If you haven't heard, the board member elections are official on. I'd like to encourage everyone who is eligible to participate, but I'd also like to encourage you do like I did and cast a blank ballot.
Because we use approval voting, a blank ballot is the same as voting for everyone and the same as not voting for all. But it is also different because it shows your interest in the process, without either approving of or disapproving of any particular candidate. Since there already votes there is no risk of us going without a board, which is good. :)
I have posted why I choose to vote blank and why I think you should do the same on my userpage, and I welcome comments. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/vote_blank
I would discourage this. Unless you really don't have an opinion, why not vote for your preferred candidates? If you don't have a preference and you don't like any of them, I can understand.
Mark
On 28/06/05, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
If you haven't heard, the board member elections are official on. I'd like to encourage everyone who is eligible to participate, but I'd also like to encourage you do like I did and cast a blank ballot.
Because we use approval voting, a blank ballot is the same as voting for everyone and the same as not voting for all. But it is also different because it shows your interest in the process, without either approving of or disapproving of any particular candidate. Since there already votes there is no risk of us going without a board, which is good. :)
I have posted why I choose to vote blank and why I think you should do the same on my userpage, and I welcome comments. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/vote_blank _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 6/29/05, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I would discourage this. Unless you really don't have an opinion, why not vote for your preferred candidates? If you don't have a preference and you don't like any of them, I can understand.
Well, I did write about it at the included URL. I like the existing board members, and I think the proposed candidates are great wikipedians and would probably all do okay. But none of them have given me much basis to choose between them, nor to choose against them. All I could really do is mark which ones I've had more positive contact with, which isn't a really good metric. What little validity my decision might have today will be long gone before two years pass.
Had there been a participant with a pure 'I am the legal mouthpiece of the community', or had there been one with a substantial story about copyright, or NOR... I might have been inclined to vote in a way which showed preference for or against them. Heck, had we even had a troll or controversial user running I'd think a non null ballot would be useful.
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On 6/29/05, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I would discourage this. Unless you really don't have an opinion, why not vote for your preferred candidates? If you don't have a preference and you don't like any of them, I can understand.
Well, I did write about it at the included URL. I like the existing board members, and I think the proposed candidates are great wikipedians and would probably all do okay. But none of them have given me much basis to choose between them, nor to choose against them. All I could really do is mark which ones I've had more positive contact with, which isn't a really good metric. What little validity my decision might have today will be long gone before two years pass.
Had there been a participant with a pure 'I am the legal mouthpiece of the community', or had there been one with a substantial story about copyright, or NOR... I might have been inclined to vote in a way which showed preference for or against them. Heck, had we even had a troll or controversial user running I'd think a non null ballot would be useful.
Hoi, Two of the candidates have a substantial story about where they stand in our community. A story that speaks louder than words as they have been doing the job for the last year. You must like politicians if you only choose on what they say in their manifesto and not judge the track record of the incumbent. I am quite happy with the current board to the extend that I did not make myself a candidate. My platform would have been to help develop the other projects. However, it is possible to work on other projects just that fine. The amount of support from the board for the work I have been doing on Wiktionary and Ultimate Wiktionary was great. They were critical and as long as good arguments were put forward and as long as it was seen that there was something of a community behind ideas there was room to do "good".
So for me it is simple who to vote for. As to the other candidates, they are known. You may know them personally and this should influence you. I am certain that people around you in your communities know the candidates, just ask. You can even ask someone you trust who to vote for. I did that at the last elections and Andre Engels told me that we need someone non-English and he knew Anthere.. so I voted for Anthere who I did not know at the time .. I know _sj_ and I know Francis Schonken. personally and I know people who know the others. So yes it is a bit obligatory to write a small voter manifesto but that is not what should lead you. We know these people.
Thanks, GerardM
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
So for me it is simple who to vote for. As to the other candidates, they are known. You may know them personally and this should influence you. I am certain that people around you in your communities know the candidates, just ask. You can even ask someone you trust who to vote for. I did that at the last elections and Andre Engels told me that we need someone non-English and he knew Anthere.. so I voted for Anthere who I did not know at the time .. I know _sj_ and I know Francis Schonken. personally and I know people who know the others. So yes it is a bit obligatory to write a small voter manifesto but that is not what should lead you. We know these people.
I don't think this is particularly true; I only know people who are active on the mailing lists and on en:, which doesn't emcompass everyone. I've also never encountered Francis Schonken, because the en: Wikipedia is a pretty big place these days (there are over a 1000 regularly active editors, and many more occasionally-active editors). I have encountered sj, but only because we've both been on the arbitration committee.
I'd also like to be able to vote for people outside my local circle of acquaintances. For example, I think there must be some good editors on the ja: Wikipedia, as it's one of the biggest, and they would be a useful voice to have as input (alas, none are running). To be able to bring together disparate communities, some sort of statement and description of how they would act if on the committee is necessary. Otherwise people just vote for who they personally know, or who people they know know, which seems to be what you suggest but which I think is a very poor practice.
-Mark
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org