Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Casliber

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008 | Vote

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Harthacnut (talk | contribs) at 11:22, 14 December 2008 (→Support). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Casliber

Hello, I am Casliber (which happens to be an unspaced version of my real name) and have been editing since May 2006, and an admin since March 2007. I am nominating myself for arbcom as I feel I have some attributes which may be of benefit to wikipedia in difficult cases.

My main role is as a contributor and coordinator of (hopefully) quality content; wikipedia excels in its opportunity and use of collaborative editing. No man editor is an island and the skills in various areas of putting pen to paper (or digital equivalent) that I have improved on since I have been here I have been impressed and grateful for. I have spent most time in areas which make use of collaborative editing; Featured Article, DYK and (to a lesser extent) Good Article writing, as well as involvement with various wikiprojects (Fungi, Dinosaurs, Birds, D&D, medicine, some sports etc.), and have thought of ways of how to bring out the best in people with respect to article writing and improvement.

Now in my day job I am a psychiatrist and part of my job/role/skill-set/training etc. involves listening and watching and figuring out things like whether people are able to negotiate and collaborate with others, and if/how they can assume responsibility.

I figure experience in both of these areas may be useful in analysing difficult cases in how firmly to apply remedies or when to cut some slack in figuring out what is ultimately best for the 'pedia and how to get the best out of users.

Another point I'd like to make is that doctors generally shouldn't treat themselves or their families; the analogy here is arbcom. Many currently involved, and seeking to get elected have been involved for some time. This is a good thing and I fully support their involvement. However, I do think the committee may benefit from some experienced wikipedians who may not have been heavily involved and are hence more able to make objective observations and recommendations in some cases where arbcom members may be involved or a particular case is critical of some aspect integral to arbcom in some way.

Thus, if folks feel this is a benefit, I am happy to serve. If people feel all candidates should be heavily experienced, then so be it. Ask away.

Support

  1. Privatemusings (talk) 00:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Cool Hand Luke 00:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Maxim(talk) 00:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. Antandrus (talk) 00:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Captain panda 00:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --Kanonkas :  Talk  00:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Cla68 (talk) 00:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Black Kite 00:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Sluzzelin talk 00:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support --maclean 00:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Seraphim♥ 00:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. ~the editorofthewiki (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 00:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Tom B (talk) 00:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Strongest support —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 00:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Perhaps a head doctor is what we need around here! JodyB talk 02:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Rationale. Giggy (talk) 00:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. ~ priyanath talk 00:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support. Mathsci (talk) 00:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support per User:SandyGeorgia/ArbVotes. Jehochman Talk 00:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support - Shot info (talk) 00:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Strong Support A fair, level-headed contributor who resolves conflict well and whom I trust to put their considerable expertise and experience to work for the betterment of the project. Steven Walling (talk) 00:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. iridescent 00:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. --PeaceNT (talk) 00:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. krimpet✽ 00:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  28. PhilKnight (talk) 01:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support - I would like to add that I would support you for multiple positions at ArbCom at the same time. :P Ottava Rima (talk) 01:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support Sam Blab 01:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support Majorly talk 01:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  32. I like Casliber, I think he's very bright, it would be very interesting to have a psychiatrist on the Arbitration Committee and all in all I have hopes that he will do a great job. His lack of familiarity with the issues before the committee does concern me, and I found it very strange that he set up a straw poll on the contents of his signature. But, on balance, a support. Avruch T 01:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  34. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Despite some concerns, I think Cas would be a net benefit to arb. Gimmetrow 01:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Protonk (talk) 01:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Strong support has strong understanding of the basics. AC makes articlewriters more inclined to write, I think. YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 01:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  38. See reasoning. east718 01:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  39. I had made a list of people who I would be find with (though not necessarily in top 7) on ArbCom and this candidate was one of those people. - NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 01:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Graham87 01:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  41. iMatthew 01:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  42. --- Euryalus (talk) 01:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  43. — CharlotteWebb 01:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support: Perhalps one of the most talent, balanced and charasmatic editors we have seen on wikipedia. His contribs are just amazing. Ceoil (talk) 01:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Dedicated to the encyclopedia part of the project. AgneCheese/Wine 01:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Great user! Great helper :D --Mixwell!Talk 02:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Atmoz (talk) 02:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Possibly the strongest support for anyone I will vote for. All around good contributor and colleague. