No subject

a standard not qualified template following them, I was figuring on having
it look for that. Your implementation sounds workable as well though and it
really doesnt matter, they would both seem to address the issue and provide
a simple 'somethings not right, fix it' red flag for a user that would
(presumably) be interested in making sure they get things right.
-Brock


On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 8:18 PM, John Vandenberg <jayvdb at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:54 PM, brock.weller at gmail.com
> <brock.weller at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Indeed, you've hit the nail on the head. In the talkpage exchange I
> already
> > accepted this election is tallied. This is more about fixing the election
> > process now. Something as simple as using a bot to template all
> > non-qualified votes pointing to an easy to follow list of whats needed to
> > achieve technical compliance during a, say, 3-day vote freeze following
> an
> > election, or even 3 days before it closes would easily be sufficient I
> > think.
>
> It might be a bit tricky for a bot to automatically find all the
> struck votes afterwards.
>
> Another solution, which might be easier to implement, is for a bot to
> check every contributor to the voting pages for compliance, and notify
> any contributor who doesn't have a cross-linked account.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>