Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2004/Candidate statements

This page lists the candidates for the December 2004 elections to the Arbitration Committee. Candidates should be listed in alphabetical order.

All users interested in the position are invited to add brief candidate statements to this page. These should be no more than 250 words and outline your views on banning and how you feel the Arbitration Committee should handle disputes. Candidates who wish to make longer statements may create a page in their own user space for this purpose, which could also be used for candidates to respond to questions from the community.

172

Members of the Arbitration Committee should see the bigger picture and better distinguish between users mucking up Wikipedia with inane rubbish and users dedicated to writing a serious, quality encyclopedia. As an active user since December 2002 (see list of list of most active on all namespaces), administrator since May 2003 [1] (making me as of now the second most senior admin in this field of candidates behind only Sannse), and main author of a few featured articles, I can see this big picture; and my user history clearly demonstrates a commitment to making this into a viable encyclopedia and to fighting for scholarly standards on Wikipedia.

As of now, arbitration seems to focus too much on personality instead of the merit of the edits. This is what I want to change. As an arbitrator, I'd favor focusing on the accuracy and constructiveness of the edits in question-- as opposed to the personalities-- to the greatest extent possible within the framework of the established norms, rules and procedures of the committee.

Wikipedia is no longer the small community it once was, but rather an increasingly complex and cumbersome, occasionally haphazard organization of thousands of users, with some users finding themselves in many different niches; unfortunately, trolls seem to understand this better than some sitting members of the arbitration committee. Too often trolls gain considerable sympathy by playing "victim." I worry that the systems in place to resolve disputes, like the arbitration, are perhaps actually exacerbating them.

I welcome any questions on my talk page. 172 02:29, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Grunt

I'm one of the better known "friendly faces" on Wikipedia. As a generally easygoing person, and having dealt many antisocial Wikipedian as an RC patroller and a mediator. I find that I've built up a virtual immunity to Wikistress and developed the ability to converse with even the most sensitive of users. If there's one place in the 'pedia that needs that person, it is the Arbcom, where often the worst of the worst on Wikipedia end up as a last resort. With any luck, as an arbitrator I'll be able to make a difference in the way the 'pedia works and hopefully turn a few of the bad apples back into productive users.

In addition, I have an excellent working knowledge of the 'pedia and its policies, having had a voice in quite a few of them myself; a good grasp of policy is something that I think any arbitrator should have.

I personally think that the Arbcom's current methods work reasonably well; if there is a problem, it is that the process is too slow. I have previously discussed this with some other users, and there are some proposals in the works regarding this. Until then, I'm sure that the Arbcom could benefit with my (legendary?) speed of action.

Please direct any questions you might have of me in relation to the direction to this page. -- Grun t 🇪🇺 01:12, 2004 Nov 15 (UTC)

James F.

As one of the original members of the Arbitration Committee, helping to formulate and pursue the Arbitration Policy, I would like to think that my actions and decisions over the past year speak for themselves, but I will try to distil my thoughts about it:
Naturally, the duty of serving on the Committee is a great one, both to Jimbo for the responsibility delegated to us, and to the Community, in representing its beliefs. Over the two years that I have held an account on Wikipedia, I have become very much attached to the community, and this focuses my mind when considering whether we can discard people like so much chaff.
I strongly believe that the Committee's real purpose is to prevent further damage to the project by taking measures as we see fit, not to mete out some form of 'justice' as punishment of those deemed to have done wrong. Where I have considered banning people, it is not because I think that they ‘deserve’ it in some way, but more that I regretfully doubt that their continued presence is damaging to the project. Of course, 'damage' is in the eye of the beholder, and so I hope that my decisions have reflected well the overall opinion of our Community.
With this in mind, I would like to ask if you think me a suitable candidate to represent us all in this most vital task of protecting the project from ourselves in our attempts to enlighten the world.
Yours,
James F. (talk) 22:07, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Mirv

I've been editing since November 2003 and have been a sysop since May 2004, so I think I have a good understanding of how things work around here, and my username ought to be a familiar one. I watch the arbitration process closely and I have found it to be both fair and helpful—its only real fault is its slowness. I am running for the position because I believe that I can devote the time and energy necessary to speed up the process of dealing with disruptive users and POV pushers—and I believe that Wikipedia's ever-increasing importance and visibility means that greater speed is absolutely necessary.

Regarding sanctions and punishments, I think it is better to reform users than to expel them. I think POV pushers ought to be restricted from editing the topics in which they have shown inability or unwillingness to abide by the requirements of the neutral point of view. I believe disruptive and/or abusive editors ought to be placed under strict parole and only banned outright if that fails to moderate their troublesome behavior.

