Arbitration Committee election 2019

[CrowsNest]

This fuckin' guy.....

......I've been around a long time and you can rest assured that although I have never sat on the committee, I have a surprisingly good understanding of what goes on there, ......Kudpung (talk) 04:37, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

That would be surprising.

Hey ho. Kudpung is an exceptional person with outstanding ability. The perfect candidate. Who knew?



Delusional.

[Kumioko]

Yeah Kudpung's a real clown!

[JuiceBeetle]

What's the word for someone painting an unrealistically positive image of himself?

[CrowsNest]

Hilarious to think just how badly this might go.

They need to fill eleven seats. Eleven!

It's only been two years since the results finished like this......

Elected: eight viable candidates for eight seats, as reflected in the fact all polled above 60%.

Also rans:

Mailer Diablo (58%) - no real issues, but clearly a non-viable candidate, rather a last minute decision to stand to keep some of the other absolute nightmares out. There was absolutely no real reason to elect them over the eight others who succeeded.

SMcCandlish (57%) - an openly transphobic Administrator with several other severe personally defects.

The Rambling Man (48%) - a disgraced ex-Administrator whose complexity of current restrictions rivals the rusty cage ArbCom gradually erected around the infamous Eric Corbett.

Sir Joseph (40%) - absolute no hoper, non-Administrator, currently facing as site ban proposal for inflammation rhetoric in the Isreal-Palestine nuclear firestorm of an arena. Scary he even got 40%, but reflective of how insanely bad judge of character (or just insanely partisan) the average Wikipedian really is.

I think it's worth noting, TRM has been relatively quiet recently, just keeping his head down and grinding away doing the only thing he knows people find valuable about his otherwise unpleasant presence. Just have been tough, throwing bombs at ArbCom over the Fram affair is absolutely what he ordinarily likes doing. So there should be a red alert out there - the dude is most likely preparing to run.

Hard to see this ending in an outcome that doesn't highlight how en.wiki governance is simply unfit. Could be as bad as watching Trump try to staff his Administration, the only outcome that suits everyone, is nobody being appointed, and pretend like it's not an issue to have nobody in key positiins of leadership and action.

I think I already said it, but if the Wikipedians don't already have a number of active Arbitrators in mind that they would accept represents a a lack of quorum, now appears to be the time to be think it about it.

I see that this has not been included in the election RfC. All talk of emergency elections and replacements seems geared around the assumption this election actually elects a sufficient number of candidates to start with, and indeed there would be visible runners up.

The 2017 and 2018 elections were marred by the presence of candidates only standing to stop the obviously unsuitable candidates from succeeding, to give at least a pretence there was a choice, while making it pretty clear they were desperate to drop out as soon as someone better and more willing stood, which happened a few times.

Even after all the horse trading, there was no actual choice presented to the non-insane members of the electorate in 2017, and there was very little choice in 2018, and that is generously assuming holding your nose and voting for Drmies because you genuinely don't like the people who did make it (four of whom supported the desysop of Fram) is a good thing for Wikipedia.

This time around they might not even be able to make this resemble a genuine election (more than eleven viable candidates for eleven seats) even with the help of press ganging reluctant victims who secretly plan to do fuck all except be a name on a register that prevents someone really bad from getting a seat. If you have to guilt trip people so hard to simply stand, people who genuinely don't really want to win, something is very, very, wrong.

Surely they can appreciate the root cause of so many candidates this year ultimately not finding the time to properly contribute? Not all of them simply under-estimated the task, many knew what it entails, knew they couldn't meet it, but when they saw who might get in otherwise, felt compelled to promise the community something they couldn't deliver - a full (and effective) term of office.

The same can be said for why there was a very rare event this term, someone actually being fired. That likely doesn't happen if you have enough viable candidate to ensure voters aren't having to take a punt on voting for candidates based on nothing but an informed guess as to their character. In any other year, Alex Shih is getting a polite 'ok, you seem all right but, can we have another year of knowing who you really are before we elect you for high office?'. That year, well, you absolutely take a punt rather than leave a seat open at best, or leave a door open for the Trump candidate at worst.

This year, they're going to probably have more Trumps than they have Anyone But Trumps.

Clearly they're not preparing for the worst. Wikipedians. Amateurs to the very end.

HTD.

[Carrite]

Hilarious to think just how badly this might go.

They need to fill eleven seats. Eleven!

It's only been two years since the results finished like this......

Elected: eight viable candidates for eight seats, as reflected in the fact all polled above 60%.

Also rans:

Mailer Diablo (58%) - no real issues, but clearly a non-viable candidate, rather a last minute decision to stand to keep some of the other absolute nightmares out. There was absolutely no real reason to elect them over the eight others who succeeded.

That election was 9-to-make-8. Mailer Diablo could have been one of them.

Is it really 11 out of 13 total seats this year? They won't be able to fill the committee with Administrators if that is so, there will be one or more regular Editors winning seats...

One factor is the administrative corps is dwindling in absolute numbers. Another is that it is an aging, more or less stagnant pool, in which most of the obvious candidates have tried their hand at Arbcom and burned out on the shitty job.

Something has to give: either the size of the committee reduces or (your favorite scenario) self-governance collapses or (most likely) the viable candidate pool is expanded to include ordinary editors.

RfB

[JuiceBeetle]

One factor is the administrative corps is dwindling in absolute numbers. Another is that it is an aging, more or less stagnant pool, in which most of the obvious candidates have tried their hand at Arbcom and burned out on the shitty job.

