On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)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.
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#Formeā¦