Hallo,
I just received an email (see below) that invites me to participate in the elections.
There are several technical issues with it:
1. I already voted. It may be a good idea to send this only to people who didn't.
2. The subject says "2009".
3. The email is sent in English and Hebrew. I don't know how did the system find out that that is my preferred language, so it's a bit weird, but in general i'm happy about this localization. There is still a problem, however: since the text is bidirectional and this email is sent in plain text, the Hebrew text is garbled and hardly readable. One way to solve this is to send the email as HTML and to define the Hebrew part as dir="rtl". This is relevant for all RTL languages - Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, Pashto, Divehi and many others.
Thank you,
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com "We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace." - T. Moore
הודעה שהועברה מאת: Wikimedia Board Elections Committee board-elections@lists.wikimedia.org תאריך: 10 ביוני 2011 14:56 נושא: Wikimedia Foundation Elections 2009 אל: Amire80 amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il
Dear Amire80,
You are eligible to vote in the 2011 elections for the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation, which operates projects such as Wikipedia. The Board of Trustees is the decision-making body that is ultimately responsible for the long term sustainability of the Foundation, so we value wide input into its selection.
For more information, please see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en . To remove yourself from future notification, please add your user name at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_nomail_list . </div>
<div style="{{quote style}}"> שלום Amire80,
הנך זכאי להשתתף בבחירות 2011 לחבר הנאמנים של קרן ויקימדיה, המפעילה מספר מיזמים כגון Wikipedia. חבר הנאמנים הוא הגוף המחליט הנושא באחריות הכוללת לקיומה של הקרן בטווח הארוך, ולכן אנו מקבלים בברכה השתתפות רחבה בבחירתו.
למידע נוסף, אנא ראו please see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/he . להסרת שמך מקבלת הודעות דומות בעתיד, אנא צרפו את שמכם בדף http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_nomail_list .
I think the system did NOT work for you :) It seems strange to send the same email in several languages. I only received it in Romanian. I think this is taken based on your language preferences (on meta?)
Strainu
2011/6/10 Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il:
Hallo,
I just received an email (see below) that invites me to participate in the elections.
There are several technical issues with it:
- I already voted. It may be a good idea to send this only to people
who didn't.
The subject says "2009".
The email is sent in English and Hebrew. I don't know how did the
system find out that that is my preferred language, so it's a bit weird, but in general i'm happy about this localization. There is still a problem, however: since the text is bidirectional and this email is sent in plain text, the Hebrew text is garbled and hardly readable. One way to solve this is to send the email as HTML and to define the Hebrew part as dir="rtl". This is relevant for all RTL languages - Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, Pashto, Divehi and many others.
Thank you,
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com "We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace." - T. Moore
הודעה שהועברה מאת: Wikimedia Board Elections Committee board-elections@lists.wikimedia.org תאריך: 10 ביוני 2011 14:56 נושא: Wikimedia Foundation Elections 2009 אל: Amire80 amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il
Dear Amire80,
You are eligible to vote in the 2011 elections for the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation, which operates projects such as Wikipedia. The Board of Trustees is the decision-making body that is ultimately responsible for the long term sustainability of the Foundation, so we value wide input into its selection.
For more information, please see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en . To remove yourself from future notification, please add your user name at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_nomail_list .
</div>
<div style="{{quote style}}"> שלום Amire80,
הנך זכאי להשתתף בבחירות 2011 לחבר הנאמנים של קרן ויקימדיה, המפעילה מספר מיזמים כגון Wikipedia. חבר הנאמנים הוא הגוף המחליט הנושא באחריות הכוללת לקיומה של הקרן בטווח הארוך, ולכן אנו מקבלים בברכה השתתפות רחבה בבחירתו.
