Content deleted Content added
Will Beback (talk | contribs) →Oppose: + |
|||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
# [[User:Nufy8|Nufy8]] ([[User talk:Nufy8|talk]]) 00:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC) |
# [[User:Nufy8|Nufy8]] ([[User talk:Nufy8|talk]]) 00:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC) |
||
# [[User:Rschen7754/ACEScores2008|Oppose]]. '''[[User:Rschen7754|Rschen7754]]''' ([[User talk:Rschen7754|T]] [[Special:Contributions/Rschen7754|C]]) 00:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC) |
# [[User:Rschen7754/ACEScores2008|Oppose]]. '''[[User:Rschen7754|Rschen7754]]''' ([[User talk:Rschen7754|T]] [[Special:Contributions/Rschen7754|C]]) 00:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC) |
||
# '''Oppose'''. In his longterm mediation of [[Prem Rawat]] he appeared to favor one side of the dispute, participated in writing a draft of the article, and then defended that draft. Because of the many disputes related to [[new religious movements]] that the ArbCom deals with, a user who cannot remain neutral on these matters could cause problems. [[Special:Contributions/Will_Beback| ·:· ]][[User:Will Beback|Will Beback]] [[User talk:Will Beback|·:·]] 00:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:43, 1 December 2008
- I have answered a candidate "vote guide" at User:MBisanz/ACE2008/Guide/Vassyana. My candidacy is based around three principles: devolution, project principles, and coherent interpretation.
- Devolution is devolving responsibility to the standing administrators and broader community. This would not preclude me from supporting sanctions and other measures as part of an ArbCom case. The community generally expects action to be taken on ArbCom cases. However, I would clearly and explicitly remind the community of their options and encourage them to take the initiative and action in similar circumstances. ArbCom needs to clearly encourage and support admins and the community in resolving disruptive behavior.
- Wikipedia has a number of project principles that form the foundation of our policies and guidelines. I am more likely to support decisions firmly grounded in these foundational principles and would oppose decisions outside of these principles. In cases where the principle is clear but policy is vague, I would act in favor of the underlying principle and encourage the community to clarify the policy.
- Coherent interpretation is key to the healthy function of ArbCom and the community. On a number of occasions various policies, principles and ArbCom decisions are perceived to be in tension (or even contradictory). I believe that this is an erroneous approach resulting from a failure to consider the various factors in context. Rules, principles, and standing precedent should not considered individually in a vacuum. I will endeavor to interpret the rules and precedent in whatever manner results in the most complementary and coherent reading. Acting otherwise leads to inconsistent decisions and fragmented rules.
I believe most, if not all, concerns about ArbCom can be addressed by acting on these principles. In terms of process, I support transparent arbitration proceedings and decisions. All ArbCom decisions should have explicit reasonings and arbitrators should be open to elaborating on decisions to clear up any lack of understanding in the community. I am open to any and all questions that will help you make a decision on my candidacy. Vassyana (talk) 16:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Vassyana (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
- Questions for the candidate
- Discuss the candidate
- Support or Oppose this candidate
Support
- Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 00:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Support Seddσn talk 00:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Privatemusings (talk) 00:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Support --maclean 00:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Elonka 00:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Support - Shot info (talk) 00:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Oppose
- Oppose, although nothing personal: I have chosen a group of seven editors that will make the best new additions to ArbCom, reflecting diversity in editing areas, users who will work well together, as well as some differing viewpoints.--Maxim(talk) 00:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Nufy8 (talk) 00:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose. Rschen7754 (T C) 00:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose. In his longterm mediation of Prem Rawat he appeared to favor one side of the dispute, participated in writing a draft of the article, and then defended that draft. Because of the many disputes related to new religious movements that the ArbCom deals with, a user who cannot remain neutral on these matters could cause problems. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 00:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)