Hoi, Why is a guideline on English Wikipedia the right place for a policy that is of a global relevance? Thanks, GerardM On Fri, 25 Jun 2021 at 09:05, টিটো দত্ত Tito Dutta <trulytito(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM টিটো দত্ত Tito Dutta <trulytito(a)gmail.com> wrote: Is this a problem? That's normally how an election works. You participate in public debates, Q&As, or other events to present yourself to voters who have come to look at all the candidates, and then you reach out and try to engage voters who haven't engaged themselves. WP:CANVASS exists in the Wikipedia milieu that proclaims that discussions are not votes, and hence discourages ordinary election behaviors in order to promote consensus-based decision-making. (I don't recall offhand whether or how WP:CANVASS has been applied to the one thing that even the English Wikipedia acknowledges is an election: the ArbCom election.) Nevertheless, I think it would be appropriate for particular venues to consider whether they want to permit themselves to be used for campaigning. For instance, a couple people announced their candidacies or intended candidacies for things on this mailing list earlier this month, which is fine, I think, but you could imagine it becoming disruptive to the list if it devolved into electioneering by a hundred different candidates. Likewise, the English Wikipedia might not permit a candidate to post a vote-for-me message on the talk pages of all eligible voters. That's really a question of disruptiveness to the forum, though, not fairness of the election. Benjamin

Greetings, If it is promotion on mailing lists, it is still open and people can see that post. I have been more concerned about the numerous one-to-one communication over different social networking and communication platforms (chats) and votstacking attempts. In many of the cases, it is just asking for votes as favour, and it ends up being how many people one knows and can contact. I believe, any process where "vote count" is the "only" way to decide the winners, appropriate canvassing policy should be a behavioral guideline. ইতি, টিটো দত্ত (মাতৃভাষা থাক জীবন জুড়ে) শনি, ২৬ জুন, ২০২১ তারিখে ৩:৩৮ AM টায় এ Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> লিখেছেন:

hi there, whatever the protocol is, it should be explicit. My general feeling is that we have too little rather than too many opportunities to understand what people propose, represent, want to achieve, understand. From that point of view, it is valuable to allow reaching out larger audiences, as Jan writes. However, as Tito notes, canvassing votes in return for favors is something we definitely should reject - as it is pretty much more or less corruption. best, dj "pundit" -- _____________________________ <https://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl/> Dariusz Jemielniak, Ph.D., Full Professor, head of MINDS <https://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl/> (Management in Networked and Digital Societies), Kozminski University Polish Academy of Sciences corresponding member faculty associate Berkman-Klein Center for Internet and Society <https://cyber.harvard.edu/>, Harvard University *Key books*: Collaborative Society <https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/collaborative-society> (2020, MIT Press, with A. Przegalinska), Thick Big Data <https://global.oup.com/academic/product/thick-big-data-9780198839705?cc=gb&lang=en> (2020, Oxford University Press), Common Knowlege? <https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=24010> (2014, Stanford University Press) On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 2:25 PM Jan Ainali &lt;ainali.jan(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: -- __________________________________ ​​ prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak kierownik katedry MINDS <https://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl/>, Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego członek korespondent Polskiej Akademii Nauk <https://pan.pl/> faculty associate Berkman-Klein Center for Internet and Society <https://cyber.harvard.edu/>, Harvard University Ważniejsze książki: Collaborative Society <https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/collaborative-society> (2020, MIT Press, z A. Przegalińską), Thick Big Data <https://global.oup.com/academic/product/thick-big-data-9780198839705?cc=gb&lang=en> (2020, Oxford University Press), Common Knowledge? <https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=24010> (2014, Stanford University Press) *Ostatnie artykuły:* - Jędrzej Chrzanowski, Julia Sołek, Dariusz Jemielniak, Wojciech Fendler (2021) Assessing Public Interest Based on Wikipedia’s Most Visited Medical Articles During the SARS-CoV-2 Outbreak <https://www.jmir.org/2021/4/e26331/>, *Journal of Medical Internet Research*, 23(4)::e26331 - Natalia Banasik-Jemielniak, Dariusz Jemielniak, Wojciech Pędzich (2021) Intercessory Rote Prayer, Life Longevity and the Mortality of Roman Catholic Bishops: An Exploratory Study <https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10943-021-01214-9>, *Journal of Religion and Health*, doi.org/10.1007/s10943-021-01214-9 - Natalia Banasik-Jemielniak, Dariusz Jemielniak, Maciej Wilamowski (2021) Psychology and Wikipedia: Measuring Psychology Journals’ Impact by Wikipedia Citations <http://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Psychology-and-Wikipedia-measuring-psychology-journals-impact-by-Wikipedia-citations.pdf> , *Social Science Computer Review, *doi.org/10.1177/0894439321993836 - Agata Stasik, Dariusz Jemielniak (2021) Public involvement in risk governance in the internet era: impact of new rules of building trust and credibility <http://nerds.kozminski.edu.pl/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Public-involvement-in-risk-governance-in-the-internet-era-impact-of-new-rules-of-building-trust-and-credibility.pdf>, Journal of Risk Research, doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2020.1864008