Steward elections: summary, week one

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
46 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Steward elections: summary, week one

Jesse (Pathoschild)
Hello,

This is a summary of the steward elections and confirmations so far. The
elections are open February 1 to 22, at <
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009> and <
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm> respectively.
902 unique users have participated in the elections and 149 in the
confirmations, already almost double last year's total participation of
roughly 575 users. The current tendency is to remove 14 current stewards
and elect 7 to 9 new ones.

If your email client has HTML enabled, a summary of each discussion is shown
below; if not, visit <
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/Statistics > for the
latest summaries.

--
Yours cordially,
Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)


Elections

Unique participants: 902.
candidate   support ratio      oppose reasons
Kylu<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Kylu>
97.2%
(173/178) —  Meno25<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Meno25>
97%
(128/132) —  Laaknor<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Laaknor>
96%
(97/101) —  Erwin<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Erwin>
95.7%
(154/161) —  Mike.lifeguard<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Mike.lifeguard>
91.9%
(227/247) —  Leinad<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Leinad>
87.4%
(118/135) inexperience.
Dorgan<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Dorgan>
84.4%
(114/135) inexperience.
Alexanderps<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Alexanderps>
81.7%
(98/120) too much access.
putnik<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/putnik>
78.9%
(120/152) inexperience, unanswered questions, dispute on ruwiki.
Mardetanha<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Mardetanha>
78.7%
(159/202) disputes on fawiki, fear that Iranian government will gain his
access under torture.
Fabexplosive<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Fabexplosive>
77.7%
(87/112) unanswered questions, dispute on
lmowiki<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Analysis_of_the_Fabexplosive.27s_election>,
allegedly executes tasks without understanding them.
Jredmond<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Jredmond>
77.6%
(52/67) inexperience, too much access, unanswered questions (later
answered).  Avraham<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Avraham>
74.5%
(102/137) inexperience, limited language skills.
SpeedyGonsales<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/SpeedyGonsales>
70%
(70/100) inexperience, misunderstanding of steward role, disputes on
hrwiki<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comments/Croatian_Wikipedia_-_User:Dalibor_Bosits_case>
.  Mywood<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Mywood>
65.6%
(42/64) inexperience, copyright issues with uploads.
PhiLiP<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/PhiLiP>
64.9%
(48/74) inexperience, copyright issues with uploads, fear that Chinese
government will gain his access under torture.
EVula<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/EVula>
54.6%
(65/119) inexperience, too much access, limited language skills, appearance
of incivility, dispute on simplewikiquote.
avjoska<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/avjoska>
37.7%
(29/77) inexperience, intent of inactivity as a steward.
Fadesga<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Fadesga>
27.6%
(16/58) inexperience, no steward goals, unanswered questions.  Al
Lemos<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Al_Lemos>
24.3%
(27/111) inexperience, misunderstanding of steward role.
Pasquale<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Pasquale>
15.7%
(8/51) inexperience, misunderstanding of steward role, unanswered questions,
little activity.
Apteva<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Apteva>
2%
(2/99) inexperience, prior block, lack of steward goals, misunderstanding of
steward role, little activity.
Loco085<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Loco085>
64.6%
(42/65) *withdrawn*; inexperience, unanswered questions.
Cometstyles<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Cometstyles>
59.8%
(76/127) *withdrawn*; alleged abuse of OTRS access, checkuser requests with
insufficient reason.
Orderinchaos<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Orderinchaos>
26.5%
(13/49) *withdrawn*; inexperience, limited language skills.  Chase me
ladies, I'm the
Cavalry<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Chase_me_ladies,_I%27m_the_Cavalry>
— *disqualified*; not identified.
Drakesketchit<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Drakesketchit>
— *disqualified*; not identified.
Fipplet<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Fipplet>
— *disqualified*; not identified.
Jagwar<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Jagwar>
— *disqualified*; not identified.
Wykypydya<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Wykypydya>
— *disqualified*; not identified, not linked to an account meeting account
requirements<http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/accounteligibility/?event=3&wiki=metawiki_p&user=Wykypydya>
.