למידע נוסף, אנא ראו please see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/he . להסרת שמך מקבלת הודעות דומות בעתיד, אנא צרפו את שמכם בדף http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_nomail_list . _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I think it is based on your home project :) I voted from meta, but got an email in Dutch - which is almost only on nlwiki my preferred language. I made some other suggestions on how to improve the email next time, maybe it would make sense to collect other suggestions there too: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Board_elections/2011#Email
Best regards,
Lodewijk
2011/6/10 Strainu strainu10@gmail.com
I think the system did NOT work for you :) It seems strange to send the same email in several languages. I only received it in Romanian. I think this is taken based on your language preferences (on meta?)
Strainu
2011/6/10 Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il:
Hallo,
I just received an email (see below) that invites me to participate in the elections.
There are several technical issues with it:
- I already voted. It may be a good idea to send this only to people
who didn't.
The subject says "2009".
The email is sent in English and Hebrew. I don't know how did the
system find out that that is my preferred language, so it's a bit weird, but in general i'm happy about this localization. There is still a problem, however: since the text is bidirectional and this email is sent in plain text, the Hebrew text is garbled and hardly readable. One way to solve this is to send the email as HTML and to define the Hebrew part as dir="rtl". This is relevant for all RTL languages - Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, Pashto, Divehi and many others.
Thank you,
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com "We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace." - T. Moore
הודעה שהועברה מאת: Wikimedia Board Elections Committee <
board-elections@lists.wikimedia.org>
תאריך: 10 ביוני 2011 14:56 נושא: Wikimedia Foundation Elections 2009 אל: Amire80 amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il
Dear Amire80,
You are eligible to vote in the 2011 elections for the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation, which operates projects such as Wikipedia. The Board of Trustees is the decision-making body that is ultimately responsible for the long term sustainability of the Foundation, so we value wide input into its selection.
For more information, please see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en . To remove yourself from future notification, please add your user name at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_nomail_list .
</div>
<div style="{{quote style}}"> שלום Amire80,
הנך זכאי להשתתף בבחירות 2011 לחבר הנאמנים של קרן ויקימדיה, המפעילה מספר מיזמים כגון Wikipedia. חבר הנאמנים הוא הגוף המחליט הנושא באחריות הכוללת לקיומה של הקרן בטווח הארוך, ולכן אנו מקבלים בברכה השתתפות רחבה בבחירתו.
למידע נוסף, אנא ראו please see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/he . להסרת שמך מקבלת הודעות דומות בעתיד, אנא צרפו את שמכם בדף http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_nomail_list . _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 15:06:14 +0300, "Amir E. Aharoni" amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
Hallo,
I just received an email (see below) that invites me to participate in the elections.
There are several technical issues with it:
I also got one, even though one of my accounts (to which is was sent) is globally blocked, and another one has an insufficient number of edits and both are thus ineligible to vote. I only got the e-mail in English, but I assume this is because I use English interface in all projects.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 15:06:14 +0300, "Amir E. Aharoni" amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
Hallo,
I just received an email (see below) that invites me to participate in the elections.
There are several technical issues with it:
I also got one, even though one of my accounts (to which is was sent) is globally blocked, and another one has an insufficient number of edits and both are thus ineligible to vote. I only got the e-mail in English, but I assume this is because I use English interface in all projects.
There were checks for regular blocks, but none for global blocks. I figured (inaccurately as it turns out) that globally blocked accounts were unlikely to qualify. :-)
I also got one, even though one of my accounts (to which is was sent)
is
globally blocked, and another one has an insufficient number of edits
and
both are thus ineligible to vote. I only got the e-mail in English, but
I
assume this is because I use English interface in all projects.
There were checks for regular blocks, but none for global blocks. I figured (inaccurately as it turns out) that globally blocked accounts were unlikely to qualify. :-)
I guess most of them indeed do not qualify, and I do not mind getting the message.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
There are several technical issues with it:
- I already voted. It may be a good idea to send this only to people
who didn't.
I don't think this is possible.
- The subject says "2009".
Whoops. I updated everything except the subject.
- The email is sent in English and Hebrew. I don't know how did the
system find out that that is my preferred language, so it's a bit weird, but in general i'm happy about this localization. There is still a problem, however: since the text is bidirectional and this email is sent in plain text, the Hebrew text is garbled and hardly readable. One way to solve this is to send the email as HTML and to define the Hebrew part as dir="rtl". This is relevant for all RTL languages - Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, Pashto, Divehi and many others.
