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

Revision as of 02:08, 10 January 2006

Revision as of 02:25, 10 January 2006

Line 13:

After looking at the current votes, I suppose many would like me to elaborate on my statement and direction, so here it is. Personally, I believe that punishment should be handed out on the basis that it would hopefully reform users, and second chance of change. Don't be surprised to see me in favour for shorter bans in place of alternative action (such as mentorship, probation, article bans, etc). A good example would be [[User:Mike Garcia|Mike Garcia]], reformed member currently on mentorship.

I believe an arbitrator should have three important aspects that they must uploaduphold, which are part of my principles - Integrity, civility and sense of shame :

#Arbitrators are in a way seen by the community as role models and should show examplary conduct and integrity, for that they are assigned to handle the dirtiest of cases. I'm personally surprised by the length of [[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Code_of_Conduct]], because I had previously believed that the community gives trust to the arbitrators not to go down to almost single scenario.