Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Luigi30
I'm the unknown 3rd party. Vote for me if you're disillusioned.
I think that Arbcom has become too slow and bloated in the last year. Cases are piling up and waiting months for a final verdict. People are being driven away by the inefficiency. If I am voted to Arbcom, I'd try to speed things along. I hate trolls, and like long walks on the beach. I am against banning except in extreme circumstances or for repeat offenders. I think that a first offense should not be banned for, only for problem users or extreme trolls. Luigi30 (Ταλκ) 03:16, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Questions and comments
Some questions being asked of all the candidates by jguk
Q: How old are you and what do you do? (If student, please state what subjects you are studying.)
A: 15, sophomore in high school.
Q: How many hours a month do you think you will need to be a good Arbitrator and are you really willing to put in the time?
A: To be a good arbitrator, you need to spend a lot of time arbitrating. However long it takes to make sure you've got all the facts, all the evidence, and all the truths sorted from the lies is how many hours one needs to do it effectively. And yes, I will take the time.
Q: If chosen, you will need to arbitrate on disputes arising from the creation or revision of articles. Experience of creating and revising articles yourself, particularly where it has involved collaboration, is very valuable in understanding the mindset of disputants who come to arbitration. With reference to your own edits in the main article namespace, please demonstrate why you think you have the right experience to be a good arbitrator.
A: I've got a knack for sorting out disputes, keeping everyone happy, spotting details buried under filler, etc. Experience in doing all of the above is important for arbitration. You have to keep both sides happy while doing what has to be done.
Q: Please list out what other Wikipedia usernames you have edited under.
A: None.
Request from Dragons flight
Arbcom is overworked and no fun. Please review these discussions: [1][2] [3] Come up with a short list of suggestions for ways you would endorse for improving the arbitration process. Bonus points for actually managing to create new policy. Dragons flight 07:59, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Form question by Snowspinner
Being an arbitrator requires a finely tuned bullshit detector. What in your life has prepared you to detect bullshit with ease? Phil Sandifer 21:22, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Form Question from karmafist
Many policies contradict and overlap with each other, and then WP:IAR makes things even more complicated while making them paradoxically more flexible. When two or more policies apply and conflict, what do you do? karmafist 18:44, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Questions from User:-Ril-
- The following questions are for each candidate, and do not specifically target you
Do you hold any strong political or religious opinions (e.g. concerning George Bush, Islam, or on which end you should break a boiled egg)? If so, would you recuse yourself from cases centred on these?
How willing are you to contest the decisions of other arbitrators rather than just "go with the flow"?
Do you view all requests to re-address cases, particularly requests made by those most penalised, as being automatically without merit?
In the case against Yuber, it was decided by the arbitration committee that it is the duty of arbitrators to investigate, and rule on the behaviour of not only one party involved, but all of them. Do you support this decision? [if current arbitrator] Does your visible behaviour on recent cases reflect this decision?
--Victim of signature fascism 16:48, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Question from Marsden
As you probably are already aware, your age may be an issue to a lot of people. I am one of those people.
My particular concern is that, at your age, you are unlikely to have a broad grounding in the general background knowledge of (what passes for?) our culture. This potentially opens the door for others, possibly including fellow arbitrators, to foist their particular agendas upon you.
In light of my concerns about this, which I suspect others may share, how would you deal with conflicts that might be brought before you as an arbitrator on subjects about which you do not have good background knowledge? How would you keep yourself from just relying on the information supplied by another arbitrator or another person, information that might be biased?