Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/WilyD

This is the talk page for discussing a candidate for election to the Arbitration Committee.

Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
Use third-level headers for new sections.
- Example: === Heading title ===.
Unsure about the election process?
- Please review the election rules.
Issue with inappropriate commentary or questions?
- Please notify an election volunteer.

Arbitration Committee Election 2008 candidate: WilyD

Law and order

Funny slogan.

This is the most directly law and order statement I've seen so far. I tend to sympathize with the position myself. Users who wind up on ArbCom are a small minority of active editors. A small minority of users cause most of the drama. I think it's often reasonable to say "enough is enough."

Good luck! Cool Hand Luke 01:51, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I support your statement too. This is exactly what I'm talking about in my statement on my user page. Good luck with your candidacy.

talk) 05:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Forgive me for playing the devil's advocate for a moment.
Is your statement perhaps too strong? I'm inclined to say that an Arbitrator who is exceptionally severe is, in some ways, almost as harmful as an Arbitrator who is exceptionally lenient.
My enquiry is what your rebuttal to that would be?

AGK 22:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Yeah, it seems that WilyD would rely on other Arbs to decide leniency where appropriate. In theory it makes sense—an automatic vote to sanction in every case makes sanctions theoretically more likely in the marginal cases where they're deserved. That said, proposing them every time is probably a good way to be ignored by the rest of the committee. I think it would be counterproductive, even for someone who hopes to be a sanctions arbitrator. Cool Hand Luke 16:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The really short of it is this: If you think to committee currently gets the level of sanctioning right, that they're well balanced in this regard, you shouldn't support my candidacy. If it's the case, though, that the committee has 13 or 14 members who're too lenient, the guy who's too harsh is not as harmful - he's tipping the balance of the ArbCom towards being less tolerant of misbehaviour.

My own feeling is that the committee is too reluctant to hand out sanctions, even mild ones, and I wanted to give the electorate a chance to make itself heard. If I'm elected, or get strong support without being elected (like Giano II last year), I think it is a message to the ArbCom that there's too much slack in the reins. Wily D 12:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you above confusion when the same unlikely suspects crop up under the hand of the same prosecutors?

23:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Edit Analysis

A detailed breakdown of this candidate's edits in article and Wikipedia spaces can be found here. Franamax (talk) 02:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]