User talk:Plato/Arbitration commitee election 2004

The L** case you refer to is a little too cut-and-dried to provide insight into how you would conduct yourself on the arbitration committee.

Also, your platform page and candidate statement are somewhat self-contradictory, in that you simulataneously have a bit of a "get tough" position in stating your firmness on the three-revert-rule and getting tough on "trolls", while in your candidate statement you also say that you can "work with all kinds of people", and in your platform you state that you want to "make the Arb-Com a friendly atmosphere".

So, I'm not sure whether to vote for you just yet.

How about the arbitration case involving Shorne? Do you agree or disagree that his actions warrant blocks or a ban?

For example, would you have blocked Shorne from editing communism-related articles for the length of the arbitration proceedings?

If the other arbitrators were discussing whether to ban him for a few months, how would you respond?

A case that is not so cut-and-dried can reveal a lot about the character of the individuals who are given authority to make decisions about such a case.

You state that you are "one of us", so I'm curious to see if you would rule any differently than the current committee.

Since you are not on the Arbitration Committee, you can offer your opinion without affecting the fairness of those proceedings.

Thanks for running for election. I appreciate having more choices from which to choose.

Cheers,

--DV 01:28, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I wasn't sure which location was best, so I placed a copy of this question on your election user discussion subpage, since you linked to that page in your candidate statement. (For some reason, linking directly to that discussion subpage doesn't work) --DV 01:28, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)