That's very good feedback, thanks for letting me know.
2011/6/10 Andrew Garrett agarrett@wikimedia.org
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
There are several technical issues with it:
- I already voted. It may be a good idea to send this only to people
who didn't.
I don't think this is possible.
The list of accounts which have voted is publicly available. I assume you could use that to eliminate accounts that have voted already? I guess there might be a few false connections there, but you would be able to eliminate most of the unnecessary emails.
Of course this problem would be less if the emails next time would be sent at the beginning of the elections.
- The subject says "2009".
Whoops. I updated everything except the subject.
- The email is sent in English and Hebrew. I don't know how did the
system find out that that is my preferred language, so it's a bit weird, but in general i'm happy about this localization. There is still a problem, however: since the text is bidirectional and this email is sent in plain text, the Hebrew text is garbled and hardly readable. One way to solve this is to send the email as HTML and to define the Hebrew part as dir="rtl". This is relevant for all RTL languages - Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, Pashto, Divehi and many others.
That's very good feedback, thanks for letting me know.
-- Andrew Garrett Wikimedia Foundation agarrett@wikimedia.org
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
There are several technical issues with it:
- I already voted. It may be a good idea to send this only to people
who didn't.
I was invited to vote too, as was a little-used alternative account of mine, one that's obviously mine from the name.
Sarah
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:22 PM, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
I was invited to vote too, as was a little-used alternative account of mine, one that's obviously mine from the name.
Sorry, there were 43,000 accounts to email. I've used SUL to filter for duplicates, but we could hardly filter them for duplicates manually :-).
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Andrew Garrett agarrett@wikimedia.org wrote:
- I already voted. It may be a good idea to send this only to people
who didn't.
I don't think this is possible.
I think Pathoschild did it in the past and he was able to remove people who voted already, who didn't meet requirements, who were bots, etc.
It would be a good idea for someone to make a list of things that need to be done/were done to make your job easier in the future. Pathoschild, do you remember what was done in the past? Could you start such a list? :-)
(Btw, thanks to Andrew for doing the e-mail!)
Before I start, can I just point out these exact same issues was discussed on this list during the last Board election 2 years ago....
On 14/06/2011 16:38, Casey Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Andrew Garrettagarrett@wikimedia.org wrote:
- I already voted. It may be a good idea to send this only to people
who didn't.
I don't think this is possible.
I think Pathoschild did it in the past and he was able to remove people who voted already, who didn't meet requirements, who were bots, etc.
Well, I was the one who sent the email back in 2008. Pathoschild (I believe) was the committee member who took on the action to get it sent in 2009, but I think it was Werdna that actually sent it.
It would be a good idea for someone to make a list of things that need to be done/were done to make your job easier in the future. Pathoschild, do you remember what was done in the past? Could you start such a list? :-)
And I wrote precisely such email to this list 2 years ago.... http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2009-August/053798.html
In 2008, one of the sysadmin build a filter list of accounts matching the edit requirements, from which all blocked & bot flagged account was removed to create the list of eligible voters. For the email list, all accounts with no or obviously invalid entry for email address was removed, and (this was pre-SUL) home project was chosen for accounts sharing the same email address by picking the account with the most edits, preferring language specific project over multi-language one (e.g. Commons).
And just before I started sending the emails, I took out those emails corresponding to accounts that had voted up to that point. Obviously, with such an approach, those that voted after I looked up the voted list still got an email but it eliminated most people that voted already getting an email.
KTC
/me wait another 2 years to see if it makes any difference
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Casey Brown lists@caseybrown.org wrote:
It would be a good idea for someone to make a list of things that need to be done/were done to make your job easier in the future. Pathoschild, do you remember what was done in the past? Could you start such a list? :-)
http://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/SecurePoll#Email_spam
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Andrew Garrett agarrett@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Casey Brown lists@caseybrown.org wrote:
It would be a good idea for someone to make a list of things that need to be done/were done to make your job easier in the future. Pathoschild, do you remember what was done in the past? Could you start such a list? :-)
<3
You're awesome, Andrew. This is exactly what we needed. It looks like you covered everything mentioned in this thread too.
