[Foundation-l] 2011 Board Elections: Input needed

[Jon Harald Søby]

2011/3/20 FT2 <ft2.wiki at gmail.com>

> Allowing votes based on donations is likely to send the wrong message,
> however noble it might be.
>
> It really is too problematic - if the level is high then it allows "buying
> votes" where lower level donors could not; if it is low then paid-for
> voting
> swamps the informed users who may know the candidates and makes it more
> "political".  If donations are to be a criterion then I would suggest it
> must be met at least the last 2 years, not just one year - regular donors
> may be seen differently to "once off" donors. But this one is a can of
> worms
> and more trouble than it's worth - best not.
>
> What I would be interested in is some representative way to involve our
> other big category of the community - readers.  Speculatively one could
> allow up to 50 or 100 reader votes, invite non-logged-in readers to apply
> by
> submitting their email address, select 50 - 100 by random poll
> proportionately by country (after checking for obvious duplicates) and
> allow
> them to vote.  Again may be more trouble than it's worth, but it is
> important to consider if readers may have a say in what matters at the
> election. After all they are whom the project and all of our efforts are
> aimed at supporting.
>
> FT2
>
>
> 2011/3/20 Jon Harald Søby <jhsoby at gmail.com>
>
> > Hello, fellow Wikimedians.
> >
> > On behalf of the 2011 Board Election Committee I would like to ask your
> > input on the criteria for voters in the election. In the last election
> > (2009), contributors needed to have at least 600 edits before the
> election
> > began and 50 recent edits (within 6 months). However, we feel that the
> edit
> > counts should be lowered, to allow newer contributors and mostly-inactive
> > members to vote, as we feel that they are also valued members of the
> > community. So our current proposal is a total of 300 edits, and 20 edits
> > within 6 months.
> >
> > This only goes for the editing community; however, the community is more
> > than just editors. Previously, suffrage has been extended to (a) server
> > administrators, (b) paid staff and (c) current or former board members.
> > This
> > still does not account for all community members though, and we would
> like
> > your input on what other community members should be eligible to vote
> (and
> > how to quantify other types of contributions).
> >
> > In discussion amongst the community, the committee, board members and
> > others, the following categories of potential voters were brought up:
> >
> > * Advisory Board members
> > * Developers who are not server administrators, but who have made a
> certain
> > number of commits (what number is "sufficient"?)
> >
> > * Donors
> > ** Donors above a certain $ amount (in that case, what amount should be
> the
> > limit?)
> > * University students in the Ambassadors program
> > * Researchers with access to the research user right
> >
> > So, to round up, we would very much like your input on these matters; are
> > the edit count requirements fair, do the additional categories seem all
> > right, and finally, are there any other user categories that should be
> > eligible to vote?
> >
> > Input can be posted here, on [[m:Talk:Board
> > elections/2011]]<
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Board_elections/2011
> > >or
> > to the board elections list,
> > board-elections at lists.wikimedia.org. We're looking forward to hearing
> your
> > thoughts on the matter!
> >
> > On behalf of the Election Committee,
> > Jon Harald Søby
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

The idea of including readers in the election is very interesting, but I'm
afraid we don't have the time and resources to make it happen for this
election (not to mention reaching a consensus on if and/or how it should be
done). But do hang on to the thought for the post-mortem, so it can be
considered for future elections.


-- 
Jon Harald Søby
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by