Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Nandesuka

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Chalst (talk | contribs) at 16:24, 9 January 2006 (Link to Theresa Knott's page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I'm confused as to how the link referenced in two of the oppose votes reflects at all badly on this candidate. Beginning with the actual difs, I see one where he says"I'd like to ask you to take a look at our discussion on those pages, and render an opinion. If you think I'm over the line, I will of course step back.", and the following where he says "I am openminded and willing to hear and respond to criticism from someone not so close to the issue, and I hope that Tony is as well." What's the problem here? - brenneman(t)(c) 14:22, 9 January 2006

I agree. Nandesuka's postings on Theresa's page illustrate a great deal of maturity and sensibility. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have either of you actually followed any of the diff links and tracked down nandesuka's response? Look at his one sentence reply to Tony's complaint:

This is characteristic of his replies: not taking the accusation seriously, and instead using the complaint to cast aspersions on Tony. While I agree there is often room for disagreement as to whether a personal attack has taken place, treating a good faith complaint in such a condescending manner violates my understanding of WP:CIVIL. Far from evidence of maturity, I find Nandesuka's behaviour evidence of at least some immaturity and a sign of unfitness for ArbCom. --- Charles Stewart 16:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]