Confirmation

Unique participants: 149.
This table only shows overall tendency. The final results are determined by
discussing the arguments, not counting votes.
 steward   support ratio
(approximate)   oppose reasons
Spacebirdy<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Spacebirdy>
100%
(50/50) —  DerHexer<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/DerHexer>
100%
(41/41) —  Lar <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Lar> 100%
(40/40) —  Drini<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Drini>
100%
(38/38) —  Pathoschild<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Pathoschild>
100%
(35/35) —  Bastique<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Bastique>
100%
(33/33) —  guillom<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/guillom>
100%
(31/31) —  Darkoneko<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Darkoneko>
100%
(30/30) —  Jon Harald
Søby<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by>
100%
(27/27) —  M7 <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/M7> 100%
(27/27) —  Shanel<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Shanel>
100%
(26/26) —  Angela<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Angela>
100%
(22/22) —  Effeietsanders<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Effeietsanders>
100%
(19/19) —  Thogo<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Thogo>
97.4%
(38/39) —  Dungodung<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Dungodung>
96.9%
(31/32) —  Nick1915<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Nick1915>
95.2%
(20/21) —  Andre
Engels<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Andre_Engels>
95%
(19/20) no statement.
Anthere<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Anthere>
95%
(19/20) inactivity.
Wpedzich<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Wpedzich>
94.1%
(16/17) usurped account on
kowiki<http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%ED%8A%B9%EC%88%98%EA%B8%B0%EB%8A%A5:%EA%B8%B0%EB%A1%9D?type=renameuser&user=wpedzich>
.  Millosh <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Millosh> 92.9%
(13/14) exclusion of en-Wikipedians from Global sysop proposal
vote<http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Global_sysops/3rd_proposal&diff=1046720>
.  Rdsmith4 <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Rdsmith4>
89.5%
(17/19) —  Mav <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Mav> 77.8%
(14/18) inactivity.
Oscar<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Oscar>
68.4%
(13/19) inactivity.
Walter<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Walter>
63.2%
(12/19) inactivity.
Yann<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Yann> 62.5%
(10/16) inactivity, frwiki dispute, no statement (later added).
Redux<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Redux>
54.5%
(6/11) inactivity.
Jusjih<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Jusjih>
50%
(8/16) inactivity, violation of steward
policies<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_policies>,
too much access.
Zirland<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Zirland>
50%
(8/16) inactivity.  Jimbo
Wales<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Jimbo_Wales>
42.5%
(17/40) inactivity, should have
'staff<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:GlobalUsers/Staff>'
flag instead.  Cspurrier<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Cspurrier>
21.4%
(3/14) inactivity.
Dbl2010<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Dbl2010>
8.3%
(1/12) inactivity.
Sj<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Sj> 7.1%
(1/14) inactivity, no statement.
.anaconda<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/.anaconda>
0%
(0/9) *resigned*; inactivity, no statement.
Paginazero<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Paginazero>
12.5%
(1/8) *resigned*; inactivity.
Shizhao<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Shizhao>
0%
(0/2) *removed* (was appointed as
ombudsman<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission>);
violation of steward policies<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_policies>
.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Cary Bass-4
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jesse (Pathoschild) wrote:

> Hello,
>
> This is a summary of the steward elections and confirmations so far. The
> elections are open February 1 to 22, at <
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009> and <
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm> respectively.
> 902 unique users have participated in the elections and 149 in the
> confirmations, already almost double last year's total participation of
> roughly 575 users. The current tendency is to remove 14 current stewards
> and elect 7 to 9 new ones.
I would suggest that the "current tendency to remove 14 current
stewards" is inaccurate--firstly, the retention requirement should not
be the same as to pass initially, and this chart uses a 78% percentage
to pass in both cases, whereas a 50% tendency should be sufficient for
steward reconfirmation.

Cary
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJkHzcyQg4JSymDYkRAtJRAKDRv5DzU7ZiR+Xre9r4eSXXtp0SdwCgsVro
TRO14+J+UCzKSsHGhbSPtjQ=
=J+SB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Robert Rohde
In reply to this post by Jesse (Pathoschild)
Looking at the summary and comments, I am struck by the fact that
Mardetanha [1] is getting a significant number of oppose votes from
people who believe it is fundamentally unsafe for a Steward to live in
Iran.  Including comments that the Iranian government might arrest and
torture him for his access, or that he might otherwise feel compelled
to co-operate with them.

