Following up with my post to the election discussion pages:
I think the 150 mainspace edits requirement was poorly discussed and
is an ill-advised change to the requirements in prior elections. It
disenfranchises relatively new (but not brand-new) editors who make
large edits to articles and make most of their edits by numbers to
talk pages. According to the discussion the rule is aimed at
preventing the participation of sockpuppets. I think that the actual
effect of this rule has been to deny suffrage to more than a dozen
editors whose total edit counts and edit history make it clear that
they are not sockpuppets. I and others have spent a fair amount of
time reading and following along with the growth and change of the
Wikipedia community for some time without always actively
participating and in some cases prior to registering a username. This
does not mean that we are unqualified to vote or have no interests in
Wikipedia that we would like to protect/advance through voting.
There ought to have been a fuller discussion about this restriction,
particularly considering the mainspace edit count rule has not been
well received in any forum where it was aired in a limited fashion.
Additionally, the decision should have been made by consensus in the
community - not be an election volunteer 'officer' - however hard
working.
If I have misunderstood the process that led to the restriction, I
apologise, but my objection to the restriction itself remains.
Avruch