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

Revision as of 06:15, 7 January 2006

Revision as of 06:16, 7 January 2006

Line 89:

3. Will you please pledge to support expanding the number of seats on the Arbitration Committee? If not, how would you propose alleviating the present arbitration backlog?

:Yes, I think expanding the number of seats is not only important for efficiency but for fairness. The more arbitrators there are, the more views there will be on an issue, and the greater the chances for a case being evaluated fairly. I support expanding the number of seats to 15. I think if there are more than that, the ArbCom does become a bit too large. I was initially thinking of 11 arbitrators, so this may be a good interim step. One idea I fully support (and I congratulate who came up with it) is the Proposal 4 at [[[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Proposed modifications to rules]], which proposes that a group of 24 arbitrators be formed, of which only 9 deal with any given case. [[Image:European flag.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] '''[[User:Ronline|Ronline]]''' [[User talk:Ronline|✉]] 00:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

4. Have you voted over at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Proposed modifications to rules]]? If not, why not? If so, please summarize your votes.