Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2004/Candidate statements: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
sannse |
|||
Line 35:
As I said during the previous election, I think I'm qualified because I'm emminently aware of what goes on on the english wikipedia; that I have deep knowledge of the policies (I helped draft many of them); I've participated in the arbitration process both as participant ('prosector' - so to speak - in the case of now-banned user Platus Satire) and arbitor; and finally, because I would like to continue to serve the community in this capacity. [[User:Raul654|→Raul654]] 21:11, Nov 14, 2004 (UTC)
==sannse==
I joined Wikipedia in December 2002 and have been active regularly since then. I have been an admin since March 2003 and a member of the mediation committee since it was created.
I see banning as a necessary tool to manage behaviour on Wikipedia. I don't see it as a punishment, but rather as a practical means to stop behaviour that disrupts the project. For this reason, I support other options if they can be shown to have a better chance of producing the desired result. Clear communication and careful limits sometimes have a better effect than a simple ban.
In general, I think the current process is fair and well thought out. I would like to see it streamlined somewhat, and ways put in place to enable cases to be dealt with more quickly. I think real-time discussions on IRC could be a very useful tool as part of this - although, of course, decisions should still be clearly communicated to the community and not taken in haste.
If I were to join the arbitration committee that would mean leaving the mediation committee. In some ways that would be a shame, because believe strongly that mediation is important and worthwhile, but I also feel that I have something to offer to the arbitration end of dispute resolution. -- [[User:Sannse|sannse]] ([[user talk:Sannse/Arbitration election|election talk]]) 23:12, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
| |||