Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Vote/Kylu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Statement

I'm going for simplicity: I'll try to be reasonable, and remember to keep the best interests of Wikipedia first in my mind. If I think that I'm prejudiced regarding a case, I'll recuse. If you want to know my definitions of reasonableness, I'd ask you look to my actions, not my statements, but I'm willing to answer almost any questions you have. Thanks! :)

Questions

[edit] Support

Gurch 00:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC) Withdrawing vote. Sorry, Kylu – Gurch 05:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  1. —  $PЯINGrαgђ  Always loyal! 00:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. ArbCom is a form of dispute resolution. As such, experience with other forms of dispute resolution is invaluable. As MedCabal Lead Coordinator, Kylu has the best qualifications here.--Ideogram 00:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. Per Ideogram. --210physicq (c) 00:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Cowman109Talk 00:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. AmiDaniel (talk) 00:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. ++Lar: t/c 00:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  7. Coredesat 00:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  8. Cyde Weys 00:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  9. maclean 00:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  10. Time issues balanced by MedCabal experience. Titoxd(?!?) 00:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  11. Jaranda wat's sup 00:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  12. Hello32020 01:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  13. Khoikhoi 01:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  14. Samsara (talk • contribs) 01:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  15. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 01:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  16. pschemp | talk 02:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  17. ßottesiηi (talk) 02:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  18. —Mira 03:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  19. Warofdreams talk 04:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  20. semper fi — Moe 05:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  21. Support. Peace. --Nielswik(talk) 05:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  22. Support --Riley 06:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  23. support Bucketsofg 06:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  24. Nufy8 06:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  25. Support: policy is over sysops. --Sugaar 10:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  26. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 12:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  27. Support (just dont have the userbox I'm afraid ...was just a little to pink for me. Okay, A LOT too pink! :) Glen 12:34, December 4, 2006 (UTC)
  28. Neigel von Teighen 12:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  29. Strongest Possible Support total confidence in Kylu's judgment and abilities. Rama's arrow 13:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  30. Support (based on answers to my questions) Anomo 14:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  31. Experience from MedCab, has good judgement.--§hanel 14:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  32. of course. -- Drini 16:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  33. Support Ge o. 17:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  34. Support  ♪♫ĽąĦĩŘǔ_Қ♫♪  (Ŧ) 19:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  35. Support experienced in dispute resolution. Eluchil404 19:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  36. —Pilotguy (push to talk) 21:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  37. Support. Statement wins it. Regards, —Celestianpower háblame 23:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  38. Support. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 03:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  39. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 03:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  40. Weak Support Just would prefer someone with more experience. GizzaChat © 07:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  41. Support. I've said it before, and will gladly say it again. I've seen overwhelmingly good and helpful contributions from Kylu, and hope to see more of the same, in the future. Luna Santin 08:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  42. Support with only minor reservations about relative inexperience. Always seems intelligent and sensible. Metamagician3000 09:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  43. Jon Harald Søby 12:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  44. Strong Support Thε Halo Θ 14:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  45. That's Hedley! Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 22:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  46. Support James.S (talk • contribs • count) — 00:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  47. Support. Nishkid64 01:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  48. Strong Support lovelaughterlife♥talk? 02:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  49. Strong Support Addhoc 11:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  50. Support Deizio talk 15:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  51. Support Fred Bauder 15:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  52. Support - based on MedCab experience. Badbilltucker 16:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  53. Support --Ruziklan 20:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  54. Support --Chili14
  55. support Yuckfoo 03:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  56. Support: At every experience with Kylu, she has been a forceful, cheery, positive experience. (Her color is well chosen.) — EncMstr 05:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  57. Support. I've had nothing but good experiences with her; she's level-minded and fair. 1ne 06:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  58. Support Kylu, almost missed you on the list. Only good experiences in my experience.--(十八|talk) 13:25, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  59. Support A genuinely nice person with a good heart and in interest in others. While obviously arbcom itself needs to be a bit salty she'd make a nice complement to the rest of the group. jbolden1517Talk 14:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  60. Support I actually can add little to jbolden's reasoning, but just can say I'm sure she won't mess up. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 08:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  61. riana_dzasta 09:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  62. Strong Support - I love the people saying she doesn't have the experience, yet voting for people with no experience in MedCab or in mediation at all. Level headedness, fairness, and ability to deal with people is what makes for a good ArbCom member. Article contributions are pointless unless an article gets irritated and takes itself to ArbCom. rolls eyes --ElaragirlTalk|Count 15:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  63. Support Krupo 04:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  64. Support. Gargaj 07:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  65. Weak support. Conscious 14:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  66. Support based on answer to question concerning the desysopping of MONGO. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  67. Support seems like someone who would carefully and even-handedly consider decisions. --rogerd 00:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  68. DVD+ R/W 02:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  69. Support - Inner Earth 18:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  70. Support - I know this user and trust her judgment. Bastiq▼e demandez 12:51, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  71. Good judgement and experience. —Xyrael / 22:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  72. Support --Bondego 20:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  73. Support —Locke Cole • t • c 21:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  74. Support moral, I fear. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

  1. Oppose --ElKevbo 00:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Far too new - crz crztalk 00:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. Ral315 (talk) (my votes) 00:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Peta 01:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. The user's refusal to answer Giano's very much to-the-point questions is a big problem for me. Bishonen | talk 02:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC).
  7. TacoDeposit 02:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  8. Insufficient experience, at least one recent instance of very poor judgement. --RobthTalk 02:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  9. Strong oppose due to inclination to under-carpet games and lack of mainspace contributions. In most cases content editing is a must to not loose touch with reality. --Irpen 02:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  10. Does not have enough nor well-rounded enough experience here for such a position. --Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 02:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  11. KPbIC 03:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  12. Geogre 03:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  13. Oppose Not enough editing experience really to be considered. Jd2718 03:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  14. Per not enough experience - although activity in mediation is a very good start. I am looking forward to supporting you next time if this keeps up...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  03:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  15. Terence Ong 04:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  16. Inexperience; very nice person, nevertheless. Xoloz 04:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  17. Too new. Not enough experience. —Centrx→talk • 04:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  18. Rebecca 04:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  19. AniMate 04:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  20. Weak oppose I suspect Kylu would make a very good arbitrator, actually, but she's rather new for the job, and her block of Giano under sub-optimal circumstances speaks to that inexperience. A little underripe. Opabinia regalis 04:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  21. THB 05:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  22. Sarah Ewart 05:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  23. Sorry, great start but way too soon. --Srikeit 05:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  24. Would likely support next time, but would prefer not to elect to ArbCom principles from the Giano case within this short a window. Serpent's Choice 05:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  25. Cryptic 06:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  26. Dylan Lake 07:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  27. Bishonen's concern is not without foundation, and the answers to several other questions are not consistent with those I'd hope a prospective ArbCommer would give; I do, though, join in Xoloz's observation that Kylu seems to be altogether kind and quite reasonable on the whole. Joe 07:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  28. Oppose. Per Bishonen's concerns. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  29. Oppose per Bish.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 08:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  30. Oppose. I don't believe in great arbitrators with negligible experience of mainspace editing and lots of experience in IRC chit chatting. --Ghirla -трёп- 08:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  31. Oppose Catchpole 08:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  32. Oppose Inexperienced and seems to have a naivity which would cause her problems on the Arbcom. Giano 09:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  33. Too soon. – Chacor 09:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  34. cj | talk 09:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  35. Oppose --Van helsing 09:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  36. Strong oppose. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 12:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  37. Kusma (討論) 13:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  38. Shyam (T/C) 13:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  39. Oppose, inexperience. --Muchness 14:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  40. Oppose, I like my Arbcom more salty (experienced) --Mcginnly | Natter 14:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  41. --Pjacobi 20:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  42. Oppose. An arbitrator needs to be able to face tough questioners, worse than Giano. AnonEMouse (squeak) 21:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  43. Michael Snow 23:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  44. Didn't recognize the name and as such thought you were too new. Sorry, you seem like a nice person aside -- Samir धर्म 00:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  45. —Viriditas | Talk 01:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  46. Oppose. I have reservations about whether she has the experience to think for herself, or whether she just does whatever her chat room buddies advise her to do. Wikipedia is not IRC. Friday (talk) 01:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  47. Seems like a great user, not yet ready for ArbCom. --Spangineerws (háblame) 05:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  48. Oppose per Bishonen. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 08:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  49. Strongest possible oppose. Inexperienced (only on WP for 7 months), too trigger-happy, and above all, an appaling lack of contribs. 5846 edits and 2234 of them on User talk space??? Oh please, it's not even funny. -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 09:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  50. --ragesoss 09:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  51. ALoan (Talk) 15:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  52. Oppose due to lack of time with the project.--Isotope23 15:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  53. —Doug Bell talk 19:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  54. Andre (talk) 22:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  55. Oppose Not enough experience, not feeling any "vision" here -Drdisque 22:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  56. Oppose I think you'll be a good Arbitrator, but not this year. Renominate yourself next year.--*Kat* 01:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  57. Oppose Sorry, but you could use some more experience and focus more on the encyclopedic aspects of Wikipedia.-- danntm T C 04:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  58. Oppose per the Giano issue. --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  59. Sorry. - Mailer Diablo 16:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  60. Dr Zak 21:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC). Lack of involvement in both mainspace and policy.
  61. Oppose. —Lantoka ( talk | contrib) 23:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  62. oppose, also due to Giano-related concerns. dab (𒁳) 09:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  63. Oppose - inexperience and lack of contributions.--Aldux 15:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  64. Oppose - way too new. Zocky | picture popups 15:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  65. Oppose. She has not shown that she would be an effective arbitrator. --Danaman5 19:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  66. Oppose--CSTAR 19:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  67. 'Not a hope. Inability to resolve issues with Giano is a huge minus. Also, I have concerns about editors who are very active in the backchannel. Spending more of that time editing would be good. Grace Note 01:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  68. Oppose. per Drdisque and Grace Note.--Dakota 03:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  69. Oppose Candidate has put no real effort into writing the statement. This is not a good sign that the candidate would put the required effort into ArbCom. Alan Pascoe 14:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  70. Oppose. enochlau (talk) 00:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  71. Oppose per Alan Pascoe and Grace Note. Stifle (talk) 15:32, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  72. Tra (Talk) 22:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  73. Saravask 04:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  74. Oppose, not enough experience; also, the Giano issue is worrying. — mark ✎ 12:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  75. Oppose for all the above reasons, but mostly because of the IRC bias.HeartofaDog 12:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  76. Oppose Focus the coming year on editing mainspace articles which should give you more experience in all areas of the project including dispute resolution and you will be a strong candidate next year Lost Kiwi(talk) 03:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  77. Oppose, level of experience, disproportion of the main space contributions. - Introvert • ~ 04:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  78. Weak Oppose. I'm a big fan of the MedCabal, but Kylu could use a little more time and editing experience. the wub "?!" 13:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  79. Oppose candidate does not seem to understand the nature of conflicts regarding scientific controversies as evinced by a rather poor response to the question on SPOV. --ScienceApologist 16:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  80. Oppose MediaMangler 09:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  81. Oppose Krich (talk) 03:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  82. Oppose Not clear what "simplicity" you are bringing to the table. There are answers to problems that are "simple, clear and wrong". Stirling Newberry 11:17, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  83. Oppose. Candidate lacks experience and has repeatedly shown poor judgement.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  84. Oppose. As much I like the candidate, she doesn't seems to be able to stay completely NPOV at times. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 18:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  85. Oppose. Character and MedCabal experience is worth a lot, but more time/experience needed before ArbCom. Sorry. Gimmetrow 21:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  86. I consider the candidate to be an on-wiki friend; MedCab experience is good, and (unless I have missed something substantial) it seems to me that her role in the unmentionable dispute was made out to be greater than it actually was, but I must respectfully oppose. I will certainly give serious consideration to placing the candidate on the ArbCom should she choose to run in the next election. theProject 22:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  87. Oppose - my vote comments. Carcharoth 23:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)