Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:02, 4 December 2008

Jayvdb

Hi. My name is John Vandenberg. I have provided a detailed history about myself on my userpage. I believe that arbitrators should be very open and honest about their formal education and experience in order that the community can make informed decisions about who to vote for, and so that people coming to the committee for arbitration can get a feel for the people that will be making the decisions.

I served as an Arbitration Clerk for much of the first half of 2008. I resigned due to a messy affair, which has since been settled amicably. This experience, and the termination of it, was an eye opener. I am aware of the responsibility, workload and difficulty involved.

My commitments:

1. I will not edit policy pages or influence policy. This is the responsibility of the community, and arbitrators should not write the policies that they will use in decisions.
2. I will oppose any remedy that is not substantially grounded in existing policy that was written by the community, or on resolutions passed by the Wikimedia Foundation.
3. I will be highly active and available, or I will step down and turn in my "access".

I will bring to the committee:

1. Broad technical skills to automate tasks that the committee regularly performs, and improve processes where possible.
2. Broad experience and exposure to the culture, policies and leaders of most of the WMF projects. There are very few arbs, ex-arbs, or other candidates who have measurable experience outside of English Misplaced Pages.
3. Broad language skills - I can only write in English, however I enjoy working with foreign languages and people who don't have a good grasp of English
4. Limited patience for long & drawn out cases. Quick and measured solutions that result in the least amount of pain and disruption are good. Perfect is the enemy of good.
5. Limited wiki-friendships with the elite in the power structure here on Misplaced Pages. It will be rare that I need to be recused.

Whilst on the committee, my mission for reform within the committee and arbitration process will be to:

1. Encourage participatory democracy.
2. Fire the slackers and the lurkers and people whose term is up.
3. Require that arbitration cases have a clear scope before they open.

See here for more detailed explanations of these three points.

• Jayvdb (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Questions for the candidate
• Discuss the candidate
• Support or Oppose this candidate

Voting in this election is now closed. Any votes cast after 00:00 15 December 2008 (UTC) will be reverted.

Support

1. Privatemusings (talk) 00:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
2. Strong support--Maxim_(talk) 00:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
3. Support I like the idea for Arbom reform.--Caspian blue 00:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
4. Cla68 (talk) 00:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
5. Black Kite 00:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
6. -- Avi (talk) 00:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
7. Support Durova 00:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
8. --Kanonkas :  Talk  00:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
9. Support Captain panda 00:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
10. Strongest possible support. --Alecmconroy (talk) 00:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
11. Strong support. Further comments available at my ACE2008 notes page. --Elonka 00:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
12. Dlabtot (talk) 00:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
13. Rationale. Giggy (talk) 00:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
14. Tom B (talk) 00:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
15. Support. Mathsci (talk) 00:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
16. Perfect for the job. ~the editorofthewiki ~ 00:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
17. - filelakeshoe 00:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
18. iridescent 00:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
19. - Pick of the bunch -- Mattinbgn\ 00:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
20. One of the best candidates for the job. krimpet✽ 01:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
21. PhilKnight (talk) 01:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
22. Support Sam 01:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
23. I have some disagreements with this candidate, but feel that I can trust his integrity, and that any "wrong" (in my view) decisions will be based on what he thinks is best for the project, and not on petty revenge or covering up for a friend. ElinorD (talk) 01:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
24. Steven Walling (talk) 01:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
25. Per: details MBisanz 01:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
26. Support Majorly 01:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
27. Kuru 01:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
28. Mr.Z-man 01:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
29. Avruch 01:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
30. Support - also, will you marry me? No, I'm just teasing. But still, swoon. :P Ottava Rima (talk) 01:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
31. kurykh 01:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
32. Pcap ping 01:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

    Heimstern Läufer (talk) (why, you ask?) 01:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

33. See reasoning. east718 01:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
34. --mikeu 01:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

    Support Sumoeagle179 (talk) 01:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