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 02:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  49. ~ Riana ⁂ 02:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Though the mainspace needs you. John Reaves 02:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support yes. J.delanoygabsadds 02:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support Kingturtle (talk) 02:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  53. L'Aquatique[talk] 02:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Never previously heard of this editor, but seems well qualified, certainly enough to be given a chance at this. And a trained psychiatrist no less ... that shouldn't do any harm! Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Daniel (talk) 02:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support. rootology (C)(T) 02:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  57. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 02:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  58. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Tentative support. Prodego talk 03:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  60. GtstrickyTalk or C 03:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support Strong candidate, mature outlook and even temperament, good demonstrated abilities in conflict resolution and taking the heat out of situations, unquestionably part of the community - all things ArbCom needs right now. I hope it doesn't affect his excellent mainspace contribs too much though :( Orderinchaos 03:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Epbr123 (talk) 03:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  63. David Shankbone 03:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Has a calm demeanor suited for an arbitrator. Royalbroil 03:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support BJTalk 04:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Support Eusebeus (talk) 04:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Casliber is a well-rounded editor and knows much of the site in and out - he would likely bring an educated and intelligent perspective to ArbCom. Master&Expert (Talk) 04:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  68. I heartily endorse this product and/or service. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 04:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Strongest support, an ideal candidate-the highest competency with everything that matters, patient, diligent, gets the project. --JayHenry (talk) 04:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Support. Would make a good arb. --Alecmconroy (talk) 04:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Mike H. Fierce! 04:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Support Law shoot! 05:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Support. Everyking (talk) 05:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Support as fellow DYK reviewer. Haven't seen this guy lose his head there, and there are opportunities. Daniel Case (talk) 05:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  75. –Outriggr § 05:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Support. Seems to have his head on straight, has been fair whenever I've run into him, and I think he'd do a fine job. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Support. (rationale) rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 06:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  78. Yeah, OK. MER-C 06:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Support. Cirt (talk) 07:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Support Graham Colm Talk 07:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  81. –Moondyne 07:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Support. — Athaenara ✉ 07:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  83. Strong support لennavecia 07:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  84. — sephiroth bcr (converse) 07:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  85. Davewild (talk) 08:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  86. -- Avi (talk) 08:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  87. Support Ironholds (talk) 08:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  88. Support Likely to get stuff done, and get it done well. Pedro :  Chat  08:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  89. Support. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  90. Strong support, sensible stance on BLP and ArbCom's role, exactly what we need right now. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  91. --Aqwis (talk – contributions) 09:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  92. Strong support per stance on BLP indicated in Lar's questions Fritzpoll (talk) 09:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  93. —Dark talk 09:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  94. Strongest possible support. - The only negative that could possibly come from this person sitting on ArbCom would be a slightly lower article development level of activity. I think that's a reasonable tradeoff for such an obviously thoughtful and careful addition to the committee; contributing to a better environment on WP will necessarily attract more good editors. // roux   editor review09:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  95. Support Avenue (talk) 09:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  96. Support Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  97. Oldelpaso (talk) 10:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  98. Support Very pleasant interaction despite occasionally opposite views. – sgeureka t•c 10:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  99. Stifle (talk) 10:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  100. — neuro(talk) 10:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  101. Absolutely. PeterSymonds (talk) 10:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  102. Support - Mr Bungle | talk 10:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  103. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 10:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  104. Very sane. Tombomp (talk/contribs) 11:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  105. Support - With the condition that he continues his great article work. ScarianCall me Pat! 11:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  106. Support with the hope that his article work does not suffer. Woody (talk) 12:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  107. Support Jayen466 12:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  108. Good chap. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 12:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  109. Support See my reasons in User:Secret/ArbCom. Note if there isn't a comment on the candidate there, I was on vacation and couldn't edit the past weekend, will leave one today. Secret account 12:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  110. Support Everything about him sounds good. Sticky Parkin 13:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  111. Support --CrohnieGalTalk 13:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  112. Support, even though his content contributions may diminish.[1] Kablammo (talk) 14:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  113. --Kbdank71 14:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  114. Support JoJan (talk) 14:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  115. Support Colchicum (talk) 15:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  116. Support PseudoOne (talk) 15:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  117. Good judgment: hopefully a breath of fresh air. Moreschi (talk) 15:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  118. Support Verbal chat 15:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  119. Support Helpful, thoughtful and voice of reasonful. But don't you dare slack off the mainspace work! --Dweller (talk) 15:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  120. Support--Taprobanus (talk) 15:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  121. Provisional support: good user, but I want a promise that you won't stop writing articles. Sceptre (talk) 16:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  122. Support --Tikiwont (talk) 16:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  123. Support, but please do keep contributing to the encyclopedia. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  124. Support JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 16:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  125. I have complete confidence in Casliber. He is very trustworthy, experienced, and civil. Acalamari 17:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  126. Support I trust Casliber's judgement completely. I fully expect his excellent contributions to articles to continue as well, as I think that will provide the grounding that he (and other arbs) need to make sure they understand how the community works now. Karanacs (talk) 17:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  127. Strong Support I'll be honest, I'd oppose just to keep him working on the articles (even if they're about shrooms). But we need to upgrade and improve Arbcomm, and Cas is the right person to do it. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  128. Hate to bureaucratize such a great content contributor, but his content work will give him excellent perspective on the Committee. Plus, he can help the Committee work through some of their Oedipal issues... :) MastCell Talk 18:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  129. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 18:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  130.  Sandstein  19:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  131. Synergy 19:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  132. Support - sound responses and communication, background good addition to arbcom. Martinp (talk) 19:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  133. Support, just don't leave DYK ! NVO (talk) 19:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  134. Tiptoety talk 20:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  135. AGK 20:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  136. Support. I share the concerns of the FA crew on the opposition but I think he is capable of both. spryde | talk 20:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  137. As long as you promise not to overmedicate Giano ;) Pcap ping 20:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  138. Support Wetman (talk) 21:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  139. Support Just look at his most-edited articles: vampire, lion, mental disorders and poisonous mushrooms. He's way more dangerous than Bishzilla! Franamax (talk) 21:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  140. Support.Biophys (talk) 21:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  141. Support -- Suntag ☼ 21:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  142. Support The Helpful One 21:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  143. Support Kafka Liz (talk) 21:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  144. Support Like many others, I worry that his FA-related activities may lessen because of it, but one should not be prevented from "branching out" just because they are good at something else. JPG-GR (talk) 22:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  145. Support if he keeps contributing. --Patar knight - chat/contributions 22:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  146. Support ...Modernist (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  147. Nousernamesleft (talk) 22:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  148. Support. macy 22:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  149. Support for a fair-minded and competent user, though I do note the concerns of the opposers regarding potential loss of content. Hopefully Cas will keep up his high-quality article work. GlassCobra 22:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  150. Support - lots of relevant experience. Warofdreams talk 23:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  151. Support - both real-life and enWiki experience. Bearian (talk) 23:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  152. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  153. BrianY (talk) 23:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  154. Ryan shell (talk) 00:16, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  155. support --Nepaheshgar (talk) 00:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  156. Caspian blue 01:06, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  157. --Koji† 01:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  158. Alexfusco5 02:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  159. Support ---Larno (talk) 02:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  160. Chensiyuan (talk) 02:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  161. SupportNrswanson (talk) 02:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  162. Support. Great candidate.