This is the talk page for discussing a candidate for election to the Arbitration Committee. | |||
---|---|---|---|
|
|||
|
There's a lot to like about Brad, but by far the best is how communicative he's been. He's been honest and open about the Committee and has been an excellent ambassador for ArbCom's work. Likewise when voting on cases/motions/etc., Brad gives a real understanding of the issues at hand, and often I find I learn something just by reading that vote. It's a skill shared by some of the best Arbs I've seen, and I look forward to seeing Brad on the Committee once again. ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 12:00, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I'd like to add my enthusiastic endorsement of Bradv for re-election to the Arbitration Committee. I have had the privilege of working with Brad for a while now, as a fellow clerk prior to his election in 2019 and subsequently supporting him as an arbitrator for the past year. Even though I was positive he would be an excellent addition to the committee, he still managed to exceed my high expectations for him. Brad is a fantastic communicator who has something insightful and thought-provoking to say in every discussion, and he brings with him a seemingly encyclopedic knowledge of policy and arbitration procedure alongside a strong sense of both fairness and empathy. It's clear to me, and I think to anyone that knows him well, that Brad really means it when he says that he loves this project and is proud of everyone helping to build it. He has both my thanks and my vote. CThomas3 ( talk) 20:30, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
- and therefore leaning to a cold, hard way of reviewing cases without always giving sufficient examination of the veracity of the claims of the original posters or comments by the uninvolved Wikipedia 'governance obsessives' or those with a general disinclination for the somewhat necessary need for administrators. This may work for some cases but not for others, so a lack of consistency. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 05:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
'This may work for some cases but not for others...'may even consider them to be a plus point, but the operative word is consistency. There are no rules at ACE that anyone who writes a voter guide or comments in the discussion section needs to have interacted with a candidate. We're talking about you here, not me (you've had your satisfaction already in dealing with me the way you chose). I have concerns in general for years about the role of the Arbitration Committee and hence the people who compose it - which might also include 'governance obsessives' . I am not a spiteful or vindictive person, you have linked to comments of yours, you may now wish to read my voter guide - fully. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 23:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
"We have a duty to perform a thorough examination of all the facts". Yes, well it wasn't intended to be a reference to my Arbcom case, more an illustration of something he claimed and then, in my opinion - and that of others - didn't honour. Still, as I have also mentioned, Parabolist, he may have some qualities that appeal to voters, but the choice of candidates is not great. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 11:28, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
This is the talk page for discussing a candidate for election to the Arbitration Committee. | |||
---|---|---|---|
|
|||
|
There's a lot to like about Brad, but by far the best is how communicative he's been. He's been honest and open about the Committee and has been an excellent ambassador for ArbCom's work. Likewise when voting on cases/motions/etc., Brad gives a real understanding of the issues at hand, and often I find I learn something just by reading that vote. It's a skill shared by some of the best Arbs I've seen, and I look forward to seeing Brad on the Committee once again. ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 12:00, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I'd like to add my enthusiastic endorsement of Bradv for re-election to the Arbitration Committee. I have had the privilege of working with Brad for a while now, as a fellow clerk prior to his election in 2019 and subsequently supporting him as an arbitrator for the past year. Even though I was positive he would be an excellent addition to the committee, he still managed to exceed my high expectations for him. Brad is a fantastic communicator who has something insightful and thought-provoking to say in every discussion, and he brings with him a seemingly encyclopedic knowledge of policy and arbitration procedure alongside a strong sense of both fairness and empathy. It's clear to me, and I think to anyone that knows him well, that Brad really means it when he says that he loves this project and is proud of everyone helping to build it. He has both my thanks and my vote. CThomas3 ( talk) 20:30, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
- and therefore leaning to a cold, hard way of reviewing cases without always giving sufficient examination of the veracity of the claims of the original posters or comments by the uninvolved Wikipedia 'governance obsessives' or those with a general disinclination for the somewhat necessary need for administrators. This may work for some cases but not for others, so a lack of consistency. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 05:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
'This may work for some cases but not for others...'may even consider them to be a plus point, but the operative word is consistency. There are no rules at ACE that anyone who writes a voter guide or comments in the discussion section needs to have interacted with a candidate. We're talking about you here, not me (you've had your satisfaction already in dealing with me the way you chose). I have concerns in general for years about the role of the Arbitration Committee and hence the people who compose it - which might also include 'governance obsessives' . I am not a spiteful or vindictive person, you have linked to comments of yours, you may now wish to read my voter guide - fully. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 23:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
"We have a duty to perform a thorough examination of all the facts". Yes, well it wasn't intended to be a reference to my Arbcom case, more an illustration of something he claimed and then, in my opinion - and that of others - didn't honour. Still, as I have also mentioned, Parabolist, he may have some qualities that appeal to voters, but the choice of candidates is not great. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 11:28, 25 November 2020 (UTC)