[Foundation-l] Concerns over en.wikipedia.org ArbCom Election Process

effe iets anders effeietsanders at gmail.com
Wed Dec 6 12:22:19 UTC 2006

Afaik has there never been a closed vote on the wiki for local policy. Even
more, there has in my memory never been a closed vote other then for the
boardelections. I guess it's not for nothing that the system we are voting
with for the board is called boardvote. I think it would indeed be
interesting to use the system on the one hand as it is more peacefull and
like we vote irl, but on the other hand it might require assistence from the
devs, or it might be very hard to track which votes are egligable, harder as
when using open voting (when everybody can help looking who might be
So it has it's pro's and con's. I think at least the community has to decide
herself whether she wants a open or closed voting, but as well the wmf has
prolly to agree on voting this way (as it requires dev assistence). Maybe it
would be best to ask the wmf first indeed :)


2006/12/6, Stephanie Erin Daugherty <stephanie at sosdg.org>:
> Having not participated in last years ArbCom elections, I was quite
> shocked to see, that with the important role the Arbitraton Committee
> has in safeguarding the ideals and policies of the English wikipedia,
> these elections are being held with an open ballot.
> I cannot have any confidence in such an election. Open ballots bring out
> the worst in politics - bullying, fear of retaliation, groupthink, and
> voting with the hope to gain political favor in the future. While an
> open ballot appears open on the surface, as history has demonstrated, it
> is anything but.
> There is a reason that most free elections use secret ballots. Only in
> secret can someone make their true opinion known, without fear of
> bullying, fear of retaliation, undue influence of others, or hurt
> feelings.
> Secret ballots also allow for good judgement to be exercised in cases
> where a moral dilemma would otherwise exist - how do you deal with
> voting against someone who you are close friends with, or who is in a
> position of power over you, be it actual or percieved? In an open
> ballot, this at the very least means either hurt feelings, or votes that
> do not reflect one's true beliefs as to right choice to make in an
> election.
> We have facilities for secret ballots and approval voting. Those
> facilities work well, as demonstrated in the last board elections.
> Why on-wiki voting was chosen in favor of this, I don't know, to me it
> defies logical sense.
> In conclusion, I condemn this election in the strongest possible terms,
> as being flawed, subject to tampering, and as being anything other than
> a free election. I would hope that I'm not the only person that it this
> way, but even if I am, I know that I cannot in good concience stand for
> such an unjust and flawed process.
> I would encourage anyone else that feels strongly about this to make
> their voice heard, and loudly, so that future elections do not follow
> the same flawed path, and so that we can have confidence in our
> elections process.
> --
> Stephanie Daugherty
> stephanie at sosdg.org
> User:Triona on en.wikipedia.org
> _______________________________________________
> 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