Hi all, 


Thanks for discussing this topic. It is clear the publication of this information is important to some community members. The Elections Committee and Board Selection Task Force approved publishing a complete list of which affiliate organizations voted in a table.


Best,


Jackie


On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 11:45 AM Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Of course it's like that Ilario,sometimes some usergroups are "userpersons". and as person involved in the previous ASBS election I politely hinted that aspect as much as possible in the past. Also, sometimes even some chapters are mostly few key persons when relationship with WMF is involved, but it's easier to start from UGs to handle the issue.

i had some general idea of what you are supposed to facilitate if you want real transparency in these processes and I felt that was not fully there. Instead of building on previous know-how, the process was restarting again and that do not get great functionality in WMF, usually. It's like knowing for sure that these sort of mails would have happened at the end.

I had no time to look carefully, but that was kinda of a feeling and as a result, despite being a first contact and having a decent know-how, I decided not to engage the affiliate in the process. The affiliate I represent is small and fragmented and lacks a strong identity yet, I know for sure that getting to a meaningful ranking would have taken a lot of effort and in May and June I simply had no time. Or it would have resulted in me pushing my ideas in a way or another, and that was not correct. Like, many people are ns-0 users and don't now names, so they trust your side of the story.

So I decided to skip it. I was asked a contact for the first step and replied by mail that in May I had no time to even start a thread on meta about deciding whom to select (it would have been me, probably, but I did not feel it was correct).

my choice was either focusing properly as a UG on the WIkisummit application or that, and I did at least properly the first one. I could have taken part in the process probably representing 90% myself, nobody would have noticed.

Alessandro

Il sabato 23 luglio 2022 17:59:01 CEST, Ilario Valdelli <valdelli@gmail.com> ha scritto:


I think that there is a very sensible point here.

Sometimes behind some usergroups there is not a specific community but only few people and sometimes some usergroups are "userpersons".

Being more transparent helps to demonstrate that the whole process has been conducted appropriately but also to have an overview that affiliates have voted really on what their community proposed.

Kind regards

On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 3:28 AM Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need to protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members, 

This is not some functionary volunteer role, nor is it a scholarship to attend some event. The affiliate and the members of the Board of Trustees are both very public facing aspects, when a person is on the Board of Trustees their identity is public https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/board/ .  It is obvious that a truly  vulnerable person would not even put themselves into a BOT position.  It's important for members of the community to know who their affiliate chose to represent them because it's a reflection of that community.  I know some affiliates actually didnt consult their communities for input into the decision process before the fact so knowing after the fact is at least pretending to be transparent in the voting.



On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 at 06:01, Benjamin Lees <emufarmers@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't think there's anything blithe in pointing out that an after-the-fact promise of secrecy serves no one.  Affiliates had to decide whether to vote without knowing whether the list would be published (but hopefully realizing that the username of their voter would be published, although I'm not sure if this was made clear).  The main effect of post-hoc secrecy here would be to sow confusion and set up unrealistic expectations about future votes; in the last affiliate-selected board seat process, not only was the list of voting affiliates published, but their individual votes were as well: <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asbs_presentation_matches_with_stv_py_results.pdf>, and for the reasons Lodewijk describes, we might well wish to return to such full transparency in the future.

If a decision either way had been made and communicated beforehand, affiliate voters could have made an informed decision, but as with most of the rules for this election, it was announced in the middle of the election, rather than in the many months before it.  In any event, I agree with SJ that this is a decision to be made by the elections committee, not WMF staff.


On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 4:45 PM Robert Fernandez <wikigamaliel@gmail.com> wrote:
I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need to protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members, especially in a community that usually prides itself on the ability to participate anonymously.

That said, perhaps we could publish the names of participating affiliates who affirm the wish to be named publicly. 
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LNXPN2Z5TY35SJOV6MOLB7ASOQL57GGF/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/DNDMKF4NKNDFEKC5FFHXWB24FISK4NCA/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org


--
GN.
  
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/27TMCRTG33NLTXSSN4P5JZFVX7OEEIFS/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org


--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Wikipedia: Ilario
Skype: valdelli
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/PQFYW2AOEK2UZFTZJFAIOBY43JVVOZT4/

To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/RRM6MMRSOECNWA7SHLMOQJEAPS6BXV5X/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org