Please Note: Comments longer than two short sentences will be moved to the talk page.
Hello. I have been a English Wikipedia contributer for a bit now. I'm also a sysop on the English Wikipedia, and I volunteer in the Wikimedia OTRS queue answering emails. I thank you for reading my candidacy statement.
I've been watching the workings of arbitration. I believe it is important in our community to have this process, and I do respect the work the arbitrators do. I don't really desire to change the dispute resolution process, or the arbitration process. I desire to arbitrate. Should I be chosen for the role, I will do it to the best of my ability. Mercury 03:05, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Fred Bauder 01:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Like those below, I oppose the Durova "witch hunts" and the use of admin tools during the dispute was uncalled for. However, no one deserves a drubbing like this, so I'm giving a Moral support. Firsfron of Ronchester 03:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Per Firs ~ Riana ⁂ 04:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Nishkid64 (talk) 00:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- AniMate 00:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Tim Q. Wells 00:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Nothing personal, I just do not think he is ready. spryde | talk 00:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Lack of experience with this, shown by the recent Kmweber case This is a Secret account 00:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Heimstern Läufer (talk) 00:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Qst 00:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. Bad faith and disruption on this and related pages. Bishonen | talk 00:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
- Prolog 00:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Actions and demeanor during the Durova issue left much to be desired. RxS 00:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- (ec*3) Not ready yet. --Jonathan (T•@•C) 00:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Chaz Beckett 00:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Because of recent misuse of admin tools during the Durova incident including semi-protection of the ANI page. Cla68 00:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- --U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 00:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. Part of the problem rather than a solution of the issue of undercarpet games. --Irpen 00:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- W.marsh 00:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Alexfusco5 02:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs(st47) 00:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose (my vote explanations) -- Jd2718 00:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Nufy8 00:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- --Duk 00:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Full disclosure: I did not support the Durova witchhunt, but condemned her actions instead. However, Durova did not need an apologist. —Kurykh 00:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- east.718 at 00:35, December 3, 2007
- – Gurch (talk) 00:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Per involvement in the durova witchhunts. ALKIVAR™ ☢ 00:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- BLACKKITE 00:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- - auburnpilot talk 00:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Have concerns. GracenotesT § 00:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Supported an admin over an innocent victim of their harassment. No. • Lawrence Cohen 00:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Per editors above regarding Durova witchhunts. Travb (talk) 00:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose — iridescent 01:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- oppose Extended comments moved to talk page. Merkinsmum 01:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- absolutely not.—Random832 01:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- GRBerry 01:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Way too much of a blind follower :/ --krimpet⟲ 01:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose for lots of reasons, e.g. saying "don't troll" to another valued contributor in a good-faith discussion. --Alecmconroy 01:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- He protected an AN/I subpage that criticized one of his friends, which of course made the dispute even worse. Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 01:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Recent, obviously inappropriate use of tools. Christopher Parham (talk) 01:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Per above. Miranda 01:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Coredesat 01:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- DGG (talk) 02:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Not impressed by answers to questions. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 02:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Especially in these situations, clinging to Durova is like clinging to a sinking ship, and it shows in this vote. Mike H. Celebrating three years of being hotter than Paris 02:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Too new, plus poor judgement. Zocky | picture popups 02:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Cryptic 02:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Rebecca 02:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strongly per Kla’quot. Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 02:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Joe 02:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, but absolutely not. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 02:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Bob Mellish 03:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. --InkSplotch 03:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Húsönd 03:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- --Cactus.man ✍ 03:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- GlassCobra 03:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- No, sorry. Videmus Omnia Talk 03:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Shalom (Hello • Peace) 03:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- JayHenry 03:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Ealdgyth | Talk 03:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose No thanks -Dureo 04:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- ViridaeTalk 04:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - perhaps at another time. Not now. -- Robster2001 04:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Everyking 04:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- — xaosflux Talk 04:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 04:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- sNkrSnee | ¿qué? 04:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - despicable behavior at the recent Durova ArbCom case. Isarig 04:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]