--Kubigula (talk) 02:58, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  163. --Moni3 (talk) 03:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  164. Support. Khoikhoi 03:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  165. Strong support. I'm only supporting a handful of candidates. I'm only "strong supporting" one. check. Keeper ǀ 76 04:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  166. Hesperian 04:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  167. Support. I especially like the response to Sarcasticidealist's question #2. Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 04:06, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  168. Certainly has the right focus (content not drama), although I'm concerned he may not be a heavily-engaged arbitrator. Skomorokh 04:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  169. Awesome candidate. It will be sad to have you do less article-writing though! Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 04:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  170. Great answers, fair caring candidate. Yes. ѕwirlвoy ₪ 04:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  171. Support Althought, can't wait for Scientologist to say something about the Psych Cabal...--Cerejota (talk) 05:46, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  172. Probably the best candidate running, though sadly I'm sure his article work would suffer. Guettarda (talk) 06:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  173. Support Melburnian (talk) 06:12, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  174. Support Kamek (Koopa wizard!) 08:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  175. Support SBHarris 10:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  176. Best candidate this year. I hope your stellar article work won't suffer too much but you're just the sort of person we need to restore faith in the ArbCom so thanks for offering your help and good luck! EconomicsGuy (talk) 11:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  177. I think so - support --Herby talk thyme 11:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  178. S.D.D.J.Jameson 12:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  179. Support. I've interacted with Casliber on a few occasions and have always come away with a very positive impression. He's familiar with the ground level reality of Wikipedia and consistantly works towards cooperation and solutions. Vassyana (talk) 12:18, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  180. Support--Joopercoopers (talk) 12:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  181. fish&karate 13:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  182. Bucketsofg 14:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  183. Support. I wasn't going to support any candidate I had no real knowledge of, but upon reading some of the praise doled out to Casliber, I decided to dig a little deeper. Everything I've read since leads me to believe Casliber is an excellent choice and will make an excellent Arb'. Steve T • C 14:21, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  184. Support --Aude (talk) 15:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  185. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  186. Support. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  187. support. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Babakexorramdin (talk • contribs) 16:31, 2 December 2008
  188. Support Probably the candidate I'm most comfortable with. Pascal.Tesson (talk) 16:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  189. Support. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  190. Support. Novickas (talk) 18:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  191. Like the other guys say... Ecoleetage (talk) 18:36, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  192. qp10qp (talk) 18:50, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  193. Support. LLDMart (talk) 19:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  194. Support.-gadfium 19:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  195. - filelakeshoe 19:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  196. Support The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  197. Support - I trust Comrade Boris. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  198. Support More than deserves it, but I hope we won't lose all the excellent article contributions. Joe Nutter 21:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  199. Support seems suitable - good luck! --Cameron Scott (talk) 22:06, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  200. --Sultec (talk) 22:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  201. Support --Stephen 23:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  202. Support - Chris (talk) 00:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  203. IronDuke 00:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  204. support Gnangarra 00:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  205. jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 01:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  206. Support --CreazySuit (talk) 01:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  207. Support faithless (speak) 02:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  208. I wasn't originally going to vote, as I am a fellow candidate this election. But you know, we agree on quite a bit based on arbcom cases we've both been involved in, you're an amazing content contributor, and I can't hold off supporting you any longer :) Wizardman 03:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  209. Couldn't think of a better candidate.  Marlith (Talk)  03:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  210. Support per GlassCobra. --Raayen (talk) 03:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  211. Support - good candidate Nokhodi (talk) 03:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  212. Support per Steven Walling. --MagneticFlux (talk) 05:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  213. Casliber has got real clue and has his mind in exactly the right place when it comes to this project. