User:Shot info/ACE2008

Just my thoughts on how I think I will vote based on nominee’s responses to the questions and my own personal thoughts and interactions (or lack thereof). Note that “not an admin” to me is just a cop out and an enforcement of Wikipedia’s growing class divide between the “Haves” and “Havenots”.

Those that are blank are those that I’m thinking about. Chances are they will be automatic opposes if they have limited article space work such that I cannot gauge who or what they are.

User	Comments	Vote
AnthonyQBachler	Nope – needs more articlespace edits....a lot more in fact.	Oppose
BillMasen
Carcharoth	Performance during Matthew Hoffman case was suspect.	Oppose
Casliber	Yes, good nominee cuts thru some of the guff (not all) supports science (generally speaking). And for that - receives my support.	Support
Charles Matthews	Nope – tends to support anti-science civil POV pushers. Besides time for new blood - current ArbCom seems to making too many determinations which the Community disagrees with.	Oppose
Cool Hand Luke	Excellent editor, cool head.	Support
Coren
Dream Focus
Fish and karate
George The Dragon
Gwen Gale	Maybe next time.	Oppose
Hemlock Martinis
Jayvdb
Jdforrester	IRC – need we say more? Besides time for some new blood.	Oppose
Jehochman	Yes, most definitely. Gets to the heart of the matter much to the undisguised disgust of those who would rather they get brushed under the carpet. Although I have to admit, he seems to be lately (ie/ in the last couple of months) trying to obtain a "middle ground" which is just presenting himself as highly confused rather than the decisive individual we have all being familiar with. This could be a result of him attempting to "retreat to the centre" in order to be more presentable to his detractors for this ArbCom. I honestly hope it as, only as the new-Jehochman is not the Jehochman that I voted support for in this election. I will definitely oppose the new-Jehochman in future ArbCom elections.	Support
Justice America	Nah - need another couple of thousand articlespace edits. So at this rate, maybe in 40 or so years time?	Oppose
Kmweber
Lankiveil
lifebaka
Privatemusings
Risker	Good to see wanting to get on board. Pro-science.	Support
Rlevse	Excellent nominee Having some problems with some of this editors edits and who he chooses to back. So moving to neutral until I think about it a bit. Could end up as a oppose though. We'll see. Actually just read SLR's comments and the ambigious response by RL. Sorry - not-pro-science = anti-science which equates to an automatic oppose. Sorry about that, but you really need to change your views.	Oppose
RMHED	Excellent nominee – pro science.	Support
Roger Davies	Wow, this guys certainly has slipped under my radar. I like what he has done and his responses to many questions. I also like the fact that I haven't encountered him which tends to imply that he stays well outside the dramazone. A lot of his work indicates that he is pro science, and I like pro-science.	Support
Sam Korn
Shell Kinney	Elonka meatpuppet (see WR). Although she does appear to be moving out of that sphere in recent times. Maybe next year.	Oppose
SirFozzie	Like how this guy edits and how he acts in the moar dramaz. Good nominee.	Support
The Fat Man Who Never Came Back	While seems flippant – it only seems to be to upseting Those-Who-Should-Know-Better. When serious – has excellent grasp on the issue(s). Heck even when flippant still has a grasp on the issue(s).	Support
Trojanpony
Vassyana	Yes. Pro-science	Support
White Cat
WilyD
Wizardman	Dang - on the whole I quite like Wizardman and his edits but this response just screams to me that he's more interested in pleasing those who don't understand science and who fail to accomdate it.	Oppose
WJBscribe	Suspect - Elonka meat puppet (see comments on WR)	Oppose