Hello,
I also received one, with
{{GENDER:Yann|Cher|Chère|Cher/Chère}} Yann,
Well, is this an attempt to be politically correct for BTGL? ;o)
Regards,
Yann
2011/6/10 Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il:
Hallo,
I just received an email (see below) that invites me to participate in the elections.
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Yann Forget yannfo@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I also received one, with
{{GENDER:Yann|Cher|Chère|Cher/Chère}} Yann,
Well, is this an attempt to be politically correct for BTGL? ;o)
Ha, looks like we need to give better instructions to the translators next time :-)
I receveid two mails:
1. To my main account (Beria) in portuguese.
2. To one of my bot accounts, in english.
So, i will guess that the language is chosen based in the home wiki (my bot has more edits in en.wiki than in pt.wiki) _____ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.*
2011/6/10 Andrew Garrett agarrett@wikimedia.org
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Yann Forget yannfo@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I also received one, with
{{GENDER:Yann|Cher|Chère|Cher/Chère}} Yann,
Well, is this an attempt to be politically correct for BTGL? ;o)
Ha, looks like we need to give better instructions to the translators next time :-)
-- Andrew Garrett Wikimedia Foundation agarrett@wikimedia.org
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 08:16, Béria Lima berialima@gmail.com wrote:
I receveid two mails:
To my main account (Beria) in portuguese.
To one of my bot accounts, in english.
So, i will guess that the language is chosen based in the home wiki (my bot has more edits in en.wiki than in pt.wiki) _____
I also received two invitations to vote, including to a little-used alternative account, one that is obviously mine from the name. This suggests among other things that the minimum voting requirements must be pretty low.
Sarah
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 8:00 AM, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 08:16, Béria Lima berialima@gmail.com wrote:
I receveid two mails:
To my main account (Beria) in portuguese.
To one of my bot accounts, in english.
So, i will guess that the language is chosen based in the home wiki (my bot has more edits in en.wiki than in pt.wiki) _____
I also received two invitations to vote, including to a little-used alternative account, one that is obviously mine from the name. This suggests among other things that the minimum voting requirements must be pretty low.
Sarah
Hey Sarah -- the voting requirements are here -- http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en#Requirements
300 edits, 20 recent ones -- the requirements were roughly halved from the last elections. There's discussion about this on the talk page.
-- phoebe
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:49, phoebe ayers phoebe.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Sarah -- the voting requirements are here -- http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en#Requirements
300 edits, 20 recent ones -- the requirements were roughly halved from the last elections. There's discussion about this on the talk page.
-- phoebe
Thanks, Phoebe. That seems awfully low, and makes sockpuppetry a lot easier, particularly given that people's multiple accounts are being invited to vote.
Sarah
Well thanks for the invite, and I voted.
Same here two invites, and also I got the mail a little late, cause the voting is already half over.
I blogged about this as well http://undeletewikipedia.blogspot.com/2011/06/funny-voting-for-wikimedia-boa...
mike
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 08:16, Béria Lima berialima@gmail.com wrote:
I receveid two mails:
To my main account (Beria) in portuguese.
To one of my bot accounts, in english.
So, i will guess that the language is chosen based in the home wiki (my
bot
has more edits in en.wiki than in pt.wiki) _____
I also received two invitations to vote, including to a little-used alternative account, one that is obviously mine from the name. This suggests among other things that the minimum voting requirements must be pretty low.
Sarah
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Oh wait,
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 10:34 PM, Andrew Garrett agarrett@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Yann Forget yannfo@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I also received one, with
{{GENDER:Yann|Cher|Chère|Cher/Chère}} Yann,
Well, is this an attempt to be politically correct for BTGL? ;o)
Ha, looks like we need to give better instructions to the translators next time :-)
I don't think this syntax goes globally. In Japanese for instance honorific titles should follow the name, not precede. Same may happen in other languages, I guess in Chinese too.
