Very interesting conversations here!
And indeed I agree with Florence. There really needs to be serious voter education especially in global South Communities, focusing on how the transferable voting system works. I went to these elections very worried about the same thing, raising it sharply during our candidate onboarding session.
I was disappointed during WikiIndaba conference to hear a number of the conference participants wishing me well with the elections adding that they only voted for me!
Anyway, we live to fight another day, thanks to everyone who voted for me - placing me as their top 4 candidate in their vote. And congrats once again to the elected candidate.
Best regards,
Bobby Shabangu
Rather than just thinking about how to teach voters how to vote, we should consider ways to adjust the process to make it more intuitive to understand. We have the opportunity to do this as part of the Board governance conversation that is collecting feedback now I think?
The data is clear that ranking this many candidates is overly complex and many voters won’t do it. The data also reflect real-world confusion in political elections implementing ranked choice voting.
The eligibility requirements round did a good job of eliminating a few candidates that would likely not have performed well. We really need to think about ways to decrease the number of candidates to a more reasonable number if we want to increase voter participation.
For instance, we could consider regional primaries where we specifically ask voters from a given set of wikis and organizations to nominate 1-2 Board candidates from their combined geographic + language region. It wouldn’t be perfect but with predefined voter participation thresholds and more targeted campaigns, it could make election outreach more effective at driving proportionally greater voting. This kind of equity is why the Global Council idea was brought forth, but we could achieve a similar outcome without creating an entirely new governance body.