Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Jpgordon: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 74:
Could you explain your rationale behind supporting [[User:deeceevoice]], a user who has broken wikipedia policies on numerous occassions? Many of her violations are documented at her RfC[Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Deeceevoice] and RfAr[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Deeceevoice], and include use of the term "crakkka". Some of her language is targeted towards vandals, but much of is directed towards editors in good standing. Is it your belief that some editors should be permitted to ignore wikipedia policies?
*See [[Wikipedia talk:Civility#User talk:]] for my feelings on this. --[[User:Jpgordon|jpgordon]][[User talk:Jpgordon|∇∆∇∆]] 23:23, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
:: Thanks for the response. Three follow-up questions, these will be my last.
:: 1) The link your provide covers how to deal with editors coming to a another user talk page behaving with a lack of civility, but what rationale do you give for supporting deeceevoice beyond those instances, such as on article talk pages?
:: 2) Your example of telling off a nazi antagonist sounds reasonable on the surface of things. It would be the sort of violation that I would hope an arbitrator would not punish greivously. However, as you know, deeceevoice has attacked editors asking her politely to behave with civility. In light of current wikipedia policies and under your proposed modifications, do you believe this behavior is acceptable?
:: 3) Finally, do you believe that behavior that violates current policies (such as civility violations on your own talk page) should be overlooked, as long as you personally disagree with those policies, as either an editor or as an arbitrator?
-[[User:Justforasecond|Justforasecond]] 00:51, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
===Attacks on users filing RfArs===
| |||