Hi. I'm
User:FT2. I've been quietly working on our more difficult cases
[1] and helping other administrators and users
[2] since 2004/05:
I've written around 100 substantive articles (
list), and authored the stable wordings/structure of many of our core policy and project pages (
list).
I undertook my first full mediation case
[3] and presented my first substantial arbcom evidence
[4] in November 2004, my first full arbcom case in December 2004
[5], followed by involvement in another in January 2005, and a further two warriors later that year, with repeated experience since. Since 2004 and moreso since adminship, I've consistently managed difficult disputes, more virulent warriors, closure of heated or difficult AFDs, further arbcom cases, and problems needing exceptional insight and communication. Throughout, I've
continuedparticipatingregularly at arbcom.
In this arena, I've not only gained respect, but also been commended for some of the best decisions and dispute resolutions in the history of the project: - "possibly the wordiest, best thought through AFD close in the history of the project"[6], and "probably the most comprehensive and balanced dispute resolution I've ever read on Wikipedia"[7]. Even in heated disputes, I am routinely considered fair
[8]... even by those I've declined[9], who initially disagreed
[10][11] -- and by more than one I've warned or blocked.
Behind the scenes, I also do a lot of "second opinion" and escalation/resolution work, in-depth allegation/dispute checking, and drafting analyses and dispute summaries that gain respect even in tough cases
[12]. I'm able to say 'no' and explain the reasons
[13], non-provokable
[14], fair to difficult editors, and evidence-centered in presenting concerns about administrator and arbcom decisions when necessary
[15]. I spot important privacy/security issues others might miss
[16], and reconsider my stance if needed
[17][18].
Arbcom is our way to endorse a panel of trusted and experienced users, to decide our most divisive or exceptional matters. The Committee must therefore 1/ be responsive (major cases often deteriorate rapidly), 2/ earn exceptional respect for its decisions (unlike all other communal decisions, the invitation "anyone can edit" does not apply), 3/ act transparently and with clarity, and 4/ be answerable to the community, not the other way round.
As an administrator, I have been community focussed and a problem-solver, accessible and supportive. As an arbitrator (if appointed) I give my commitment to absolute integrity; to be accountable; to be approachable; and to be fair, insightful and effective.
Hi. I'm
User:FT2. I've been quietly working on our more difficult cases
[1] and helping other administrators and users
[2] since 2004/05:
I've written around 100 substantive articles (
list), and authored the stable wordings/structure of many of our core policy and project pages (
list).
I undertook my first full mediation case
[3] and presented my first substantial arbcom evidence
[4] in November 2004, my first full arbcom case in December 2004
[5], followed by involvement in another in January 2005, and a further two warriors later that year, with repeated experience since. Since 2004 and moreso since adminship, I've consistently managed difficult disputes, more virulent warriors, closure of heated or difficult AFDs, further arbcom cases, and problems needing exceptional insight and communication. Throughout, I've
continuedparticipatingregularly at arbcom.
In this arena, I've not only gained respect, but also been commended for some of the best decisions and dispute resolutions in the history of the project: - "possibly the wordiest, best thought through AFD close in the history of the project"[6], and "probably the most comprehensive and balanced dispute resolution I've ever read on Wikipedia"[7]. Even in heated disputes, I am routinely considered fair
[8]... even by those I've declined[9], who initially disagreed
[10][11] -- and by more than one I've warned or blocked.
Behind the scenes, I also do a lot of "second opinion" and escalation/resolution work, in-depth allegation/dispute checking, and drafting analyses and dispute summaries that gain respect even in tough cases
[12]. I'm able to say 'no' and explain the reasons
[13], non-provokable
[14], fair to difficult editors, and evidence-centered in presenting concerns about administrator and arbcom decisions when necessary
[15]. I spot important privacy/security issues others might miss
[16], and reconsider my stance if needed
[17][18].
Arbcom is our way to endorse a panel of trusted and experienced users, to decide our most divisive or exceptional matters. The Committee must therefore 1/ be responsive (major cases often deteriorate rapidly), 2/ earn exceptional respect for its decisions (unlike all other communal decisions, the invitation "anyone can edit" does not apply), 3/ act transparently and with clarity, and 4/ be answerable to the community, not the other way round.
As an administrator, I have been community focussed and a problem-solver, accessible and supportive. As an arbitrator (if appointed) I give my commitment to absolute integrity; to be accountable; to be approachable; and to be fair, insightful and effective.