> I am concerned about that implied definition of "voters", and the
> "they get what they deserve" throw away.
I think it's more "in the unlikely event that people go crazy and vote
for this person, they get what they deserve". I, and I think most
people, expect the community to vote sensibly.
> Wikimedia UK is meant to be open and inclusive (please correct me if I err).
>
> Hence, the ins and out of Wikimedia, Wikipedia, WMF, ARBCOM,
> checkuser, Commons etc, etc may mean very little to a diligent editor
> who works away at articles from time to time.
>
> Wikimedia UK should involve everybody, not just the hardened old
> timers, admins, and the cognicenti.
Indeed, which is why we need to make sure voters know what's going on.
Perhaps the election committee should make a brief statement on this
user's candidate statement and questions section explaining that
they've been blocked.