Similar concerns were also voiced about a Chinese candidate, but that
candidate already has significant opposition for other reasons, and so
the political comments do not seem to be a major factor.

[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Mardetanha

-Robert Rohde


On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 2:43 AM, Jesse (Pathoschild)
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> This is a summary of the steward elections and confirmations so far. The
> elections are open February 1 to 22, at <
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009> and <
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm> respectively.
> 902 unique users have participated in the elections and 149 in the
> confirmations, already almost double last year's total participation of
> roughly 575 users. The current tendency is to remove 14 current stewards
> and elect 7 to 9 new ones.
>
> If your email client has HTML enabled, a summary of each discussion is shown
> below; if not, visit <
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/Statistics > for the
> latest summaries.
>
> --
> Yours cordially,
> Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
>
>
> Elections
>
> Unique participants: 902.
> candidate   support ratio      oppose reasons
> Kylu<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Kylu>
> 97.2%
> (173/178) —  Meno25<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Meno25>
> 97%
> (128/132) —  Laaknor<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Laaknor>
> 96%
> (97/101) —  Erwin<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Erwin>
> 95.7%
> (154/161) —  Mike.lifeguard<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Mike.lifeguard>
> 91.9%
> (227/247) —  Leinad<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Leinad>
> 87.4%
> (118/135) inexperience.
> Dorgan<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Dorgan>
> 84.4%
> (114/135) inexperience.
> Alexanderps<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Alexanderps>
> 81.7%
> (98/120) too much access.
> putnik<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/putnik>
> 78.9%
> (120/152) inexperience, unanswered questions, dispute on ruwiki.
> Mardetanha<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Mardetanha>
> 78.7%
> (159/202) disputes on fawiki, fear that Iranian government will gain his
> access under torture.
> Fabexplosive<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Fabexplosive>
> 77.7%
> (87/112) unanswered questions, dispute on
> lmowiki<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Analysis_of_the_Fabexplosive.27s_election>,
> allegedly executes tasks without understanding them.
> Jredmond<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Jredmond>
> 77.6%
> (52/67) inexperience, too much access, unanswered questions (later
> answered).  Avraham<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Avraham>
> 74.5%
> (102/137) inexperience, limited language skills.
> SpeedyGonsales<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/SpeedyGonsales>
> 70%
> (70/100) inexperience, misunderstanding of steward role, disputes on
> hrwiki<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comments/Croatian_Wikipedia_-_User:Dalibor_Bosits_case>
> .  Mywood<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Mywood>
> 65.6%
> (42/64) inexperience, copyright issues with uploads.
> PhiLiP<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/PhiLiP>
> 64.9%
> (48/74) inexperience, copyright issues with uploads, fear that Chinese
> government will gain his access under torture.
> EVula<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/EVula>
> 54.6%
> (65/119) inexperience, too much access, limited language skills, appearance
> of incivility, dispute on simplewikiquote.
> avjoska<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/avjoska>
> 37.7%
> (29/77) inexperience, intent of inactivity as a steward.
> Fadesga<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Fadesga>
> 27.6%
> (16/58) inexperience, no steward goals, unanswered questions.  Al
> Lemos<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Al_Lemos>
> 24.3%
> (27/111) inexperience, misunderstanding of steward role.
> Pasquale<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Pasquale>
> 15.7%
> (8/51) inexperience, misunderstanding of steward role, unanswered questions,
> little activity.
> Apteva<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Apteva>
> 2%
> (2/99) inexperience, prior block, lack of steward goals, misunderstanding of
> steward role, little activity.
> Loco085<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Loco085>
> 64.6%
> (42/65) *withdrawn*; inexperience, unanswered questions.
> Cometstyles<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Cometstyles>
> 59.8%
> (76/127) *withdrawn*; alleged abuse of OTRS access, checkuser requests with
> insufficient reason.
> Orderinchaos<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Orderinchaos>
> 26.5%
> (13/49) *withdrawn*; inexperience, limited language skills.  Chase me
> ladies, I'm the
> Cavalry<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Chase_me_ladies,_I%27m_the_Cavalry>
> — *disqualified*; not identified.
> Drakesketchit<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Drakesketchit>
