WP Sado-Masochism Festival — It's 2017 Arbcom Election Time!

[Kumioko]

And Wikipedia and the WMF have made equally dumb decisions.

Personally Alabama can elect anyone they want to represent their state as far as I'm concerned, I don't live there so it doesn't affect my life. Given the closeness of the election though, it's not just about Roy Moore but about the weakness in the competition.

[Poetlister]

Alabama can elect anyone they want to represent their state as far as I'm concerned, I don't live there so it doesn't affect my life.

Surely, given the narrowness of the Republican majority in the Senate, this has a perceptible effect on wha tthe Senate does or doesn't do, which in turn must affect all Americans and indeed people in general. But we're off topic.

[Volunteer Marek]

And Wikipedia and the WMF have made equally dumb decisions.

Personally Alabama can elect anyone they want to represent their state as far as I'm concerned, I don't live there so it doesn't affect my life. Given the closeness of the election though, it's not just about Roy Moore but about the weakness in the competition.

You don't actually know much about Alabama, do you?

[Kumioko]

Nope not really, only been there a couple times.

[Volunteer Marek]

Nope not really, only been there a couple times.

Ok. Well, see, the Democrats could've had Jesus Christ himself running for that seat and it STILL would've been close. That's why this results was such a big deal - a Democrat winning a senate seat in Alabama in 2017 makes you want to check if the current temperature in hell is less than 0 Celsius.

[Bezdomni]

Nope not really, only been there a couple times.

Ok. Well, see, the Democrats could've had Jesus Christ himself running for that seat and it STILL would've been close. That's why this results was such a big deal - a Democrat winning a senate seat in Alabama in 2017 makes you want to check if the current temperature in hell is less than 0 Celsius.

From 1828 to 1960 it was the Bourbon Democrat (T-H-L) (and the pre-Bourbon slave-owners who were the backbone of the Democratic party in the South) who carried the state consistently:

https://www.270towin.com/historical-pre ... elections/

They sure do count votes quickly enough though... (Kumi, you may find this post at the genderdesk interesting. Looking through the records it appears that VM voted more than once too. ^^)

[Midsize Jake]

From 1828 to 1960 it was the Bourbon Democrat (T-H-L) (and the pre-Bourbon slave-owners who were the backbone of the Democratic party in the South) who carried the state consistently...

My GOD, man, do you even know what year it is? Have you been in a coma for most of your adult life? Have you any sense of the passage of time whatsoever?

[Poetlister]

From 1828 to 1960 it was the Bourbon Democrat (T-H-L) (and the pre-Bourbon slave-owners who were the backbone of the Democratic party in the South) who carried the state consistently...

My GOD, man, do you even know what year it is? Have you been in a coma for most of your adult life? Have you any sense of the passage of time whatsoever?

The Democrats pre-Civil War and indeed until the 1960s included a lot of people who'd never associate with the current Democrat party. Don't forget that George Wallace (T-H-L) was the Democrat governor of Alabama. "I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."

[Randy from Boise]

From 1828 to 1960 it was the Bourbon Democrat (T-H-L) (and the pre-Bourbon slave-owners who were the backbone of the Democratic party in the South) who carried the state consistently...

My GOD, man, do you even know what year it is? Have you been in a coma for most of your adult life? Have you any sense of the passage of time whatsoever?

The Democrats pre-Civil War and indeed until the 1960s included a lot of people who'd never associate with the current Democrat party. Don't forget that George Wallace (T-H-L) was the Democrat governor of Alabama. "I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."

The history of the Democratic and Republican parties is pretty interesting. The Ds were founded on the notion of states' rights populism vs. Federalist centralism and were effectively a left wing opposition party. This morphed into defense of states' rights slavery vs. creeping abolitionism as represented by the upstart Republican Party, which was thus the effective left wing opposition party. Then Lincoln the Republican came to power, the Democrats split the country and both sides killed each other. Around the start of the 20th Century, the parties more or less flipped, with the Republicans becoming the party of the high tariff and Big Business and the Democrats the party of labor — but with a one party reactionary Democratic Party maintaining its hold in the South and some enclaves of progressive Republicanism surviving in places like New York, Wisconsin, and here in Oregon.

During the 1970s and 1980s, things realigned, with the Republican Party consolidating as a right wing, nationalist, states' rights party and the Democrats in their current Big Business-friendly, Social Democracy Lite incarnation. The progressive Republicans are all dead.

