A three-member Electoral Commission was proposed and gained consensus during the 2012 Arbitration Committee Election Request for comment. Editors wishing to volunteer as a commissioner should create a section on this RfC, and all editors are encouraged to comment on the suitability of volunteers for this role. Three volunteers will be chosen as Commissioners, and the remaining qualified applicants will be reserve members of the Electoral Commission. This is not a vote or an election; the final appointments will be made by Jimbo Wales.

The mandate of the Electoral Commission is to deal with unforeseen problems in the 2013 Arbitration Committee election process, and to adjudicate any disputes during the election, but members of the Election Commission should only intervene when there is a problem that needs resolving, and either discussion isn't working, the rules are unclear, or there isn't time. Commissioners and reserve members are not eligible for election to the Arbitration Committee during this year's election. Commissioners must be identified to the Foundation.

GiantSnowman[edit]

Hello I'm GiantSnowman, I've been an editor for editor for just under 8 years and an admin for just under 2. I think I'm a pretty good guy, and I'm more than happy to lend a hand if one is needed.

Comments[edit]

Thanks for volunteering. Could you confirm whether you're identified to the Foundation, or would be able to identify if necessary? Happy‑melon 16:15, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not currently, but am more than happy to identify should it be required. My identity is not a big secret, as anyone who has ever e-mailed me will testify. GiantSnowman 16:18, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Users endorsing GiantSnowman[edit]

1. Endorse Perfectly trustworthy, experienced and suitable, obviously. Thanks for volunteering. Begoon ^talk 15:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
2. 28bytes (talk) 17:46, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
3. Rschen7754 18:47, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
4. Guy Macon (talk) 20:12, 1 November 2013 (UTC) Please note that where I did not endorse a candidate it is because I am unfamiliar with her/him; they all seem to be qualified. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:12, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
5. Thryduulf (talk) 22:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
6. Miniapolis 22:56, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
7. Mark Miller (talk) 03:09, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
8. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 21:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
9. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
10. Hobit (talk) 14:33, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
11. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:00, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
12. —John Cline (talk) 06:06, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
13. Neljack (talk) 08:33, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
14. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 17:01, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
15. NE Ent 00:12, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
16. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TParis[edit]

Hello I'm TParis. I'm willing to volunteer for the electoral commission. I have no intention to run for Arbcom and I've never had a sanction levied against me by Arbcom (or anyone that I recall). I've been involved in the Arbcom election process for the last couple of years and I am fairly familiar with the community consensus about the election. I'm already identified to the foundation.

Comments[edit]

Users endorsing TParis[edit]

1. Endorse Perfectly trustworthy, experienced and suitable, obviously. Thanks for volunteering. Begoon ^talk 15:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
2. 28bytes (talk) 17:46, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
3. Rschen7754 18:47, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
4. Guy Macon (talk) 20:13, 1 November 2013 (UTC) Please note that where I did not endorse a candidate it is because I am unfamiliar with her/him; they all seem to be qualified. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:13, 1 November 2013 (UTC) Given recent revelations since I placed my vote, I want to make it clear that nothing has changed my initial favorable opinion. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:08, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
5. Thryduulf (talk) 22:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
6. Miniapolis 22:57, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
7. Mark Miller (talk) 03:09, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
8. Yep. I often find myself in agreement with TParis, occasionally don't, but he's about as straight-up as they come, fair, knowledgeable, trustworthy, and a clear and concise communicator. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:32, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
9. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 21:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
10. - MrX 23:21, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
11. Hobit (talk) 14:33, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
12. Strong endorsement. Go Phightins! 04:52, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
13. Glaisher [talk] 09:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
14. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:00, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
15. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 19:48, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
16. —John Cline (talk) 06:06, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
17. Neljack (talk) 08:33, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
18. --Epipelagic (talk) 03:46, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
19. – TP took on a tough ANI matter and handled it with aplomb. – S. Rich (talk) 05:03, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
20. NE Ent 00:13, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
21. Even when I disagree with him about something, he still exhibits the qualities Sandy lists above. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:33, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
22. Based on past experience with the election RFC's. Neutron (talk) 02:30, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy-melon[edit]

