On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Milos Rancic <mill...@gmail.com> wrote: > On the other side, I would note > that being a member of en.wp's ArbCom is highly stressful position and > I don't think that there are many of long-term ArbCom members (in > comparison to, let's say, WMF Board). I am sure that one of the most > important reasons are negative votes, exactly. You can't do good job > if you want to be reelected.
Advertising
Newyorkbrad managed to serve for _eight years_, and most people seem to think he did a good job. It is true that most arbitrators don't serve for very long,[0] but this is mainly because they either resign or choose not to run again. The standard reasons are "it's too stressful" or "I'm too busy". From what I remember, the usual panic around election time is that there won't be enough candidates (of course, there always are). There were elections for CheckUser and Oversight for a couple years, but ArbCom went back to just appointing people after there was an election in which only one person passed the vote threshold. CU/OS is more comparable to stewardship than to ArbCom, though. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/History#Former_members _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
