User:Majorly/ACE2008

This page exists to give explanations for the votes I make, and my thoughts about the candidate. I'll be making a total of seven support votes; every other candidate will be opposed. Unlike some people who don't like their votes questioned, I am happy to answer questions about my voting, and am willing to be persuaded to change my mind. If you require further explanation for votes, please ask me.

Important note: table created entirely by myself, with help from no-one. Credit goes to Microsoft Excel!

Username	Statement	Questions	Thoughts	Vote
AnthonyQBachler	Statement	Questions	Not an admin. Inexperienced and barely active. Statement is... poor. Lack of answers to questions shows lack of interest.	Oppose
BillMasen	Statement	Questions	Not an admin. Never heard of him, but his answers aren't bad - they're not great though. Statement gives no information on how they would work as an Arbitrator. Maybe with more experience, and adminship, would be good. But not now.	Oppose
Carcharoth	Statement	Questions	Reminds me very much of FT2, with lots of tl;dr posts on the drama boards. Tends to be a reasoned voice in disputes, so looking very favourable. Could have better article work. I love the fact he has only made three actions in his block log.	Support
Casliber	Statement	Questions	Strong article work. Friendly voice in discussions. Nice thoughtful answers to questions. Looking very positive.	Support
Charles Matthews	Statement	Questions	Another difficult one for me. I met Charles at Wikimania, and he is a nice person IRL (as no doubt every Wikipedian is). Concerned about activity in relation to Arbitration matters, and whether Charles is really suited to continue. I really dislike the whole Matthew Hoffman thing. Let's not ignore the fact Charles is a very active editor and has made over 150,000 edits - most, if not all, manual ones, working on articles. But I'm not sure how neutral he can stay when arbitrating.	Oppose
Cool Hand Luke	Statement	Questions	Answers to questions are worrying. Not too sure here.	Support
Coren	Statement	Questions	Here for the fight, not for the write ([1]). Answers to my questions disagree with my own. Would probably turn into a clone of the current arbitrators, which would be exceedingly bad. Doesn't seem to understand ArbCom have their place, and regularly overstep it.	Oppose
Dream Focus	Statement	Questions	Not an admin. Statement shows user doesn't really know what they're running for. Answers to questions are bad/lacking.	Oppose
Fish and karate	Statement	Questions	Seen some poor judgement from this user, probably on RFA. Excellent and thoughtful question answers.	Oppose
George The Dragon	Statement	Questions	Too much poor judgement from this user, here and on Simple English Wikipedia, where he edited as MindTheGap. Anyone who thinks children/teenagers should be banned doesn't understand "anyone can edit".	Oppose
Gwen Gale	Statement	Questions	When I see Gwen on my watchlist, the first word that comes to my mind is Drama, which is unfortunate. The ArbCom case she was part of under another username doesn't bother me; it was over three years ago. It's old news. Answers to questions are good.	Oppose
Hemlock Martinis	Statement	Questions	Good statement and question answers - so far.	Oppose
Jayvdb	Statement	Questions	I disagree with John strongly on a lot of things, but his candidacy is impressive, as are the answers to questions.	Support
Jdforrester	Statement	Questions	I've met James on several occasions in real life. I didn't really get along with him before we met, but I suppose once you've met a user in person, they're always better in real life. IRC issues shouldn't be used as a grudge imo. The channels are run by other people, who aren't even active on Wikipedia much anymore (example, the owners of #wikipedia-en are Martinp23 and Wimt. Wimt's last 50 edits go back through to August. Martin is barely active as well). Answers to questions are unfortunate, and I cannot support with thinking like that. Maybe it is time he did something else on Wikipedia?	Oppose
Jehochman	Statement	Questions	Drama, policy-wonking, fighting are words that spring to mind here. His behaviour during this initial period shows he could be unsuited. Could conflict with other arbitrators. The answers to my questions were fine though.	Oppose
Justice America	Statement	Questions	Not an admin, too new. Not answered any questions, so not interested.	Oppose
Kmweber	Statement	Questions	All I'll say now is his answers to my questions are OK. Not great, but OK.	Oppose