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 05:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  214. - auburnpilot talk 06:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  215. Support N p holmes (talk) 07:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  216. Support Badger Drink (talk) 08:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  217. DrKiernan (talk) 09:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  218. Support - very trustworthy above others. --Marianian (talk) 09:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  219. Kusma (talk) 12:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  220. I support. Dark and stormy knight (talk) 13:56, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  221. Kauffner (talk) 14:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  222. Support. TBH Cas I was hoping for a longer reply to my question. I'm still not entirely convinced your cheerful nature won't take a drubbing on the committee. But you have the intelligence, the fair-mindedness, and the mainspace contributions we need in an ARB. It looks like you're already through, so good luck. Marskell (talk) 15:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  223. SupportTundrabuggy (talk) 15:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  224. Terence (talk) 16:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  225. Support —αἰτίας •discussion• 16:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  226. Support. A very sound candidate. -- ChrisO (talk) 18:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  227. Support Hiberniantears (talk) 18:41, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  228. Support - Tājik (talk) 19:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  229. Michael Snow (talk) 20:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  230. Support. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  231. Support. -- Banjeboi 22:07, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  232. Support. I really hate voting, but I can't imagine anything nicer for Wiki than having this keen contributor and very friendly man helping to look after us. Full of good humour is Cas, a great contribution to ArbCom. Alastair Haines (talk) 22:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  233. Support vi5in[talk] 23:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  234. sure, --Jan eissfeldt (talk) 00:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  235. Support -- Strong answers, good candidate. Mww113 (talk) 01:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  236. Support --Cube lurker (talk) 01:49, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  237. Support. A strong foundational candidate..well grounded.⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 02:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Support --cmelbye (t/c) 03:12, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 150 mainspace edits by November 1. ST47 (talk) 04:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  238. Support Always level headed and would be willing to carefully consider all sides of an issue before passing judgement. Always a good characteristic of an ArbCom member.--Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  239. Support - Peripitus (Talk) 05:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  240. Support --Kansas Bear (talk) 07:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  241. Support --Chapultepec (talk) 08:25, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  242. Support dougweller (talk) 13:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  243. Support --Apoc2400 (talk) 14:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  244. Support --157.228.x.x (talk) 14:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  245. Support Impressive article work. A man in space (talk) 14:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  246. Support Tony (talk) 16:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  247. Support. Baku87 (talk) 17:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  248. Support Happy‑melon 17:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  249. Support Carlosguitar (Yes Executor?) 18:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  250. Support -- Tinu Cherian - 18:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  251. Support But please don't let Arbcom prevent you from producing/editing/helping create/maintain quality articles. BuddingJournalist 18:48, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  252. Support L337*P4wn 19:24, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  253. Support --Cactus.man ✍ 19:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  254. Support hbent (talk) 19:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  255. Support Slrubenstein | Talk 20:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  256. Support YES. Poltair (talk) 20:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Per the rest. Please note this is a new account as the password on the old one (User:Peter Damian) was lost. I have many 10's of thousands of edits on my old accounts so please accept this vote. Peter Damian II (talk) 21:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sorry, your unblock terms do not allow you edit, or vote within this namespace.--Tznkai (talk) 03:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  257. Support. A shoo-in. Guy (Help!) 21:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  258. Support – interesting elements, assume wide experience in RL with relevant qualities, Julia Rossi (talk) 22:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  259. Support' Decent enough choice I guess. ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 23:44, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  260. TS 00:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  261. Support. Axl ¤ [Talk] 01:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  262. Support Though you'll have less time for FA level work.--MONGO 02:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  263. SupportDineshkannambadi (talk) 03:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  264. support JoshuaZ (talk) 03:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  265. Crystal whacker (My 2008 ArbCom votes) 04:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  266. Support --VS talk 06:29, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  267. Support because of some of the reasons people casted oppose votes (like it is a loss to content creators) Leujohn (talk)
