Hi,
we would like to elect something similar to ArbCom on cs: wiki using the same voting software which was used in en: ArbCom elections. I'm wondering how to do that.
Thanks
Jan Kulveit ([[User:Wikimol]])
"Jan" == Jan Kulveit jk-wikitech@ks.cz
Jan> we would like to elect something similar to ArbCom on cs
Voting is a bad idea. In general, and especially in the context of Wikipedia. Voting is a sickness of democracy. It fails everywhere, miserably. It is a visible sign of the collapse of the Social Contract. It would be urgent to acknowledge this fact, and to think of it, instead of digging one's heads in the sand of easiness and tradition.
Some obvious problems with voting: - anonymous, thus opaque, untractable, untraceable, free from responsibility. - synchronous -- everything in a big bag, now. Waiting until next time. - dehumanising: people as numbers; everybody reduced to the highest common denominator; differences unacknowledged. - disdain of minorities. - delegation of power; loss of responsibility. ...
Bush supports voting. That's what he means by democracy.
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Marc Girod wrote:
"Jan" == Jan Kulveit jk-wikitech@ks.cz
Jan> we would like to elect something similar to ArbCom on cs
Voting is a bad idea. In general, and especially in the context of Wikipedia. Voting is a sickness of democracy. [...] Bush supports voting. That's what he means by democracy.
It is said that democracy is the worst government system, except for all the others. If you can come up with an alternative to voting for ArbCom or whatever vote on Wikipedia which is simultaneously morally superior, possible to implement and with equal or better results feel free to propose it.
Alfio
Alfio Puglisi wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Marc Girod wrote:
> "Jan" == Jan Kulveit jk-wikitech@ks.cz
Jan> we would like to elect something similar to ArbCom on cs
Voting is a bad idea. In general, and especially in the context of Wikipedia. Voting is a sickness of democracy. [...] Bush supports voting. That's what he means by democracy.
It is said that democracy is the worst government system, except for all the others. If you can come up with an alternative to voting for ArbCom or whatever vote on Wikipedia which is simultaneously morally superior, possible to implement and with equal or better results feel free to propose it.
That trite old platitude about democracy has nothing to do with it. Suggesting that democracy implies voting may be comforting for those with a fetish for politically correct moral superiority. In most cases any alternative is better if it strives to find a common ground between positions.
Ec
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Ray Saintonge wrote:
Alfio Puglisi wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Marc Girod wrote:
>> "Jan" == Jan Kulveit jk-wikitech@ks.cz >
Jan> we would like to elect something similar to ArbCom on cs
Voting is a bad idea. In general, and especially in the context of Wikipedia. Voting is a sickness of democracy. [...] Bush supports voting. That's what he means by democracy.
It is said that democracy is the worst government system, except for all the others. If you can come up with an alternative to voting for ArbCom or whatever vote on Wikipedia which is simultaneously morally superior, possible to implement and with equal or better results feel free to propose it.
That trite old platitude about democracy has nothing to do with it. Suggesting that democracy implies voting may be comforting for those with a fetish for politically correct moral superiority. In most cases any alternative is better if it strives to find a common ground between positions.
It is better if it strives *and* succeeds. I sait "feel free to propose it", and that's not a rethorical question. On wikipedia, there are votes about deleting pages, about admin elections, about ArbCom decisions, and others. So, instead of saying "voting is bad", one should propose an alternative mechanism that works when people have different opinions.
Alfio
On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 09:26:20AM +0300, Marc Girod wrote:
"Jan" == Jan Kulveit jk-wikitech@ks.cz
Jan> we would like to elect something similar to ArbCom on cs
Voting is a bad idea.
...
I believe VotingIsEvil vs. VotingIsGood debate is off-topic here, so it would be better to move further replies to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_vote_on_everything or private mail.
-----
I usualy find myself advocating the "VotingIsEvil" and "DoNotVoteOnEverything" positions. I consider e.g. nonexistence of "Vote on desysoping" on cs: as achievement :-)
But in this case, please take as a premise we want to create something like en: Arbitration Committee and the question is how to do that. Well known alternatives are 1) members appointed by some higher authority. This is problematic in non-english language wikis, because higher authorities such as Wikimedia Board or Jimbo propably don't have enough inside in the community. 2) public elections 3) secret elections I can imagine other possiblilies, e.g. members randomly selected from active wikipedians, but we dont want to be much original in this case.
AFAIK 2) was used on fr:, 3) on en:
IMO 3) is better than 2) for number of reasons. The most prominent - arbitrators should treat all users equal, no matter how they voted, and this principle is better guaranted by secret elections. Public voting IMO encourages creation of parties and coalitons more than private voting.
Additional question is, if elections, which voting system. That was discussed in great detail before en: ArbCom elections and I think it worked fine. => Taking the voting software a vote counting algorithm from en: is IMHO the best option now.
Jan Kulveit
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org