Even if it sounds rude, better to omit these and go straight?
My home wiki should have determined as somewhere en or meta, so I got one English mail and only. I don't know how it went really in Japanese ... So my proposal comes from only an assumption, but this kind of cultural and linguistically varied things is hard to generalize.
Cheers,
-- Andrew Garrett Wikimedia Foundation agarrett@wikimedia.org
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 6/10/11 3:30 PM, Yann Forget wrote:
Hello,
I also received one, with
{{GENDER:Yann|Cher|Chère|Cher/Chère}} Yann,
Well, is this an attempt to be politically correct for BTGL? ;o)
Regards,
Yann
Yes, this one was very cute :)
I also liked the
"Le comité directeur est l'organe de décision qui est <i> in fine </i> responsable de la viabilité à long terme de la WMF"
Otherwise very disappointed because I got only one invitation :(((
Flo
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 13:58, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Phoebe. That seems awfully low, and makes sockpuppetry a lot easier, particularly given that people's multiple accounts are being invited to vote.
Well, the SecurePoll extension has multiple measures built-in that allow for easy sock detection. It captures some data in addition to the username that would help eliminate those votes.
On a side note: would a simple check for duplicate emails be possible? I received an email for my main and my alt account, which are registered with the exact same email address. I'm not sure how the system would decide which account gets the email (Perhaps highest edit count?), but I'm sure someone could figure out something. :-)
--Avic
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 14:38, Shane Simmons avicennasis@gmail.com wrote:
Well, the SecurePoll extension has multiple measures built-in that allow for easy sock detection. It captures some data in addition to the username that would help eliminate those votes.
On a side note: would a simple check for duplicate emails be possible? I received an email for my main and my alt account, which are registered with the exact same email address. I'm not sure how the system would decide which account gets the email (Perhaps highest edit count?), but I'm sure someone could figure out something. :-)
I've received two invitations to vote -- also both at the same e-mail address -- so all I'd have to do now (if it were a user name that didn't make it obvious it was mine) is go somewhere else to vote. And given how low the voting requirements are the software must be sending out multiple invitations to quite a few people.
I can't see how it benefits the project to have multiple accounts voting that only need to have made 300 edits and 20 recent ones, and a kind bot that reminds them of all the eligible account names. We're shooting ourselves in the foot with this, surely.
Sarah
Perhaps. Although with that said nearly 1000 people have voted today - compared to between 100-200 on the previous days (excepting the 29th, first day, which had about 600-800). So it's a case of; is the risk worth the reward?
Tom
On 10 June 2011 22:19, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 14:38, Shane Simmons avicennasis@gmail.com wrote:
Well, the SecurePoll extension has multiple measures built-in that allow
for
easy sock detection. It captures some data in addition to the username
that
would help eliminate those votes.
On a side note: would a simple check for duplicate emails be possible? I received an email for my main and my alt account, which are registered
with
the exact same email address. I'm not sure how the system would decide
which
account gets the email (Perhaps highest edit count?), but I'm sure
someone
could figure out something. :-)
I've received two invitations to vote -- also both at the same e-mail address -- so all I'd have to do now (if it were a user name that didn't make it obvious it was mine) is go somewhere else to vote. And given how low the voting requirements are the software must be sending out multiple invitations to quite a few people.
I can't see how it benefits the project to have multiple accounts voting that only need to have made 300 edits and 20 recent ones, and a kind bot that reminds them of all the eligible account names. We're shooting ourselves in the foot with this, surely.
Sarah
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 10 June 2011 22:19, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
I've received two invitations to vote -- also both at the same e-mail address -- so all I'd have to do now (if it were a user name that didn't make it obvious it was mine) is go somewhere else to vote. And given how low the voting requirements are the software must be sending out multiple invitations to quite a few people.
