My question to all candidates:
“ | How can Wikipedia better communicate its processes to outsiders? | ” |
Some of the answers I have received are unimpressive.
Support
edit- Strong support
- Drmies - Has a sense of humour and often provided unique perspectives in ArbCom cases during his tenure as arbitrator.
- Isarra - As a MediaWiki software developer, her technical skills are an asset to the committee. Level-headed and is able to see the issues of ArbCom. Answers to questions show nuance.
- Mkdw - Good answer to my question. I love the fact that he emphasises transparency, which is important as it allows the community to trust that decisions are made fairly. Has been great as an arb.
- SilkTork - Good answer to my question and has the correct attitude towards ArbCom: it is not above the community. Has been a great arb and has shown his dedication to the project.
- Support
- GorillaWarfare - Experienced and resilient, has demonstrated herself as a valuable arb. I don't like her questions to Salvidrim in the 2016 election but that is minor in the grand scheme of things.
- Joe Roe - Will be competent as an arbitrator. Good answer to my question.
- Robert McClenon - While I may not always agree with his views, he has shown himself to be an editor acting in the best interests of Wikipedia and would likely bring new perspectives.
Oppose
edit- Courcelles - I cannot support a candidate married to a WMF employee, considering WP:CANCER.
- DGG - DGG is a lot like Jordan Peterson: a person who loves to use complex words and phrasing but is utterly unable to convey any basic reasoning for his judgments. What exactly is he trying to say with
a unverbalized system of successive approximation
? He has been disappointing as an Arb. - Fred Bauder - I have nothing to add.
Neutral
edit- AGK - I don't like how he is jumping into ArbCom straight out of retirement, but otherwise he was a good Arb.
- Kelapstick - Has been a good arbitrator, but I dislike his answer to my question. As other candidates have pointed out, Wikipedia policies are often difficult to understand by non-insiders.
- Lourdes - An editor who is not afraid to speak her views in the face of pressure. I especially like how she started this RfC – it's unfortunate that so many editors I respect think that this is even a controversial issue. She will bring a lot of common sense to the committee. However, her not answering questions is concerning.
These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |