My views
- Candidates must demonstrate, in my opinion, a degree of responsibility. The ideal way of demonstrating this would be through a successful request for adminship. As such, I am of the belief that only administrators should be able to serve on the Committee. I also believe that candidates must be in good standing, with no active sanctions or recent blocks, and must demonstrate an ability to deal with disputes effectively. Those that have previously served on the Committee, and those with CheckUser or Oversight privileges, will be given supporting votes from me as these also demonstrate responsibility. Without any further ado, this is how I will be voting this year:
Support
- Worm That Turned - previously on Committee.
- KrakatoaKatie - admin with CU and OS.
- Opabinia regalis - previously on Committee.
- RickinBaltimore - responsible attitude to adminship and excellent work within the anti-vandalism field.
- Alex Shih - demonstrated ability to handle disputes and close them effectively at ANI.
- Callanecc - previously on Committee.
- Mailer diablo - admin with CU and OS.
- BU Rob13 - admin with CU
- Premeditated Chaos - only recently became active again but seems to be an experienced candidate, so moving to Support.
Neutral for now (subject to change)
Oppose
- The Rambling Man - resigned admin privileges under cloud, recent block/poor block log, subject to sanctions, odd mentality re. Arbcom.
- Sir Joseph - not an administrator, not able to deal with disputes effectively, recent block/poor block log, uncivil attitude.
- SMcCandlish - not an administrator, frequently involved in disputes.
Conclusion
8 of the 9 candidates I supported will serve two-year terms at ArbCom. None of the candidates whom I opposed are serving.
 | These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |