My guide for the 2010 Arbitration Committee (ArbCom) Elections is now complete, I may make small adjustments based on further research. I have argued at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2010 against guides that are linked from the election template and hosted on an individual's userpage. However, unsurprisingly guide publishers came out quickly to support the status quo so I felt I needed to produce a guide to even out the influence of the established insiders and give the opinions of a less well established editor but still one with some experience. So here it is.
Notes: These guides represent only the views of their authors. All guides are welcome for inclusion.
Weak weak weak
A dizzyingly weak field of candidates to date. Come on step up to the plate. I'd do it myself if I thought I stood a chance (which I do not).
Okay slightly stronger now the nominations are finished but with 11 places to fill there are very clearly not anywhere near 11 strong candidates. I plead with all users to only vote for the cream of the crop. DO NOT BE TEMPTED TO VOTE FOR MEDIOCRITY OR LESS. Arbcom is not a place for people keeping seats warm. It is exactly those seat-warmers who have done the worst damage in the past.
The low down
Disclaimer. These are my thoughts and my thoughts alone. You may wish to read them and may agree or disagree as the mood takes you.
I have tried to assess candidates on their past actions and have given little or no weight to the election questions.
We badly need an arb with the knowledge, ability and common sense of this user. I'm serious don't let first appearances fool you.
The pressure has got to Balloonman, with all of the negativity he has withdrawn. I am not going to revise my rating though because I think we should vote for what we want wikipedia to be. A message needs to be sent out here. These arbcom elections currently suggest a dying wikipedia to me.
Brer Fox (Fuchs in German) tackles a difficult job
I am worried about this candidate and have seen some silly moves when they get into complex situations. I don't think they have the right experience for the job. A vandal fighter and FA reviewer not an arb.
Far too wet behind the ears but shaping up very well. Slight revision of my opinion, minor hysterics on the election talkpages have shown me that this candidate is probably not suitable for the position at present. Down from 3 star rating to 2 star rating.
Jesus H Christ! If we are going to be forced to accept second or even third best in these elections why not give this one another spin? There are much worse candidates, let's scrape the barrel.
A look at this candidate's contributions suggests to me that they are a follower not a leader. We don't really need another arb voting like a sheep because it makes a mockery of having that many arbs.
I must thank NuclearWarfare, a fellow guide writer for bringing my attention to a ridiculous arbcase drafted by John Vandenberg. We do not need arbs who increase drama with crazy findings, added to his earlier resignation John appears to be a drama arb supreme with added limitations on his time. Thanks for your willingness to serve but no thank you DEMOTED.
I am completely 100% on the fence. Candidate has recused as an arb several times but still comes in and comments in a most annoying and disruptive way. Why can't they just sit it out. What is going on?
There were reasonable concerns about this user becoming a crat but I voted support then because I thought we needed some fresh crats and the experience running bots was a plus. My concerns about this user have not gone away, I see them as being too judgemental in an inflexible way. They have several traits that suggest they would be a very poor arb. More damage can be done to the ethos of the pedia as an arb than as a crat, even though they are only one member of a team.
Nothing personal, I supported his RfA, but PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't give him the chance to add any more bling to his userpage. Think of all the suffering in central and western Africa. Sadly withdrawn. First to bite the dust after close of noms. Actually impressed by his withdrawal but I think he has summed it up wrongly, there are not enough credible candidates running and he was at least credible even if I would not vote for him.
Apart from an odd exception these are my caricatures of the candidates. I am trying to make a political statement on the candidate in a light hearted way. For example I know NYB looks nothing like Brad Pitt.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