As I said in the RfC, I have held this (or equivalent) role in every ArbCom election since 2009, and am very happy to serve on the Electoral Commission again. I don't see it as a very substantive role, but it is one which occasionally requires some technical skill and a level head, both of which I believe I have and have demonstrated in the past. As a former Oversighter I am already identified to the Foundation. Happy‑melon 15:52, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

Users endorsing Happy-melon[edit]

1. Well-duh... I thought you were preselected... I already said obvious above and I'm all out of superlatives - super-obvious, maybe? Begoon ^talk 16:22, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
2. 28bytes (talk) 17:46, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
3. Rschen7754 18:48, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
4. Thryduulf (talk) 22:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
5. Neljack (talk) 07:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
6. --S Philbrick(Talk) 21:37, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
7. Very strong support: Happy-melon is the only candidate on this list with an intimate knowledge of, and ability to trouble-shoot, the SecurePoll software. I can speak from my personal experience as a member of the WMF election committee this year that the absence on that committee of someone of Happy-melon's skillset was a major factor in the unplanned delay of that election. I have little doubt that Happy-melon can help to develop these skills in one or more other members of this electoral commission, and will do so gladly, so that this knowledge is spread more effectively through the community. Risker (talk) 22:15, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
8. Looking over the list here over the past few days, I had been thinking along the same lines as Risker. There will definitely be a need to draw on the previous experience of someone like Happy-melon. Carcharoth (talk) 00:15, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
9. Based on experience doing this job in previous years. Neutron (talk) 03:34, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
10. Strong support per Risker - Happy-Melon has alot more of an understanding, the knowledge and the experience here!. -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 17:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
11. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:16, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
12. NE Ent 00:11, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
13. Vital that we have someone on board who has done this before. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:33, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Macon[edit]

I am Guy Macon, and I have over seven years with no blocks or sanctions (and as far as I recall no administrator warnings in at least the last five years). I am a volunteer at the dispute resolution noticeboard, and looking over my activities there should give you a good indication of my temperament and experience with calmly dealing with situations where tempers tend to flare. I have been involved with three arbcom cases (always as an outside observer) and one enforcement request. They are:

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Monty Hall problem/Evidence#Evidence presented by Guy Macon (outside observer, uninvolved with editing the page in question)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Racepacket/Evidence#Evidence presented by uninvolved editor Guy Macon

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/MickMacNee/Evidence#Civility isn't taken seriously by the community

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive96#Request concerning Glkanter

I edit using my legal name and have provided identification to the Wikimedia Foundation.[1][2] --Guy Macon (talk) 18:05, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

• Through what I've seen of Guy, I have significant concerns about his ability to act neutrally and professionally in such a role. For example, [3], [4], and most of all [5]. --Rschen7754 19:07, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While the above should be evaluated on its own merits, not on who wrote it, here is a bit of context regarding previous interactions I and my fellow DRN volunteer Mark Miller had with Rschen7754. [6][7][8][9][10](Thread) --Guy Macon (talk) 19:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would also note that Rschen7754 voted for every candidate except me, usually within minutes of the candidate filing. I have no misconceptions about the probable result here (others have more experience and support, and indeed I have given support votes to several of my "opponents"), but I would like to be evaluated on my record, not on the fact that one admin holds a grudge against me because I volunteer at DRN and asked him to follow the published DRN guidelines. --Guy Macon (talk) 02:25, 9 November 2013 (UTC) Ann explanation by Rschen7754 on my talk page[11] has convinced me that I was wrong about his reason for voting for every other candidate, Please disregard the above. --Guy Macon (talk) 08:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The last of the diffs is from 2012, well before any of the DRN stuff happened. Also, I am very familiar with all the other candidates and their work on this site, or for Ruslik0, as a steward. --Rschen7754 07:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So your "and most of all" complaint is this: After multiple users -- yourself included -- asked Saboche to stop complaining about the Vietnamese Wikipedia on the English Wikipedia without any apparent effect (he kept posting complaints after your attempt), I told him the same thing in a considerably more direct and forceful manner (which resulted in him stopping his behavior) and somehow my actions were biased and unprofessional? He just wasn't getting it. Sometimes you have to be direct and even blunt when dealing with someone who has limited English skills and who isn't quite understanding the more vague/polite language that works well with a native speaker. As I said, I invite anyone to look at the above diffs and make up their own mind. I doubt that anyone else will see any wrongdoing and suggest that you -- consciously or unconsciously -- are biased against me because I didn't let you violate the published DRN guidelines. It doesn't matter in this case -- other candidates are better qualified unless Jimbo decides that having no prior relationship with anyone associated with Arbcom is the deciding factor -- but am I going to have to deal with this every time I volunteer to help, anywhere on Wikipedia? Would opening a discussion on one of our talk ages and trying to resolve our differences help? --Guy Macon (talk) 08:34, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Users endorsing Guy Macon[edit]

