Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Vote/White Cat: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 88: Line 88:
# '''<u>No</u>''' — [[User:Jack Merridew|Jack Merridew]] 06:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
# '''<u>No</u>''' — [[User:Jack Merridew|Jack Merridew]] 06:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
# '''Oppose''' [[User:Sjakkalle|Sjakkalle]] [[User talk:Sjakkalle|<small>(Check!)</small>]] 07:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
# '''Oppose''' [[User:Sjakkalle|Sjakkalle]] [[User talk:Sjakkalle|<small>(Check!)</small>]] 07:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
# [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Civility]]. [[User:MaxSem|Max<font size="+1">''S''</font>em]]<sup>([[User talk:MaxSem|Han shot first!]])</sup> 08:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:04, 3 December 2007

Please Note: Comments longer than two short sentences will be moved to the talk page.

White Cat

Hi, everybody out there. For those who may be surprised why am I even a candidate there is a very simple yet unorthodox explanation for this. I have had gotten into a fair share of disputes. Of course being into disputes is by very nature not pleasant. It isn't necessarily a bad thing either. After how can anyone truly be able to deal with disputes big or small without experiencing big or small disputes.
I'd like to talk about my "failures"
  • I have one hell of a block log (as user "Cool Cat" and "Coolcat")
  • I have had 4 failed RfA's here on en.wikipedia. Full list is available here and I would recommend a short peek at it at least.
  • I let my paranoia bother AKMask to the point of an RFC.
  • I had been in front of ArbCom twice as an involved party:
    1. WP:RfAR/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek had put me on a year long temporary mentorship on issues concerning Turkey and/or the Kurds and banned me from mediating indefinitely until I am officially appointed to the Mediation Committee. That case was closed on 5 October 2005. Two out of three the other involved parties User:Davenbelle and User:Fadix ended up getting banned indefinitely* and for a year* respectively.
    2. WP:RfAR/Moby Dick had not levied any remedies on me. That case was closed on 13 August 2006. A number of remedies were levied on Moby Dick, a user treated like a sockpuppet of Davenbelle at least by arbcom*.
I am not "proud" of any of this and I will not even attempt to make excuses. But I can't change the past. I was not genetically engineered with wikipedias policies and I do have a learning curve with a finite slope.
I have been recommended to have a fresh start with an unconnected account but I desire not to do that. My reason for this is simple. I value honesty above everything else. It would be dishonest for me to come and claim to be a different user - at least in my own mind. I refuse to give up on my ideals simply because it is convenient.
So in sum I am not any near your "ideal" and popular candidate. I think I have a lot of experience that I can put to good use should I get appointed as an arbitrator. I hope to offer a different perspective which I feel is healthy in any median. I strongly feel that if everybody is thinking alike, often nobody is truly thinking. Weather I have grown adequately with my involvement with wikipedia and other wikimedia projects such as commons in my 2+ years here is for you to judge.
-- Cat chi? 22:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Support

  1. —trey(wiki) 00:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. fuck yes. we need drastic change on arbcom.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 00:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 01:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Alexfusco5 02:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. This user has gotten into trouble but I think he/she has learned lessons. I believe its worthwhile having people on arbcom that have been on the other side of an arbcom case. I also believe he/she is dedicated to the project. Pocopocopocopoco 04:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Often takes things way too seriously, but this only shows Cat would be dedicated to impartiality. Would probably be most impartial of any users. Has never misused tools on commons. The Evil Spartan 05:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Moral support per Alkivar. I dorftrottel I talk I 05:37, December 3, 2007

Oppose

  1. Too much drama This is a Secret account 00:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Kwsn (Ni!) 00:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Creating drama out of a signature was not the best thing Wikipedia has ever seen. Kurykh 00:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --W.marsh 00:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. — Coren (talk) 00:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Rschen7754 (T C) 00:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Er, no. BLACKKITE 00:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Woodym555 00:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 00:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Chaz Beckett 00:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. – Gurch (talk) 00:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. -- Ned Scott 00:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Nishkid64 (talk) 00:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. —Charles P._(Mirv) 00:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. — TKD::Talk 00:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. The signature drama is enough to leave a sour taste in my mouth. Qst 00:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs(st47) 00:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Nope. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Nishkid64 (talk) 00:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Voted once above. — TKD::Talk 00:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Oppose (vote explanations) -- Jd2718 00:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Daniel 00:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. east.718 at 00:34, December 3, 2007
  22. Nufy8 00:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. --Duk 00:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. I respect this candidate, but am concerned about his past behavior in dispute resolution. GracenotesT § 00:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Oppose per Gracenotes. Sorry! Jonathan (T•@•C) 00:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Nick 00:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  28. I respect this user, but I'm just not so sure about maturity and associated behaviour. 哦， 是吗？(review O) 00:39, 03 December 2007 (GMT)
  29.  — master sonT - C 00:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Ρх₥α 00:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. - auburnpilot talk 00:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  32. I like cool white cat, but not in DR. Prodego talk 00:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Stardust8212 01:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Prolog 01:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Sean William @ 01:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Drama king. -- drini [meta:] [commons:] 01:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Oppose -- Avi 01:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  38. GRBerry 01:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  39. krimpet⟲ 01:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  40. sh¤y 01:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Oppose with a Red Flag Due to weird conspiracy theories, drama, etc.. Miranda 01:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Sorry, no. DS 01:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  43. No way. --Coredesat 02:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  44. ➪HiDrNick! 02:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Honesty's fine, but experience is better. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 02:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Mike H. Celebrating three years of being hotter than Paris 02:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Oppose Thatcher131 02:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  48. This is probably the worst case of WP:POINT I've ever seen from an established user. Scobell302 02:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Rebecca 02:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Jimbo fetish, for lack of a better reason. Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 02:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  51. —Wknight94 (talk) 03:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Ummm .. no. AmiDaniel (talk) 03:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  53. His abominably poor judgment and conduct was instrumental in causing RickK's departure. Some things are worth holding a grudge about. —Cryptic 03:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  54. I agree with Alkivar that some significant changes are needed at ArbCom (although for reasons very different from his), but I certainly don't think that this candidate would bring anything near positive change. Joe 03:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Inappropriate. --InkSplotch 03:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Mercury 03:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Oppose -Dureo 03:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  58. — madman bum and angel 03:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Poor judgment. Videmus Omnia Talk 03:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Húsönd 03:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 04:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  62. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 04:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Oppose. Eluchil404 04:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  64. — xaosflux Talk 04:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Oppose. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 04:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Mbisanz 05:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  67. JayHenry (talk) 05:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Super mega no. RyanGerbil10(Говорить!) 05:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  69. No no drama. Spebi 06:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  70. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 06:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Good heavens, no. —David Levy 06:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  72. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie | tool box 06:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  73. No — Jack Merridew 06:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Oppose Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Civility. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 08:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2007/Vote/White_Cat&oldid=175437681"