Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Ilyanep

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Concerns about the candidate

I must express some serious reservations about placing a 14-year-old on the ArbComm. Although I have only been involved in one arbitration action so far, I can see based on it and based on the comments of others that this is a genuine job, and one that is critical to Wikikpedia. As I see it, this job requires time, dedication, wisdom, intelligence, and maturity.

I do not doubt either the dedication or intelligence of Ilyanep. The fact that heis already an admin and a bureaucrat speaks quite highly of him, along with his stated desire to get into the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy. However, this leaves the other three points. To wit:

• Time - Ilyanep is attending school, and is already heavily involved in Wikipedia. Based on the comments of others, this job requres 10-30+ hours a week, which is quite a chunk of time, even if he gives up his other Wikipedia duties (and I assume that he will). My concern is that if he takes on too much, then something will have to give. If it is ArbComm, then this already overtaxed committee suffers. If it is his schooling, then the overall result is even worse since this may cripple the future of an otherwise very talented person. The other option is to cut down on sleep in which case everything suffers!
• Wisdom - While I would agree that age ≠ wisdom, for an individual in general the older one gets the wiser they also get. In this case, there are areas of concern. For one, I am sure that malicious editors will seek to evade topical bans just as much as they seek to evade complete ones. Overall, I see a good awareness of the issues, but I don't think that this user sees all the connections and nuances yet.
• Maturity - There are a lot of intangibles in this. For a committee like this, it is a combination of being hard to fluster and also being able to function even when you are. It is the abilty to handle a pressure-cooker situation because you have done so before. It is also the ability to measure youself against a challenge and to know when to go for it even through you are likely to fail, as well as when it is likely that you will succeed but not worth the risks of failure for yourself and/or others.

I kindly submit that Ilyanep is asking too much of himself and seeking to take on too large a role at this time. In that respect I do not see his promise to "stay on for my entire term, as I see myself as a person who finishes what he started" as recommending him much. If this job places too much of a strain on himself, then it is what must be dropped for his own good, and in the long term ours. It takes wisdom and maturity to see that, and yet it is obvious that Ilyanep does not.

Yes, I am saying that this is a case of a child trying to do a man's job. I do admit that I would sooner see Ilyanep doing it than many of the other candidates, but in my opinion this is too big and too important a job for us, and too risky for himself even though he does not realize it yet. I kindly ask that he withdraw. Otherwise, I ask those who would support him to please be sure that they are doing both him and us a favor by letting him have this job. --EMS | Talk 04:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I would like to respond to your concerns:

Time: If 10-30+ hours a week is what is required, that's 2-6 hours a day even if you don't work on the weekends at all. I have spent more time playing video games (and feeling guilty because I'm not doing anything productive). The amount of schoolwork that I get here is mind numbingly small and easy (not more than 15 minutes a day most of the time).

Wisdom: I don't think that anything I could say in this regard would convince you the other way. As far as topical bans go, I am a proponent of Assuming Good Faith. If the editor can not be saved with such a ruling, then unfortunately hard bans are the way to go. But I meant that topical bans and mentorship are both good replacments to hard bans that work in some, if not many, situations.

Maturity: All I have to prove myself is my edit summary.

Perhaps I am asking too much of myself, but considering my amount of free time, I have a great deal of time in which to do Arbitration Committee work. And by my statement that I would stay on for my entire term, I meant that that would be barring and extravagant circumstances, which almost never happen to me.

In light of that, I don't wish to withdraw, but continue on in the election. I respect the opinions of anyone voting in the election, and if you want to vote oppose, go ahead. I won't hold it against you either way (especially because I can't possibly memorize all of these people). —Ilyanep (Talk) 17:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

EDIT: In addition to that, as far as the age concerns go, I'd like to restate what 172 said on the main page; Ambi and Neutrality are both about my age (perhaps a year or two older) and are both Arbiters. —Ilyanep (Talk) 17:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I hear you. I suspect that the time figure that I gave is high (others seem to thing that 10-30+ hours a month is more realistic). Even so, I remain concerned. As Wikipedia grows so does the workload and the complexity of the situations involved. While I certainly don't believe that you would be bad at this, I still see an overall situation wherein it is unwise to foist this position on a minor. Maybe a year of two ago I would have gladly voted for you (and Ambi and Neutrality) given a smaller, calmer Wikipedia at that time. Now I see a different beast. There are now plenty of older people around now who are at least as qualified as yourself and better positioned to put in the time needed.

If you get elected, then I wish you well. My doubts are less in your ability than in your priorities and overall judgement. At the least, please do not place Wikipedia or the ArbComm ahead of your schooling and/or your sleep and recreation. You will do more harm than good if that should happen. To help keep you from possibly having to make that choice, I am opposing you. --EMS | Talk 18:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom will never be ahead of real life, nor will anything on the computer or internet, and I understand your concerns. I appreciate your looking out for me :) Cheers —Ilyanep (Talk) 22:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Why I agree with your general concern about time and whether the candidate is getting himself into too much, I don't agree with the analysis that an adult would be in a better situation regarding time. Unless the person is retired, or otherwise do work at all, then that person is spending probably more time at work than a child does at school. Add on to that other "adult responsibilities", especially if a family is involved. My opinion is of that someone still at school have probably more time than your average adult. KTC 06:07, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I was going to say that, but forgot to while I was formulating my reply. Thanks. —Ilyanep (Talk) 17:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

The issue here is not just the time, but the ability to judge it properly. Ilyanep is obviously already putting a lot of time into Wikipedia, and this will call for even more. As I see it, it is easy to get yourself into a time crunch, especially when you never have done so before. --EMS | Talk 03:23, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

It's my personal view that 14 is too young for the arbcom. Age may not equal wisdom, but only the young would actually claim it doesn't equal experience, which is a component in thinking about the world and the people in it (or that experience doesn't matter in that respect, which I have to say is something that experience itself would put you right on!). I don't mean just wiki-experience. I have no doubt Ilyanep thoroughly understands Wikipedia and its policies. I wouldn't have voted for Ambi or Neutrality either, and I don't consider either to be particularly good examples of age's not mattering, particularly in light of Ambi's temper tantrums in the recent Userbox kerfuffle. Neither has ever struck me as particularly good at understanding people or their motivations, leading both to come across as not very sympathetic, which I feel is a bad thing. It's not personally directed at Ilyanep. Grace Note 08:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I understand. What you are speaking of is life experience, and I never claimed that I had more than any adult. However, there are certain things on Wikipedia that most people's life experience wouldn't have prepared them for (i.e. WP:NOT a democracy). Also, life experience gives people time to build up biases, which are definately not something we want on the ArbCom (not that all adults are immediately biased though). Finally, I think that I would be a set of fresh eyes for the ArbCom which might prove useful. —Ilyanep (Talk) 17:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

"Biases" are means of making quick judgements, and appropriate biases often serve people very well. Personally, I would want an arbitrator to deal with an action in an impartial manner, ready to assist the party in need even if they do not like them. The advantage of youth is that it is easier for it to integrate itself with a new medium like Wikipedia due to the lack of misleading life experiences. The disadvantage is an often overly simplistic view of the world, as evidenced by your being biased against biases. For a central position in Wikipedia such as arbitrator, the newness of youth can show new ways of doing things, but when it goofs up (such as the case with Ambi mentioned above) it can really be a nuisance especially if it involves ones arbitration duties. --EMS | Talk 03:23, 16 January 2006 (UTC)