The Arbitration Committee exists to settle disputes that the community can not resolve on its own. For this reason the Arbitration Committee is essential for helping the Wikipedia community achieve its purpose of creating a free encyclopedia.
I would like the opportunity to assist the community towards meeting this goal by working as an Arbitrator. I've been an editor since September 2005, an Administrator since May 2006, and an Arbitration Committee Clerk since August 2006. I also answer
OTRS queries for the
Wikimedia Foundation. I have knowledge of Wikipedia culture and policy as well as time to do the job well. I am easily approachable, will listen to all sides of the dispute, and will strive to find the best solution for the Wikipedia community.
FloNight 00:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Strong support. One of our very best administrators. Kind, civil, and calm. Works well even with troublesome users. Will make a great arbitrator.
AnnH♫ 00:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Per above ... (update on 6 Dec at 17:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC): Some of the opposes suggesting she'd be partial to friends confuse me. Flo has 20 years experience as a professional in a field where a strict patient confidentiality and bedside manner is required, and I'm just not seeing evidence that she has shown favouritism to friends. There are, unfortunately, some editors here that DO show such favouritism, some egregiously so, to the point of being blind to the faults of their friends, but I'm not seeing it with FloNight at all... Further, I'm sure she would recuse herself at any reasonable suggestion of conflict of interest anyway ) ++
Lar:
t/
c 00:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support - First person to greet me when I got to Wikipedia and a help whenever I needed her ever since then.
Adam Cuerdentalk 00:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Please take a break though if you're stressed out, the last thing we need is hyper stressed arbs (wait, that throws our our current arbcom doesn't it :o) --
Tawker 07:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Experienced, thorough, and somehow seems ... well, kind, though can't point to a specific diff.
AnonEMouse(squeak) 21:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support - Impressive credentials, more than qualified. --
Refusetobesilenced 00:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support - Good administrator, familiar with ArbCom's role and procedure from three months as a clerk. The oppose rationales are unsupported and unpersuasive.
Newyorkbrad 00:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support I think that Cyde raises an issue which may have some merit. However, I am more than confident that Flo will recuse herself when there is any serious conflict.
JoshuaZ 00:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support --
Dakota 03:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support eminently experienced. riana_dzasta 03:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support —
JeremyA 04:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support for being approachable and critical-thinking at the same time - an excellent and rare combination of qualities. Also, ArbCom needs more women. I agree with JoshuaZ that she'll recuse when necessary. You can always remind her.
Kla'quot 06:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support to the max. Has superb judgment and will make a great arbitrator.
Metamagician3000 08:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support--
ragesoss 09:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support per SlimVirgin, with stress on the editor part. Good to see that an active article editor is doing so well.
172 |
Talk 09:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support One of Wikipedia's best.
FeloniousMonk 20:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Strongest possible support - If only one of the candidates I favor actually makes it into the committee, I hope Flo is that editor. I've had involvement at three arbitration cases so far - four if the
Jason Gastrich case counts - and my interactions with Flo as a clerk have been uniformly positive. She's diplomatic and cordial under the most trying circumstances. This woman is so level-headed she could probably balance a book atop her cranium as she strolled through a hailstorm.
DurovaCharge! 20:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Although I think she might fall just short with the current results, I nonetheless believe her to be one of the kindest and most effective people here on the English Wikipedia.
Scobell302 18:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. I am impressed with her answers to the questions. If there is indeed a concern about her neutrality in cases involving friends, then she needs to be aware and work on that. From what I see here, though, she can do the job. --
Danaman5 21:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Candidate has removed my doubts.
Fys. “
Tafysaym”. 09:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Strong Support Was of excellent help during a time of much strife in editing an area in which I'd spent much time.
Drgitlow 00:51, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Strong Support. Civil, compassionate, dedicated and even-handed. (BTW, where's the substance behind the rumor below about lack of impartiality? Such an accusation ought to be backed up with evidence, or not made at all.) --
Jim Butler(
talk) 00:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. While I know Flonight has friends on the Wikipedia, I fully trust her to be entirely objective in her decisions as an arbitrator, even when it involves those friends.
