Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2021/Candidates/Wugapodes

Wugapodes

This is the talk page for discussing a candidate for election to the Arbitration Committee.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Use third-level headers for new sections. Example: === Heading title ===. Unsure about the election process? Please review the election rules. Issue with inappropriate commentary or questions? Please notify an election volunteer.	Be civil No personal attacks Refrain from canvassing and harassment Discuss the election, or ask questions here

Arbiter

I have not participated in discussions regarding arb candidates before. I was impressed that the candidate would take on the recent Halloween thread. However I was unimpressed that the candidate repeated in summary, every accusation uttered by antagonists in that thread. I said as much to the candidate and was dismissed. We are all volunteering our time for the benefit of the project, and it should be helpful to remind the candidate of that. Not sure how I will ivote. Lightburst (talk) 01:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Experience as admin needed?

Wugapodes' run for ACE comes very hard on the heels of his successful bid for the mop only a year and 10 months ago and has only been really actively editing since May 2019. In his candidate statement, he claims: I can provide a unique perspective to the committee, but leaves one to guess what that special perspective might be. There's nothing to dislike about Wugapodes or his work so far, but not much to demonstrate how he might perform as an arbitrator. If this were a request at ORCP (which of course it isn't), my boilerplate suggestion would be: 'Keep up the good work and come back in a year when we have something to measure.' And indeed, there will almost certainly be an ACE in 2022 (time passes very quickly), unless the community votes for a radically different system to replace Arbcom - which might not be a bad idea ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:44, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

This is reasonable, but I did think it worth noting for comparison @Kudpung: I thought I'd note that Barkeep49 was only an admin for about 16 months before his successful election, and I don't think many (though I don't know about you) view him as an unsuccessful arb. Having some "younger" (experientially) opinions on the committee to go along with the need for institutional history a la WTT, are both beneficial imo. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:56, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't think Barkeep49 has been unsuccessful as an Arb. Quite to the contrary in fact, Nosebagbear, and that's why I was enthusiastic about him running for a seat despite the fact that as I accurately predicted, NPR would fall apart without his leadership. Barkeep49 was never one of my 'collectibles' but I had a great respect for what he did there; it was a pleasure to work with him and he left an enduring impression. He's that kind of 'get up and go' person - one who sees a task and without waiting to be begged to help out, he just goes for it like he has with his monumental attempt at RfA reform and he has at least another year left to continue making his mark on Arbcom.

As I said above, there's nothing not to like about Wugapodes, but for me he's a bit of a dark horse and I don't see that level of energy. Fortunately he's certainly not a governance obsessive and he doesn't throw his weight about which are huge plus points for eating at the high table. Without saying who I have voted for, he might not be a front runner but he nevertheless ranks high in my preferences and I would far sooner see him on the committee than some of the other candidates. Anyway, the voter guides are written, the initial stampede to vote is over and people have stopped jostling to get into the polling station, so it's all rather moot now. We just need to sit back and wait for the results and perhaps look forward to what that 'unique perspective' actually is. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:31, 29 November 2021 (UTC)