Endorsements are now open for all candidates. Any endorsements for candidates who do not confirm are, of course, contingent upon confirmation. Philippe ----- Original Message ----- From: Florence Devouard To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 6:54 PM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board election endorsements hmmmm ? Well, this is not disastrous. Surely, this can be flexible. Either get 24-48 hours more, or put the endorsement on the talk page until they are confirmed, or endorsement could be open but candidate labelled non confirmed. I'll tell you... I think that whatever the little mistakes, the current situation looks good; Is that due to the endorsement ? I dunno, but this year, we only have "serious" (real) candidates. I also think there is a very active questionning of the candidates, and this is fabulous. A unique opportunity to see where the current board is not very good :-) All in all, I find the situation rather positive. Do not worry about bureaucracy. I do not think any candidate will be left aside because of a short deadline for endorsement. Ant Robert Leverington wrote: _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

That's true. This is especially misleading because the candidates start at different times and therefore are always going to collect different numbers of endorsements. It's turning into a very odd kind of popularity contest. Perhaps continue to require a minimum of 12 and cap them at 30 next time? On 6/19/07, Walter Vermeir <walter(a)wikipedia.be> wrote: -- Toward Peace, Love & Progress: Erik DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.

On 6/19/07, Erik Moeller <erik(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: "next time" meaning *next elections* in 2008 of course: i do not suppose you propose to now suddenly start erasing people's endorsements? best wishes, oscar -- DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the Wikimedia Foundation nor of its Board of Trustees.

Ideally I would like to see six candidates in the "finals" when there are three seats to be elected. At the moment, there are already 5 candidates with >30, and Yann will get to the 30 soon too. Maybe it wouldn't be that weird to state that the required number can be raised next time? In my opinion, a good and serious candidate (as in: would make a good chance in the elections, because that is what we are selecting on), shouldn't have much trouble in getting 15-20 endorsements in 24 hours (if (s)he tries a bit). In a week such a candidate should be able to get 50 endorsements imho. Maybe it would be a good idea to have the candidate collecting the endorsements on beforehand next time, he could send them privately to the committee, they would be validated, and could be put online "en block". That way you work around several problems like "vote-like", having them to be confirmed on beforehand etc. One disadvantage is the confirmation of the endorsers though, maybe someone can come up with a good way of validating these endorsements? I.e. should they be made on a saperate page, with signature, should they consist of emails, whatever? Should the endorsers confirm their endorsement? I admit it makes it a littlemore fuzzy, please come with better procedures :) Lodewijk 2007/6/20, Azdiyy <azdiyy(a)googlemail.com>om>:

Just a quick response, without making any judgment on the rest of the proposal (indeed, it's one that deserve more thorough study): The practice of removing endorsements before a candidacy has been removed ended days ago. Since then, candidates have been able to be listed and endorsed from the minute they make their candidacy known. There is a note, however, that says that endorsements are subject to the identity process being completed. There are currently two candidates listed who are not yet confirmed. Philippe ----- Original Message ----- From: GerardM To: effeietsanders(a)gmail.com ; Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 5:11 AM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board election endorsements Hoi, Getting endorsements for candidates prior to launching a bit is a valid strategy. However, for this to work the current practice of removing endorsements before a candidacy has been approved has to end. I do think that getting endorsements prior to asking for approval for the candidacy is good. It does however not mean that having the endorsements prior to asking for approval for a candidacy need to coincide. What is essential is that prior to the start of the election the candidature has been approved and, that it comes with a sufficient number of endorsements. When there is a need for twelve, it does not make sense to have more than twelve. Voting is done in secret and endorsements are only to show that there is sufficient support. However, if getting endorsements is seen and appreciated as a political instrument, then it should also be considered as such. Thanks, GerardM On 6/20/07, effe iets anders <effeietsanders(a)gmail.com> wrote: _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l