Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight/2022 CUOS appointments/CU: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Comments (JJMC89): cmt |
Rschen7754 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 87:
*:::I'm a little surprised by this. Resigning your bits doesn't make you impartial. As a steward, for example, just because we hang up our bits at our homewiki, it doesn't make us impartial from the situation and magically we can operate in that territory. We have already formed opinions on members of the community and that will be reflective in the work that is done. The reason why we have to recuse from our homewiki is because of the relationships, not the bits. Further, the idea that self-recusal from the OC would somehow lose effectiveness or ability because one member has to step out is misguided. The operation of the OC is meant to extend the right of review to all wikis, not just enwiki. The number of cases that I saw affecting an enwiki functionary during my OC term vs. the rest of our case load was a fraction. Enwiki is not the be all, end all of wikis, there is still plenty of other work to be doing on the OC in the meantime while you sit out a homewiki case. -- [[User talk:AmandaNP|<span style="color:white;background-color:#8A2DB8"><b>Amanda</b> (she/her)</span>]] 12:00, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
*::::The part where this candidate said they will be avoiding acting '''here''' because of their own conflict with OC is my primary concern; that the candidate is volunteering to do a job that they then say they won't do. They said they would do it later, so I think they should volunteer again when they aren't conflicted. Like most things here, there are no deadlines. — [[User:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">xaosflux</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 12:25, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
*:::::My impression was similar to Amanda's, FWIW. --'''[[User:Rschen7754|Rs]][[User talk:Rschen7754|chen]][[Special:Contributions/Rschen7754|7754]]''' 04:09, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
*For what it's worth, my experience with JJMC89 in their Ombuds capacity has been overwhelmingly positive, and I believe that they would make a great addition to the English Wikipedia's CheckUser team. And in reading the above discussion...I am concerned that there seems to be an idea that the Ombuds Commission shouldn't include active functionaries. The reason the Ombuds Commission has capacity and accuracy issues, to a large extent, is ''because'' it has so few experienced functionaries. Recusal or mixed responsibilities is minimal and does not affect capacity to the extent described above, especially in view of the added experience and understanding of CU processes that can benefit both the OC's function and enwiki's CU-ing. I also want to note, as it isn't stated clearly above, that the concerns discussed seem exclusively to be on the idea of functionaries being on the OC, rather than any specific feedback on JJMC89. Best, [[User:Vermont|Vermont]] ([[User talk:Vermont|🐿️]]—[[Special:Contributions/Vermont|🏳️🌈]]) 04:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
----
| |||