I made a whoopsie in the title. "If you have not yet" was intended to
mean "if you have not in past cycles." To be clear, voting in this
season's elections is not yet available. I'll keep an array of lists
updated with relevant timelines, etc, as I can. If you're interested
in running yourself, but not sure what it entails, please contact me
offlist, and I can walk you through a lot of what you'll be dealing
with. Also of note, even though we've never had an arb who has not
yet been an admin, there's no actual requirement that arbitrators be
admins.
Best,
Kevin Gorman
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Kevin Gorman <kgorman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all -
I'll be circulating this to multiple lists, in part to ensure that
everyone is aware of both the importance and ability of ENWP's
arbitration committee, and in part to ensure that everyone who is
eligible to vote is aware that they are eligible to vote, and aware
that their votes are anonymous - and aware of how significantly they
can count. Although oppose votes do carry more weight than neutral
votes or support votes, in our last tranche of elections (which had a
steep decline in voters from previous elections,) an arbitrator was
elected with only 227 support votes, and a total of only 593 votes
cast in relation to that arb in general.
The arbitration committee has, for all practical purposes, binding
decision making ability on all matter that come before the English
Wikipedia. For members of that committee to have been elected on the
basis of only 227 support votes seems (sorry to the arb in question
for using him as an example) absolutely bizarre to me. The
arbitration committee is the body ultimately responsible for ensuring
the health of ENWP's community, including on issues of gender,
harrassment, and everything else. I'm not going to suggest who you
vote for (especially because another three weeks of nominations are
coming in,) but if you are concerned about the state of ENWP's
community, please take the minimal time necessary to scrutinize
candidate statements and cast your anonymous votes according to those
candidates who you believe are most likely to represent your
interests.
In comparison with the 227 positive votes and the 593 total votes that
an arbitrator was actually elected with last year, this list alone has
over 400 members, most of whom are eligible to vote in arbcom
elections. Again, I'll be circulating this (or a very similar
message) around to multiple other lists, and won't be making direct
suggestions or endorsements of candidates on-list, although I may
compile a voter candidate guide on-wiki when all nominations are in.
If you meet the fairly minimal requirements to ote, please take the
fairly minimal time out of your day once elections start to cast your
anonymous votes in favor of the candidates who best supports your
interests and the interests of the community - and I know that even on
this list, there are certainly people who will disagree with me about
what candidates will be represent the interests of the community, and
am totally fine with that - vote how you want to vote. But vote!
ENWP's final ruling body shouldn't be determined by a small fraction
of eligible voters who will all be effected by the decisions our next
arbcom makes:
These are literally the only requirements to vote in the English
Arbcom's upcoming elections:
"(i) has registered an account before 28 October 2015
(ii) has made at least 150 mainspace edits before 1 November 2015
and,(iii) is not blocked from the English Wikipedia at the time of
their vote.
(iii) is not blocked from the English Wikipedia at the time of their vote."
If you meet those requirements, please consider the candidates and
their position statements and their answers to questions, and vote for
whatever candidates best think represent how you would like the future
of ENWP's community to be.
Best,
Kevin Gorman