It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
I’ve run in the distant past and know it is hard to stand for an election. Thank you to all the candidates for offering your services. After another decade of experience, I realize I would not be a good fit for the job. Please don’t feel discouraged if I don’t support you.
This guide format was copied from another editor who is skilled at making guides.
Good statement because they have experience and correct priorities and they already have OS right that’s normally given to arbitrators. I would support.
Worm has been responsive to questions and attempted to do thorough analysis of difficult cases. This year the Committee has demonstrated poor judgement. I do not blame Worm for this, and am thinking whether it's more important to have healthy turnover (which suggests opposing all the incumbents running for re-election) or better to have the known quantity (an above average arbitrator).
I have a favorable impression of Casliber. Having served in the past, we know what to expect from him. On the other hand, we need some turnover, so I will have to see how many other candidates I'm supporting and prioritize.
Has served as an arbitration clerk and seems to have good judgment. On the other hand, I have not been that fond of most arbitration clerks who then run for the Committee (NYB being the main exception) because it shows a desire for power, which I dislike. However, that's not a strong enough reason to oppose.
Generally I have had a positive view of KrakatoaKatie. As I suggested in Worm's section above, I am unsure whether to vote for the known quantity or to vote for change, because ArbCom has performed poorly during the last year. I will vote for her.
Unsure. Leaning against on my theory that Arbs and Crats should be disjoint sets of people. But, I think I'll make an exception because the user gave a strong answer to my question and seems qualified, and adds geographic diversity.
A professional lawyer and a legendary arbitrator. Just who we need to set things right. I especially like his empathy and desire to see the good in people.
I like TRM but his demeanor is not ideal for serving as arbitrator. I think it shows bad judgement to run in an election and at the same time publish a voter guide, User:The Rambling Man/Arbcom voting guide. Please choose one or the other, or else I must oppose.
Smart editor with lots of life experience. Also provides geographic diversity. I think they would resist groupthink and they have not been an arbitrator before, and show no signs of unhealthy desire for power. I would probably support.
I'm of the opinion that anybody elected to ArbCom who isn't an administrator would easily pass RfA and should thus be given sysop rights upon election. I am not sure this candidate has sufficient clue. I'll have to review their record.