[Foundation-l] Voting suffrage criteria (established members should be able to vote)

[Dan Rosenthal]

It's a catch 22 to be sure. I'm not against the suffrage requirements per
se. I just would like to see more turnout. I think Greg Maxwell is actually
stating my point better and more accurately.

-Dan

On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Joe Szilagyi <szilagyi at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > In short, edit count suffrage requirements, in theory at least, exclude
> > legitimate voters, while not excluding people who want to game the
> system.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
>
> On the other hand, since the board elections are an internal process,
> should
> it not be limited to active participants? The suffrage is fair in that its
> as mentioned incredibly easy to get.
>
> Who should be voting but users of one of the sites that the Board oversees
> and employees of the corporation? Certainly not any of the following:
>
> 1. Charitable financial contributors
> 2. "Partners" such as (possibly) Creative Commons people/staff, Answers.com
> people, etc.
> 3. General public
> 4. ?
>
> It should be somewhat exclusive. I've given to the ASPCA, I've given to the
> Democratic party here in the US, I've given to the local library here in my
> city. That doesn't give me a board vote on any of those, even though I'm an
> active participant to some degree in all three.
>
> In reply to Scream in general on this thread, no one ever is forced to
> scramble their account login. I'd been very, very tempted in the past to do
> just that on my EN account, but in hindsight I'm very glad that I never
> did.
>
> Joe
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



-- 
Dan Rosenthal