People looking for specific evidence that Drmies was bad for Wikipedia when he was an Arbitrator, need only look at one of the two incidents he likely referred to here.....
there are two specific things that I wanted to get done last time and I did get them done--meaning, twice I managed to convince the committee to do something, something good, in relation to specific editors.
He of course declined to give specifics, because the one I am certain is being referred to, is horrific. Drmies has a lifetime wiki-friend Malik Shabbaz. He was emergency desysopped, for reasons he has never accepted were valid. The whole thing was a disgrace, it saw Malik falsely accuse an editor of racism, then flip the fuck out when the community disagreed, which was why he got emergency desysopped. It then saw Drmies stalk that editor and finally block them for an unrelated reason, as revenge. Nobody did anything, because they're either afraid of Drmies, or they just didn't care (the victim was not an editor with any social standing).
Fast forward to July 2016, with newly elected Arbitrator now familiar with how things work, who his potential allies might be, and lo and behold, out of nowhere, an ArbCom motion appears.....
The Arbitration Committee has satisfied itself that the account was not compromised and that any ongoing disruption at the time has ceased. Accordingly, we affirm that Malik Shabazz may be resysopped at his request at any time.
Subsequent inquiries revealed this had been instigated by Drmies and off his own back - Malik had not asked for the committee to review his status. It all happened in secret, and attempts to obtain more information on the Committee's reasoning for this frankly bizarre decision, were rebuffed, and strongly, by none other than Drmies. Above your pay-grade, so kindly fuck off and mind your own business, was the basic message.
If that doesn't show you he is bad news, you then need to consider just how bad a decision this was. At the time, the reason for people's surprise, was that Malik had already done things post-emergency which would have likely meant he would not have passed an RfA, and by some margin, not just due to the 'has collected enemies' incumbency handicap. He has only gone on to do even more things, bad things, which would ensure that if he stood for RfA now, he might get record levels of disapproval.
And yet just months ago, in the aftermath of one such incident, Drmies still only had one thing to say, to simply express sympathy for Malik's current plight, as he is now very much considered one of Wikipedia's problem users subject to specific sanctions, claiming everything he has done is down to failures of the Wikipedia community (a not so cryptic call back to the original decision not to back his false accusation of racism).
Worse, he happily joined in with Malik's harassment of Sandstein, for no other reason than he was the one simply doing his job and working this problem user through the tedious paperwork of increasing sanctions when they can't or won't admit fault.
A few weeks ago, Malik even broke a topic ban by posting on Drmies' talk page, an ArbCom Enforcement sanction, and Drmies' reaction was to try to cover it up.
If you think when Drmies is elected to ArbCom again, that he might recuse from matters Malik, you would be wrong. If you doubt me, go ask, is he willing to state here and now that he will recuse on any matter even slightly related to Malik? He will undoubtedly refuse, and bullshit you. Right to your face. Just as he bullshitted those tiny few who queried the original motion.
There is absolutely no reason to think Drmies has learned and would not do such things again, or worse, if the need arises. His campaign claim that he is now all for transparency is laughable bullshit. Go ask him to do what is necessary to release the conversations that led to this motion. He will refuse, and bullshit you.
Right to your face.
He knows those conversations will reveal him saying proveably false things to his colleagues to secure this motion, safe in the knowledge they wouldn't bother to go check for themselves. They'd assume nobody would be so bold as to get elected as an Arbitrator and then blatantly lie to their colleagues to help a friend and inevitably damage Wikipedia, confident they won't be found out because people like me cannit see them and offer the truth.
The whole thing could have been so much worse, had Malik chosen to take up the Committee's offer of restoration of rights, no questions asked, that Drmies said and did God knows what to secure. We can only thank our lucky stars, that, psychopathy aside, unlike Drmies, Malik at least seems to have a good grasp of the fact that no, he is not Administrator material, and likely never was, so he never asked.
He will try to claim otherwise, if by some miracle someone can even make him account for himself over this matter, but this was an act Drmies has to take sole responsibility for, as a great example of what damage he can and likely would do again, as an Arbitrator. All other signatories to that motion are covered in terms of guilt or even culpability, because Drmies absolutely will not have presented the case as it should be, and like it or not, it is a reasonable assumption that if someone gets elected as an Arbitrator, they can be assumed to not be lying in correspondence to other Arbitrators. If not, then what's the fucking point of this bullshit election? There is none, because it cannot prevent people like Drmies securing power.
