Hi Mike,
Yes, on-wiki replies are fine and the organizers of the election will
contact you to clarify the details.
We will find a fix to the problem of the content license on the forum.
Thank you for pointing this out.
About features, this is what the election organizers want to try out:
* Let affiliates propose and select their questions by themselves. This is
why we are providing a private space for affiliate representatives to
propose questions and vote for them.
* Give all candidates three days to writel their replies before they can be
read by anyone. This allows all candidates to organize their time to
respond, not taxing as much those who have less free time or less flexible
schedules. This is why we give access to candidates to this private space
at the same time, when the questions are ready, and then make this space
public at the date announced.
* Give everyone more time to read the candidates' answers in their
preferred languages, using automatic translation. We want to reduce the gap
that non-English speakers have to endure when texts are only available in
English, and when translations take extra days to arrive, if they arrive
for their language at all. This is another reason to use the forum.
On Sat, Jun 11, 2022, 11:09 PM Mike Peel <email(a)mikepeel.net> wrote:
On 11/6/22 05:10:51, Quim Gil wrote:
For context, the same email gives an option to
candidates to answer the
questions via email. In this case, the election organizers will post the
answers in the forum on their behalf.
Answering by email isn't a great solution. I'm hoping to be able to
reply on-wiki, which is the normal way of answering questions during
Wikimedia elections. However, since the forum doesn't seem to specify
copyright, I don't think CC-BY-SA responses on-wiki can be shared on the
forum.
This is the only point of the election process
where this forum is being
used. It allows affiliates to propose and prioritize their questions
quickly, and it allows to open the candidate replies to the public at
the same time, automatically translated to the preference to each
reader. Candidates can reply via email if they prefer. If a candidate
doesn't want to use the forum, they don't have to.
It's good to hear that it won't be used more than that. It shouldn't
even be used for this, though.
More context. This election process also includes
an option for voters
to use a voting advice tool that is off-wiki as well. This tool was used
in the last MCDC election and received wide support and positive
feedback. None of the candidates had any objections, and there were +70.
Here too the candidates don't have to use this tool directly if they
don't want to.
So because no-one objected before, my objections are clearly unreasonable?
These specialized tools are easy to use and they
provide a benefit to
users that right now we cannot replicate with wiki pages alone.
There is nothing on these forums that can't be replicated on-wiki, as
has been thoroughly demonstrated in this thread.
This is Wikimedia. Please keep things on-wiki.
Thanks,
Mike