Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2009/Candidate statements/Seddon: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 04:23, 14 November 2009

Latest revision as of 13:11, 15 December 2009

(14 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 1:

===[[User:Seddon|Seddon]]===

:{{{I, nor any other candidate standing this year, can state that we can single-handedly make sweeping changes to the way the Arbitration Committee runs,. but weWe should endeavourtry to push for changesthough.

:'''History Rundown''': For those that are interested in what experience I have on the project, I've been around since November 2007. Since then Iand have contributed 5500+ edits, written a [[WP:FA|FA]], a [[WP:GA|GA]], contributed four [[Wikipedia:Featured pictures|featured pictures]] and two [[Portal:Featured sounds|featured sounds]]. I have mediated several cases at [[WP:MEDCAB|MedCab]] and am on the [[WP:MEDCOM|Mediation Committee]]. Iand have been an arbitration clerk since July 2009. Off wiki I am also on the board of directors for Wikimedia UK and am part of the [[WP:OTRS|volunteer response team]]. In terms of how these responsibilities would affect my ability as a arbitrator, I would no longer serve as a mediator for the mediation committee or an arbitration clerk, as is standard for Arbitrators with backgrounds in these areas.

:'''Arbitration Oversight''': There have been many times when the Arbitration Committee has overstepped its remit, or have been slow to react to a serious issue, have acted without sufficient due care and attention or just have been so caught up in the huge reams of evidence that even looking at aan page putsarticle result in an youeditor at risk of a topicban. As the project matures and [[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimmy]]'s role becomes more diminished and ceremonial , the oversight role he was supposed to hold, should/needs to be filled. This needs to be through the creation of an arbitration oversight body; small in size that it is efficient; large enough to be effective; and most importantly made up of non-arbitrator community members. By working with the community, the committee can solve many of the oversight concerns many members of the community have.

:'''Communication''': Too often the committee remains unresponsive, silent to emails and leaves problems and issues fade away into the deep, dark and dreary depths of thier archives.}}} Simply put, the committee needs to be less of an inapproachable mass and more of an interactive group of real people.

:Many people will probably raise the issue of the somewhat low level of activity I have show ever since I joined the project. All I can say is that when I commit myself to a task, I ensure it gets done. Whether it be mediation, clerking or even my chapter work, I see the job through to the end.

:And as my closing comment, for those who are currently banned or blocked and refuse or do not wish to have [[WP:TEA|a nice cup of tea and a sit down]], I offer my own modified version of the [[WP:OFFER|standard offer]] that includes "[[Open_source_beer|free beer (forever)]]".

*{{admincheck|Seddon}}

{{ACE candidate|Seddon}}

*[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2009/Candidate statements/Seddon/Questions for the candidate|Questions for the candidate]]

*[[Category:Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections DecemberCandidates 2009/Vote/Seddon|Discuss the candidate]]

{{ #ifexpr: {{CURRENTTIMESTAMP}}>20091201000000 | *'''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2009/Vote/Seddon|Support or Oppose this candidate]]''' | *Voting opens at 00:00 UTC on 1 December 2009. }}