On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 5:47 AM Butch Bustria <bustrias(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Congratulations to the 4 winners.
I saw that the STV system unveiled how the 4th and 5th positions (appears to be from a G7
country and a non G7 country) had switched. I am interested to know from which sector/s or
Wikimedia project brought the switch of those two positions (starting from the 8th
I also observed that I have no option to choose which wiki I will represent. It appears
that the system only allows which wiki I first clicked the central notice link. I tried to
go to the other projects and vote, it allowed me to change my vote (still one eligible
ballot) but it did not change the project I will represent. I am saying this because it
would allow people reading the statistics which project the eligible voter truly
Despite all the consultations made prior to the elections to bring the emerging
communities/ global south to the board it had not accurately painted the picture. I would
personally suggest in the future not all candidates vie for the same set of seats. So for
instance, there are 4 seats up for grabs, two seats must be reserved for sector A and two
seats for sector B. Candidates must select which sector they represent and cannot be both.
Then the whole electorate votes for candidates for Sector A board seats and Sector B board
seats using the same STV system. Qualifications for Sector A and Sector B seats shall be
different and will be decided by the board of trustees with consent from an advisory/
electoral committee. I personally suggest developed communities (from big chapters and
wiki projects with large edit participation) and emerging communities (small to medium
sized affiliates and wiki projects with medium to small edit participation).
I think these are excellent points and should be discussed in general
as a freedom of (de-)association and self-identification.
Best Z. Blace