Given your reluctant candidacy, your limited service and the not insignificant opposition at your RfA, how open are you to the idea that ArbCom perhaps might be better off having fewer members returned this year, rather than electing candidates who may not yet be able to command the required level of trust and respect through no fault of their own? In other words, do you believe the Committee is better off being a certain size regardless of its makeup, or do you have any reason why you specifically should be elected in spite of your limited experience? Horizon of Happy (talk) 11:15, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Hard pass!I refute your assumed equivalence between time served and experience. If I stopped editing today, and did the bare minimum to avoid an inactivity desysop, I would progress up the Wikipedia:Administrative service awards until March 2026. I would have improved not one iota as an editor or as an admin but would, by your criteria have 6 years experience rather than a just under two. None of the serving arbitrators (so far as I have seen) have indicated that the last year at Arbcom has been such a cushy number that they feel fewer members are required. Cabayi (talk) 09:58, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
This looks increasingly likely to be the first year ever where fewer candidates reach the minimum support threshold than there are seats available.