User:Z1720User:ToBeFreeUser:SdrqazUser:MaximUser:HJ MitchellUser:FireflyUser:CabayiUser:AoidhUser:Worm That TurnedUser:WugapodesUser:Opabinia regalisUser:IznoUser:EnterpriseyUser:Donald AlburyUser:CabayiUser:BeeblebroxUser:SilkTorkUser:PrimefacUser:MoneytreesUser:L235User:GuerilleroUser:GeneralNotabilityUser:CaptainEekUser:Barkeep49User:PrimefacUser:MaximUser:L235User:BDDUser:BradvUser:CaptainEekUser:Barkeep49Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2023Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2021Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2020

6 Seats means 6 or less supports and the rest Neutral/oppose.

Questions

edit

Questions from Guerillero

edit

Thank you for running for the hardest and most thankless job on the project. I am rehashing most of my 2015 questions because I don't think that these issues have been resolved over the past three years. Enjoy!

Current Disputes and Cases

edit
  1. What are your standards for banning someone from the project compared to a topic ban or some lesser sanction?
  2. Nearly every case involves violations of the civility policy in some way, shape, or form. At one time, a remedy called a "Civility Parole" existed but it fell out of vogue. Today, the only tools in the current Arbitrator's toolboxes to deal with civility issues are interaction bans, topic bans, and site bans. What new and creative ways would you bring to the table to solve this problem?
  3. Do you believe that the Super Mario Problem exists? How would you fix it?
  4. Do you see value in Admonishments and Warnings as remedies at the end of a case?

Insider Baseball

edit
  1. Does the workshop serve as a useful portion of a case?

Thoughts

edit

These are my intial thoughts. I asked some questions because I am not 100% locked in with these.

Support

edit

Neutral

edit

Oppose

edit

Yikes

edit