Bastiq▼edemandez 16:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Candidate understands the issues related to science controversies well and would make a fine arbitrator. --
ScienceApologist 16:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Of course FloNight would make an excellent ArbCom member; don't be silly. The fact that's she's helpful, patient, and kind hasn't prevented her from kicking my ass when it's been warranted; knowing as much as been given me to know of her, I think its scurrilous to maintain that she'd play favorites. She has character. That matters. A lot.
Herostratus 17:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support only ever seen her make positive actions, I could have missed lots of bad ones but overall I think she would be good at it.
Ksbrown 18:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Weak Support While I wish FloNight had better seized the opportunity in my question to very directly address whether she believes that "friendship" is a ground for recusal, I nonetheless believe FloNight's will excersize good faith and will provide much thoughtfulness and experience as an ArbCom member. I hope, once elected, she will deliberately seek opportunities to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest for the sake of the ArbCom and Wikipedia.
Thesmothete 19:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Full Support Your goals are thos I believe that the Arbitration Comimmitee should have been founded on.--
Whytecypress 21:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Whytecypress does not have suffrage; he had only
138 edits as of 00:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC). —
Cryptic 23:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. --
Túrelio 22:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I haven't interacted directly with this candidate, but from observing contributions, I believe the candidate would make an excellent arbitrator.
theProject 22:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. An excellent admin. -
Will Beback ·
† · 23:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose
Sorry, but I question your ability to remain impartial when arbitrating cases that may involve your friends. --
Cyde Weys 04:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose at this time. Candidate is qualified, but 3 years + clerkship is too long to be associated with ArbCom withotu a break.
Jd2718 05:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC) —— That was clear as mud, sorry. Would prefer that no one be associated with ArbCom for more than 3 years, without a break (would support term limits, to include clerking time, if that were an option)
Jd2718 11:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC) Changing stance to neutral. Still concerned about association with ArbCom extending beyond 3 years, but would rather talk about it than hold a vote hostage.
Jd2718 18:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Very weak oppose Although Flo's altogether agreeable demeanor disposes me to support, and although I find her writing to be well-reasoned even as I often disagree with her views, such that I expect that the thinking underlying her ArbCom work should be quite sound, I must admit that I share Cyde's concern and thus can't offer my support.
Joe 06:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Cyde.
CJCurrie 06:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Jd2718, I too am worried about potential burnout. Keep the clerks job... I'd rather have a competant clerk than a burnt out arbitrator.
ALKIVAR™☢ 07:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC) changed to neutral.reply
Oppose She tried to help resolve a dispute in which I was involved but seemed rather condescending and uninformed—not desirable traits for an arbitrator. Also, she has a large group of "wiki-friends," which could prevent her from carrying out her duties effectively and impartially. In fact, in the aforementioned dispute she tried to mediate, she was collaborating with one of her friends more than the disputing parties, I felt. Overall, she's a very kind editor, but lacks the professionalism for the job. --
WGee 06:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I don't like the community sanctions idea, too much like the Cabal that we don't have.
Fys. “
Tafysaym”. 23:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC) Changed vote to support.
Fys. “
Tafysaym”. 09:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose There's nothing in the candidate's statement to indicate an aptitude for arbitration.
Alan Pascoe 15:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC) Switched to neutral following feedback from candidate.
Alan Pascoe 21:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Could not oppose more vehemently. Contributed to the permablock of a user who protested against a lack of neutrality in an article and abuse of administrators who protected their point of view about doping in US cycling - a view that may have been changed by
Floyd Landis.
[1]Happily ever after 03:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Unfortunately, Happily lacks sufferage - I only count 106 edits prior to 12/4
TheronJ 04:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Cyde. Sorry!
Voretustalk 15:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose I am unhappy how FloNight handled my request for clarification in the arbcom case regarding Sathya Sai Baba.
Andries 16:54, 16 December 2006 (UTC)reply
very weak Oppose a good Clerk, a bit concerned about impartiality per above
Krich(talk) 03:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose by default. (Did not provide example for good work. I'm sorry, I had planned to do some more research today which was prevented by an emergency in our area.) —
Sebastian 04:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Cyde.
