Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2004/Candidate statements/Discussion

message: If someone worth listening to (someone with any legitimate say on the matter) insists I accept "endorsements", I will withdraw from the election. Sam Spade Arb Com election 22:01, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  I want nothing to do with this page, nor any endorsements of any kind 

message: I don't appreciate the unilateral decision to bury my endorsements and opposition on an obscure subpage under my user page, where no one will ever read them, especially before asking me if it was OK. What was the motivation for wanting to hide my comments about the candidates?
If this election is to be free and fair, then in the "public square" that the candidate discussion page represents, everyone should be allowed to make their opinions known. Please restore my comments to the public discussion page where potential voters can read them without having to click on dozens of links before a potential voter can see what I have to say. Thank you. --DV 00:24, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Michael Snow suggested that I "pipe" my endorsements into my link on his centralized link page of endorsements. I disagree with his assessment of linking vs. a central page (for the reasons I gave above), but if this is as far as he is willing to compromise, so be it. --DV 00:44, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is the public square for me to post my endorsements? 

message: Someone made the comment about how clicking on subpages only requires a click on one link. This comment is demonstrably dishonest - potential voters will have to click on dozens of links above mine, or below mine, (depending on the order they are going through the other user's endorsements) before they get to mine. Most users will become impatient and stop clicking long before they get to my endorsements. Hence why I posted on the central discussion in the first place - so my comments would be read!
Excerpts from other pages get read much more frequently than links. (Many popular news sites and blogs illustrate this every day, by excerpting what they link to in order to entice the reader to bother clicking on the link.)
Also, I made endorsements of Neutrality and blankfaze, and they do not appear on the candidate subpages that were recently created. Since the person doing this move wasn't super careful about moving this material around without losing some of it, those two candidates lost some endorsements that they would otherwise have.
The "consensus" on redistributing comments on a single page into many subpages seems weak. And who appointed Michael Snow the "boss" of the candidate endorsements discussion page in the first place? His statements that he would continue his actions despite the wishes of others doesn't seem very wiki-like. --DV 00:24, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Michael Snow suggested that I "pipe" my endorsements into my link on his centralized link page of endorsements. I disagree with his assessment of linking vs. a central page (for the reasons I gave above), but if this is as far as he is willing to compromise, so be it. --DV 00:44, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Follow up