Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Silverback: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:52, 3 December 2005

Revision as of 04:08, 4 December 2005

Line 34:

''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?''

:I have no religion except perhaps a fondness for knowledge and truth, but I consider humans a religious species, and religious belief a natural and perhaps more normal state for members of that species. I am inclined towards critical thinking and to take contrary positions if I don't think the other side is make sense or is overstating their case, so I have found myself defending Bush quite a bit even though I think he is a mass murderer. I am opposed to those who presume to rule and abuse other people since that seems presumptuous and unfriendly so I run afowl of those who support communists and dictators quite a bit, since I don't find cultural differences and claims of past victimization or past colonization as legitimate excuses for such behavior. In other words, I think the world is better and safer place if individuals are held responsible for their behavior, and that past wrongs or noble ends cannot justify immoral means. Frankly, I think a fair and impartial process is so important, I would not want to see anyone get an unfair decision, whatever my past history with them might be. So I think in general, I should not recuse, although I also think the appearance of fair is important too, I would recuse if I thought that would make the process appear fairer. --[[User:Silverback|Silverback]] 04:08, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

''How willing are you to contest the decisions of other arbitrators rather than just "go with the flow"?''

:Extremely willing, frankly, I intend to decide cases on the merits, not based on how other arbs are voting. They won't be able to expect me to just tag along. Now if they assemble good arguments based on the evidence, I would give those consideration of course.--[[User:Silverback|Silverback]] 04:08, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

''Do you view all requests to re-address cases, particularly requests made by those most penalised, as being automatically without merit?''

:Hell no.--[[User:Silverback|Silverback]] 04:08, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

''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?''

:I am not familiar with that case, but considering the behavior of all the parties to a dispute has been a long standing practice of the committee, and I can see the merit in that policy, although I have become concerned that it could be abused by a clique, who could make sure that uninvolved parties bring the complaint, so that their fellow members who were directly involved in the dispute, would not face review and possible sanctions, unless a separate action were brought explicitly against them. I am concerned about the overall fairness of the process.--[[User:Silverback|Silverback]] 04:08, 4 December 2005 (UTC)