I can't see how it benefits the project to have multiple accounts voting that only need to have made 300 edits and 20 recent ones, and a kind bot that reminds them of all the eligible account names. We're shooting ourselves in the foot with this, surely.
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 15:29, Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com wrote:
Perhaps. Although with that said nearly 1000 people have voted today - compared to between 100-200 on the previous days (excepting the 29th, first day, which had about 600-800). So it's a case of; is the risk worth the reward?
It's more than a risk, though, it's a certainty that the software is inviting multiple alternate/sock accounts to vote. And there's no way of knowing what the percentage is. So the cost/benefit can't be addressed, because we have no figures.
Sarah
As Shane said, there are built-in features in the SecurePoll software that help us to control for sockpuppeting, so we are pretty safe. Sockpuppeting in a large enough scale to influence an election of this size would also be very difficult to pull through, and practically impossible to do undetected.
2011/6/11, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com:
On 10 June 2011 22:19, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
I've received two invitations to vote -- also both at the same e-mail address -- so all I'd have to do now (if it were a user name that didn't make it obvious it was mine) is go somewhere else to vote. And given how low the voting requirements are the software must be sending out multiple invitations to quite a few people.
I can't see how it benefits the project to have multiple accounts voting that only need to have made 300 edits and 20 recent ones, and a kind bot that reminds them of all the eligible account names. We're shooting ourselves in the foot with this, surely.
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 15:29, Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com wrote:
Perhaps. Although with that said nearly 1000 people have voted today - compared to between 100-200 on the previous days (excepting the 29th, first day, which had about 600-800). So it's a case of; is the risk worth the reward?
It's more than a risk, though, it's a certainty that the software is inviting multiple alternate/sock accounts to vote. And there's no way of knowing what the percentage is. So the cost/benefit can't be addressed, because we have no figures.
Sarah
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
2011/6/10 Jon Harald Søby jhsoby@gmail.com:
As Shane said, there are built-in features in the SecurePoll software that help us to control for sockpuppeting, so we are pretty safe. Sockpuppeting in a large enough scale to influence an election of this size would also be very difficult to pull through, and practically impossible to do undetected.
Jon, there's no built-in feature in the software that will tell you account A is someone voting from home, and account B is the same person voting from an internet cafe a block away.
This is always the case. But add to it (a) requiring only 300 edits across all the projects in 10 years, just 20 since November 2010, and (b) that the software is actively inviting all accounts that meet those requirements, it means we're alerting all the socks that they're able to vote. They might otherwise not even have remembered some of the accounts the software is reminding them of.
This is just not a good idea.
Sarah
2011/6/11, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com:
On 10 June 2011 22:19, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
I've received two invitations to vote -- also both at the same e-mail address -- so all I'd have to do now (if it were a user name that didn't make it obvious it was mine) is go somewhere else to vote. And given how low the voting requirements are the software must be sending out multiple invitations to quite a few people.
I can't see how it benefits the project to have multiple accounts voting that only need to have made 300 edits and 20 recent ones, and a kind bot that reminds them of all the eligible account names. We're shooting ourselves in the foot with this, surely.
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 15:29, Thomas Morton morton.thomas@googlemail.com wrote:
Perhaps. Although with that said nearly 1000 people have voted today - compared to between 100-200 on the previous days (excepting the 29th, first day, which had about 600-800). So it's a case of; is the risk worth the reward?
It's more than a risk, though, it's a certainty that the software is inviting multiple alternate/sock accounts to vote. And there's no way of knowing what the percentage is. So the cost/benefit can't be addressed, because we have no figures.
Sarah
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- mvh Jon Harald Søby http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 06/10/2011 11:55 PM, Sarah wrote:
2011/6/10 Jon Harald Søby jhsoby@gmail.com:
As Shane said, there are built-in features in the SecurePoll software that help us to control for sockpuppeting, so we are pretty safe. Sockpuppeting in a large enough scale to influence an election of this size would also be very difficult to pull through, and practically impossible to do undetected.
Jon, there's no built-in feature in the software that will tell you account A is someone voting from home, and account B is the same person voting from an internet cafe a block away.