I believe abusive sysops ought to be treated with special rigor due to the special problems which their misbehavior may cause. Abuse, unchecked, tends to multiply; if sysops are not held to the highest standards, if they are perceived as an elite cabal, then I worry that that perception may become reality.

Essentially, I believe arbitration should enforce community norms on those who will not abide by them willingly.

Any questions should be directed to user talk:Mirv/Arbitration election. —No-One Jones ^(m) 22:45, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Neutrality

I joined Wikipedia in early May (if memory serves me correctly) and have been extremely active in the community since then both as an editor, policy-contributor, and admin. I watch every arbitration case that the ArbCom hears and have even brought a case before the Arbitrators, so I have that experience that allows me to relate to the people who request the Arbitrators' relief.

Reforming the procedures of the ArbCom is exceptionally important to me, and I want to make it more efficient, fair, and just for all concerned. In general, I think that the ArbCom has done an excellent job and has done well in being fair and just with many users, especially in the cases of RickK v. Guanaco, RK, Wik, Irismeister, and Rex. However, the main problem–the area desperately in need of change–is the efficiency of the committee. Specifically, this is what I'd like to do:

Establish specific prerequisites for bringing a case to the ArbCom. The ArbCom should be a court of last resort, and should not be used for advisory opinions or rulings on certain articles.
Establish specific procedures with presenting a case to the ArbCom. Subpages for requests and quick and speedy archiving will help in the regard. There should be a standardized format that will make requests be matter-of-fact and to the point, instead of long rambling rants. There should also be separte pages for evidence and counter-evidence.
Develop creative ways of dealing with offenders. Blanket bans tend to be ineffective and only used when reforming the user is too late. Instead, we should look toward creative solutions like a revert parole or ban on certain types of articles. I think this helped particularly in the case of Michael.
Ban repeat offenders. There will always be users that cannot or will not reform. For those, I advocate temporary injunctions and swift banning.

To close, I say this: Like Mirv, I believe arbitration "should enforce community norms on those who will not abide by them willingly." [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (Any questions?)]] 01:58, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Plato

I've been editing as Plato since March of 2004. I am not a sysop although I was briefly one for wiktionary. I do think we should try to get tough on trolls, especially ones who break the rules repeatedly and act like there is nothing wrong.

I feel need to really enfrource the three revert rule, because currently it really has no teeth. Also I think we need to speed up the arb-com process because it is very slow currently.

I have worked to try to make wikipedia a more friendly place by dealing with people whom I had problems with. Also, I capable of working with all sorts of people.

If anyone has questions for me, my talk is available.--[[User:Plato|Comrade Nick @)---^--]] 02:38, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Raul654

I'm a long time Wikipedian and current member of the arbitration committee. I was elected in August to fill in one of the seats left by the departure of Eloquence and Uninvited Company. I think since the election in August, the speed at which the arbcom handles matters (the primary complaint against it) has increased dramatically, without compromising the fairness of the process.

As I said during the previous election, I think I'm qualified because I'm emminently aware of what goes on on the english wikipedia; that I have deep knowledge of the policies (I helped draft many of them); I've participated in the arbitration process both as participant ('prosector' - so to speak - in the case of now-banned user Platus Satire) and arbitor; and finally, because I would like to continue to serve the community in this capacity.

I think my record speaks for itself, although I'd be more than happy to answer any questions. Ask on my talk page. →Raul654 02:41, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

sannse

I joined Wikipedia in December 2002 and have been active regularly since then. I have been an admin since March 2003 and a member of the mediation committee since it was created.

I see banning as a necessary tool to manage behaviour on Wikipedia. I don't see it as a punishment, but rather as a practical means to stop behaviour that disrupts the project. For this reason, I support other options if they can be shown to have a better chance of producing the desired result. Clear communication and careful limits sometimes have a better effect than a simple ban.

In general, I think the current process is fair and well thought out. I would like to see it streamlined somewhat, and ways put in place to enable cases to be dealt with more quickly. I think real-time discussions on IRC could be a very useful tool as part of this - although, of course, decisions should still be clearly communicated to the community and not taken in haste.

