Durova
4. Geogre
5. Giano
6. Bishzilla
7. Fred Bauder
8. David Gerrard
9. PhilSandifer

chaired, of course by

10. Newyorkbrad

Can anyone think of a combination more able to case DRAMA and LOL?

Oh yes, naturally

11. Jimbo Wales

[GlassBeadGame]

My fantasy arbcom:

1. Kelly Martin
2. Everyking
3. Durova
4. Geogre
5. Giano
6. Bishzilla
7. Fred Bauder
8. David Gerrard
9. PhilSandifer

chaired, of course by

10. Newyorkbrad

Can anyone think of a combination more able to case DRAMA and LOL?

Oh yes, naturally

11. Jimbo Wales

Why not yourself? I rather like the new, more deeply disaffected, Doc Glasgow.

[trenton]

Oh yes, naturally

11. Jimbo Wales

The Jimbeau will never agree to being number 11. He will demand to get a special flag as the sole, perpetual, 'zero'th member.

[Doc glasgow]

Oh yes, naturally

11. Jimbo Wales

The Jimbeau will never agree to being number 11. He will demand to get a special flag as the sole, perpetual, 'zero'th member.

Oh good - that will case moreDRAMA®

[A Horse With No Name]

Hey, don't hate on Newyorkbrad. His article contributions are considerable, close to 100 as I recall, and he has acted as the primary author on some important ArbCom decisions.

In fairness, Brad was the only arbitrator in the Law/TU case who behaved in an intelligent manner -- he immediately recused himself without snide commentary, he immediately answered the question on whether he was aware of the Law/TU connection, and he made no open announcements afterward. If you had to redo Arbcom, Brad is the only one I could recommend keeping.

My fantasy arbcom:

1. Kelly Martin
2. Everyking
3. Durova
4. Geogre
5. Giano
6. Bishzilla
7. Fred Bauder
8. David Gerrard
9. PhilSandifer

chaired, of course by

10. Newyorkbrad

My fantasy Arbcom:

1. Lara
2. CharlotteWebb
3. Alison
4. FlyingToaster (come back, mama, Horsey misses you!)

[Casliber]

If you wish, you should consider returning to Wikipedia at some point to contribute to article content, if you can do so in a collaborative fashion, but your participation in governance-related discussions was consistently unhelpful.

It has yet to be demonstrated that it is possible to contribute to a governance discussion on Wikipedia in a manner that is actually helpful.

Oh I dunno, I thought we did pretty good to at least push a quasi-post-finding push to get names on Ireland and West Bank sorted....

My fantasy arbcom:

1. Kelly Martin
2. Everyking
3. Durova
4. Geogre
5. Giano
6. Bishzilla
7. Fred Bauder
8. David Gerrard
9. PhilSandifer

chaired, of course by

10. Newyorkbrad

Can anyone think of a combination more able to case DRAMA and LOL?

Oh yes, naturally

11. Jimbo Wales

Oh Scott you cheeky boy, you forgot to put yourself in

[Happy drinker]

Shouldn't we have a few more people who (judging by their posts here) believe they know how to run things better than the current ArbCom, such as Victim of Censorship?