Dude is crashing and burning.
Turns out they no like the scrappy scrappy after all. Well, in a large enough minority, anyway. Can't really call it evidence that the community as a whole now has principles and standards. Regardless, it is proving to be another spectacular misread by Ritchie. I wonder if he will update his stats, or just stop claiming he's the RfA whisperer? It is also arguably another case of a candidate looking at the people who oppose and thinking, you bloody hypocrites, you've done far far worse, and paid no price at all. Literally none.
You can tell Wikipedia has a long ways to go before it really gets this idea of standards and ethics. This really low blow, coming at a critical point, has raised no eyebrows at all.....
Oppose I've thought about this for a couple of days, and I just can't support yet. Lots of good stuff, to be sure, but I keep coming back to the arb case. If you can't keep your head in a formal setting when you're criticized, the informal admin confrontations will really make you nuts. There's a way to disengage, and it's not by calling one of my colleagues 'despicable' and it's not by running away from something you started in the first place. I could support in a few months, perhaps, but not now. Katietalk 18:25, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
There is something quite unseemly about an Arb opposing an admin candidate in a way that merely reads as defence of the honour of a colleague. A rather disreputable colleague, one who happily advocates for user's rights to express themselves in a frank manner, in ways many call disrespectful, and has consistently defended users who do so, so it isn't even a morally consistent defence.
Indeed, it is a defence which fails to acknowledge said colleague admitted at the time to have used "rhetorical excess" in the comment that triggered his reaction, and that extremely opinionated comment was really a mild example of what she is capable of in that role.
There is also something unseemly about Arbs bringing their considerable weight to RfA at all, but for some reason it is still allowed. I thought precedent has been set, via Gorilla Warfare at AE, that no, for reasons of separation of powers and influence, they are no longer entitled to be seen as ordinary Admins who can do ordinary Admin stuff, like vote in RfA.
Above and beyond those two issues, is the fact her oppose relates directly to how the candidate reacted to a decision she made as an Arb, which he vehemently disagreed with. That is what makes it look like more than just being too casual with roles and responsibilities. Plenty of hopefully neutral observers had already had their say on it, so it isn't like she can even claim to be raising an unknown issue, or a unique perspective.
To put some clarity on her likely motivation to squish this guy's candidacy, here's the context:
Admin_Candidate wrote:I firmly feel this needs to be directly addressed by the committee [not of a a motion]........The last time was handled by motion too and contained warning that further problems could result in a desysop......Jbh Talk — 19:30, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Sitting_Arbitrator wrote:I don't think this requires a full case, and I don't think it rises to the level of a desysop. I would be open to a final warning to FPaS to avoid the appearance of INVOLVEment. Katietalk 21:35, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
Decline. A motion is in the works. Katietalk 19:45, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
The barb about "running away" is particularly cold, given the Administrator he was seeking to have an Arb Case about, simply said this.......
Statement by Future Perfect at Sunrise
I stand by every word I said yesterday on the noticeboard and I'm not planning to engage in any further discussion here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:28, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
It makes you wonder why Administrators are even allowed to essentially brush off an Arb Case request against them, given WP:ADMINACCT at al. Surely a substantive rebuttal of the request
fits Katie's definition of what is required of a cool head in such a formal setting?
No standards. Dude is lucky. It's a fast track to an ulcer for anyone who actually has standards, to volunteer to work in conflict resolution, in this environment.
If or when Future Perfect is finally, justifiably, desysopped, it will hopefully turn Jbh against Wikipedia for good. Shit like that tends to have a transformative effect. Knowing you were right, and being proven right much later, but far too late to have a second chance at being all the Wikipedian you could have been, well, that'll turn a dude to the Dark Side as much as anything.
We here on the Dark Side, we likes us a new recruit with a bit of the scrappy scrappy.....