If I were to join the arbitration committee that would mean leaving the mediation committee. In some ways that would be a shame, because believe strongly that mediation is important and worthwhile, but I also feel that I have something to offer to the arbitration end of dispute resolution. -- sannse (election talk) 23:12, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC) 机电组合泵机顶盒机动车闯红灯数码监摄系统机动工具机柜机架机力风冷器机螺钉橡胶管机器配件机器喷沙机器人机热载体炉机上变换器机筒螺杆机箱机箱货架机箱机柜机箱机壳冲件机械机械备件机械除尘器机械传动减速机机械传动配件机械传动输送带机械化舞台机械基础件机械加工机械减速器机械连接件机械零件机械密封机械密封环机械密封件机械配件机械设备机械停车库机械无极变速机机械行业各类热处理炉机械液压件机械用平键机械用碳机械榨油机机械制芯工艺机械阻尼器机压配件机研磨设备机用刨刀机用套筒机油泵机油泵采油设备机油滤清器机制钢锹鸡眼鸡眼机咭纸染色机基础传动件基础件基带MODEM 基站天线激光标记激光标记机激光成套设备激光打标机激光打孔激光打码机激光打印机激光打字机激光雕刻机激光雕刻切割设备激光防伪打标机激光工业加工设备激光光盘激光焊接激光焊接机激光技术激光加工机激光加工设备激光晶体激光美容仪激光器激光切割激光切割机激光全息安全线防伪标识激光射码机激光医疗器械激光医疗设备激光医学设备激光影像输出机激光战车激光照排机激光制膜激励器激流探险吉妮宫内节育器即时贴急救护理车急救器械设备棘轮组合工具集尘器集成电路拆焊焊接设备集电环集动力电源集群集群车控制系统集输泵集团电话集中抄表集中监控集装箱半挂车集装箱封口栓挤出复膜机组挤出机挤出模具挤拉电缆槽挤压包覆盖生产线挤压设备挤压式机组机计步器计费系统计量泵配料系统计量设备计量糟计时器计数器计数器步进电机计税收款机计算机计算机控制设备计算机宽带网络计算机通信计算机网络计算机网络系统计算机系统集成计算器水处理设备继电保护继电器加碘盐包装机加料罐加料机加气砼砌块加氢进料泵加热炉加液管加液头及转换接头加油机加油机税控装置加油站管理系统夹板夹具夹纱板夹桶机夹心复合板家电类塑料模具家电配套线家电用加热器家电用橡胶制品家电装配生产流水线家电装配线家居报警家庭净水器家庭用超音波清洗机家用电器家用电器电机家用电器连接器家用电器使用线家用电器塑胶面板家用可视门铃系统家用面条机家用摄像机家用水泵家用台钻家用温度表家用小家电家用中央空调甲醇重整制氢设备架空绝缘电缆架桥机架桥设备间隔棒监护医疗车监护仪监护仪模块监控监控防盗设备监控系统减速减速电动机减速电机减速机减速机械减速机支架减速器减振器减震器减震元件剪扳机剪板机设备剪裁设备剪刀剪切机剪切线检测机检漏仪检针机简称吹瓶机简易炉纸杯成型机碱处理设备建材建材机械建材设备建筑变形装置建筑不锈钢门窗建筑材料建筑材料测试仪器建筑防水建筑防水材料建筑钢材建筑钢模板建筑机械建筑机械配件建筑机械设备建筑基础结构件建筑及机械工具建筑剪台建筑建材机械建筑卷扬机建筑模板建筑幕墙建筑弱电建筑塑料管材建筑陶瓷机械设备建筑五金建筑五金制品建筑仪器建筑用扣件建筑装饰材料剑杆带剑杆纺机用齿轮剑杆织布机剑杆织机健康分析专家系统健身机械鉴别仪鉴伪点钞机键盘浆泵浆染联合机浆纱机浆丝机浆液阀浆液阀开度显示仪降耗辅机降阻剂交换交换设备交换系统交接箱交联聚乙烯电力电缆用半导体电屏交流交流电动机交流电动转辙机交流电焊交流电机交流调速电机交流发电机定转子铁心冲片交流弧焊机交流伺服精密运动部件交流永磁伺服电动机交通安全设备交通安全设施生产标线涂料交通标志杆体交通道路安全设备交通电讯器材交通电子工程交通监控设备交通警示设备交通路障警示灯交通设施交通信号灯交通信号及控制交通信号装置交直流串激马达交直流电焊交直流电机用碳刷交直流电源分配柜交直流调速器交直流两用电动机交直流伺服交直流伺服系统交直流微型电机轴流风扇交直流无级调速电机浇铸浇铸件浇铸模胶板眼镜架机器胶带胶带输送机胶袋胶订包本机胶管胶管总成胶辊胶合板胶合板木工机械设备胶合机胶木制品胶囊胶囊充填机胶枪胶圈装订机胶塞清洗系统胶水机