Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Ajwebb

I am a relatively new user to Wikipedia, but I enjoy the community and feel that I would be a strong addition to the Arbitration Committee. Before registering, I browsed Wikipedia with an interest on learning the entire process of editing, contributing, submitting AfD, and other procedures. Wikipedia is focused on allowing people to receive the gift of free information and to make sure that all users follow proper procedures and enjoy contributing information. I would follow all procedures accurately, professionally, and do my best to resolve the situation and work closely with other members of the Arbitration Committee. Even though I am a new member to Wikipedia, I promise to fulfill all requirements and be very active with the Committee. I love Wikipedia and contributing, and I’m sure it will be a lasting process. I would be a successful mediator and vote decisively and accurately. I do not hold personal opinions of members, as everyone deserves a fair resolution process. Feel free to ask any questions or concerns that you might have. I would be happy to answer them. Thank you for your time. Ajwebb 20:18, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Questions from -Ril-

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?

I hold political opinions. However, I do not hold strong religious opinions. I was raised as a Christian, but I do not hold any opinions regarding religion. If a case was centered on politics, I would not "choose sides" because of a political opinion that I might have. All users deserve fairness, and it is my duty to make sure that their case is looked at fairly, no matter what my political opinions are. Ajwebb

How willing are you to contest the decisions of other arbitrators rather than just "go with the flow"?

I do not wish to cause arguments or disputes with other arbitrators. However, if I feel that a decision is not valid I will contest it so that the parties involved are treated fairly. From this point, I hope that the other arbitrator and I are able to reach a fair decision. Ajwebb

Do you view all requests to re-address cases, particularly requests made by those most penalised, as being automatically without merit?

No. I do not believe that this is what Wikipedia or the Arbitration Committee stands for. All users of Wikipedia deserve fairness, and that is what I intend to uphold. Every request will deserve the same attention and respect as another. Ajwebb

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?

Yes. I believe that we need to look at all parties involved so that we maintain fairness. We cannot accurately make a decision by looking at one party, because other parties may have been involved or caused a dispute themselves. Ajwebb

--Victim of signature fascism 17:35, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another question

What are your views of the proposed Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Code of Conduct and User Bill of Rights?

I would have to agree on the Code of Conduct as well as the Bill of Rights. Arbitrators are not "above the law" and must strictly follow rules and guidelines so that all users are treaded with fairness in an orderly manner. Users should obey policies and conduct themselves in an orderly manner as well. This is to ensure that Wikipedia will sustain for future generations. Ajwebb

--HK 15:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality question and Censuring questions from -Ril-

(Being asked of all candidates)

Do you believe that regardless of Jimbo Wales' own views on the matter, the community should be able to strip arbitrators of their position under certain circumstances, and if so, what circumstances?

As a corollory:Do you believe, regardless of Jimbo Wales' view on the matter, that a large number of signatories (e.g. 150 requesting censure against 50 supporting the arbitrator) to an RFC against an arbitrator is enough that the arbitrator should be judged as having been rejected by the community in light of their actions, and consequently for them to be forcibly stripped of their post?

wikipedia has a policy of NPOV. Excepting straw men, have you ever introduced a substantial opinion or fact that contradicts your own political or religious viewpoint into an article on a topic of which you have strong opinions, and if you have, how frequently do you do so compared to your other substatial edits to articles?

--Victim of signature fascism | help remove biblecruft 02:01, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recusal, Code of Conduct, Expansion

I am asking these questions of all candidates:

1. Do you pledge to abide by the proposed recusal guidelines at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Code of Conduct#Recusal?

2. Are there any parts of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Code of Conduct that you do not agree with? If so, please describe in detail how you would improve them.

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?

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.

Thank you for your kind consideration of and answers to these questions. —James S. 06:17, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]