Misplaced Pages

OK, so it seems to me that Ks0stm may not be the biggest vote magnet in this election, which means I should probably elaborate on why I'm so enthusiastic about his candidacy. For starters, just read his answers to the questions! Go on, take your pick — not one single keystroke was wasted on anything other than honest, intelligent discourse. If that alone does not convince you of Ks0stm's suitability for the role, check out his work as an administrator. Go through his Misplaced Pages space history and find something he didn't handle well, because I'm having a hard time doing so. The only minor issue I can perceive is the fact that he seems to avoid using admin discretion in controversial areas (eg. contentious AfDs), but this also demonstrates that he is not interested in partaking in pointless drama. Although a Misplaced Pages comprised solely of Ks0stm's would probably not function very effectively, we do need people like him. And although he's not the most prolific content contributor, he does have solid experience in the area, which I find preferable for ArbCom candidates.

This is clearly someone with an open mind and an eagerness to learn and grow, a trait I strive for in myself and value immensely in others. He is not given to delusions of grandeur, nor ensnared by his own insecurities — Ks0stm knows his limits, will speak his mind and be bold, all the while without being reckless. He is someone who genuinely cares about other people no matter who they are or what they believe. In short, I am extremely confident that electing Ks0stm to the Arbitration Committee would make Misplaced Pages as a whole a better place.

Being serious, I like NuclearWarfare and consider him one of our better editors and administrators. He's got plenty of solid content work under his belt, and he knows his way around the bureaucracy. That being said, I'm not 100% behind him in his bid for ArbCom. Aside from my own observations, NuclearWarfare himself openly admits that he is "by no means the most eloquent of people." Good communication skills are the most important trait an arbitrator needs to possess; that isn't to say NuclearWarfare is lacking in social nuances, but there are times when I find he can be a bit terse. Getting straight to the point is one thing; being vapid in tone is another. For me, the fact that he does not intend to answer every single question is somewhat concerning, as I believe arbitrators should be open to discussing any issues brought to them (besides private matters, of couse) even if they go a bit beyond their mandate. I agree with most of his platform and I've always found him to be sensible, but something just doesn't sit well with me. I suspect NuclearWarfare will be elected by a pretty broad margin and I'm sure he'll do fine as an arbitrator, so I don't feel comfortable opposing him either.

I hope for the best and wish him good luck in this election. =)

• "ArbCom is in an uncomfortable situation where arbitration is what it should do by virtue of its name, but a Supreme Court is what it really is" — What does that even mean? If he's referring to ArbCom's tendency to mete out strict sanctions as a punitive measure rather than a preventative one, then I would agree. But is he referring to its structure, or the procedure in which cases are handled? I can't tell, and it bodes ill for me when I have a hard time understanding what an ArbCom candidate is saying.

• "I am fully aware that no one has ever been elected into this body who did not have prior administrator status" — Technically he's right, in that no one has ever been elected to ArbCom without having been made an administrator beforehand, but there was a non-admin who got appointed to the committee by Jimbo Wales himself when it was originally established in 2004; although Gutza subsequently became an administrator in 2008, he had no special permissions at the time of his tenure as an arbitrator. It may seem like a trivial point to make, but I need to feel confident that a candidate would check their facts thoroughly as an arbitrator before I can support them.

• On an unrelated note, I don't think the position of Checkuser can be adequately filled by someone who is not already an administrator. For instance, how would a Checkuser be able to find the username of someone who created a subsequently deleted page if they are unable to view deleted pages to begin with? Yes, another administrator could provide them the username in question, but that would make things much more tedious than if the Checkuser were able to find it themselves. I also have issues with granting a non-admin oversight permissions. Unless someone has already proven themselves capable of handling a moderate degree of access to private information responsibly — as is inherently the case for any administrator — I would not feel comfortable granting them the ability to handle a very high degree of access to private information.

I'm sorry, but as intelligent as I think Pgallert probably is in real life (being a university professor and all), I have to oppose his candidacy.

There are other reasons why I feel this user is a poor fit for ArbCom. YOLO Swag formerly edited as Certified.Gangsta, then as NWA.Rep (actually, now that I think of it, I opposed him in 2011 as well), yet he makes no mention of this anywhere in his nomination statement. His talk page has no archives and doesn't show any posts aside from a warning posted by Jehochman to avoid edit warring, something for which he has gotten into trouble many times in the past. Not content with what I saw, I decided to check his talk page history to research some of the past discussions that took place there, but I didn't even bother reading past this colourful collection of edit summaries.

No, this user is definitely not mature enough for the role. I'm not even sure why he thinks running at all is a good idea, and I can only conclude that this candidacy was not made in good-faith. (Note: redacted per this)

• v
• t
• e

• 2012 Arbitration Committee Elections
• Voter log
• Contact the coordinators
• Discuss the elections

Candidates

Candidate guide

Candidate statements

Questions for the candidates

Discuss the candidates