  268. Support. One of the most competent WP editors. Whenever I had the chance to talk with him, he was always calm, open-minded and constructive. I think he will be the kind of "judge" we need.--Yannismarou (talk) 14:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  269. Support. Warrington (talk) 14:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  270. Support I know this editor/admin for more than a year, and I have no doubts that he will make a good arb. Ruslik (talk) 14:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  271. Support. --Hectorian (talk) 14:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  272. Support. Strong editor, ready to contribute in a different way. You have my support. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  273. A good candidate to me. Full rationale: User:Camaron/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  274. Pile-On Support. I have heard/seen nothing but good things from/about the CAS. Just don't allow the corrupt political culture of the ArbComm change you, but rather change it!R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 21:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  275. Yup &#0149;Jim62sch&#0149;dissera! 23:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  276. Support -- Samir 23:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  277. Strongest possible support - You are just incredible!!!@pple complain 00:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  278. Casliber's on-wiki and real life experience will serve ArbCom well. — Manticore 05:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  279. Wronkiew (talk) 06:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikisaver62 (talk) 10:04, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sorry, you did not have 150 mainspace edits before November 1. J.delanoygabsadds 01:28, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  280. Support - EdJohnston (talk) 15:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  281. Support - AdjustShift (talk) 15:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  282. Support Wkdewey (talk) 21:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  283. Support My experience—little of it direct, to my detriment, I imagine—with the candidate leads me to support, even as I am not quite thrilled with certain of the answers. I hope and trust, I should say, that Casliber's deliberative temperament and sound sense of judgment will lead him to be the arbitrator whom Seraphim and Fritz, for two, suppose that he will be vis-à-vis BLP. Joe 03:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  284. Support — BillC talk 03:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  285. Support - ---Buster7 (talk) 04:16, 7 December 2008 (UTC) Communicates with clarity and conviction[reply]
  286. Support Per my details. MBisanz talk 04:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  287. Support - SmthManly / ManlyTalk / ManlyContribs 04:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  288. Support Aunt Entropy (talk) 05:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  289. Support - Shyam (T/C) 08:19, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  290. Support =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  291. Support Jon513 (talk) 16:15, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  292. Support No reason not to.--Iamawesome800 16:50, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  293. Support Likely to be ineffective as an arbitrator, which should hasten the death of Wikipedia. Kelly Martin 20:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  294. Support Giants2008 (17-14) 00:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  295. kurykh 02:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  296. Support--Regents Park (bail out your boat) 03:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  297. Support Awadewit (talk) 05:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  298. Support Very fair and knowledgeable user. – Alex43223 T | C | E 08:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  299. Support --Peter cohen (talk) 13:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  300. Support. — E ↗ 14:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  301. Support. He seems really good. Vancouver dreaming (talk) 15:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  302. Good enough for me. Tex (talk) 19:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  303. Support Shows strong willingness and ability to write and act in an impartial manner, to persevere in detailed investigations, and to ratiocinate complex situations. - Eldereft (cont.) 20:50, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  304. Support. Willking1979 (talk) 21:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  305. Support. Huldra (talk) 21:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  306. Support Fangfufu (talk) 02:38, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  307. Support per rationale at User:JayHenry/chimpmanzee. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 02:52, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  308. Support. Abyssal (talk) 03:12, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  309. Weak support. A few of his answers are a little underwhelming, and it's not all together clear how transferable his dazzling article writing experience will be to Arbing, but seems generally quite sensible. Besides that, I have a bias towards editors with disclosed identities and real life experience and grown up responsibilities (despite meeting only the "disclosed identity" criterion myself). Sarcasticidealist (talk) 05:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  310. Support A genuinely nice guy, which is apparent from the support he's getting. Cas and I don't agree on all issues, just the important ones. I believe he has extremely useful insights regarding the issues facing the wiki. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  311. Support - excellent contributor at the coal-face as it were of what the project is ultimately about. Whilst several of answers been noted as weak, I am actually reassured that recognises limit of knowledge and not some tekkie who knows all possible aspects of past decissions. Coming afresh to the committee (other members will be able to point out relevant points) makes him a good choice of candidate as breath of types of arbcom members would be useful. Has clear writing style, open thinking processes, pragmatic, sensible and polite - ticks all the boxes for me... David Ruben Talk 14:56, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  312. Johnbod (talk) 20:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  313. Support tgies (talk) 04:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  314. Support. Parishan (talk) 07:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Support User: Marcos987 (User talk:Marcos987) 07:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, you are not eligible to vote. — neuro(talk) 13:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  315. Support Gazimoff 