Lankiveil	Statement	Questions	Very sorry answer to my first question. Statement is very persuasive though, and experience, whilst not as an admin until recently, is good.	Oppose
Lifebaka	Statement	Questions	Great answers to my questions. Doesn't seem experienced enough though, even admitting it in his statement.	Oppose
Privatemusings	Statement	Questions	Had interactions with this user via Skype. Nothing against him at all, but it would make awful precedent to elect him. Better as an editor I think. Good answers to my questions though.	Oppose
Risker	Statement	Questions	Another drama-person (though admittedly does a little more article work than Coren). I don't think she'd be suited for ArbCom, unfortunately. The worst thing is, I can't really express my reasoning as to why - just a bad feeling (not about Risker personally, but may be bad for her.) See the answer to my first question, which may give an idea.	Oppose
Rlevse	Statement	Questions	Shouldn't be a bcrat in my opinion, because he doesn't understand what consensus is. No doubt will become another clone of the current arbcom, which would be disasterous. Anyone who thinks discussions on potential CUs need to take place in secret seriously needs to get their facts straightened out. Will probably get elected, because he's popular, not because he'll make a good arbitrator. Reminds me of Deskana last year - became a bcrat in July, CU in September (I think) then ArbCom in December. Nothing against Deskana, whom I've met in real life, but I firmly believe he was only elected because of the other roles he has, and popularity. He's been barely active for most of his term as far as I can see. Either this is what will happen to Rlevse, or he'll be another ArbCom clone, who supports each other and conducts important discussions in secret, completely unnecessarily. Other answers to questions are bad as well.	Oppose
RMHED	Statement	Questions	Very negative user. Very sure I opposed an RFA of his fairly recently.	Oppose
Roger Davies	Statement	Questions	Very sensible user, with persuasive statement. Waiting on answers to questions.	Support
Sam Korn	Statement	Questions	Simply put, no. Wasn't he one of the editors who didn't want to ban serial sockpuppeteer Mantanmoreland, part of the arbcom case that arbcom famously, if you'll pardon my French, fucked up big-time? Someone correct me if I'm wrong. His answers to questions show a massive lack of confidence; a know-all, "we're better than you because we know more" attitude is a poor one to have. May just burn out again. But no doubt will retain access to the lists etc.	Oppose
Shell Kinney	Statement	Questions	Poor statement, but good answers to questions so far.	Oppose
SirFozzie	Statement	Questions	I'm happy here. Looking forward to some answers to my questions.	Oppose
The Fat Man Who Never Came Back	Statement	Questions	Good statement, but user isn't an admin, and lacks experience in suitable areas.	Oppose
Trojanpony	Statement	Questions	Joke candidacy.	Oppose
Vassyana	Statement	Questions	OK answers to my questions. Nice statement.	Support
White Cat	Statement	Questions	White Cat's had a difficult time on Wikipedia. I've met him in real life, and we spent quite a bit of time together at Wikimania. I honestly don't think he's at all suitable for ArbCom, and wish he would work on some articles instead, for his own sake. I think a lot of users believe WC is a troll; I disagree that he is, only he is provoked. He was an admin on Commons, and has made tens of thousands of edits, as well as ones with his bot. He's very dedicated, just not at all suited for this position.	Oppose
WilyD	Statement	Questions	Answers to my questions were odd... not quite sure what to make of them. However, general impression is a good one.	Oppose
Wizardman	Statement	Questions	Seems strange he's not a bureaucrat yet, but what the hell. OK answers to questions so far. Not entirely sure what to make of him though - don't know if he'll be suitable - he keeps going on wikibreaks for a start, which would be bad as an arbitrator.	Support
WJBscribe	Statement	Questions	Friendly hardworking editor. Met him several times. Unlike some, doesn't seem to be a badge collector, and is genuinely hardworking and interested in the processes he's involved in. Shame the article work is so weak, but I believe that's made moot when you see all the other work he does. Makes very calm, sensible posts, helping to end the drama in lots of places. He'll do well.	Support