You're probably reading this because I linked to this page from all my votes in the January 2006 Arbitration Committee elections. I thought that all of my votes needed a short explanation and a few caveats as well, so instead of cluttering up all the voting pages, I thought I'd lay them out here.
First, right off the bat, if I don't support your bid, please don't be offended. Being on the Arbitration Committee is a huge responsibility that won't suit everyone; some wonderful Wikipedians and administrators probably won't make good Arbitrators. My vote is only based on whether or not I feel that you are one of the best choices for the limited number of spots available. It doesn't mean that I don't "like" you or don't think you're doing a wonderful job with helping Wikipedia right now. Contrary, I commend all of the candidates for their chutzpah, their great contributions, and the commitment they have made if they are elected. As a side note, I also have to add in this: my support votes (the total number in single digits) were very rare, as I voted with an extremely high standard. In addition, my votes are also heavily influenced by personal interaction and impressions, your candidate statement and views, your responses to questions, and your past contributions. On that note, if you are a candidate that is relatively new to Wikipedia, I laud you, once again, for your boldness and your preemptive dedication to this great project. However, experience and time are invaluable teachers, and your time to serve may not be now.
Second, if I don't support you, it doesn't mean that I don't support you as a Wikipedian. As I stated above, my vote is only designated on how I feel you would do on the Arbitration Committee, a job that's not suited for everyone. I hope that my vote doesn't influence any future interactions between you and me; it's with the utmost respect and dignity that I vote opposing you. Also, if I vote in favor of you and you are elected, the highest encomiums to you, and may you serve well! If I do not vote or vote otherwise and you are elected, my congratulations to you as well.
Third, while I've outlined some of my voting rationale here, if you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me. While I cannot guarantee that I will answer any specific questions related to my vote, I'd be more than happy to listen to your questions, comments, and concerns and respond to them as best as I can.
Finally, I've also been covering this election for The Wikipedia Signpost since September of 2005. I've tried to stay as neutral as possible, both in the articles I've written and my actions regarding this election. However, I feel my duty to vote is more imperative; rest assured, though, that despite my votes, I - and the Signpost - will continue to provide you with the most accurate, unbiased, and comprehensive information possible regarding this election and all other Wikipedia news.
My experience covering this ground-breaking event has also offered me a unique perspective on all of this; from how the elections developed from talk into reality, and how a delicate balance was sought. It's been a long journey, so I must commend everyone who's helped make this a success: from Jimbo, the people who helped organize this event, those who gave their opinions and participated in the poll, the candidates, the voters, and anyone else I may have forgotten. Without your help and dedication to Wikipedia, today would not have been possible.
As such, I look forward to a bright 2006 under a great Arbitration Committee.