Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2009/Candidate statements/SirFozzie

SirFozzie

Wikipedia is a year older, and a year wiser. We face challenges, both old and new. The Arbitration Committee has made a good start to being more open, and handling things in a more reasonable manner. We must continue to elect new blood, and new ideas.

Once again, I will make the pledge that no matter what the result of the ongoing ArbCom RfC, I will limit myself to a tranche of no more then two years. Two years is all a vast majority of people can handle in this position, and for those brave few who think they can do longer then that, the two year mark is a good position for the community to see what type of job they are doing.

We must not become complacent. We must not stop looking for ways to improve. Last year, a new wave was set in motion. This year, we must ensure that wave does not peter out.

Here are some thoughts.

A) Look into additional ways in which ArbCom can streamline case handling Whether that's continuing to delegate sub-groups in the ArbCom, such as the Ban Appeal Committee, appointing 4-6 members of ArbCom per case to work as an active sub-group (rather then waiting for all 18 or however many Arbitrators to chime in), we need to be looking for additional ways to make sure ArbCom is handling their duties in an expeditious manner. ArbCom is the last stop on dispute resolution, so whenever a case gets accepted, it means that any delays will only harden the ill-will and un-collaborative editing environment, making the ArbCom job even more difficult. ArbCom must always be looking for ways to expedite their work, while making sure to do a complete job.

B) Highlight areas of Wikipedia policy that need to be looked at fully. ArbCom cannot create policy out of whole cloth.they can highlight areas where Wikipedia's policies are unclear, contradictory or can be improved. They cannot create policy, but they can lead the discussion... this is something that needs to be more aggresively pushed at the ArbCom level.

C) Continue to look at alternative remedies to manage problematic areas Topic bans, 1RR, and probation can be more fully utilized to keep users with problems editing in certain areas from disrupting, although keeping them in editing in areas where it benefits the encyclopedia. I would also be more willing to put subject areas under probationary terms.

• SirFozzie (talk · contribs · count · logs · target logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · checkuser · socks · rights · blocks · protects · deletions · moves)