RfB

[Bezdomni]

You made me hunt down C. V. Woodward's Tom Watson: Agrarian Rebel. I highly recommend it, but it'll be under copyright protection for a while yet.

Most of my knowledge about the US South comes from encyclopedia enthusiast WEB Dubois. Ballot-stuffing and stripping of suffrage rights have long been common in elections that "go South".

Any word on the exit polls yet? ^^

[Vocal]

From 1828 to 1960 it was the Bourbon Democrat (T-H-L) (and the pre-Bourbon slave-owners who were the backbone of the Democratic party in the South) who carried the state consistently...

My GOD, man, do you even know what year it is? Have you been in a coma for most of your adult life? Have you any sense of the passage of time whatsoever?

The Democrats pre-Civil War and indeed until the 1960s included a lot of people who'd never associate with the current Democrat party. Don't forget that George Wallace (T-H-L) was the Democrat governor of Alabama. "I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever."

The history of the Democratic and Republican parties is pretty interesting. The Ds were founded on the notion of states' rights populism vs. Federalist centralism and were effectively a left wing opposition party. This morphed into defense of states' rights slavery vs. creeping abolitionism as represented by the upstart Republican Party, which was thus the effective left wing opposition party. Then Lincoln the Republican came to power, the Democrats split the country and both sides killed each other. Around the start of the 20th Century, the parties more or less flipped, with the Republicans becoming the party of the high tariff and Big Business and the Democrats the party of labor — but with a one party reactionary Democratic Party maintaining its hold in the South and some enclaves of progressive Republicanism surviving in places like New York, Wisconsin, and here in Oregon.

During the 1970s and 1980s, things realigned, with the Republican Party consolidating as a right wing, nationalist, states' rights party and the Democrats in their current Big Business-friendly, Social Democracy Lite incarnation. The progressive Republicans are all dead.

RfB

Is defining the pre-Civil War American political spectrum along left-right lines, as opposed to centralist-devolutionist, elitist-populist, free trade-protectionist, urban-rural, etc. really that worthwhile an endeavour? I have trouble recognising, say, Jefferson or Andrew Jackson as left-wingers.

[mynameisnotdave]

The results have been posted! The results have been posted!!

Pending scrutineer approval, commiserations to The Rambling Man, SMcCandish, Sir Joseph and Mailer diablo.

A first place surprise (or maybe not) for KrakatoaKatie!

[Kingsindian]

And my Final Jeopardy answer as voting begins...

YOUR 2017 ARBCOM ELECTION WINNERS

Opabinia regalis <--- TOP VOTE GETTER THIS ELECTION
Krakatoa Katie
Callanecc
Rick in Baltimore
Worm That Turned
BU Rob13
Premeditated Chaos
Alex Shih
-----------------
Mailer diablo

It's a coin toss for the 8th slot. I now think Alex buzzing around the Administrative drama boards will barely carry him.

RfB

Tim's 100% prediction record is unbroken, I see. The only flaw is that he didn't get the pole position right. Also, he did get the Alamaba Senate election wrong

[Jim]

Tim's 100% prediction record is unbroken, I see. The only flaw is that he didn't get the pole position right.

Tim got Alabama wrong, though.

They'll regret BU Rob.

[mynameisnotdave]

Tim's 100% prediction record is unbroken, I see. The only flaw is that he didn't get the pole position right.

He got Alabama wrong, though.

They'll regret BU Rob.

Or rather, he'll burn out in his Concorde-speed rise up the food chain.

[Jim]

Or rather, he'll burn out in his Concorde-speed rise up the food chain.

It's a train crash, and it will happen.

[Kumioko]

Or rather, he'll burn out in his Concorde-speed rise up the food chain.

It's a train crash, and it will happen.

Yep I agree, fortunately they are an obvious sock and an obvious hat collector so now that they have all the hats maybe they will do the community a favor and move on. It's doubtful that they will do anything positive for the project having risen so quickly.

[TNT]

Interesting results, nice to see KK at the top of the list, irked to see some people getting seats - all in all, ArbCabal as expected

[Mason]

The Rambling Man got 47.82%... looks like I owe Tim five dollars.

[Anthonyhcole]

Well done Tim.

[Poetlister]

How much difference will this make? I suspect that very little will change. Maybe we need a new thread to discuss.

[Randy from Boise]

And my Final Jeopardy answer as voting begins...