35. I had made a list of people who I would be find with (though not necessarily in top 7) on ArbCom and this candidate was one of those people. - NuclearWarfare _{My work} 01:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
36. iMatthew 01:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
37. Support - Aboutmovies (talk) 01:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
38. Graham87 02:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
39. EconomicsGuy (talk) 02:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
40. ~ Riana ⁂ 02:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
41. Support Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
42. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 02:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
43. L'Aquatique 02:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
44. Support J.delanoy_adds 02:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
45. Support. Cirt (talk) 02:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
46. The most qualified candidate in the whole election. Daniel (talk) 02:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
47. Support JodyB _talk 02:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
48. Support. rootology (C)(T) 02:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
49. β 03:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
50. Synergy 03:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
51. Gtstricky 03:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
52. Support Very solid candidate, will work for the good of the community and with the best of purposes and the highest of integrity, and has a mature outlook and a good understanding of community dynamics. I hope he makes it and that ArbCom will be the better for it. Orderinchaos 03:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
53. Support Thoughtful and fair. Exactly what we need on ArbCom. Tundrabuggy (talk) 03:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
54. Support--Toffile (talk) 03:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
55. More qualified than the soon to be former arbitrator that told him to stop clerking. GRBerry 04:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
56. I have absolute confidence in his judgement, and believe John would be a superb arbitrator. Master&Expert (Talk) 04:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
57. Support Kingturtle (talk) 05:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
58. Strong Support - user shows excellent judgement. PseudoOne (talk) 05:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
59. David Shankbone 05:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
60. Support -MBK₀₀₄ 05:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
61. Mike H. Fierce! 05:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
62. Strong support As near ideal a temperament for the job as we could hope. A great deal of integrity and, per ElinorD, an allegiance primarily to what's best for the project. --JayHenry (talk) 06:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
63. Carnildo (talk) 06:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
64. Support. — Athaenara ✉ 06:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
65. -- penubag  (talk) 06:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
66. MaxSem 07:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
67. Support. I think he would do a good job. ···日本穣 07:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

    Support, excellent editor who has shown great judgment, open minded and fair. Dreadstar † 07:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

68. Strong support لennavecia 08:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
69. –Moondyne 08:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
70. Weak support, temperament seems suited to arbcom and judgement generally appears worthy of confidence - I do have a few concerns but will keep these to myself for now. Brilliantine (talk) 08:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
71. —Dark 09:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
72. chaser - t 09:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
73. Strong support, exactly the kind of new blood we need, and I like the explicit promise not to make policy. Seraphimblade 09:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
74. Rebecca (talk) 09:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
75. Able candidate. PeterSymonds (talk) 09:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

    Strong Weak support - excellent platform, especially limited patience for long & drawn-out cases. More speed (with due caution) is exactly what ArbCom needs. // roux   editor review10:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC) Changing to weak support; opposing fellow candidates, while allowed, is distasteful. May change to oppose. // roux   editor review14:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

76. Stifle (talk) 10:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
77. — neuro 10:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
78. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 10:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
79. Horologium (talk) 11:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
80. Support. Suicidalhamster (talk) 11:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
81. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 12:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
82. Strongest Possible Support See my reasons in User:Secret/ArbCom. Note if there isn't a comment on the candidate there, I was on vacation and couldn't edit the past weekend, will leave one today. Secret 12:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
83. Support. Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
84. Support --CrohnieGal 14:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
85. Support. Jehochman 14:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
86. Not perfect, but John has sufficiently good judgment IMO. It is not my experience that "bias" on AA topics is at all substantial, and there's always recusal anyway. Moreschi (talk) 15:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
87. Support Colchicum (talk) 15:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

    Support ATren (talk) 15:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC) _{changed to oppose ATren (talk) 22:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)}

