Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Ronline: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 19:
#What are your views on the proposed policy [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Code of Conduct]]? Whether you think it should be a formal policy or not, do you believe you would generally act in accordance with it? What aspects of it do you think should not be there, or to put it another way, are there any proposals there which you can think of good reasons to ignore on a regular basis? (Please date any replies to this question as the proposal may well change over time.)
::Yes, I have read the policy and I agree with it, particularly the structures that seek to ensure user rights in arbitration. For me, this is very important, because I think the Arbitration Committee has to act in the utmost fairness and transparency to be considered (otherwise, as I said before, alienation and conflict sets in, and that's most detrimental for any society or community). It is deeply disappoint to read of cases where arbitrators are friends or acquiantances of one side involved in arbitration and therefore pass unfair judgements. As to the specificity of the code - some users have raised doubts over its length, saying that it should be more general. I believe, however, that the Arbitration Committee should be treated seriously and should act professionally. Sure, Wikipedia isn't a court or anything, but there should be a structure - the ArbCom, in this case - that deals with matters very seriously and impartially. [[Image:European flag.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] '''[[User:Ronline|Ronline]]''' [[User talk:Ronline|✉]] 07:38, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
[[User:PurplePlatypus|PurplePlatypus]] 07:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
| |||