YOUR 2017 ARBCOM ELECTION WINNERS

Opabinia regalis <--- TOP VOTE GETTER THIS ELECTION
Krakatoa Katie
Callanecc
Rick in Baltimore
Worm That Turned
BU Rob13
Premeditated Chaos
Alex Shih
-----------------
Mailer diablo

It's a coin toss for the 8th slot. I now think Alex buzzing around the Administrative drama boards will barely carry him.

RfB

Tim's 100% prediction record is unbroken, I see. The only flaw is that he didn't get the pole position right. Also, he did get the Alamaba Senate election wrong

I'm way happier to be wrong about the Alabama Senate race than the prospect of missing one on the ArbCom election.

I never get the order of finish right, no worries.

RfB

[Randy from Boise]

The Rambling Man got 47.82%... looks like I owe Tim five dollars.

Woo hoo!!!

$5 check to:

Safe Haven Humane Society
32220 Old Hwy 34,
Tangent, OR 97389

Or web donation through their website:

https://safehavenhumane.org/


Thanks!


tim

[Randy from Boise]

The history of the Democratic and Republican parties is pretty interesting. The Ds were founded on the notion of states' rights populism vs. Federalist centralism and were effectively a left wing opposition party. This morphed into defense of states' rights slavery vs. creeping abolitionism as represented by the upstart Republican Party, which was thus the effective left wing opposition party. Then Lincoln the Republican came to power, the Democrats split the country and both sides killed each other. Around the start of the 20th Century, the parties more or less flipped, with the Republicans becoming the party of the high tariff and Big Business and the Democrats the party of labor — but with a one party reactionary Democratic Party maintaining its hold in the South and some enclaves of progressive Republicanism surviving in places like New York, Wisconsin, and here in Oregon.

During the 1970s and 1980s, things realigned, with the Republican Party consolidating as a right wing, nationalist, states' rights party and the Democrats in their current Big Business-friendly, Social Democracy Lite incarnation. The progressive Republicans are all dead.

RfB

Is defining the pre-Civil War American political spectrum along left-right lines, as opposed to centralist-devolutionist, elitist-populist, free trade-protectionist, urban-rural, etc. really that worthwhile an endeavour? I have trouble recognising, say, Jefferson or Andrew Jackson as left-wingers.

Fair enough.

t

[Mason]

The Rambling Man got 47.82%... looks like I owe Tim five dollars.

Woo hoo!!!

$5 check to:

Safe Haven Humane Society
32220 Old Hwy 34,
Tangent, OR 97389

Or web donation through their website:

https://safehavenhumane.org/


Thanks!


tim

Done.

[Kumioko]

How much difference will this make? I suspect that very little will change. Maybe we need a new thread to discuss.

It won't make any difference because the Arbcom is institutionally corrupt and worthless regardless of the merits of the individuals elected to be on it.

I am a little disappointed to see WormThatTurned didn't get better but I suspect I cost them some points due to them unblocking me on ENWP a couple years ago and since he wasn't functionally an admin when he ran for arbcom (although technically all he had to do is ask for the tools back).

[TNT]

How much difference will this make? I suspect that very little will change. Maybe we need a new thread to discuss.

It won't make any difference because the Arbcom is institutionally corrupt and worthless regardless of the merits of the individuals elected to be on it.

I am a little disappointed to see WormThatTurned didn't get better but I suspect I cost them some points due to them unblocking me on ENWP a couple years ago and since he wasn't functionally an admin when he ran for arbcom (although technically all he had to do is ask for the tools back).

I wouldn't personally say corrupt, but a broken system remains broken no matter the calibre of the people running it - I naively have a bit of hope given there are some good people with seats this year

[Kumioko]

How much difference will this make? I suspect that very little will change. Maybe we need a new thread to discuss.

It won't make any difference because the Arbcom is institutionally corrupt and worthless regardless of the merits of the individuals elected to be on it.

I am a little disappointed to see WormThatTurned didn't get better but I suspect I cost them some points due to them unblocking me on ENWP a couple years ago and since he wasn't functionally an admin when he ran for arbcom (although technically all he had to do is ask for the tools back).

I wouldn't personally say corrupt, but a broken system remains broken no matter the calibre of the people running it - I naively have a bit of hope given there are some good people with seats this year

With the exception of a couple (like 3) each years selection of arbs is weaker than the one before and this year is no exception. One obvious sock (BU Rob) and probably a second (Rickinbaltimore), 2 that are just plain worthless, 1 that's frankly to busy to be an admin let alone an arb (WTT), etc.