13:53, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  316. Alun (talk) 14:06, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  317. Support. A fair, open-minded candidate. Escellent contributions across the wiki. Rje (talk) 20:06, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  318. Support Húsönd 21:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  319. Support Shyamal (talk) 03:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  320. Support Amalthea 03:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  321. Support Shenme (talk) 05:16, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  322. Support. -SusanLesch (talk) 06:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  323. momoricks (make my day) 07:32, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  324. Support Rivertorch (talk) 08:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  325. Support Candidate of the year. DGG (talk) 15:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  326. Support--Dacy69 (talk) 16:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  327. Support I trust the candidate's judgement. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 16:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  328. Support, not only on basis of good statement, but the fact that some folks I respect also favor the candidate. Having had no interactions myself w/ the editor, that seems like a fair metric. --Jim Butler (t) 17:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  329. Support Paranormal Skeptic (talk) 21:23, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  330. Support ---- The Myotis (talk) 21:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  331. Support His experience listening to people should prove very useful. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 21:59, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  332. Support Finn Rindahl (talk) 02:02, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  333. Support miranda 09:09, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  334. I took a number of factors into consideration - to specify a few: keen willingness to learn, good answers to my questions (although they fell short in Questions 1c, 2 and a few parts in 4), and no concerns with timeliness (except in answering Question 4). A lack of directness in a few responses may be an issue, but I am trusting that this user will make attempts to resolve this concern with time. At the conclusion of my analysis, I ranked this candidate somewhere in the top 8. Support. Ncmvocalist (talk) 10:56, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  335. Support Knows how to disagree without being disagreeable. Haiduc (talk) 11:56, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  336. Support Grandmaster 12:11, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  337. Support, seen around doing useful thoughtful work in reslolving disputes, answers interesting and good. . dave souza, talk 12:49, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  338. Support (Quentin X (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]
  339. Support Per Kelly Martin I can't wait to enjoy the end. ILovePlankton (talk) 17:24, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  340. Support User has been around since May 2006 and track is outstanding.Liked the way he supported a candidate in a RFA with whom he had disagreed.Further as per User:JayHenry/chimpmanzee. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:14, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  341. Support - I don't agree with SandyGeorge that all the candidates need to necessarily have extensive recent work on content, but this who I feel I can support Nil Einne (talk) 21:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  342. Jitse Niesen (talk) 21:37, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  343. Support -Dureo (talk) 21:54, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  344. Yes Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  345. --MPerel 00:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  346. Support. Looks pretty good, although I would have like to see more decisive answers and stands on some controversial issues. It seems clear that you will be elected to ArbCom. While serving there, please remember that ArbCom is there to resolve disputes, usually the most nasty and unpleasant ones. This means that often pretty decisive measures will be needed, and a fireside chat with the concerned parties will usually not be sufficient. Nsk92 (talk) 01:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  347. Support Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  348. Support Sure. --Xp54321 (Hello! • Contribs) 06:05, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  349. Support. I have seen nothing but good things from/about Casliber. --Kaaveh (talk) 06:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  350. Support. Ateshi-Baghavan 11:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  351. Support per SandyGeorgia. Kelly hi! 16:47, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  352. Support Switzpaw (talk) 22:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  353. support E104421 (talk) 23:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  354. Support - Xasha (talk) 23:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  355. Support – Have had good interactions with Casliber. I'm sure he'll make a fine member of the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee. – RyanCross (talk) 01:43, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  356. Support. alanyst /talk/ 04:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  357. Support Ariel♥Gold 04:59, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  358. Support. — xaosflux Talk 05:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  359. Support. A good and sound candidate. --Anish (talk) 06:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  360. Support, solid candidate, but I echo the article production concerns. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 07:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  361. Support - --Roisterer (talk) 11:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  362. Support --Peter Andersen (talk) 11:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose. Rschen7754 (T C) 00:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Nufy8 (talk) 00:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Dlabtot (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Voyaging(talk) 00:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I fear we will lose Casliber's prolific Banksia/fairy wren/dinosaur/random animal FA production if he is elected to the AC. Also, a bit too unfamiliar with the committee's dealings for my liking. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 01:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Nothing personal, but I chose a group I want to win. Good luck though. RockManQReview me 01:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose because I'd rather have Cas continue his excellent featured work than have him get sidelined and end up with enemies. The articles need you more than the 'cracy! --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 02:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. ArbCom must be disbanded and replaced with a system which actually works. Sorry, I oppose. Bstone (talk) 02:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Rjd0060 (talk) 03:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. All things to all men. Too nice, and too many politicians' answers.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 10:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. David Fuchs sums up my concerns well. Mackensen (talk) 11:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. He deserves better. Dengero (talk) 15:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Extremely, extremely, good user. That about sums it up, since his content is too good to lose. —Ceran ♦ ♦ (speak) 22:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Oppose. Миша13 22:50, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose - Either 1) is unwilling to cast even the slightest amount of criticism towards potential future colleagues, or 2) takes a nice long while to answer questions, or 3) feels that the ArbCom has never made a mistake and has no thoughts on the ArbCom RFC. So, the candidate, for all his wonderful mainspace qualities (and there are lots!) is either 1) political to a fault, 2) a bit too prone to C68-SV-FM style inactivity, or 3) brain damaged. The mainspace contributions should rule out possibility #3, which leaves what is likely a mixture of #1 and #2. Neither of those possibilities are compatible with a seat on the already slow-moving, politics-besotted ArbCom. Badger Drink (talk) 23:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC) Moving to support per Talk conversation Badger Drink (talk) 08:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Oppose. Different people have different strengths, and I feel that Casliber's strengths do not lie in the realm of ArbCom mediation. bibliomaniac15 00:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    This is my first oppose in the two ArbCom elections for which I've been eligible, and I hate to register it, but (since it won't matter anyway) this candidate is simply too congenitally noncommittal to be an effective member of the committee. Deor (talk) 03:03, 3 December 2008 (UTC) With considerable embarrassment, I'm withdrawing my vote. I had the nominee confused with someone else. Deor (talk) 17:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Phil Sandifer (talk) 03:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Gentgeen (talk) 10:04, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose Max (talk) 10:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    You are not eligible to vote as you have fewer than 150 mainspace edits Fritzpoll (talk) 10:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. oppose. log; G.4 William M. Connolley (talk) 22:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Oppose. Seems to want to apply the absolute standard of confidentiality present in medicine (where nobody else has any right to know the information) to arbcom evidence (where the person the evidence is being used against has an absolute right to know the information). Cynical (talk) 22:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Oppose Sorry, I have chosen other editors that better reflect my views. Diderot's dreams (talk) 04:47, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Article work isn't the carte blanche for arbitrators, saying that, it is of a high quality and losing that would be regretful. Caulde 11:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Very strongly oppose. Saying that leaving a half-completed RfC around is just not on is unacceptable. More seriously, this candidate is the subject of a strong electioneering campaign; unless he pledged to recuse himself from all issues of interest to his sponsors, I could not, and do not, trust him. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Oppose. See this spectacular answer to the question about nationalist edit warring. Jd2718 (talk) 20:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. seresin ( ¡? )  00:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose He doesn't obey NPOV. He doesn't realize that Taiwan is part of China. Alonso McLaren (talk) 01:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 150 mainspace edits by November 1. ST47 (talk) 01:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Oppose   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 17:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Oppose. Further comments available at my ACE2008 notes page. --Elonka 19:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Strong oppose based on answer to my question; nothing else really need to be said, the answer speaks for itself. Celarnor Talk to me 20:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  28. The quality, breadth and diligence of this candidate's content output far outweigh the worth of his service as an arbitrator. The same could be said of several other candidates, but I am not as familiar with their work. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 05:28, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Oppose Glib, but failure to unambiguously support fundamental policies such as Wikipedia:Civility. Fred Talk 02:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Oppose, per his role in the TV episodes case. I don't want an arbitrator who regards pop-cruft cleanup as a disruptive activity. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:31, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Oppose, as an assigned mentor of a serial harasser, I don't think it would be appropriate for Casliber to be an arbitrator in the least. ArbCom does not exist to hold the hands of and enable trolls. --Pixelface (talk) 11:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Oppose: Per comments at my RFA, Casliber doesn't quite grasp WP:NOT#DEMOCRACY. That's a pretty critical policy for someone who wants to be an Arbcom member.—Kww(talk) 21:22, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Oppose. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 17:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008/Vote/Casliber&oldid=257888117"