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

Revision as of 17:18, 27 December 2005

Revision as of 21:12, 27 December 2005

Line 212:

:The funny thing is that I agree with you--people get upset and there is nothing wrong with that. As I've said, this whole Deeceevoice thing has ticked me off. Despite that, though, I have not personally insulted anyone during the affair (although I have made pointed comments about the overall affair but not to any individual editor). That said, I don't know if Sam would be a good arbitrator or not--and I guess it doesn't matter, since that is not my decision to make. I do want to publically state, though, that he is an excellent editor with a proven track record of working to improve Wikipedia. In the end, all of this must be considered during this decision process.--[[User:Alabamaboy|Alabamaboy]] 17:18, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Well that is very nice of you, thanks. If you want to know what I find objectionable about DC, have a look at her user page. I think she is violating [[WP:POINT]] if nothing else. As far as yourself, you havn't insulted me that I have noticed, but suggesting that DC's RfAr was similar to a lynching struck me as extremely hyperbolic and contentious. She certainly is not being singled out for her race, nor will she be mistreated, altho those are both crimes I feel she is guilty of (singling others out for their race and mistreating them). As far as if I would be a good arbiter, I think reviewing my edits at length is a better judge of that than ancient RfC's and the like. Personally I'd like it if we were all alot more civil, myself included. This is to be an intellectually rigourous endeavor, is it not? [[User:Sam Spade|Sam Spade]] 21:12, 27 December 2005 (UTC)