When can we expect to see a formal announcement of the board election results on the election page, etc?
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
--- Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com wrote:
When can we expect to see a formal announcement of the board election results on the election page, etc?
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
A per wiki breakdown with percentages would also be nice.
-- mav
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 23:52:59 -0700 (PDT), Daniel Mayer maveric149@yahoo.com wrote:
A per wiki breakdown with percentages would also be nice.
I'm not an authoratitative source on this, but apparently there will be NO release of figures (!), even on a sitewide basis, according to directives by Jimbo, for some sort of fear that it will hurt peoples' feelings? potentially provide statistics which might perhaps in the future maybe damage their potential standing in future elections? I have no idea, some sort of excuse of that nature... This is what I hear in the IRC channel, anyway, would anyone here (Jimbo? etc) care to confirm or deny it in a less transient medium?
Jun 12 23:11:25 <dannyisme> i was originally against making them public, and jimbo, without knowing my opinion, concurred in a private email
I completely disagree with this decision, and note that this probably should have been decided and made clear prior to the election. Hmm.
On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 07:58:37AM -0400, Fennec Foxen wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 23:52:59 -0700 (PDT), Daniel Mayer maveric149@yahoo.com wrote:
A per wiki breakdown with percentages would also be nice.
I'm not an authoratitative source on this, but apparently there will be NO release of figures (!), even on a sitewide basis, according to directives by Jimbo, for some sort of fear that it will hurt peoples' feelings? potentially provide statistics which might perhaps in the future maybe damage their potential standing in future elections? I have no idea, some sort of excuse of that nature... This is what I hear in the IRC channel, anyway, would anyone here (Jimbo? etc) care to confirm or deny it in a less transient medium?
Personally I have absolutely nothing against knowing how much I suck. Please uncover the stats.
ciao, tom
--- "Thomas R. Koll" tomk32@gmx.de wrote:
Personally I have absolutely nothing against knowing how much I suck. Please uncover the stats.
I would be interested in at least seeing the number of candidates who received a majority of approval and the actual percentages (names not needed). I assume there were at least two. If names are provided, then perhaps those who did receive a majority of approval but who did not win could be considered for officer positions.
-- mav
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/
Fennec Foxen wrote:
I'm not an authoratitative source on this, but apparently there will be NO release of figures (!), even on a sitewide basis, according to directives by Jimbo, for some sort of fear that it will hurt peoples' feelings? potentially provide statistics which might perhaps in the future maybe damage their potential standing in future elections? I have no idea, some sort of excuse of that nature... This is what I hear in the IRC channel, anyway, would anyone here (Jimbo? etc) care to confirm or deny it in a less transient medium?
There is no directive from me. Please try not to say things that are inflammatory!
Jun 12 23:11:25 <dannyisme> i was originally against making them public, and jimbo, without knowing my opinion, concurred in a private email
I do concur in the opinion. The numbers are not that meaningful, and I am ont sure what the point is. But I leave it to others to decide, hopefully by a consensus of the candidates.
The reason I think that the numbers are not so meaningful is that I think that a lot of people agreed with the idea of having a more international board. So I think some of the Americans got fewer votes not because they were thought to be unsuitable, but rather than when people felt that two candidates were otherwise equal, they tended to vote European.
It is no big deal either way, but of course I understand that it is a Wikipedia tradition to make a huge deal out of everything. ;-)
--Jimbo
On 06/15/04 10:14, Jimmy Wales wrote:
The reason I think that the numbers are not so meaningful is that I think that a lot of people agreed with the idea of having a more international board. So I think some of the Americans got fewer votes not because they were thought to be unsuitable, but rather than when people felt that two candidates were otherwise equal, they tended to vote European.
I dunno about that. I was very pleased it was ticky-box for as many candidates as you like, rather than PICK ONE. So I ticked the boxes for every candidate I was familiar with and knew was clueful in their Wikipedia work to date.
It is no big deal either way, but of course I understand that it is a Wikipedia tradition to make a huge deal out of everything. ;-)
Battles to the death for insanely low stakes!
- d.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org