I d really love to have a simple voting right without exceptions, simple to
explain. This than could be adopted as well by chapters and thematic orgs
to distinguish between active and other members. I.e. have a number of
billable contributions to Wikipedia or commons or be a registered
developer. To make it an incentive more to contribute.
Rupert
On Oct 6, 2014 1:55 PM, "Lodewijk" <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org> wrote:
Do you know which users were among these 534? Would it
be possible to
randomly approach 20-30 of them and ask why they didn't vote? It would be
helpful to learn, I guess. This is, assuming such a mini-survey was not
attempted yet.
Best,
Lodewijk
2014-10-06 8:46 GMT+02:00 James Alexander <jalexander(a)wikimedia.org>rg>:
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 5:12 AM, James Alexander
<
jalexander(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
A completely un deduped (and so is double+
counting anyone who is
eligible
on multiple wikis because of activity there)
number is 207911 for 2013.
Caveats:
This number is quick and dirty and 'reasonable' as a starting point but
far from perfect, among other things:
- It doesn't include 100% of the staff or developers, only the staff
who had staff rights or asked and developers who asked because they
couldn't vote in other ways). This is a relatively small amount of
missing
people.
- It still includes bots and blocked users, because that was checked
later in the process. I, again, think this is a relatively small
amount
given number of bots + blocked users with more
then 300 edits
relative to
> the total. It is possible some of the bots are very active across
the
board
> though which will be helped by the de dupping.
> - It is not de dupped meaning it double+ counts people who were
active
on
many wikis or accounts, sometimes a lot (for example there are 7
entries
> for my personal account, 7 for my work account, and 69 for the
steward
> DerHexer given global work). Sorting
through the crap that the
script
spat
out is more then I'm willing to do at 5am
but I will try to do this
later
> today and get this number down. My guess is this is in the 10k
range.
So I was wrong about the extent of the de duplication. In the end there
were about *50124* unique people marked off on the voter list (again,
like
above, that does still include some bots/blocked
on multiple wiki users
but
they are only counted once each) so call it
50k.
Using that number:
- With a total of 1809 valid votes that is about a 3.6% turnout.
- We know that another 534 people authenticated to vote but did not
actually cast a valid vote (and so most likely left after seeing the
ballot)[1]. That would account for an additional 1%
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2013/Post_mo…
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>