Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Filiocht: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
unwithdrawing |
|||
Line 91:
First question: No, I wouldn't have a problem. Second question: if I felt I wasn't doing a good job or if I felt that the ArbCom was working against the idea of an encyclopaedia and I could not change that form the inside. Sorry for the delay, on a short (busman's) holiday. [[User:Filiocht|Filiocht]] | [[User talk:Filiocht|The kettle's on]] 07:15, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
==Questions from [[User:-Ril-]]==
:''The following questions are for each candidate, and do not specifically target you''
''Do you hold any strong political or religious opinions (e.g. concerning George Bush, Islam, or on which end you should break a boiled egg)? If so, would you recuse yourself from cases centred on these?''
''How willing are you to contest the decisions of other arbitrators rather than just "go with the flow"?''
''Do you view all requests to re-address cases, particularly requests made by those most penalised, as being automatically without merit?''
''In the case against Yuber, it was decided by the arbitration committee that it is the duty of arbitrators to investigate, and rule on the behaviour of not only one party involved, but all of them. Do you support this decision? [if current arbitrator] Does your visible behaviour on recent cases reflect this decision?''
--Victim of signature fascism 16:45, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
| |||