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

[Cla68]

I already stated in my answers to the questions on my candidate page that I was committed to openness. I've made it clear that I don't think you have been treated fairly in the past, but the most recent ArbCom ruling on your situation seemed reasonable to me. So, I guess I can't make the pledge that you're looking for.

You never addressed my question about RfA. Why is it that you've never run again?

No one who has offered to nominate me has followed through and actually posted the nomination. I'm not upset about it. If I really wanted to try to be an admin I'm sure I could have just asked enough people until I found someone willing and able to follow through.

In my answers to the questions on my candidate page, I stated that I felt that having admin privileges was necessary for the position. Thinking about it more, however, I realize that whenever I've wanted or needed to read an admin deleted page or needed admin assistance in some other way, I've never had any trouble finding a helpful admin to provide assistance. So, if I'm elected and the Committee decides not to grant me admin privileges, I don't think that will be a big deal.

That seems reasonable. I think someone should be an admin before becoming an arbitrator, although it wouldn't be a deal-breaker for me if someone was otherwise a good candidate. Another question, though: why do you think it's reasonable for the ArbCom to classify me as some kind of stalker? Do you seriously believe I've done anything to warrant that? If any kind of "restraining order" were necessary, don't you think a mutual restriction would be more reasonable in light of the history?

Remember, ArbCom has placed a similar restriction on me also. They should have given the same restriction to the the other guy that they placed on you. It's too late for that now.

[Milton Roe]

My interview with Cla68: Ogg, MP3

Dan, ban "Ah" from your vocabulary.

Won't help if it's being used as a verbal placeholder, to gain time to think.

What about...erm...?

If it's between sentences, or used as a preface, sometimes I've heard an attorney usefully replace "Uhh" with "Now..."

This sounds much more professional, for some reason.

"Now... moving on with the questioning, Mr. Smith... do you have any idea what I'm billing for this turkey of a depo?"

[taiwopanfob]

In my answers to the questions on my candidate page, I stated that I felt that having admin privileges was necessary for the position. Thinking about it more, however, I realize that whenever I've wanted or needed to read an admin deleted page or needed admin assistance in some other way, I've never had any trouble finding a helpful admin to provide assistance. So, if I'm elected and the Committee decides not to grant me admin privileges, I don't think that will be a big deal.

Actually, admin and all other Power Bits should be summarily stripped from everyone who serves as an arbitrator. If they want them, just give 'em back when they leave.

[Milton Roe]

My interview with Cla68: Ogg, MP3

Phooey! No talk about the real issues: Tiger Woods' girlfriends, breast implants, blondes versus brunettes versus redheads, etc. What kind of interview is this?

http://www.popeater.com/2009/12/02/tiger-woods-women/

Where is that Tiger thread? Here comes his 15 minutes of public prostate exam. Or perhaps longer.

Needed: SNL General Motors commercial where "Tiger" is trying to escape from half a dozen blonde zombies, all armed with 3-irons.

"Quick, to the Pontiac, Batman! No, not the Escalade-- the faster one! No, not the fire hydrant...! "

<crash> <smash>

Time for meditation....

[everyking]

Remember, ArbCom has placed a similar restriction on me also. They should have given the same restriction to the the other guy that they placed on you. It's too late for that now.

Too late? They can change it at any time. If the 2009 (or 2010) ArbCom wants to reaffirm what the 2005 ArbCom did, then I will hold the 2009 (or 2010) ArbCom responsible for it just as if they'd made the original ruling. The 2005 ArbCom is gone (well, maybe not entirely gone, since the ghost of Kelly Martin still haunts this forum )--any restrictions currently in place are entirely the responsibility of the currently sitting arbitrators. As an aspiring arbitrator, you should understand that. Are you saying it's "reasonable" to continue to impose a punishment even while acknowledging that the original decision to impose the punishment was in error?

[Malleus]

I already stated in my answers to the questions on my candidate page that I was committed to openness. I've made it clear that I don't think you have been treated fairly in the past, but the most recent ArbCom ruling on your situation seemed reasonable to me. So, I guess I can't make the pledge that you're looking for.

You never addressed my question about RfA. Why is it that you've never run again?

No one who has offered to nominate me has followed through and actually posted the nomination. I'm not upset about it. If I really wanted to try to be an admin I'm sure I could have just asked enough people until I found someone willing and able to follow through.

In my answers to the questions on my candidate page, I stated that I felt that having admin privileges was necessary for the position. Thinking about it more, however, I realize that whenever I've wanted or needed to read an admin deleted page or needed admin assistance in some other way, I've never had any trouble finding a helpful admin to provide assistance. So, if I'm elected and the Committee decides not to grant me admin privileges, I don't think that will be a big deal.

That seems reasonable. I think someone should be an admin before becoming an arbitrator, although it wouldn't be a deal-breaker for me if someone was otherwise a good candidate. Another question, though: why do you think it's reasonable for the ArbCom to classify me as some kind of stalker? Do you seriously believe I've done anything to warrant that? If any kind of "restraining order" were necessary, don't you think a mutual restriction would be more reasonable in light of the history?

Remember, ArbCom has placed a similar restriction on me also. They should have given the same restriction to the the other guy that they placed on you. It's too late for that now.