Huldra 17:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
The Arbitration Committee exists to settle disputes that the community can not resolve on its own. For this reason the Arbitration Committee is essential for helping the Wikipedia community achieve its purpose of creating a free encyclopedia.
I would like the opportunity to assist the community towards meeting this goal by working as an Arbitrator. I've been an editor since September 2005, an Administrator since May 2006, and an Arbitration Committee Clerk since August 2006. I also answer
OTRS queries for the
Wikimedia Foundation. I have knowledge of Wikipedia culture and policy as well as time to do the job well. I am easily approachable, will listen to all sides of the dispute, and will strive to find the best solution for the Wikipedia community.
FloNight 00:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)reply
Strong support. One of our very best administrators. Kind, civil, and calm. Works well even with troublesome users. Will make a great arbitrator.
AnnH♫ 00:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Per above ... (update on 6 Dec at 17:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC): Some of the opposes suggesting she'd be partial to friends confuse me. Flo has 20 years experience as a professional in a field where a strict patient confidentiality and bedside manner is required, and I'm just not seeing evidence that she has shown favouritism to friends. There are, unfortunately, some editors here that DO show such favouritism, some egregiously so, to the point of being blind to the faults of their friends, but I'm not seeing it with FloNight at all... Further, I'm sure she would recuse herself at any reasonable suggestion of conflict of interest anyway ) ++
Lar:
t/
c 00:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support - First person to greet me when I got to Wikipedia and a help whenever I needed her ever since then.
Adam Cuerdentalk 00:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Please take a break though if you're stressed out, the last thing we need is hyper stressed arbs (wait, that throws our our current arbcom doesn't it :o) --
Tawker 07:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Experienced, thorough, and somehow seems ... well, kind, though can't point to a specific diff.
AnonEMouse(squeak) 21:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support - Impressive credentials, more than qualified. --
Refusetobesilenced 00:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support - Good administrator, familiar with ArbCom's role and procedure from three months as a clerk. The oppose rationales are unsupported and unpersuasive.
Newyorkbrad 00:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support I think that Cyde raises an issue which may have some merit. However, I am more than confident that Flo will recuse herself when there is any serious conflict.
JoshuaZ 00:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support --
Dakota 03:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support eminently experienced. riana_dzasta 03:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support —
JeremyA 04:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support for being approachable and critical-thinking at the same time - an excellent and rare combination of qualities. Also, ArbCom needs more women. I agree with JoshuaZ that she'll recuse when necessary. You can always remind her.
Kla'quot 06:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support to the max. Has superb judgment and will make a great arbitrator.
Metamagician3000 08:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support--
ragesoss 09:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support per SlimVirgin, with stress on the editor part. Good to see that an active article editor is doing so well.
172 |
Talk 09:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support One of Wikipedia's best.
FeloniousMonk 20:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Strongest possible support - If only one of the candidates I favor actually makes it into the committee, I hope Flo is that editor. I've had involvement at three arbitration cases so far - four if the
Jason Gastrich case counts - and my interactions with Flo as a clerk have been uniformly positive. She's diplomatic and cordial under the most trying circumstances. This woman is so level-headed she could probably balance a book atop her cranium as she strolled through a hailstorm.
DurovaCharge! 20:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Although I think she might fall just short with the current results, I nonetheless believe her to be one of the kindest and most effective people here on the English Wikipedia.
Scobell302 18:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. I am impressed with her answers to the questions. If there is indeed a concern about her neutrality in cases involving friends, then she needs to be aware and work on that. From what I see here, though, she can do the job. --
Danaman5 21:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Candidate has removed my doubts.
Fys. “
Tafysaym”. 09:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Strong Support Was of excellent help during a time of much strife in editing an area in which I'd spent much time.
Drgitlow 00:51, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Strong Support. Civil, compassionate, dedicated and even-handed. (BTW, where's the substance behind the rumor below about lack of impartiality? Such an accusation ought to be backed up with evidence, or not made at all.) --
Jim Butler(
talk) 00:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. While I know Flonight has friends on the Wikipedia, I fully trust her to be entirely objective in her decisions as an arbitrator, even when it involves those friends.
