[WikiEN-l] Suffrage in ArbCom election

[John Lee]

On Dec 6, 2007 10:08 PM, Red Rocket <redrocketboy at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> On 06/12/2007, Nathan Awrich <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Following up with my post to the election discussion pages:
> >
> > I think the 150 mainspace edits requirement was poorly discussed and
> > is an ill-advised change to the requirements in prior elections. It
> > disenfranchises relatively new (but not brand-new) editors who make
> > large edits to articles and make most of their edits by numbers to
> > talk pages. According to the discussion the rule is aimed at
> > preventing the participation of sockpuppets. I think that the actual
> > effect of this rule has been to deny suffrage to more than a dozen
> > editors whose total edit counts and edit history make it clear that
> > they are not sockpuppets. I and others have spent a fair amount of
> > time reading and following along with the growth and change of the
> > Wikipedia community for some time without always actively
> > participating and in some cases prior to registering a username. This
> > does not mean that we are unqualified to vote or have no interests in
> > Wikipedia that we would like to protect/advance through voting.
> >
> > There ought to have been a fuller discussion about this restriction,
> > particularly considering the mainspace edit count rule has not been
> > well received in any forum where it was aired in a limited fashion.
> > Additionally, the decision should have been made by consensus in the
> > community - not be an election volunteer 'officer' - however hard
> > working.
> >
> > If I have misunderstood the process that led to the restriction, I
> > apologise, but my objection to the restriction itself remains.
> >
> > Avruch
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
>
> It wasn't a change though - it's always been 150 edits (mainspace or
> otherwise). What precautions would you put in to stop sockpuppets?
>
> --Redrocketboy

Yes, that is what I recall as well. (Standard faulty memory disclaimer
applies.) In any event, there will always be some collateral damage
from whatever restrictions we impose. 150 edits is an arbitrary but
nonetheless reasonable cut-off point.

Johnleemk