This is a good summary. I assume the "closed circle" nature of the admin corps led to this aging. I blame the negative treatment (bullying) of editors, who stand up for their values, and would make formidable admins.

Something as to give: either the size of the committee reduces or (your favorite scenario) self-governance collapses or (most likely) the candidate pool is expanded to include ordinary editors.

The 1st one won't change much imo. The latter two of these outcomes might benefit the community.
1st: The committee can't be much worse, if smaller, than it was in recent years (assumption).
2nd: I prefer that the MYTH of self-governance collapses. There's no actual self-governance, enwiki is lead by a small group of influential editors (mostly admins and checkusers), in an oligarchic and authoritarian system. Independent, professional outsiders are necessary in decision-making positions to make the community less toxic, more inclusive, welcoming, and productive.
3rd: Including non-admins in ArbCom would lessen the power imbalance between editors and admins, probably. The result depends very much on the neutrality, and values of the chosen editor. The most visible/known/popular editors are not typically the drama-resolving kinds, so I see small chance that a really beneficial editor be chosen. Although being an arbitrator might bring out the best from anybody, so this is also just an assumption.

[CrowsNest]

The oddity is that while arbitrator is a "higher" and more "trusted" position than administrator, at least in theory one can imagine a very polarizing wiki-person, who is respected by 60% of the voters and disliked by the other 40% -- and who therefore could get elected to ArbCom but not pass RfA. That being said, this was never a very likely scenario, and is even less likely now that one can pass RfA (in the discretionary zone) at 65% rather than needing 75%.

Never a likely scenario?

This buffoon has clearly forgotten that the pass mark for Arbitrators is 50%, not 60% or 65%.

Why the discrepancy? Clearly because it's less of a risk to let someone scrape through on 50% just to be part of a Committee for a single year. Even less of a risk if they have already cleared the bar of 65% to be considered perpetually trustworthy as an individual.

Disgraced ex-Administrator The Rambling Man got 48% in 2017.

It is absolutely a threat that the community has not remotely taken seriously.

Maybe they would, if Wikipediocracy didn't keep banning people who know what the fuck they are talking about, simply because it upsets Brad to be publicly contradicted by outsiders.

[Kumioko]

The chances of a non admin getting selected to arb are basically zero.

The chances of people wanted to apply, let alone pass RFA are slightly above zero.

One of the many problems with arbcom is that traditionally the ones that want it are not the ones who should get it and the ones who would do good at it are usually smart enough not to want to do it.

Arbcom sucks, it's even worse when you have a bunch of burned out shithead hat collectors who don't want to do anything. The people who are running this year are no exception. It's a collection of some of the worst in the community trying to gain clout and peek behind the curtain.

[CrowsNest]

The chances of a non admin getting selected to arb are basically zero.

Obviously false. Hilariously so. I literally just showed an example of one finishing just 2% short.

The chances of people wanted to apply, let alone pass RFA are slightly above zero.

In English please?

One of the many problems with arbcom is that traditionally the ones that want it are not the ones who should get it and the ones who would do good at it are usually smart enough not to want to do it.

You get this shit from a Christmas cracker or something? What next? Absolute power corrupts absolutely?

Arbcom sucks, it's even worse when you have a bunch of burned out shithead hat collectors who don't want to do anything.

Lolwut? How the fuck does a hat collector who doesn't do anything end up burning out?

And to point out fucking obvious, the shitheads are the rabble rousing loudmouths who claim they'd do better, but like to make excuses for why they don't stand.

The people who are running this year are no exception.

The election hasn't begun yet, we don't know who is running yet. You absolute mong.

It's a collection of some of the worst in the community trying to gain clout and peek behind the curtain.

Pretty sure I heard someone say that already.

Do you have a single original thought in your head? One that actually makes sense.

You could at least do people the courtesy of attribution when you're stealing their thoughts.

[CrowsNest]

Whisper it quietly, but the departures of only two of the six Arbitrators who didn't make it to a full term, can be attributed to the unique pressures of serving during Framgate - BU_Rob and SilkTork. They lost three to the pressures of real life (Callanecc, Courcelles and RickInBaltimore) and one got fired for misconduct (Alex Shih).

I'll say it again, so it sinks in, they lost double the amount of Arbitrators for entirely foreseeable reasons, than they did for reasons of the supposedly unforeseeable Framban and its fallout.

The whole system has been creaking under the pressure since well before Framgate.

There is just waaaay too much distance now between the office of Administrator, who can basically do what they like, and the office of Arbitrator, whose every single word is ripped apart.

This was the case before Framgate.

Now that candidates know there is also loyalty test to pass, and a promise to never examine private evidence on the assumption you're up to no good, to be made, well, who would even bother to stand?

By my estimation, those who want change, if desysopping Fram is considered a bad decision, they need to win eight of the eleven seats up for grabs. If they can't win at least four outright, on the assumption there won't be eleven people who get over 50%, they also fail. And this is being generous.

I don't see that many electable people in the ranks of those who want change.

Nor do I see many who really believes in the fundamental principles of Wikipedia being willing to stand, or being able to win without telling a few pretty serious lies about who they are and what they want to achieve.

The result of this election is likely to show Wikipedia is properly fucked, their assertions of, or ambitions to be autonomous and self-governing, laughably laid bare.