[Foundation-l] Open question from an Election Official: on voters' elibiglity

effe iets anders effeietsanders at gmail.com
Fri Aug 25 15:47:14 UTC 2006

I think th idea of exampting people who don't have the right to work
on a wiki anymore should also not be allowed to be part of the group
that is represented by the representative is ok. It is not possible to
make a good comparison with the American way of democratics, please
let us not stick into that discussion, because there are much more
other sides to the story, but let's stick to the core of the question.

What are the elections for? We choose a representative. That
representative represents the communities. If someone is no part of
the communities, should it be able to vote who should represent that
community? It's a good question. But I don't think someone should be
taken away his or her right to vote when (s)he is banned from a
project. That would be as an additional punishment. I think it would
be best to state that the edits on the project you are indeinitely
banned from do not count. So if it was your only project, you can't
vote. But when you were active enough on another project as well, and
not banned indef there, it's ok to vote. That way it is not an
additional punishment, but a clearer definition of the representation.


2006/8/25, Jeffrey V. Merkey <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com>:
> Aphaia wrote:
> >Thank you for your interest on Election.
> >
> >Today I would like to invite you to an open question from me. About
> >voters' eligibility. There is no discussion among three, mainly
> >because two of them have been not available since the midst of this
> >month, hence no opinion, there is no consensus based conclusion.
> >
> >http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Elections_for_the_Board_of_Trustees_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%2C_2006/En#Open_question:_on_voters.27_elibiglity
> >
> >I could rather say "we will do so-and-so because of lack of
> >consensus", without bother you with my question, but even if I should
> >say so at that time, I think it would be nice to know what kind of
> >trends are found among us, the community from hundreds projects,
> >people from hundreds lands and languages.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >
> In America, only convicted felons loose the right to vote, and only in
> certain states. People on probation have the right to vote, and people
> from every social class and range of offenses have the right to vote
> (except for convicted felons). No "Concensus" of citizens can strip from
> any individual the right to vote in this country. This is because we are
> an "enlightened society", not the forum of the Roman Senate where
> splinter groups assassinate the emperor and and citizen or senator with
> views we don't like, or the Court of Queen Elizabet in the 1500's where
> you could loose your head for wearing the wrong color clothes on the
> wrong day or criticize the queen. I thank God America doesn't run this
> way, or most countries in modern times (except for a few in the middle
> eastern countries).
> Ultimately, the finanacial contributors to the Foundation will vote with
> their $$$ to confirm your choices and practices. Banned users from the
> whole of Wikimedia should not vote. Banned users from a particular
> project should vtoe just not on that project. This isn't an article for
> deletion, it's board members for the community. All the communities
> should vote. I am glad you raised this issue because it shows exactly
> where you stand, and I'm happy to know it.
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

More information about the foundation-l mailing list