Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
BlankVerse (talk | contribs) |
→Candidate Questions: oh filiocht :) |
||
Line 74:
I suppose I have a view of this from another angle. I considered not answering this question for a different reason. Many of the electorate are likely to view me as a bit old and boring and probably not all that good at the technical stuff. But I decided in the end that I would answer it, because being a bit old and boring and probably not all that good at the technical stuff is part of what I am and influences the way I operate and interact. I think, though I may be wrong, that if I was young and energetic and good at the technical stuff, as many of the other candidates clearly are, I'd make that plain, too. I do agree most strongly that it is wrong to discriminate on the grounds of age here. But I would reserve the right to be put off a candidate with a track record of immature behaviour, be they 50 or 15. [[User:Filiocht|Filiocht]] | [[User talk:Filiocht|The kettle's on]] 14:08, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
:Oh my. I'm young and boring and not good at the technical stuff. Is that worse? [[User:Dmcdevit|Dmcdevit]]·[[User talk:Dmcdevit|t]] 08:12, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
I think it's a valid question. There's no way I'd vote for a minor to be an arbitrator. [[User:Grace Note|Grace Note]] 01:07, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
:To ask the obvious - why? [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 01:25, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
| |||