So my respect for the couple that I like that got elected aside, this Arbcom will be just as dysfunctional and useless as the last couple.

[CrowsNest]

Tim's 100% prediction record is unbroken, I see. The only flaw is that he didn't get the pole position right.

This has to be scored as a fail. Predicting the correct order was literally the only hard thing to do this year, picking eight viable candidates from a field with only eight viable candidates, was not exactly something that would have got 538.com excited.

As it turns out, if we are going by predicting finishing order, I am clearly the new king of ArbCom forecasting around here. My voter guide based forecast was scarily accurate......

viewtopic.php?p=210175#p210175

Wierdly, for both of us, finishing positions were predicted either correctly or within one place, the only exception being Opabina, and I think it might be fair to say bias played a part in both of our errors, scarily producing both the same misplacement (two positions out) and by about the same vote percentage too (about 7%).

Overall, I win, since Carrite didn't specify either the full field, nor any idea of likely margins. He phoned it in basically. Sacked.

[CrowsNest]

To build on everything said before, here's an example of the sort of slop that made it through quite comfortably this year......

I'll be frank: I have no idea who you are. I don't care enough about you to have any interest in "attacking" you. I speedy closed the MfD because I am the kind of person who hangs out at MfD habitually and closes things. I'll be even more frank: I don't know drmies from Adam. I could give a fuck if you want to question their actions all day and all night in an appropriate venue like a public talk page, ANI posting, or ArbCom filing. Fill your boots. Plenty of people question so-called "high-ranking" editors every day. But pages like your "archive" clearly fall outside the boundaries of what is acceptable, per WP:POLEMIC. I'm not restoring it, so you can either take it to DRV or stop asking. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 10:57, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

The back story to it all is hilarious too, but I picked it out to see if anyone here thinks it presents a different side of her perhaps to the one she portrayed in her electioneering, plus to demonstrate what I think I said about the risks of voting for her earlier simply because she is a woman. And the general awfulness of it. Higher standard? Not really.....

[Randy from Boise]

I'd say the biggest surprise of this election was the horrible candidate Sir Joseph pulling a nearly 40%. He was an epically bad prospect that should have been in the low 20s. There were a ton of Hasten The Day sockpuppets in play there, or something.

RfB

[Kingsindian]

Tim's 100% prediction record is unbroken, I see. The only flaw is that he didn't get the pole position right.

This has to be scored as a fail. Predicting the correct order was literally the only hard thing to do this year, picking eight viable candidates from a field with only eight viable candidates, was not exactly something that would have got 538.com excited.

As it turns out, if we are going by predicting finishing order, I am clearly the new king of ArbCom forecasting around here. My voter guide based forecast was scarily accurate......

viewtopic.php?p=210175#p210175

Wierdly, for both of us, finishing positions were predicted either correctly or within one place, the only exception being Opabina, and I think it might be fair to say bias played a part in both of our errors, scarily producing both the same misplacement (two positions out) and by about the same vote percentage too (about 7%).

Overall, I win, since Carrite didn't specify either the full field, nor any idea of likely margins. He phoned it in basically. Sacked.

Well, you both got 100% and Tim did not specify that he is aiming for predicting the order correctly, so it's not good to move the goalposts now.

But, since you asked (not), if we code the first 10 positions as 0-9, ArbCom position, your prediction and Tim's prediction would be (Tim only predicted the first 9, so the length of the string is 9):
012345678 <--- Results
104325679 <--- CrowsNest
201436578 <--- Tim

The total distance between the result and predictions (using the corresponding characters) is 7 for you and 8 for Tim.

1 + 1 + 2 + 0 + 2 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 1 = 7
2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 0 + 0 = 8

So you beat Tim by a hair, but both were pretty good.

[Randy from Boise]

Tim's 100% prediction record is unbroken, I see. The only flaw is that he didn't get the pole position right.

This has to be scored as a fail. Predicting the correct order was literally the only hard thing to do this year, picking eight viable candidates from a field with only eight viable candidates, was not exactly something that would have got 538.com excited.

As it turns out, if we are going by predicting finishing order, I am clearly the new king of ArbCom forecasting around here. My voter guide based forecast was scarily accurate......

viewtopic.php?p=210175#p210175

Wierdly, for both of us, finishing positions were predicted either correctly or within one place, the only exception being Opabina, and I think it might be fair to say bias played a part in both of our errors, scarily producing both the same misplacement (two positions out) and by about the same vote percentage too (about 7%).

