User talk:Shalom Yechiel

Thanks for the support (as distinct from strong support)

Hi Shalom - I just reviewed your vote and rationale for same, and I wanted to thank you for lending me your support in spite of the fact that I fall short of a few of your criteria. I obviously don't agree with all of your criteria, or I'd deem myself to be lacking and refrain from running (I also don't think you give enough weight to platform, which I think is roughly as important as the person running on it). I read your Livejournal from time to time, after stumbling across it once after googling my username (you mentioned me in your post about getting CreepyCrawly unblocked on enwiki - in hindsight, I regret not being more supportive of that effort, although I don't regret nominating R. Baley for adminship), and I find your commentary on Wikipedia issues to be lucid and interesting.

Finally, I wanted to make sure that you'd read my answer to the "Skeletons, closets, etc." question; you seem to value ethical integrity, and I wanted to make sure that you were aware of my past ethical shortcomings. Cheers, Sarcasticidealist 18:35, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. To clarify, my thanks for your support was sincere, and not intended as some kind of complaint about not receiving your strong support. My ballot obviously looks different from yours, but you formulated a coherent set of criteria and evaluated me fairly against them; that's all I can ask of any voter. I too find myself ranking highly candidates with contradictory positions; in part, that's because there isn't any correlation between the extent to which people agree with me on different issues, so I'm likely to rank very closely two candidates who each agree with me on one important issue and disagree with me on another, even if they disagree with each other on all important issues. In part it's also because I agree with you that personal integrity can trump positions on specific issues; in "real" elections I will often more highly prefer a candidate who disagrees with me on some issues for rational, coherent reasons to one who agrees with me for more jingoistic ones. In summary, voting is complicated.

I also read with interest your essay, as well as the linked blog posts and your most recent RFA. I am impressed (though somewhat confused). If you need a nom or a co-nom for any future RFA, please do let me know.

Again, thanks for your support and for your analysis. Cheers, Sarcasticidealist 20:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Yechiel -- thanks from me too, naturally. I read your analysis with interest. I hope others are reading it too :-) תודה רבה וכל טוב לך, Harel 18:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)