I'm a student whose editing on Wikimedia is primarily done on the English Wikipedia on history-related articles. I enjoy both content-editing and participating in Wikipedia's various processes.
When it comes to "conflicting Wikimedian philosophies," I'd say that I am an exclusionist and eventualist editor who places more value in an article's potential than in its immediately-visible characteristics. I believe that polling and voting are extremely important to a venture like the English Wikipedia, and hope that they are used more extensively in the future. The input of multiple editors is more conducive to the reaching of a good decision than that of just one, or a few, I think.