Overall, I win, since Carrite didn't specify either the full field, nor any idea of likely margins. He phoned it in basically. Sacked.

Well, you both got 100% and Tim did not specify that he is aiming for predicting the order correctly, so it's not good to move the goalposts now.

But, since you asked (not), if we code the first 9 positions as 0-9 (A for 10), ArbCom position, your prediction and Tim's prediction would be:
012345678 <--- Results
104325679 <--- CrowsNest
201436578 <--- Tim

The total distance between the result and predictions (using the corresponding places) is 7 for you and 8 for Tim.

So you beat Tim by a hair, but both were pretty good.

The #1 predictor is the administrative flag. Since it became clear during the campaign that former administrator TRM was not being seen as an administrator and former administrator WTT was being seen as an administrator (the former having lost tools at Arbcom, the latter having voluntarily resigned tools) there were effectively 9 administrators running for 8 seats, so it was simple to get 7/8 if one stuck to that central predictive factor.

Getting them all right involved guessing which of the several administrators with a spotty recent contribution history would be considered least favorably. Alex has been a busy bee at AN/I lately; Mailer diablo came out of nowhere with decade-old credentials.

RfB

P.S. You forgot the 5 point penalty for missing a pick.

[Jim]

Overall, I win

That's never happened, except in your mind.

Please reconsider your reasons for posting here - you're boring the shit out of most people.

[Renée Bagslint]

Kendall's tau is a widely accepted measure of rank correlation.

[CrowsNest]

Overall, I win

That's never happened, except in your mind.

Please reconsider your reasons for posting here - you're boring the shit out of most people.

If I had ever properly considered it, I'm quite sure piquing the interest of Wikipedians like you, is not it. We have no common interests, friends or goals that I can see, thankfully. I'd typically now say something here about your comment and the reputation of this place, but it rather speaks for itself.

[Tarc]

I'd say the biggest surprise of this election was the horrible candidate Sir Joseph pulling a nearly 40%. He was an epically bad prospect that should have been in the low 20s. There were a ton of Hasten The Day sockpuppets in play there, or something.

RfB

[CrowsNest]

It's informative to compare the performance of Sir Joseph and The Rambling Man.

If all of Joseph's 444 supporters are just epic trolls or completely clueless, then its reasonable they also voted support for TRM, meaning he only really ever had 149 genuine supporters, i.e. people who believed he would do a good job, and whose opinion on such things can at least be described as informed, albeit loosely.

On the flip side, there is numerically virtually no difference in the sheer size of the landslide of opposition which turned out to oppose both as entirely unfit for a position of leadership or a dispute resolution function.

Seen in this light, comments like this from TRM give a real window into the delusion he suffers from, and indeed the likely delusions of the other 149 who evidently picked this fool to be their champion.....

it was a miraculous result, 594 supporters!! That should really teach Arbcom a thing or two about their ways, and with luck, it might reflect on their attitudes and behaviours towards us mere mortals going forward. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:26, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

[Poetlister]

Kendall's tau is a widely accepted measure of rank correlation.

It's fiddlier than Spearman's measure, but better especially with small sample sizes or a lot of tied ranks.

[No Ledge]

I've never heard of the Kendall rank correlation coefficient (T-H-L). You guys are talking way over my head.

Joseph's support was way higher than the 17.7% I got in 2014. I suppose I can console myself with the thought that I barely squeaked in ahead of that guy (discussed earlier in this thread) who was later banned for sock-puppetry.

I think that the mass-messaging to canvas up voters has had the effect of raising everyone's support percentages. Or maybe the vastly larger field back then, both gave the appearance of a more competitive race and gave cover for voting thumbs down on multiple candidates. Some may have been neutral on Joseph out of sympathy, as in why ?

In the spirit of the optional RfA poll, I'd be curious to know how my potential candidacy looks from the crow's nest out in Boise. Confess I thought about it a bit, but my on-wiki time is still oversubscribed so I thought I'd wait another year to see if I could get more of my to-do list cleared. I probably could have been talked into it, but nobody was asking me. But, just for kicks, where would you have slotted me within this year's field?

[Bezdomni]

Well, 1058 *is* 2 · 232, so you've got some prime in you.

[JCM]

Overall, I win

That's never happened, except in your mind.

