[Foundation-l] Board elections
Florence Devouard
Anthere9 at yahoo.com
Wed Feb 20 17:46:52 UTC 2008
Philippe Beaudette wrote:
> Hi Andrew:
>
> I can only speak for my experience last year.
>
> Last year, we had essentially three main tasks: rule-making, communication,
> and logistics.
>
> 1) Rule-making was, far and away, the easiest. Part of that is because we
> were sort of locked into one voting system for technical and timing reasons
> (no time to change it really), although we spent a good deal of time looking
> at it to see if it could be done prior to making a recommendation to the
> board. Then, we created the endorsements system and wrote the documents to
> make them public that had the rules of the election on it. We also codified
> who was eligible to vote in that election, etc.
>
> 2) In Communication, we (by we, I mean "Aphaia" primarily) found people to
> translate the documents into as many languages as possible and posted them
> as many places as we could think of ... including the Village Pump or
> equivalent on EVERY wiki ... and pushed the documents out as far as we
> could. This took a major chunk of our time. Throughout the election,
> communications dominated my life, and I can't even imagine how much work
> Aphaia put into it.
>
> 3) For logistics, we communicated with SPI to get their agreement to help
> and to audit, and we set up (by we, I mean "Tim and SPI") a wiki on SPI's
> server. Then, the messages were localized on that Wiki and prepared for
> voting. In addition, we reviewed each endorsement to see if they were
> appropriate to the rules and watched (closely) for sockpuppets on the SPI
> wiki. We also had to deal with importing (and then re-importing, because of
> a technical glitch) the list of voters with suffrage.
>
> It was hard work. Frankly, there were some things that I wish we'd had time
> to do that just didn't get done. I couldn't even guess how many hours went
> into it for each committee member. The committee we had worked well
> together, as a rule - like any group working under that much stress, there
> were disagreements - and worked hard. I can remember several IRC meetings
> that were hours long.
>
> I hesitate to guess how many total hours I put in, but I'll tell you that
> when the election was over, my partner joked that he hadn't seen me in
> weeks. I was up very late many nights, and cancelled a lot of "non-wiki"
> events in order to be online as each of our several deadlines rolled over.
> My boss still shudders when I mention that time. So, while the time
> commitment is great, I thoroughly enjoyed the experience. As a study in web
> 2.0 communities, it's fascinating work. As a study in election systems and
> methods, it's even more fascinating.
>
> Philippe
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Andrew Whitworth" <wknight8111 at gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 8:21 AM
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board elections
>
>> A few quick questions about this: First, what are the responsibilities
>> of this committee? How much work is involved in it? When does work
>> start?
>>
>> I would love to volunteer for something like this, if an opening were
>> available.
>>
>> --andrew whitworth
Agreed, it seems to be a lot of hard work (not that I want to discourage
anyone here :-)).
One more point not mentionned: quite obviously, a member of the election
committee must not be a candidate to the board himself.
Ant
More information about the foundation-l
mailing list