|
[[User:Jdforrester|James F.]] [[User_talk:Jdforrester|(talk)]] 22:07, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
==[[User:Jongarrettuk|jguk]]==
'''SEE ALSO: [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2004/Candidate statements/jguk|How jguk would decide a case: A case study]]'''
My views on banning, handling disputes and my qualifications follow. Please direct any questions you may have to [[User talk:Jongarrettuk|my talk page]].
===Banning===
Banning is contrary to the concept of having a wiki, but it is occasionally a necessary evil to protect users who read or edit in good faith from those who seek to disrupt. Where employed it should be as short as possible, and we should encourage those we ban to reform and become good Wikipedians.
===How I would handle disputes===
Disputes should be handled politely, quickly and in everyday English: this is a disciplinary process, not a court of law.
I will:
*ensure that I always vote quickly (within a week) unless I had previously excused myself
*restrict my considerations to the evidence brought before me
*only accept evidence and discuss cases in the publicly available forum of the Arbcom area of the Wikipedia namespace
*support the case or defence put forward by an unpopular editor if, in the evidence before me, that editor is in the right.
I will not:
*pre-judge (so I will not accept a case and simultaneously say that a user is troublesome).
===Qualifications===
I am a 30 year old chartered accountant from [[London]], [[England]]. I am used to analysing complex positions calmly and without prejudice. I have only been at Wikipedia a short time and am not a sysop, so would offer a balance to others on the committee.
==[[User:Johnleemk|Johnleemk]]==
| 