88. Crystal whacker (My 2008 ArbCom votes) 15:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
89. Strong support - On not answering questions: It is said if you want something done, give it to a busy person. I hear Jayvdb has been handling a LOT of the oversight-l work since being appointed. That might be more important than answering every question (yes, I wish he had answered mine first but hey...) On "power voting": I prefer someone who is willing to hold opinions and go on record about them to someone who won't say what they think. We need more plain speaking on ArbCom I think, so bully to Jayvdb for saying what he thinks, even if he's wrong where he disagrees with me! :). On the AA thing: There's actually nothing to this in my view, after you factor out ethnic POV pushers who don't like being called on things. Jayvdb said he'd recuse (in a case where I don't actually think he has to) See this post and the thread it's in for more. On contribs: Jayvdb is a large part of the reason that en:ws "doesn't suck". That shows he's not insular, and it shows he gets stuff done. WS is hugely important for a certain class of articles. In short: Jayvdb will bring us the change we need. why my vote? ++Lar: t/c 15:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
90. Sure. Tex (talk) 16:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
91. Support — Gavia immer (talk) 16:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
92. Support - concur with much of what Lar said above. Parsecboy (talk) 17:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
93. I do have some reservations, but I agree 200% with your platform - very clearly expressed and incisive - so I have to support. :) Please, please follow through if/when elected. MastCell  18:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
94. Support, strongly. Trustworthy and has some excellent ideas. Should be a good arbitrator. AGK 18:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
95. Superb candidate statement. Davewild (talk) 19:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
96. Support, my top candidate. Has my trust in his decision making ability. Unusual? Quite 19:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
97. Support --Herby 19:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
98. Support---Taprobanus (talk) 20:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
99. Not exactly a content contributor, but very involved with the maintenance of this project. —Ceran ♦ ♦ (speak) 22:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
100. Support JPG-GR (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
101. Support. Franamax (talk) 22:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
102. Tiptoety 22:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
103. Nousernamesleft (talk) 22:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
104. -Hit bull, win steak 22:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
105. Support...Modernist (talk) 23:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
106. GlassCobra 23:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
107. Support - strong experience. Warofdreams talk 23:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
108. Support -phobia don't be afraid to drop a line! 23:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
109. Support Aramgar (talk) 23:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
110. Support - good level of experience.--VS 00:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
111. Hurrah SHEFFIELDSTEEL 01:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
112. Support TimidGuy (talk) 02:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
113. Alexfusco 02:08, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
114. Ok, S. Jayvdb has impressed me with his attention to small detail and he seems like somebody who won't back off when he sees a right. Doesn't suffer fools. Ceoil (talk) 02:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
115. Support. Seems to have a good head on his shoulders. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 04:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
116. Support.--Kubigula (talk) 02:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
117. Support. Rschen7754 (T C) 03:12, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
118. macy 03:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
119. Support.Nrswanson (talk) 04:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
120. Hesperian 04:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
121. Support. SlimVirgin 04:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
122. Brilliant pick. ѕwirlвoy ₪ 05:08, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
123. Support - his statement shows a deep respect for the community in taking time to structure his thoughts and not simply soapbox. After all, this not an election for political office, but to an administrative office. I want competence, too. This guy reeks it. Thanks!--Cerejota (talk) 06:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
124. Support --Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
125. Support Ronnotel (talk) 11:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
126. fish&karate 13:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
127. —DerHexer (Talk) 13:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
128. Support. Kablammo (talk) 14:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
129. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
130. --Peter cohen (talk) 15:55, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
131. Support. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
132. Support Would be a fine arbitrator. I don't see how one can oppose on the grounds that he would be partial in an AA case when he has specifically said he would recuse himself. Pascal.Tesson (talk) 17:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
133. Non-cabalist, sensible yet unequivocal answers to questions, refreshing stance on WP:BAN, experience in the relevant areas, has the guts to evaluate his potential colleagues (ArbCom is no place for thin skins or groupthink). Yes, yes, yes. Skomorokh 18:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
134. Three thumbs up! Ecoleetage (talk) 18:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
135. Support. Ankimai (talk) 22:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
136. Support - Epousesquecido (talk) 22:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
137. Support  — Mike.lifeguard |  22:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
138. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
139. Support --maclean 00:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
140. Joe Nutter 00:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
141. IronDuke 00:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
142. Support Gnangarra 01:24, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
143. jpgordon 01:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
144. Support. Jonathunder (talk) 04:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
145. Icewedge (talk) 04:53, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
146. - auburnpilot talk 06:20, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
147. Kusma (talk) 07:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
148. Support Kauffner (talk) 14:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
149. Support. We need arbitrators who are willing to take tough but fair decisions. I see the Iranian-Azeri nationalist squad has turned out in force to oppose this nomination; this is in no way a disqualifying factor for John, and if anything it stands in his favour that he's willing to deal resolutely with disruptive nationalist editors. -- ChrisO (talk) 18:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
150. Strongest possible support. E104421 (talk) 19:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
151. Michael Snow (talk) 20:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
152. Support to bump the numbers up; the current stream of opposition smells of off-wiki canvassing by the Armenian block. Hope this activity is looked into by those managing the election. Sceptre 20:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
153. Not my favorite candidate, but supporting per Sceptre. ST47 (talk) 21:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
154. Support Purely for tactical reasons in a bid to keep other vote percentages less than yours (nothing personal to your good self). Pedro :  Chat  21:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

     Support tactical vote to balance out the clear canvessing. --Cameron Scott (talk) 00:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

