User:Gerda Arendt/ACE 2018

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Please first read User:Shock Brigade Harvester Boris/A pocket guide to Arbitration. Then pay a minute of silence to its author whom to have known was one of the pleasures on the site. (The link doesn't work any more, because his talk was archived, try again. It's still true.) He would have been an arb for whom I'd have voted without a question.

If you want analysis and recommendations, look what others offer. To know what I go for, or just compare what the candidates answered, stay here and read their answers, - I offer only teasers in the table below. I may sound boring because my question this year is the same as last year. Sadly, some who answered to my liking, didn't live up to their answers. New: I mark good answers. (Needless to say: good for me.) That's no guarantee I'll vote for the candidate ;) - 21 November: I voted now for those marked green, but there's no guarantee that I wouldn't change my mind if things change.

My simple question (and the same as last year): Can you agree with Opabinia regalis here?


Candidate nom day answer day answer Precious date Precious reason Experience
Fred Bauder[b] 5 6 "crew talk vs. civil conversation" 23 October 2009 Awesome former arb
Robert McClenon 5 6 "civility is more complex than the avoidance of bad words"
Patient Zero[c] 5 11 "There's a difference between using swearwords out of exasperation and using them in an uncivil manner"Symbol support vote.svg 6 May 2016 friend of the wiki, terror of vandals
Courcelles 8 8 "Far be it from me to disagree with Opabinia on much of anything."Symbol support vote.svg 9 November 2018 featured lists and GA reviews former arb
Kelapstick 8 8 "Having served two years on the committee with OR, I can honestly say that she is one of the most thoughtful Wikipedians I have ever had the pleasure of working with."Symbol support vote.svg 11 July 2013 mining and bacon former arb
SilkTork 9 9 asked back, then complex answer, so one more question, and more former arb
AGK 11 11 "Where an editor couches good points in blunt language, or uses an expletive to express them, they do not in all cases behave disruptively."Symbol support vote.svg 29 October 2008 courage and analysis (18 July 2012) former arb
Doug Weller[d] 11 12 "happy to change my mind when new arguements are heard" arb
Mkdw 12 13 "I also agree with her opinions about civility and how in certain contexts it has been weaponized"Symbol support vote.svg 10 November 2016 battleship and ballerina arb
Drmies 12 12 "First of all I ALWAYS agree with Opabinia regalis, even if I don't."Symbol support vote.svg 20 February 2012 reviewing eyes arb
Lourdes 13 14 "If the question pertains to the issue of turning a blind eye to incivility under the clarion call to continue editing, broadly, no." 3 July 2016 helpful insight with a pun admin
Joe Roe 13 14 "I agree that the intent behind a message is important." 30 November 2017 archeological culture admin
DGG 13 14 "I see her posting as an magnificent demonstration of the need for context, rather than simply going by a list of forbidden words."Symbol support vote.svg 12 April 2013 keep articles arb
Isarra 13 21 "I would say the points seem quite reasonable"
GorillaWarfare 14 20 asked 20, explained former vote, and good other points 24 November 2013 articles for creation former arb



  1. ^ Template adapted from User:Worm That Turned/ACE2015
  2. ^ blocked 11 November, unblocked 12 November
  3. ^ withdrawn 13 Nov
  4. ^ withdrawn 15 Nov