Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Dmcdevit: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→[[Anarchism]] page: I'm afraid I souldn't really answer that |
"Problem users" and "productive editors" |
||
Line 119:
How would you resolve the [[situationist|situation]] on the [[anarchism]] page?[[User:Harrypotter|Harrypotter]] 18:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
:Could you be more specific? I presume you are asking what I would do in an Anarchism arbitration case. This is hard for me to answer, not the least of which because I have had no statements made or evidence presented. Also, considering that one of the parties there is already before ArbCom, I think it would be inappropriate for me to comment right now. If, however, you would like to get a feel for how I would decide particular cases, I can tell you that I've been involved in, or have significant knowledge of, [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 2|Instantnood 2]], [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Lightbringer|Lightbringer]], [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gibraltarian|Gibraltarian]], [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freestylefrappe|Freestylefrappe]], and [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Benjamin Gatti|Benjamin Gatti]] (and I will of course be recusing myself if any of the last three are still open at the beginning of the term). For instance, if I remember correctly, four of the five findings of fact in the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Benjamin Gatti/Proposed decision|proposed decision]] page in the Benjamin Gatti case were proposed by me on the workshop. I encourage you to take a look at these case and ask me about them if you care to. [[User:Dmcdevit|Dmcdevit]]·[[User talk:Dmcdevit|t]] 19:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
== "Problem users" and "productive editors" ==
(I decided to ask this question based on something I wrote on [[Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_January_2006/Vote/Dmcdevit#.22problem_users.22_and_.22productive_editors.22|the talk page of your voting page]].)
Several voters have taken exception to your use of the terms "problem users" and "productive editors" in your opening statement. I suspect some people are interpreting your comments to mean something you did not mean to imply, so I wonder if you could clarify by answering the following questions. Thanks, – [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] <sup>([[User_talk:Quadell|talk]]) ([[Wikipedia:Bounty board|bounties]])</sup> 17:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
* Would it be appropriate, in your mind, for an arbcom member to publicly refer to a specific user as a "problem user"?
* Are you inclined to think of a user as a "problem user" because they appear before the arbcom?
* What proportion of Wikipedia editors do you think are "problem users", what proportion are "productive editors", and what proportion are in the gray area inbetween?
| |||