Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2004/Candidate statements: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:19, 23 November 2004

Revision as of 21:47, 23 November 2004

Line 47:

==[[User:Cecropia|Cecropia]]==

It was kindly suggested to me that I would be a suitable candidate for a position on the Arbitration Committee.

I have long life experience in arbitration and conflict resolution: in the U.S. military; as an instructor; educator; manager; union steward; father of teen-aged girls.

My belief in regard toregarding banning any ''productive'' Wikipedian is that you don't. In my opinion a ban is an insult—if the user is ''so'' incorrigible that every reasonable attempt at resolution has failed and the editor’s rights should be suspended, then we should consider doing it permanently. I am especially mindful that one of our most long-term and productive editors seemed headed for a ban, due to conflict with many others, including myself. But I and others protested the move toward forcing him out; the editor was engaged productively, moderated his behavior and Wikipedia is lucky to still have him.

Disputes are for unbiased resolution; sanctions a last resort. In a perfect world, both sides will agree the arbitration was fair and the situation resolved. Possible? It’s what we must strive for.