This is the talk page for discussing a candidate for election to the Arbitration Committee.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Use third-level headers for new sections. Example: === Heading title ===. Unsure about the election process? Please review the election rules. Issue with inappropriate commentary or questions? Please notify an election volunteer.	Be civil No personal attacks Refrain from canvassing and harassment Discuss the election, or ask questions here
v t e Arbitration Committee Election 2008 candidate: Kmweber Candidate statement (create) Questions for the candidate (create) Discuss this candidate (create)

A detailed breakdown of this candidate's edits in article and Wikipedia spaces can be found here. Franamax (talk) 02:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After all, a lot of people say things at RFA that honestly, I don't consider to be all truthful. You certainly make a good argument, that's for sure ;). Anyway, Good luck Kurt. —Ceran ♦ (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both inclusivedisjunction and Sceptre are now comparing electing Kurt to electing a pedophile. Can we please either enforce a minimum of civility on this page or just snowball close this? If this is indicative of what's to come something needs to be done. EconomicsGuy (talk) 17:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's an appropriate analogy, i.e. a pedophile would be a stupid choice for a PTA, just as Kurt is a stupid choice for ArbCom. But yeah, I see how it's offensive, but I'm not refactoring. a) Because he brought it on himself, and b) he has to apologise to me and every single person he has harasssed on IRC before I even think of apologising. Sceptre ^(talk) 18:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What about other readers who might be offended reading this inappropriate analogy? What about a minimum of decorum, at least on the vote page for arbcom election? Personally, I don't care whether you refactor, but please think about whom you're actually hurting. Is it Kmweber? Is it the electoral climate? Is it your own reputation? (By the way is there a Godwin's law for bringing up pedophilia? This isn't the first time I've seen it on WP, and it rarely fails to stir up drama). ---Sluzzelin talk 18:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the statement from my oppose, but I'm not sure if removing it "because it would offend pedophiles" is a joke or serious: as you can probably guess, I hate Kmweber. It's only by the civility policy that I'm not calling him every name under the sun. Sceptre ^(talk) 18:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for removing the statement, Sceptre. ---Sluzzelin talk 18:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, good call Sceptre. There's no real need to kick this man when he's down. It's not like he's a threat, just an annoyance. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would having a record number of opposes actually be the right message here? If it is true that Kmweber does many things here on Wikipedia just for the attention (I don't know all of the details about this editor primarily because he's not worth my limited time to watch), wouldn't that distinction simply be feeding a troll? -- llywrch (talk) 22:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and no. Sceptre ^(talk) 23:20, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He wants democracy, doesn't he? Hiberniantears (talk) 23:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think an overwhelming majority of "abstains" would send a much clearer message. -- llywrch (talk) 21:15, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• The pile-on opposition wasn't exactly unexpected, and I think that's just one of the things Kurt wanted to do - this whole candidacy is a textbook example of WP:POINT. Master&Expert (Talk) 04:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it gives Kurt some manner of perverse satisfaction to be one of the most opposed candidates for anything in Wikipedia history, sure, whatever. Whether that's the case or not, what would send a significantly worse message would be to influence, censor, halt or otherwise massage the vote for this or any other reason. Hell, I even think that the "sympathy Supports" he's getting from contrarians are asinine and immature, but Wikipedia's rules give them the privilege to cast their vote for good reason, lousy reason or none at all. The vote should end if he withdraws, and not otherwise before the deadline.  Ravenswing  05:30, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking about this and I believe this is the most opposed thing in the history of Wikipedia, at 263. Correct me if I'm wrong. Grandmasterka 06:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With 220+ oppose votes and a week and a half left, Kurt has a good chance to break it. Daniel Case (talk) 10:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update: We are now just four votes away. Daniel Case (talk) 22:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It has fallen! Daniel Case (talk) 01:23, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mm. One wonders whether Kurt's "candidacy" will be the first issue on Wikipedia ever to rack up three hundred Opposes.  Ravenswing  19:37, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My question was not "to influence, censor, halt or otherwise massage the vote for this or any other reason" -- although I believe an overwhelming majority of "abtains" would be just as good because it would make it harder for him to claim that he is "an enemy of the Wikipedians". If anything, it is an explanation why I'm not going to be part of this pile-on, & a warning that silence here should not be read as support, or even tolerance. (And maybe a suggestion for how to vote in future ArbCom elections.) -- llywrch (talk) 19:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Kurt has perceived non-voters to be on his side with this wonderful quote: "And no, the community does not oppose me, as evidenced by the fact that my supporters vastly outnumber my opponents. I simply need to keep doing what I've been doing--if not take it up another notch or ten--so as to continue to lead by example and help to inspire the revolutionary courage in my followers, who are currently oppressed by those with a vested interest in the corrupt status quo to the extent that they're scared to speak out." - Make up your minds on how utterly illogical that one is. Maybe Kurt's supporters have all been unable to get to their computers to support him? Yes, that must be it. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 01:27, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Malignant narcissist. Who called it? Koji did. Booyah.--Koji† 02:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt always comes off as a massive narcissist or a massive idiot. I think it's the latter, because he is smart enough to toe the line without crossing it... but on the other hand... he's an Objectivist... I'll say no more :P Sceptre ^(talk) 19:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I appreciated this quote from the same source: "Kurt, you seem to be engaging in a mistake that is common among extremists of all types. When extremists see that they are not succeeding they decide the problem is that they are not extreme enough. This tactic rarely works ... Kurt, there is no silent mass waiting for you to show them the way. There are a handful of people who have some sympathy with you, a handful of others who find you amusing, a lot who disagree with you, and another chunk who dislike you. There's also a large junk who don't care ..." Mind you, in the same discussion, Kurt says "My content work has been, and continues to be, stellar. In fact, it is better than anything anyone else has ever done. That you refuse to acknowledge that obvious fact is your failure, not mine." Sooooo ... either he's delusional or he's screwing with all of us and laughing his backside off, but either way he's got WAY too much time on his hands ... and so do we, if we keep feeding the troll.  Ravenswing  05:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in this related story Robert Mugabe declares the cholera outbreak in Zimbabwe to be over. Some people just don't know when to leave. Hiberniantears (talk) 14:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've opposed Kurt already, but the new announcement on his talkpage really concerns me. Announcing that all who oppose him will be tried in a court of law? I don't care if it is just a joke, it's in poor taste and reeks of trolling. Does anyone have any thoughts on the matter? Skinny87 (talk) 09:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt's got a twisted sense of humor to be sure. The fact that the notice is placed in all caps, right underneath the April Fool's notice, makes me think he's kidding. Actually, sometimes I think all his posts are jokes, and he just sits around and laughs while we all squabble over the legitimacy of his opinions and right to express them. Ah well. Anyway, I wouldn't take it seriously. GlassCobra 11:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Sollog reference, people... Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 15:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, I can't wait for the next person blocked on WP:NLT to cite this and claim "Aw, I was just kidding."  Ravenswing  20:00, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]