User:MarioGom/Voting guides/U4C2024

This is a brief guide on how I will be voting in the U4C 2024 election. A better overview of all candidates is available at User:Giraffer/U4CE2024.

Voting criteria

This is the main criteria I plan to apply for voting. It is not meant to be copied, but to give ideas on how you could define your own voting strategy, given that there is a fairly large candidate pool that most people are likely to be not familiar with.

1. Did the candidate fill the initial statement? U4C will require significant commitment from its members and the community will be likely to demand as much transparency from it as possible. A blank candidate statement signals lack of commitment both to the role itself and to transparency. I will be opposing most candidates not meeting this criteria.
2. Did the candidate engage in the question phase. While some candidates might have more availability than others, and I do not plan to rank them based on number of answers, a complete lack of community engagement during the election might signal a lack of commitment to accountability. I will be opposing any candidate not meeting this criteria by the end of the question phase.
3. More than 10,000 global edits? More than 20,000? There is multiple ways to participate in Wikimedia projects, but I think an U4C member will not be able to handle conflicts properly if they lack any significant experience engaging with Wikimedia projects directly. 10,000 global edits is a very moderate threshold. If we had a far more experienced pool of candidates, I would likely use a way higher threshold.
4. Signed up more than 4 years ago? or at least 2? The threshold here is rather arbitrary, but I think it takes quite some time to grasp the social dynamics of Wikimedia projects, as well as getting familiar with their policies. Even the most skilled candidate is likely to be unequipped with the role if they joined Wikimedia not long ago.
5. Steward, arbitrator or functionary? Members of ArbCom already have the experience for the tasks that U4C will carry. Stewards should have it to some degree too. All of them have already demonstrated that they have a high degree support from their projects.
6. Administrator (sysop)? Candidates who are administrators in any project might enjoy higher community trust and are more likely to have faced hard decisions on conduct.
7. No recent or concerning sanctions? Everyone makes mistakes, but I expect every U4C member to have a great behavioral track record, at least in the recent past. In short: a track record of being part of the solution, not the problem.
8. Any red flag? I will be checking if there is any major red flag that would warrant an oppose regardless of any other criteria.

Voting strategy

Given the complex interactions between region and home wiki rules, I expect strategic voting to be a thing. However, given that 15-16 seats will most likely be assigned, I will be supporting or abstaining for at least 16 candidates. This means I will relax my own criteria, and very regretfully not oppose some candidates who did not participate in the question phase.

Table

Here's a summary based on the criteria I outlined above. The first column indicates how likely I am to support, abstain or oppose each candidate.

Candidate	Answers	Reg. date	Edit count	Perms	No sanctions	No red flags
0xDeadbeef	Yes	2020-10	14k	sysop	Yes	Yes
1233	Yes	2012-02	14k	No	Yes	Yes
787IYO	No	2021-09	10k	temp sysop	Yes	Yes
Akwugo	Yes	2020-11	15k	No	Disruptive editing block over improper references in 1lib1ref.	Yes
Barkeep49	Yes	2005-06	40k	arbitrator, oversighter, checkuser, sysop	Yes	Yes
BHARATHESHA ALASANDEMAJALU	No	2014-11	14k	sysop	Yes	Yes
Borschts	Yes	2019-07	4k	temp sysop	Yes	Yes
Chinmayee Mishra	Yes	2015-12	12k	No	Yes	Yes
Civvì	Yes	2004-09	164k	bureaucrat, sysop	Yes	Yes
C.Suthorn	Yes	2016-08	181k	No	Yes	Yes
Danotech	No	2022-04	3k	No	Yes	Yes
DeBolsillo	No	2014-10	1k	No	Yes	Yes
Ghilt	Yes	2011-07	501k	arbitrator, sysop	Yes	Yes
Ibrahim.ID	Yes	2011-06	76k	bureaucrat, sysop	Yes	Yes
Iwuala Lucy	Yes	2020-02	9k	No	Yes	Yes
J ansari	No	2016-09	50k	No	Yes	Yes
JogiAsad	No	2011-07	71k	sysop	Yes	Yes
Justine Msechu	No	2021-01	4k	sysop	Yes	Concerns over UCoC violations.
Khunou S	No	2020-11	3k	No	Yes	Yes
Leaderboard	Yes	2013-11	13k	sysop	Yes	Yes
Luke081515	Yes	2013-05	40k	arbitrator, temp sysop	Yes	Yes
NANöR	Yes	2019-07	29k	sysop	Yes	Yes
Nskjnv	No	2020-12	14k	No	Yes	Yes
Ozzeon	Yes	2019-01	3k	No	Yes	Yes
Patriot Kor	Yes	2013-03	45k	No	Yes	Concerns over LLM usage for discussions.
ProtoplasmaKid	No	2006-04	92k	bureaucrat, sysop	Yes	Yes
Ruby D-Brown	No	2019-06	2k	No	Yes	Yes
RXerself	Yes	2010-02	31k	sysop	Yes	Yes
Sleyece	Yes	2016-10	2k	No	Disruptive editing blocks	Bizarre answers
Superpes15	Yes	2010-05	131k	steward, checkuser, sysop	Yes	Yes
Soni	Yes	2014-02	10k	No	Yes	Yes
SpringProof	No	2019-10	1k	No	Yes	Yes
Taylor 49	Yes	2016-12	131k	sysop	desysopped	discussion
Tiputini	Yes	2014-09	25k	No	Yes	Yes
Ugwulebo	Yes	2020-05	2k	No	copyvio block	Yes
Volstand	No	2019-07	15k	temp sysop	Yes	Yes
Ybsen lucero	Yes	2010-11	1k	No	Yes	LLM-like responses in the questions phase