I voted that I wasn't going to "vote" in the ArbCom elections, but you may just have changed my mind. It's about time that ArbCom wasn't the sole preserve of administrators.

[RDH(Ghost In The Machine)]

My interview with Cla68: Ogg, MP3

Looks like a couple of editors didn't approve of the interview.

Further evidence that Wikivoices has been hijacked and turned into another propaganda tool.
(don't think that Harvester Boris, groks the irony of his stance either).

We need an alternative, comrades...since we cannot, yet, take back our "pedia", let's at least take back our "radio".

[wjhonson]

"Now... moving on with the questioning, Mr. Smith... do you have any idea what I'm billing for this turkey of a depo?"

Mr Roe did you uh, did you uh, did you uh... know that the focus of this here uh, this uh, this investigation would be on your uh, your uh sexual problems?

On another note, to DTobias, I loved the ending of the interview with Fred. And now it's linked up on my page. Why isn't the link to a WikiVoices page? Did they shut you down for being too aggressive in your line of questioning?

By the way, I've now given Fred a neutral (don't hit me, stop hitting me!) and given Fritz a thumbs up.

This post has been edited by wjhonson: Fri 4th December 2009, 3:37am

[Doc glasgow]

Well, the voting is done and its all over. I'm now able to announce the results right here:

Elected to a two-year term:

Cla69
Steve Smith
Kmwebber
RMHED
Fred Bauder

Elected to a one-year term:

Fritzpoll
Sir Fozzie
William M. Connelley


Congratulations to our virtual winners.

The organising cabal

[Lar]

Well, the voting is done and its all over. I'm now able to announce the results right here:

Elected to a two-year term:

Cla69

Awesome, that user wasn't even one of the choices. I knew the thing was rigged.

Either that or you're just off by one.

[Doc glasgow]

Well, the voting is done and its all over. I'm now able to announce the results right here:

Elected to a two-year term:

Cla69

Awesome, that user wasn't even one of the choices. I knew the thing was rigged.

Either that or you're just off by one.

I hate to think what Freud would say...

[Milton Roe]

Well, the voting is done and its all over. I'm now able to announce the results right here:

Elected to a two-year term:

Cla69
Steve Smith
Kmwebber
RMHED
Fred Bauder

Who the devil is Kmwebber (T-C-L-K-R-D) ?

[CharlotteWebb]

Dr. Connolley really hates it when folks misspell his name, though Kurt could probably give a shit less.

[Doc glasgow]

Dr. Connolley really hates it when folks misspell his name, though Kurt could probably give a shit less.

Damn these scrutineers....

OK, what would it take to bribe Jimbo to announce the real results here first.

[Jon Awbrey]

Dr. Connolley really hates it when folks misspell his name, though Kurt could probably give a shit less.

Damn these scrutineers …

OK, what would it take to bribe Jimbo to announce the real results here first.

I heard it on the Gropevine that he does a lot of Mandating, but No True Scotsman wants to know the answer to that question.

Jon

[Doc glasgow]

Dr. Connolley really hates it when folks misspell his name, though Kurt could probably give a shit less.

Damn these scrutineers …

OK, what would it take to bribe Jimbo to announce the real results here first.

I heard it on the Gropevine that he does a lot of Mandating, but No True Scotsman wants to know the answer to that question.

Jon

I don't know about the mandating, but we've had some poet.. pretty girls on this site who could ask him nicely.

[Lar]

I don't know about the mandating, but we've had some poet.. pretty girls on this site who could ask him nicely.

29 User(s) are reading this topic (18 Guests and 7 Anonymous Users)
4 Members: A Horse With No Name, Nerd, Seddon, privatemusings


Nuff said.

[SirFozzie]

Hate you, Doc. *laughs*

(and no, I haven't heard anything yet either)

[Newyorkbrad]

Actually, admin and all other Power Bits should be summarily stripped from everyone who serves as an arbitrator. If they want them, just give 'em back when they leave.

We (the arbitrators) need access to administrator tools such as the ability to review deleted contributions in order to decide some of the cases. Some arbs also do a lot of the checkuser and oversight work, partly because it becomes relevant to cases and partly because we've already been elected and therefore have the community trust necessary to these assignments.

One could make an argument that arbitrators shouldn't use their tools for routine administrator work during their tenure as arbitrators. As a practical matter, there are only so many hours in the wiki-day and I don't think many arbs spend lots of time doing usual admin tasks such as closing XfDs, patrolling AIV, resolving issues on ANI, and the like. (This is partly because of time limitations and partly because of the desire to reduce the potential number of recusal situations.) On the other hand, if I see a blatant vandal doing damage or a ridiculously inappropriate page posted, I don't think it would add any value if I had to report it to another administrator rather than deal with it myself, just because I happen to also be an arbitrator.

This post has been edited by Newyorkbrad: Wed 16th December 2009, 9:09pm

[The Joy]

Well, the voting is done and its all over. I'm now able to announce the results right here:

Elected to a two-year term:

Cla69

Awesome, that user wasn't even one of the choices. I knew the thing was rigged.

Either that or you're just off by one.

I hate to think what Freud would say...

What would Freud say about Wikipedia election officials being called "scrutineers?"

Seriously, you guys need to change the name to like "election monitors" or "election supervisors."