This is the talk page for discussing a candidate for election to the Arbitration Committee. | |||
---|---|---|---|
|
|||
|
Endorse - AGK is a candidate I am personally endorsing. I have had the pleasure of working with him in the clerking ranks and hold him in the highest regard. He will, in my opinion, make an excellent arbitrator. (Naturally I don't regard my opinion as particularly special, but there it is anyway). Manning ( talk) 00:34, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
As looking into current ArbCom cases, we can judge how aspired arbitrators would judge or make drafts for ArbCom cases in future. I think AGK's such view toward admins' abuse are problematic and too generous and make me wonder "Is Adminship a divine privilege? As well as his answers on community-based on desysopping suggestion, I feel he does not trust the community's ability of handing big issues. "Trust" is a basic element for becoming arbitrators. I can not agree that AGK could be an excellent arbitrator. -- Caspian blue 23:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Regarding points on desysopping: I made it quite clear that I think Piotrus should be desysopped. What I disagreed with was banning him. I am strongly in favour of liberal use by the committee of desysopping remedies where administrators are found to be unfit for office.
Regarding your points on community desysopping: I actually state in my answers to the general questions that the community should be able to desysop users without committee intervention: see answer two (A2) to Avaraham's first question. As a candidate, I am broadly of the view that ideally the arbitration committee's role would be less prominent than it currently is: see answer two (A2) to Majorly. So to say that I "do not trust the community's ability of handing big issues" is not a fair representation of my candidacy.
Final point: of course, if I was elected, I would never have to resort to such strong rhetoric as I did in the two links you gave. People usually pay heed to an arbitrator's comments without them having to shout.
Are my responses to your concerns adequate, Caspian? That I appear to you in the way you describe alarms me, and I'm eager to set the record straight. AGK 00:09, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I read your platform and your answers and I'm very satisfied. I'm interested in the second question of Heimstern about nationalist and ethnic edit wars, and I'm looking forward to your answer. Good luck. Sole Soul ( talk) 14:37, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
A detailed analysis of this candidate's edits in article, user and project space can be found at User:Franamax/Ucontribs-2009/AGK. Franamax ( talk) 05:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
-- Caspian blue 02:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Your support and kind comments are appreciated. Best, AGK 18:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
This is the talk page for discussing a candidate for election to the Arbitration Committee. | |||
---|---|---|---|
|
|||
|
Endorse - AGK is a candidate I am personally endorsing. I have had the pleasure of working with him in the clerking ranks and hold him in the highest regard. He will, in my opinion, make an excellent arbitrator. (Naturally I don't regard my opinion as particularly special, but there it is anyway). Manning ( talk) 00:34, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
As looking into current ArbCom cases, we can judge how aspired arbitrators would judge or make drafts for ArbCom cases in future. I think AGK's such view toward admins' abuse are problematic and too generous and make me wonder "Is Adminship a divine privilege? As well as his answers on community-based on desysopping suggestion, I feel he does not trust the community's ability of handing big issues. "Trust" is a basic element for becoming arbitrators. I can not agree that AGK could be an excellent arbitrator. -- Caspian blue 23:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Regarding points on desysopping: I made it quite clear that I think Piotrus should be desysopped. What I disagreed with was banning him. I am strongly in favour of liberal use by the committee of desysopping remedies where administrators are found to be unfit for office.
Regarding your points on community desysopping: I actually state in my answers to the general questions that the community should be able to desysop users without committee intervention: see answer two (A2) to Avaraham's first question. As a candidate, I am broadly of the view that ideally the arbitration committee's role would be less prominent than it currently is: see answer two (A2) to Majorly. So to say that I "do not trust the community's ability of handing big issues" is not a fair representation of my candidacy.
Final point: of course, if I was elected, I would never have to resort to such strong rhetoric as I did in the two links you gave. People usually pay heed to an arbitrator's comments without them having to shout.
Are my responses to your concerns adequate, Caspian? That I appear to you in the way you describe alarms me, and I'm eager to set the record straight. AGK 00:09, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I read your platform and your answers and I'm very satisfied. I'm interested in the second question of Heimstern about nationalist and ethnic edit wars, and I'm looking forward to your answer. Good luck. Sole Soul ( talk) 14:37, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
A detailed analysis of this candidate's edits in article, user and project space can be found at User:Franamax/Ucontribs-2009/AGK. Franamax ( talk) 05:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
-- Caspian blue 02:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Your support and kind comments are appreciated. Best, AGK 18:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)