155. --Sultec (talk) 00:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

     Support Acting in good faith, I used the account checker on the Elections page and it told me I was eligible to vote in this election. Apparently it malfunctioned, and probably not just for me, but for many whose votes have been rendered invalid. It seems fundamentally unfair to trick people into believing they are eligible to do something and then yank the rug out from under them when they do it. This is not an effective way to encourage more participation in Misplaced Pages. It seems to me that all persons who relied on the malfunctioning account checker who voted should have their votes count. Admittedly, my view is a bit academic, but that's where I'm coming from. It's a fundamental fairness issue, not a personal issue, although in this environment, every principle seems to get reduced to personalities pretty quickly. So on the advice of a person I respect, I will cast my votes, even if they will be summarily and unfairly invalidated, therby undermining the credibility and legitimacy of the entire election, at least in my benighted eyes. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 01:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

     Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 150 mainspace edits by November 1. ST47 (talk) 01:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

156. Support. John's contributions to Wiki Foundation projects extend way beyond Misplaced Pages, the time he has given to the projects argues for a man who is committed to investing voluntarily in time consuming and complex processes. Alastair Haines (talk) 01:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
157. Support --Cube lurker (talk) 01:30, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
158. Support. Was neutral, but switching in response to evidence of interest groups attempting a co-ordinated sabotage of your candidacy. Rockpocket 02:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
159. Support I've seen nothing but good work from this user on all the projects with which he is involved. Kafka Liz (talk) 02:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC) For the record, I should state that I am related to Aramgar (talk · contribs), but although we sometimes edit from the same computer, we maintain separate accounts and are happy to submit information to confirm that we are separate individuals, should the need arise.

     As a CU who was asked to investigate these users (some time ago) and found technical correlation, I am confirming my belief that these two accounts are likely to be different users despite that correlation. (which you'll find if you look at me and my wife, too...), and giving thanks for the forthright disclaimer. ++Lar: t/c 11:48, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

160. Support. -- Kim van der Linde 02:48, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
161. --PeaceNT (talk) 03:25, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
162. Support for his principled conduct in the omnibus case and for his general high amount of clue. Dr. eXtreme 03:37, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
163. I have reservations, but this seems to be in the overall best interests of the project. 6SJ7 (talk) 03:48, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
164. He seems to be a decent user and gives decent answers. Though I have not have personal interactions; I'm also supporting to counteract what I believe is unfair bloc opposition. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 04:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
165. Support - Peripitus (Talk) 05:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
166. Suppport' --AniMate 05:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
167. Support - The personal interactions I've had have all been positive. He has the good of the community at heart. Kylu (talk) 05:38, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
168. Support --Versageek 05:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
169. It comes to something when you're ranked seventh. Christ! Naerii, aka THE GROOVE 06:45, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
170. Support --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 06:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
171. Support, I see no damning issue with his voicing opinions on other candidates, this is not a competition to see who is classiest, but most qualified. Likewise, while Azeri editors seem to be somehow connected to him...everybody has a niche, and I haven't seen any specific allegations to make me question my judgment in his resolution and arbitration skills. Sherurcij 07:28, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
172. Support --Chapultepec (talk) 07:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
173. II | (t - c) 09:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC) Even tone, positive interactions, and seems less into politicking than most. "
174. Support --Apoc2400 (talk) 11:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
175. Strong Support - I was always planning to support John in this election - he and I have never interacted, but I've always admired a number of his abilities around the 'pedia. I then got thrown by the opposition below, which appeared to raise (on further inspection) some ideas that, as I described them, made me uneasy. It seems to me now, having looked at the AN thread, John's own explanation of these events, and allowing my gut instinct to play a part in my decision-making that he is still an excellent candidate. If the allegations below are true: I don't care in the context of this election, and trust John to recuse himself appropriately. If they are not true, then who am I to allow the well to be poisoned. Best of luck. Fritzpoll (talk) 13:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
176. Support -- billinghurst (talk) 13:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
177. Support dougweller (talk) 14:31, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
178. Support. As I explain on the talk page this community should resist the coordinated off-site attacks on this candidate. I urge all tactical opposition to drop their oppose votes because Jayvdb has received more than enough. Vote for Jayvdb on his own merits. Cool Hand Luke 15:31, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
179. Support. Man, you must be doing something right. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
180. Support. Objectives and integrity are one of his strongest points. Baku87 (talk) 17:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
181. Supportthough disagree that arbcom can avoid "policy" Mccready (talk) 17:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
182. Support high clue levels -- _{Escape Artist Swyer Contributions} 17:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
183. Supporrt Justforasecond (talk) 18:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages Arbitration Committee Elections 2008