Misplaced Pages

:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Candidate statements/Questions for Nandesuka - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006 | Candidate statements

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nandesuka (talk | contribs) at 22:47, 5 November 2006 (→Questions from []: reply to Chacor). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:47, 5 November 2006 by Nandesuka (talk | contribs) (→Questions from []: reply to Chacor)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Please ask your questions here. Thanks! Nandesuka 14:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Questions from Chacor

A question I ask of randomly-selected candidates (although it was originally planned for all to answer):

  • What is your opinion of ex-admins who have not voluntarily given up their sysophood? Do you think they should be resysopped at AC's will, or do you think that they should go through another RfA? What are your thoughts on the current re-adminship process for involuntarily-desysopped admins? – Chacor 15:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Answer: As the number of admins makes clear, the bar in terms of getting admin privileges in the first place is fairly low. I don't view it as unnecessarily burdensome to ask ex-admins in the situation you describe to go through RfA again. It's clear that AC/the bureaucrats can resysop ex-admins at will, but I think such privilege should be exercised sparingly, along with an explanation to the community as to why the need for such action was compelling.

This is completely separate from the question of whether the RfA process as it exists is working well. Nandesuka 22:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Questions from Newyorkbrad

Welcome to the race. My standard questions. Newyorkbrad 15:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

1. What can be done to reduce the delays in the arbitration process?

2. Would you anticipate participating in the actual writing of decisions. If so, do you have writing experience relevant to this task?

Questions from Fys

  1. I will be asking the same three questions to every candidate. 'Arbitration' is a process of dispute resolution. If the parties to an arbitration, after it has gone to the committee, manage to resolve the dispute or any part of it themselves, would you continue the case or that part of it? If so, why, and if not, why not? Fys. &#147;Ta fys aym&#148;. 17:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. What role do you believe private discussions between the parties and members of the committee should play in determining the outcome of Arbitration cases? Fys. &#147;Ta fys aym&#148;. 17:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Take a look at Misplaced Pages:Probation. Under what circumstances should users who have not had any restrictions on their editing imposed, be removed from probation? Fys. &#147;Ta fys aym&#148;. 17:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Questions from jd2718

1. Nandesuka, can you point us to a dispute in which you have benefited from mediation? (or which could have used mediation?) Have you been involved in an arbitration? Please comment.

2. Your statement explains why you think you would make a good arbitrator. What would the ArbCom be missing if you were not elected? Jd2718 19:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Question(s) from xaosflux

  1. As functions assigned by ArbCom, describe your view on the assignments of Oversight and Checkuser permissions, including thresholds for (or even the possibility of) new applicants. (Question from — xaosflux 19:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)