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

Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
Thu Dec 7 08:50:35 UTC 2006

Alphax (Wikipedia email) schreef:
> I actually see two problems with the current round of arbcom elections:
> 1. We're not using a secret ballot, which makes voting too easily
> influenced by peer pressure
> 2. I don't believe that there are enough suitable candidates to fill the
> vacant positions, and that the community will do a very poor job of
> chosing the right people. Arbcom on en: is supposed to be made up of
> senior, trusted, respected members of the community, but most of the
> candidates could be described as anything but.
> So, like several people, I shall continue to boycott the current round
> of elections.
 From where I stand, the English language Wikipedia arbcom, is very much 
an issue of the English Wikipedia community. However, the arguments that 
apply for the Arbcom elections are very much the same for the Steward 
elections. The voting is done in a similar way and from the way you 
approach it, you cannot know the people who stand for office like the 
people who know them from their native projects.

Effeietsanders for instance has his roots very much in the Dutch 
language projects. I have got to know him a great guy. He is senior in 
the Dutch realm, he is trusted and he is respected. There is however no 
chance for you to know him like I do. You can boycott the Steward 
collections because you do not believe people to have these qualities 
then again how do you know? You also have to measure people by a certain 
yardstick. Never mind your sterling remark that got so many people 
incensed because of the sensitivity towards women (was it a joke?), I 
still believe and trust that even people like yourself will rise to the 
occasion and prove to do better than expected and do good in a role as 
arbcom member or steward.

What do you achieve by applying this "I vote with my feet" logic? The 
vote will still go ahead. You earn some more "malcontent" points. You 
/will /be able to say, "I always said it would be no good" when the 
arbcom does things that you disapprove off. This is a negative behaviour 
that does get you nowhere. When you do not want to vote, do not vote. 
Voting does not necessarily get you the results that you want, but that 
is exactly what voting is meant to do.


More information about the foundation-l mailing list