1. Support See there's the rub, and my mistake... !Vote early and keep having to come back, lest a new candidate has been missed. Did I say obviously yet? Well it applies to Guy, obviously. Begoon ^talk 18:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
2. Thryduulf (talk) 22:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
3. Miniapolis 22:59, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
4. Mark Miller (talk) 03:09, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
5. Neljack (talk) 08:32, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
6. 3 positions = 3 endorsements. I've seen Guy on numerous occasions, but this this edit won my endorsement [12]. Who gets my 3rd endorsement? Tough call! – S. Rich (talk) 05:16, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

KTC[edit]

I have been an editor on the English Wikipedia since 2004, and an administor since December last year. I have previously served on the Wikimedia Foundation Election Committee in 2008 and 2013, and volunteered for the electoral commission last year. I have not been in any serious conflict with other editors, so will not have any conflict of interest with any potential candidates for this election. KTC (talk) 20:02, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

• KTC has a potential conflict of interest regarding Wikimedia UK staff and trustees, but as my understanding is that the same conflict of interest issues would prevent their running for ArbCom (Chase me ladies resigned from ArbCom to take up a WMUK staff position) this CoI will not arise with any candidate. In the very unlikely event that there is a problem with a WMUK staff member or trustee's voting and/or commenting during the election I trust KTC to leave any non-urgent action to a fellow commissioner. Note that I am supporting KTC's nomination at the same time as writing this comment. Thryduulf (talk) 22:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Users endorsing KTC[edit]

1. Rschen7754 20:05, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
2. Guy Macon (talk) 20:13, 1 November 2013 (UTC) Please note that where I did not endorse a candidate it is because I am unfamiliar with her/him; they all seem to be qualified. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:13, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
3. See also my comment.Thryduulf (talk) 22:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
4. ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 21:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
5. I had the pleasure of working with KTC on the WMF Election Committee earlier this year, and she was a diligent and focused member of the committee. Risker (talk) 22:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
6. Mark Miller (talk) 23:19, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
7. —John Cline (talk) 06:06, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
8. Based primarily on Risker's endorsement; experience in this kind of thing (even if not exactly the same) is a significant plus. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:33, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
9. Neljack (talk) 23:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ruslik0[edit]

I have been an administrator for nearly five years and and a Wikimedia steward for nearly three years. I am willing to serve as a member as the Electoral Commission because I want to enrich my experience with the election process. I am already identified to the Foundation. Thank you. Ruslik_Zero 19:33, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

Users endorsing Ruslik0[edit]

1. Rschen7754 19:52, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
2. Vogone (talk) 20:35, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
3. Thryduulf (talk) 21:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
4. yep, stable and sane editor. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:36, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
5. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:12, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
6. Glaisher [talk] 09:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
7. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:00, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
8. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 17:33, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
9. Neljack (talk) 23:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]