Bastiq▼edemandez 16:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Candidate understands the issues related to science controversies well and would make a fine arbitrator. --
ScienceApologist 16:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Of course FloNight would make an excellent ArbCom member; don't be silly. The fact that's she's helpful, patient, and kind hasn't prevented her from kicking my ass when it's been warranted; knowing as much as been given me to know of her, I think its scurrilous to maintain that she'd play favorites. She has character. That matters. A lot.
Herostratus 17:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support only ever seen her make positive actions, I could have missed lots of bad ones but overall I think she would be good at it.
Ksbrown 18:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Weak Support While I wish FloNight had better seized the opportunity in my question to very directly address whether she believes that "friendship" is a ground for recusal, I nonetheless believe FloNight's will excersize good faith and will provide much thoughtfulness and experience as an ArbCom member. I hope, once elected, she will deliberately seek opportunities to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest for the sake of the ArbCom and Wikipedia.
Thesmothete 19:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Full Support Your goals are thos I believe that the Arbitration Comimmitee should have been founded on.--
Whytecypress 21:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Whytecypress does not have suffrage; he had only
138 edits as of 00:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC). —
Cryptic 23:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. --
Túrelio 22:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I haven't interacted directly with this candidate, but from observing contributions, I believe the candidate would make an excellent arbitrator.
theProject 22:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. An excellent admin. -
Will Beback ·
† · 23:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose
Sorry, but I question your ability to remain impartial when arbitrating cases that may involve your friends. --
Cyde Weys 04:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose at this time. Candidate is qualified, but 3 years + clerkship is too long to be associated with ArbCom withotu a break.
Jd2718 05:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC) —— That was clear as mud, sorry. Would prefer that no one be associated with ArbCom for more than 3 years, without a break (would support term limits, to include clerking time, if that were an option)
Jd2718 11:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC) Changing stance to neutral. Still concerned about association with ArbCom extending beyond 3 years, but would rather talk about it than hold a vote hostage.
Jd2718 18:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Very weak oppose Although Flo's altogether agreeable demeanor disposes me to support, and although I find her writing to be well-reasoned even as I often disagree with her views, such that I expect that the thinking underlying her ArbCom work should be quite sound, I must admit that I share Cyde's concern and thus can't offer my support.
Joe 06:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Cyde.
CJCurrie 06:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Jd2718, I too am worried about potential burnout. Keep the clerks job... I'd rather have a competant clerk than a burnt out arbitrator.
ALKIVAR™☢ 07:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC) changed to neutral.reply
Oppose She tried to help resolve a dispute in which I was involved but seemed rather condescending and uninformed—not desirable traits for an arbitrator. Also, she has a large group of "wiki-friends," which could prevent her from carrying out her duties effectively and impartially. In fact, in the aforementioned dispute she tried to mediate, she was collaborating with one of her friends more than the disputing parties, I felt. Overall, she's a very kind editor, but lacks the professionalism for the job. --
WGee 06:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I don't like the community sanctions idea, too much like the Cabal that we don't have.
Fys. “
Tafysaym”. 23:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC) Changed vote to support.
Fys. “
Tafysaym”. 09:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose There's nothing in the candidate's statement to indicate an aptitude for arbitration.
Alan Pascoe 15:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC) Switched to neutral following feedback from candidate.
Alan Pascoe 21:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Could not oppose more vehemently. Contributed to the permablock of a user who protested against a lack of neutrality in an article and abuse of administrators who protected their point of view about doping in US cycling - a view that may have been changed by
Floyd Landis.
[1]Happily ever after 03:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Unfortunately, Happily lacks sufferage - I only count 106 edits prior to 12/4
TheronJ 04:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Cyde. Sorry!
Voretustalk 15:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose I am unhappy how FloNight handled my request for clarification in the arbcom case regarding Sathya Sai Baba.
Andries 16:54, 16 December 2006 (UTC)reply
very weak Oppose a good Clerk, a bit concerned about impartiality per above
Krich(talk) 03:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose by default. (Did not provide example for good work. I'm sorry, I had planned to do some more research today which was prevented by an emergency in our area.) —
Sebastian 04:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Cyde.
Huldra 17:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply