[Foundation-l] Concerns over en.wikipedia.org ArbCom Election Process

[Stephanie]

effe iets anders wrote:

>Afaik has there never been a closed vote on the wiki for local policy. Even
>more, there has in my memory never been a closed vote other then for the
>boardelections. I guess it's not for nothing that the system we are voting
>with for the board is called boardvote. I think it would indeed be
>interesting to use the system on the one hand as it is more peacefull and
>like we vote irl, but on the other hand it might require assistence from the
>devs, or it might be very hard to track which votes are egligable, harder as
>when using open voting (when everybody can help looking who might be
>sockpuppet)
>So it has it's pro's and con's. I think at least the community has to decide
>herself whether she wants a open or closed voting, but as well the wmf has
>prolly to agree on voting this way (as it requires dev assistence). Maybe it
>would be best to ask the wmf first indeed :)
>
>Effeietsanders
>
>2006/12/6, Stephanie Erin Daugherty <stephanie at sosdg.org>:
>  
>
>>Having not participated in last years ArbCom elections, I was quite
>>shocked to see, that with the important role the Arbitraton Committee
>>has in safeguarding the ideals and policies of the English wikipedia,
>>these elections are being held with an open ballot.
>>
>>I cannot have any confidence in such an election. Open ballots bring out
>>the worst in politics - bullying, fear of retaliation, groupthink, and
>>voting with the hope to gain political favor in the future. While an
>>open ballot appears open on the surface, as history has demonstrated, it
>>is anything but.
>>
>>There is a reason that most free elections use secret ballots. Only in
>>secret can someone make their true opinion known, without fear of
>>bullying, fear of retaliation, undue influence of others, or hurt
>>feelings.
>>
>>Secret ballots also allow for good judgement to be exercised in cases
>>where a moral dilemma would otherwise exist - how do you deal with
>>voting against someone who you are close friends with, or who is in a
>>position of power over you, be it actual or percieved? In an open
>>ballot, this at the very least means either hurt feelings, or votes that
>>do not reflect one's true beliefs as to right choice to make in an
>>election.
>>
>>We have facilities for secret ballots and approval voting. Those
>>facilities work well, as demonstrated in the last board elections.
>>Why on-wiki voting was chosen in favor of this, I don't know, to me it
>>defies logical sense.
>>
>>In conclusion, I condemn this election in the strongest possible terms,
>>as being flawed, subject to tampering, and as being anything other than
>>a free election. I would hope that I'm not the only person that it this
>>way, but even if I am, I know that I cannot in good concience stand for
>>such an unjust and flawed process.
>>
>>I would encourage anyone else that feels strongly about this to make
>>their voice heard, and loudly, so that future elections do not follow
>>the same flawed path, and so that we can have confidence in our
>>elections process.
>>
>>--
>>Stephanie Daugherty
>>stephanie at sosdg.org
>>User:Triona on en.wikipedia.org
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>    
>>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>  
>