Giano at ArbCom, Everyone takes a brief break from writing articles Options

[Cla68]

What's going on here? Why is it that a Featured Article candidate can sit in the FA nomination forum for three weeks and receive only three comments, but an ArbCom request on Giano gets input from 30 people in less than 24 hours?

[Nerd]

What's going on here? Why is it that a Featured Article candidate can sit in the FA nomination forum for three weeks and receive only three comments, but an ArbCom request on Giano gets input from 30 people in less than 24 hours?

Because hardly anyone cares about FAC. A lot of people care about about Giano.

[Wiki Witch of the West]

What's going on here? Why is it that a Featured Article candidate can sit in the FA nomination forum for three weeks and receive only three comments, but an ArbCom request on Giano gets input from 30 people in less than 24 hours?

Because hardly anyone cares about FAC. A lot of people care about about Giano.

Because, strange as it may seem, FAC is even worse of a political sinkhole than arbitration.

[everyking]

Because hardly anyone cares about FAC. A lot of people care about about Giano.

Because, strange as it may seem, FAC is even worse of a political sinkhole than arbitration.

And at least the arbitrators are elected. No one can do anything about the self-appointed FA director.

[Doc glasgow]

Because hardly anyone cares about FAC. A lot of people care about about Giano.

Because, strange as it may seem, FAC is even worse of a political sinkhole than arbitration.

And at least the arbitrators are elected. No one can do anything about the self-appointed FA director.

Well, actually that's been discussed many times. The answer was "if it ain't broke..."

I'm not Raul fan, but unless there's other candidates pressing for the job, there's hardly a need for an election. Wikipedia is supposedly an encyclopedia, it has to my mind far too many elections. Having another one for the sake of democracy seems to be stupid.

However, if you want the job, I'll happily set up a page for people to vote between you and Raul.

[everyking]

Well, actually that's been discussed many times. The answer was "if it ain't broke..."

I'm not Raul fan, but unless there's other candidates pressing for the job, there's hardly a need for an election. Wikipedia is supposedly an encyclopedia, it has to my mind far too many elections. Having another one for the sake of democracy seems to be stupid.

However, if you want the job, I'll happily set up a page for people to vote between you and Raul.

It shouldn't really be all that controversial to argue that an important position shouldn't be filled indefinitely, with no elections, by someone who appointed himself. I would be happy to do the job, but since at the moment I apparently can't even pass an RfA, I think my prospects would be rather dim--especially in some mock, non-binding poll set up by you.

Is there a Deputy FA Director or a successor to Raul? If Raul disappears or is unable to continue working on Wikipedia, who has the permissions to handle FAs, if even on an interim basis? Just curious.

It seems suitable that someone would take the position the same way Raul did--you just start doing the job, and if anyone challenges you, ignore them. Eventually, it gets to a point where everyone is accustomed with it and people excuse the situation by saying "if it ain't broke..."

Of course, that kind of thing might not work on Wikipedia as it is now. Raul's ability to hang onto a self-appointed-for-life position might be nothing more than a relic of an earlier time, which couldn't be replicated by anyone else.

[One]

I would be happy to do the job, but since at the moment I apparently can't even pass an RfA, I think my prospects would be rather dim--especially in some mock, non-binding poll set up by you.

This is a small quibble, but, you can pass RfA, but you apparently refuse to.

I realize that a lot of the oppose votes were pretextual, but a large number of them honestly opposed because your answer to closing AFD's happened to be particularly clumsy. If you actually wanted to become an admin, your answer would look something like this: "I will not be closing any AFDs ever because I have some idiosyncratic views about how they should operate."

It's similarly easy for you to get out of the last remaining ArbCom sanction. You just don't bring it up again and they lapse. But given your prior behavior, I expect you will post another "appeal" on January 1.

[gomi]

It's similarly easy for you to get out of the last remaining ArbCom sanction. You just don't bring it up again and they lapse. But given your prior behavior, I expect you will post another "appeal" on January 1.

And goodness knows there is no worse wiki-crime than tweaking ArbCom!