 |
|
This guide represents the personal views of SandyGeorgia:
The election of 12 new arbitrators, to bring the 2011 Committee to a total of 18 arbitrators, is expected for the December 2010 Arbitration Committee Elections—with voting underway through December 5.
A 2009 RFC on the makeup of ArbCom was poorly thought out and had the (intended or unintended) effect or removing to some extent discretion for handling unforeseen events in ArbCom appointments. This RFC extended the Committee size to 18, resulting in the appointment of six members to the 2010 ArbCom with lower support totals than would be necessary to pass RFA; one appointment—Shell Kinney (talk · contribs)—gained less than 60% support.
The 18-member size of the Committee makes it harder for the Committee to come to consensus on deliberations. We give the Arbs access to highly sensitive and personal information, and we are now in the curious position of granting access to privileged information to editors who have lower support totals than are even required to pass the already very low (70%) trust barrier of RFA. If the trend holds for the 2010 election, the result is likely to be another overly large Committee comprised of candidates who gain even lower support percentages.
I hope the unfortunate side effects of the 2009 RFC will be revisted depending upon the outcome of the 2010 elections, but I do not support the notion of an 18-member Committee comprised of members who don't enjoy a high level of trust within the Wiki community, I do not believe they are 12 desirable candidates this year, I will not be Supporting 12 candidates, and it is my hope that there will be no appointments of candidates who gain less than 60% Support. Trust, fairness, balance, diligence, and longevity will be key factors in my Support votes this year.