Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
WOSlinkerBot (talk | contribs) m fix html tag issues and reduce lint errors |
m Fixing Lint errors from Wikipedia:Linter/Signature submissions (Task 31) Tags: Fixed lint errors paws [2.2] |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 18:
I think it's about time, as there are only two months left until the election. — [[User:Ilyanep|<span style="color:gray;">Ilγαηερ</span>]] [[User talk:Ilyanep|<span style="color: #333333;">(Tαlκ)</span>]] 03:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/
:The Signpost can do a writeup on the statements whenever they wish, but that doesn't affect the statements themselves being released. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 14:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Line 51:
::::Agreed — [[User:Ilyanep|<span style="color:gray;">Ilγαηερ</span>]] [[User talk:Ilyanep|<span style="color: #333333;">(Tαlκ)</span>]] 23:21, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
:::::Same here. Personally, I didn't even think about my statement going over 250 words, but I feel that a strict limit is bad. As long as we don't get 5,000 word manifestos, I think we're fine.
:::::I'm with that, so long as we don't see "Username's Extended War and Peace Reponse and Criticism on the Role of the Arbitration Committee and why I should be an Arbiter" essay (to think that's just the title!) I don't think anyone will really mind reading a tad more to make the RIGHT choice (if that exists, as they all seem to be great choices). '''[[User:Sasquatch|<font color=#89CF19>Sasquatch</font>]]'''<span style="background-color:#C1FF5F">[[User_talk:Sasquatch|t]]|[[Special:Contributions/Sasquatch|c]]</span> 06:15, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Line 71:
:OK, that's fine with me. I just ask that people respect a candidate's right not to answer some questions, if the candidate feels uncomfortable answering it, and ask that people not hold that against them. For example, if I asked every candidate ''Where do you live? What is your phone number, your employer (if you have one), and your social security number?'', all the candidates would clearly refuse to answer. I just don't think that someone refusing to answer any type of question that is not directly pertinent to the ArbCom should be held against him/her. Thanks! [[User:Flcelloguy|Flcelloguy]] |<small> [[User talk:Flcelloguy|A <font color = brown> note? </font color>]]| [[User:Flcelloguy/Desk|Desk]] </small>| [[Wikipedia:Signpost|W]]<sub>[[Wikipedia:Signpost|S]] </sub> 23:49, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
::::Here's one reason I prefer not to disclose my age: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAlkivar&diff=10055656&oldid=10055192]. [[User:Ingoolemo|<
:::::I've taken the liberty and moved your comment to the bottom, Ingoolemo. That's exactly my point — I've seen multiple times where people have looked down on someone or believed that they were superior based on age. I've seen people say that because someone was younger then him, that his version had to be right. I don't think age should be a factor; judge the candidates by their actions, not their age. In addition, with the candidates giving their ages, some people might lose respect for the ArbCom — the same people who scorned those younger then them would scorn people younger then them judging them. I urge that people not take a candidate's age, occupation, or classes into account here. Thanks. [[User:Flcelloguy|Flcelloguy]] |<small> [[User talk:Flcelloguy|A <font color = brown> note? </font color>]]| [[User:Flcelloguy/Desk|Desk]] </small>| [[Wikipedia:Signpost|W]]<sub>[[Wikipedia:Signpost|S]] </sub> 13:51, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
| |||