If I wouldn't pass this time, the next one I'll ask you to become my campaign manager ;) Obviously, you know what should be done ;)
This is always the case. But add to it (a) requiring only 300 edits across all the projects in 10 years, just 20 since November 2010, and (b) that the software is actively inviting all accounts that meet those requirements, it means we're alerting all the socks that they're able to vote. They might otherwise not even have remembered some of the accounts the software is reminding them of.
This is just not a good idea.
According to the present situation (email sent three days before the end of elections), I think that we are pretty safe. Besides that, we don't have any really problematic candidate, like it was on previous elections.
Besides that, participation in elections was lower in 2009 than in 2008, which means that we need more voters. Election committee did what is in their power to increase participation. That's about lowering requirements, sending emails and similar. And, yes, that's not the best way, but Election committee didn't have much more tools.
The best way is to do structural work to increase [constructive] participation in decision-making processes out of hot topics on Wikipedias.
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Milos Rancic millosh@gmail.com wrote:
Election committee did what is in their power to increase participation.
That's sad.
:(
2011/6/11 Fajro faigos@gmail.com On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Milos Rancic millosh@gmail.com wrote:
Election committee did what is in their power to increase participation.
That's sad.
why try to increase participation is sad, Fajro? _____ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.*
2011/6/11 Béria Lima berialima@gmail.com:
why try to increase participation is sad, Fajro?
The lousy performance of the committee is sad.
-- Fajro
Fajro, 11/06/2011 19:13:
2011/6/11 Béria Limaberialima@gmail.com:
why try to increase participation is sad, Fajro?
The lousy performance of the committee is sad.
What did /you/ do?
Nemo
On 10/06/2011 5:55 PM, Sarah wrote:
[...] that the software is actively inviting all accounts that meet those requirements, it means we're alerting all the socks that they're able to vote. They might otherwise not even have remembered some of the accounts the software is reminding them of.
This is just not a good idea.
You are begging a number of questions: - that the proportion of socks accounts is significant to begin with - that many of those sock accounts will vote because of the reminder that otherwise would not have - that the number of resulting fraudulent votes will be more significant than the number of *valid* votes the email will have generated; and - that even a statistically significant number of sock votes would overweight the benefits of the increased voter turnout.
I don't believe any of those presumptions are valid.
-- Coren / Marc
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 21:03, Marc A. Pelletier marc@uberbox.org wrote:
On 10/06/2011 5:55 PM, Sarah wrote:
[...] that the software is actively inviting all accounts that meet those requirements, it means we're alerting all the socks that they're able to vote. They might otherwise not even have remembered some of the accounts the software is reminding them of.
This is just not a good idea.
You are begging a number of questions:
- that the proportion of socks accounts is significant to begin with
- that many of those sock accounts will vote because of the reminder that
otherwise would not have
- that the number of resulting fraudulent votes will be more significant
than the number of *valid* votes the email will have generated; and
- that even a statistically significant number of sock votes would
overweight the benefits of the increased voter turnout.
I don't believe any of those presumptions are valid.
-- Coren / Marc
Marc, what I'm saying is that these are all unknowables.
We don't know how many editors we have, as opposed to accounts, not even roughly. If we want to move toward good governance, we ought to try to determine how many individual editors there are; how to make sure people are members of the community in a substantive sense before asking for their votes; then how to make reasonably sure that each person votes once.
There seems to be a sense that quantity of votes is what matters, regardless of where they come from. I'm unclear why numbers alone would matter so much.
Sarah
Also, looking at the elections e-mail again, it links to a page that, so far as I can see, doesn't tell people where to go to vote, except for those most active on meta.
Sarah
Sarah, 11/06/2011 21:54:
Also, looking at the elections e-mail again, it links to a page that, so far as I can see, doesn't tell people where to go to vote, except for those most active on meta.
It says «Go to the wiki page "Special:Securepoll" on one wiki you qualify to vote from». Could be easier, but we have also non unified accounts.
Nemo
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org