User:Tryptofish/ACE2014

Go away! Don't read this!

You really should not care what I say here. I'm not a reliable source, and everything that follows is nothing more than original research. The entire voter guide system is flawed. Many of the guide writers have axes to grind. I do hope that you will vote in the election, and that you will think carefully about your vote. But voter guides should not be taken too seriously. And if you are here just for the lulz, you are going to be disappointed by how boring my opinions are.

I don't do "neutral" or "abstain", so I'm going to offer an opinion on every candidate, for better or for worse. I'm not going to qualify my supports or opposes as being "strong" or "weak", but you can get a feel for those nuances if you read my comments. There are nine seats to be filled in this election. I don't try to support exactly nine candidates and oppose the rest (so called "strategic voting"), but I do try to align my level of support approximately with the level of need. (This year, I am supporting more candidates than there are open positions.) Consequently, you will see that I oppose some candidates, not because I think that they would do a bad job, but because I think that other candidates would do better.

I don't have any litmus tests, but I look for candidates whom I trust. I consider how well a candidate's views match up with where I think the community is at, and how I think the particular candidate will fit in as one member of a committee. I also care about being open to improving how the Committee works. Although I posed a question to the candidates about that, I'm not basing my decisions on how they replied, partly because there really are not right or wrong answers, and partly because some of them responded in terms of copyediting rather than import, so, whatever.

New this year: Per the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2014#Statement by Roger Davies, I want to offer candidates the opportunity to rebut anything that I say here. Please feel free to do so at User talk:Tryptofish/ACE2014, and if you do, I will make a notation in the table below so that anyone looking here will be directed to it.

Recommendations

Candidate	Comments	Recommendation
Calidum	I feel more positively about Calidum than some of the other guide writers have been, because I have seen a lot of maturity and cluefulness in his more recent editing. However, he has had a mixed history in the past, and there are stronger candidates.	Oppose
Courcelles	A previous arbitrator, running to return to the Committee this year. An unfailingly sensible and trustworthy person, and a very easy decision for me to support.	Support
DeltaQuad	DeltaQuad has had a lot of experience in higher level responsibilities, and should be a good new member of the Committee.	Support
DGG	DGG is a longtime editor and administrator, and someone I have long looked up to. He can be trusted to exercise excellent judgment.	Support
Dougweller	An experienced administrator, with a solid track record. He should be a strong addition to the Committee.	Support
Dusti	Too much of a checkered history as an editor. No convincing evidence of being able to resolve other users' disputes.	Oppose
Euryalus	A thoughtful and articulate candidate, who has impressed me very highly.	Support
Geni	A longtime editor and administrator. I feel however that the history has been sufficiently checkered that I cannot support.	Oppose
Guerillero	Guerillero has been a clerk for ArbCom as well as a member of the Audit Subcommittee, and has done an excellent job as far as I can tell. He is smart, and has accumulated a lot of experience in how the Committee works. However, I don't have a good feeling about his temper, as exemplified by his comment this summer about the Committee not responding promptly enough to his request to appoint new AUSC members.	Oppose
Hahc21	He can rub some people the wrong way, but I have consistently been impressed with his judgment. I never like it when a drama erupts while an election is in progress, but there is a thread at WP:ANI concerning possible misuse of administrative tools in relation to copyright violations. I don't think that there is enough time to really resolve the issues definitively before the voting ends, but I am sufficiently concerned that I am about to change my own vote to neutral.	Support Neutral
Isarra	Unserious candidate statement, and the answers to questions are not particularly insightful.	Oppose
Kraxler	I opposed Kraxler last year, but I'm supporting now, on the basis of his obvious intelligence and his experience as a content creator.	Support
Ks0stm	An experienced ArbCom clerk and a nice person. He has matured considerably, and should be a positive contributor to the Committee.	Support
PhilKnight	Another past member, running to rejoin the Committee, and another easy support for me. Phil has a very strong track record as someone who can reduce conflict, and I support him with the highest enthusiasm. Unfortunately, this candidate has withdrawn for personal reasons.	Withdrew
Salvio giuliano	The one sitting member who is running for reelection this year. I don't always agree with him – I think he was too hard on 28bytes a year ago – but he has earned reelection.	Support
Stanistani	I've thought hard on this one. As Zoloft, Stanistani has been a major presence at Wikipediocracy, where he has been one of the more reasonable and responsible commentators. I've gotta say, there is something rather appealing about having someone from that other site on ArbCom, and I like the way he favors more transparency. But what tips me to oppose is the way that other site has been involved in doxing, which is one of the most odious of Internet phenomena, and which is incompatible with arbitrators' access to private information.	Oppose
Technical 13	A nice person who entered the race early, but not enough of a track record in solving disputes.	Oppose
Thryduulf	I was very happy to see Thryduulf become a candidate this year. He is a truly thoughtful and sensible person, with a good understanding of dispute resolution, and I support him enthusiastically.	Support
Wbm1058	Withdrawn candidate, but still on the ballot. The candidate subsequently reentered the election, but the on-off candidacy does not give me confidence, and I was not going to support anyway, given that there are plenty of other candidates who are better qualified.	Oppose
Yunshui	An experienced editor and a very nice person. I came very near to supporting on that basis, but maybe this is someone who is just a tad less inclined to deal with unpleasantness, and there are enough other good candidates.	Oppose

And finally...

Being on ArbCom is a difficult and largely thankless task, but if it is done right, it makes Wikipedia a better place for the rest of us. Thank you to everyone who is a candidate in this election!

This year, six sitting members of the Committee – Beeblebrox, Carcharoth, David Fuchs, Newyorkbrad, Timotheus Canens, and Worm That Turned – have completed their terms and are not seeking reelection. The entire community owes them the very deepest of thanks for their outstanding service.

And, although nobody asked me, there are quite a few Wikipedians who I think would make excellent Arbs in the future, and I wish that they would run. They include: 28bytes, Dennis Brown, Drmies, Fluffernutter, Hobit, JamesBWatson, Kudpung, MastCell, Mr. Stradivarius, NE Ent, Ponyo, Someguy1221, and WereSpielChequers.