On 10/26/05, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)ctelco.net> wrote:
I suggest you submit names to Jimbo with a basis for
why you think
they would be a good arbitrator. That is basically all we do. If we
all agree on one person (remember we often disagree) he is likely to
seriously consider the person. If a person is making a lot of trouble
already we are not likely to think they are good candidates, but
personally I am a little concerned that what makes a good arbitrator
is not all that predictable.
So what is the point of involveing Jimbo? Why should he be able to
make a better descission than people like me who spend far more time
on en.
If you look at
[[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2005/Proposed_modifications_to_rules#Proposal_1]]
the one attempt to limit who could run was rejected
--
geni