Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2021/Candidates/Opabinia regalis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This is the talk page for discussing a candidate for election to the Arbitration Committee.


Big mouth and very big fairness

I didn't run for arbcom in order to retroactively validate past bad decisions with new bad decisions. – Opabinia regalis (2016)
Opabinia, master (or should I say 'mistress') of the pithy comment is one of those people from whom one look could kill you stone dead but the next day she would buy you a beer. Metaphorically of course, because sadly I've never had the pleasure (or danger) of meeting her in RL. She has those excellent qualities of not being vindictive or grudge-bearing nor advocating the harshest of remedies on Arbcom cases just because she could if she so wanted. She was certainly an asset to the Committee during her two previous terms, and it didn't leave her jaded. It would be interesting to know how she would have voted were she on the Committee these two years past when Arbcom was lining admins up like plastic ducks in a shooting gallery. She is going to be absolutely furious if she actually wins a seat at the high table, but she knows what she will be letting herself in for and will do a good job. A force to be reckoned with, but extraordinarily fair and forgiving. Now if every Committee member had such attributes...

@Kudpung: I think you forgot to sign your comment. Colonestarrice (talk) 21:35, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I did (copied and pasted from the offline draft). Can happen to anyone. Thank you Colonestarrice. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:08, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome and yes, it can happen to anyone indeed. Colonestarrice (talk) 23:02, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Kudpung! I first saw this on my phone and only saw the "big mouth" part, I figured it'd be about my bad habit of writing excessively long posts (I'll try to stop, I swear!) Opabinia regalis (talk) 17:48, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your detailed, but clearly expressed, to the point, and umambiguous answers that always correctly interpreted the questions are much appreciated. Thank you again. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:40, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]