On the whole, my views of every candidate running this year are positive, and I have had positive interactions with a fair few of them. My votes are based on multiple factors, including the candidates' ability to answer the questions in a satisfactory manner, their overall temperament, their experience in dealing with controversial and/or difficult disputes, and their views as to the transparency of certain cases.
I personally believe that a successful request for adminship should be a requirement to serve on the Committee; this is because of the great deal of trust required of editors in order to access the CheckUser and Oversight tools. In light of recent events involving a former arbitrator, I feel as though it is too much of a risk to allow non-administrators to have access to such high levels of sensitive and confidential information. As such, regrettably, I will be opposing any non-administrator candidates.
I will be supporting the following individuals, and wish them the very best of luck:
I have used a tool in order to determine which personal pronouns to use for each candidate on this page (per the gender they have declared in their Preferences). If I have accidentally used the wrong ones for you, please email me.