Please reconsider your reasons for posting here - you're boring the shit out of most people.

Those that haven't taken advantage of one of our functionality options and automatically collapsed your comments with a brief hatnote anyway.

[Bezdomni]

-- Begoon

What does that mean?

[Vocal]

I'd say the biggest surprise of this election was the horrible candidate Sir Joseph pulling a nearly 40%. He was an epically bad prospect that should have been in the low 20s. There were a ton of Hasten The Day sockpuppets in play there, or something.

RfB

I certainly voted for him.

[CrowsNest]

But, just for kicks, where would you have slotted me within this year's field?

Well, you're no Katie, and you're not a former Arb, so you can forget finishing higher than fifth this year. But, you don't seem to have any of the things about you that dragged Alex, Rob and PC into the low 60s. So I could see you fighting Rick for the title of best of the bottom half. Hard to say without seeing your statement and questions, and of course, the guides. There's nothing in that 2014 result you need worry about, and at the current rate of decline, you can almost be guaranteed a seat in 2019 if you merely keep breathing.

[Alex Shih]

I am still quite surprised by the result. I have always firmly believed in "no big deal", hopefully I don't turn into a robot.

[Renée Bagslint]

I've never heard of the Kendall rank correlation coefficient (T-H-L). You guys are talking way over my head.

A major theme in statistics is about deciding whether or not there is a significant difference between two sets of data. That's something people have wanted to know for a long time in many different fields (agriculture, medicine, finance, advertising, horse-racing, ...) and so you should not be surprised to find out that there are lots of techniques for answering such questions. Very broadly, you want to have some sort of numerical measure of the difference, and some sort of idea how likely the various values, large or small, of that measure of difference are. You want to be able to make statements like "If there were no underlying difference between these data sets, then the amount of difference we see in this data would occur by chance less than one time in twenty".

In this case the data sets are not directly numerical, but rankings (orderings or permutations). Kendall's tau is a numerical measure of how different two rankings are, and Kendall also described how likely the various values of that measure were under various assumptions.

This is exactly the sort of question under discussion here. You know what sort of question you want to ask, and it's the sort of question that turns up a lot in different fields, and there are various ways of answering it.

[Midsize Jake]

I have always firmly believed in "no big deal", hopefully I don't turn into a robot.

A good way to tell is if you're having to carry one of those big grease guns around all the time to stop your metal parts from scraping together and making loud creaking noises.

[CrowsNest]

I am still quite surprised by the result. I have always firmly believed in "no big deal", hopefully I don't turn into a robot.

Robots would make fine Arbs. A robot would see the following exchange I just observed, and block User A as a tendentious user who is most likely just bullshitting User B, either because he is friends with User C, or because he's a stone cold moron.

User A: Do not restore the material just removed by User C, per ONUS
User B: ONUS is an inappropriate defence for wholesale removal of long standing material which has been discussed many times before
User A: ONUS is clear, do not restore challenged material until consensus says it is OK, this might simply be material that has never been examined until User C made a compelling case to remove it
User B: It was already examined explicitly, such as [here], and has copious levels of silent consensus. The applicable guidance is BRD, which states that now I have objected, it is User C who now needs to establish consensus for removal
User A: [essentially repeats previous answer]
User B: Your claims of what is the correct process here do not match ONUS, and indeed are not in line with the EDIT policy. ONUS is not a free pass for User C to impose his will unilaterally.
User A: If User B has erred, it should be easy for you to follow ONUS and prove it.

Flesh based Arbs like yourself would most likely disagree with User A and give User B a medal and User C a barnstar. Why? Because A was just a grunt, while B and C are admins.

Arbs are meant to stand up to obvious bullshitting and bullying wherever it occurs, ESPECIALLY in a situation like this, where it's being done in the name of policy and when in all likelihood an admin was merely protecting another admin in a content dispute under the guise of being a neutral party.

I find it hilarious that in this situation, it was the admins who acted like robots, or rather the stereotype of them, which holds that in circumstances of conflicting rules, they're meant to get stuck in loops or crash. These days, we can have robots which are smart enough to appreciate which of the rules based arguments in conflict here would lead to the best outcome for Wikipedia, and choose it.

[Randy from Boise]

I am still quite surprised by the result. I have always firmly believed in "no big deal", hopefully I don't turn into a robot.

Good luck with it, Alex. Mind the case deadlines and don't be a dick.

best,

tim