I'm the unknown 3rd party. Vote for me if you're disillusioned.
I think that Arbcom has become too slow and bloated in the last year. Cases are piling up and waiting months for a final verdict. People are being driven away by the inefficiency. If I am voted to Arbcom, I'd try to speed things along. I hate trolls, and like long walks on the beach. I am against banning except in extreme circumstances or for repeat offenders. I think that a first offense should not be banned for, only for problem users or extreme trolls.
Luigi30 (
Ταλκ)
03:16, 5 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Oppose I find that certain comments made in the statement and in response to some questions are flippant, which doesn't bode well for a prospective arbitrator.
Rje17:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Candidate does not adequately address the nature of arbitration in their candidate statement. In ignorance: I must oppose. With so many candidates, the statement is the extent to which I can engage in becoming an informed voter. Any candidate so contemptuous of the demos as to make it difficult for me to become an informed voter: I must oppose, it bodes poorly for their capacity to take on social responsibility.
Fifelfoo22:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Reluctant oppose I really like what I've seen from this editor, so my heart sank a bit when I read the candidate statement. Seems too reluctant to ban.
Andrew Lenahan - Starblind15:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)reply
I'm the unknown 3rd party. Vote for me if you're disillusioned.
I think that Arbcom has become too slow and bloated in the last year. Cases are piling up and waiting months for a final verdict. People are being driven away by the inefficiency. If I am voted to Arbcom, I'd try to speed things along. I hate trolls, and like long walks on the beach. I am against banning except in extreme circumstances or for repeat offenders. I think that a first offense should not be banned for, only for problem users or extreme trolls.
Luigi30 (
Ταλκ)
03:16, 5 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Oppose I find that certain comments made in the statement and in response to some questions are flippant, which doesn't bode well for a prospective arbitrator.
Rje17:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Candidate does not adequately address the nature of arbitration in their candidate statement. In ignorance: I must oppose. With so many candidates, the statement is the extent to which I can engage in becoming an informed voter. Any candidate so contemptuous of the demos as to make it difficult for me to become an informed voter: I must oppose, it bodes poorly for their capacity to take on social responsibility.
Fifelfoo22:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Reluctant oppose I really like what I've seen from this editor, so my heart sank a bit when I read the candidate statement. Seems too reluctant to ban.
Andrew Lenahan - Starblind15:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)reply