> — *disqualified*; not identified.
> Fipplet<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Fipplet>
> — *disqualified*; not identified.
> Jagwar<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Jagwar>
> — *disqualified*; not identified.
> Wykypydya<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Wykypydya>
> — *disqualified*; not identified, not linked to an account meeting account
> requirements<http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/accounteligibility/?event=3&wiki=metawiki_p&user=Wykypydya>
> .
>
>
> Confirmation
>
> Unique participants: 149.
> This table only shows overall tendency. The final results are determined by
> discussing the arguments, not counting votes.
>  steward   support ratio
> (approximate)   oppose reasons
> Spacebirdy<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Spacebirdy>
> 100%
> (50/50) —  DerHexer<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/DerHexer>
> 100%
> (41/41) —  Lar <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Lar> 100%
> (40/40) —  Drini<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Drini>
> 100%
> (38/38) —  Pathoschild<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Pathoschild>
> 100%
> (35/35) —  Bastique<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Bastique>
> 100%
> (33/33) —  guillom<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/guillom>
> 100%
> (31/31) —  Darkoneko<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Darkoneko>
> 100%
> (30/30) —  Jon Harald
> Søby<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by>
> 100%
> (27/27) —  M7 <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/M7> 100%
> (27/27) —  Shanel<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Shanel>
> 100%
> (26/26) —  Angela<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Angela>
> 100%
> (22/22) —  Effeietsanders<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Effeietsanders>
> 100%
> (19/19) —  Thogo<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Thogo>
> 97.4%
> (38/39) —  Dungodung<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Dungodung>
> 96.9%
> (31/32) —  Nick1915<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Nick1915>
> 95.2%
> (20/21) —  Andre
> Engels<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Andre_Engels>
> 95%
> (19/20) no statement.
> Anthere<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Anthere>
> 95%
> (19/20) inactivity.
> Wpedzich<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Wpedzich>
> 94.1%
> (16/17) usurped account on
> kowiki<http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%ED%8A%B9%EC%88%98%EA%B8%B0%EB%8A%A5:%EA%B8%B0%EB%A1%9D?type=renameuser&user=wpedzich>
> .  Millosh <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Millosh> 92.9%
> (13/14) exclusion of en-Wikipedians from Global sysop proposal
> vote<http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Global_sysops/3rd_proposal&diff=1046720>
> .  Rdsmith4 <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Rdsmith4>
> 89.5%
> (17/19) —  Mav <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Mav> 77.8%
> (14/18) inactivity.
> Oscar<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Oscar>
> 68.4%
> (13/19) inactivity.
> Walter<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Walter>
> 63.2%
> (12/19) inactivity.
> Yann<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Yann> 62.5%
> (10/16) inactivity, frwiki dispute, no statement (later added).
> Redux<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Redux>
> 54.5%
> (6/11) inactivity.
> Jusjih<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Jusjih>
> 50%
> (8/16) inactivity, violation of steward
> policies<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_policies>,
> too much access.
> Zirland<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Zirland>
> 50%
> (8/16) inactivity.  Jimbo
> Wales<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Jimbo_Wales>
> 42.5%
> (17/40) inactivity, should have
> 'staff<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:GlobalUsers/Staff>'
> flag instead.  Cspurrier<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Cspurrier>
> 21.4%
> (3/14) inactivity.
> Dbl2010<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Dbl2010>
> 8.3%
> (1/12) inactivity.
> Sj<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Sj> 7.1%
> (1/14) inactivity, no statement.
> .anaconda<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/.anaconda>
> 0%
> (0/9) *resigned*; inactivity, no statement.
> Paginazero<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Paginazero>
> 12.5%
> (1/8) *resigned*; inactivity.
> Shizhao<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm/2009/Shizhao>
> 0%
> (0/2) *removed* (was appointed as
> ombudsman<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission>);
> violation of steward policies<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_policies>
> .
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Ting Chen-2
Robert Rohde wrote:

> Looking at the summary and comments, I am struck by the fact that
> Mardetanha [1] is getting a significant number of oppose votes from
> people who believe it is fundamentally unsafe for a Steward to live in
> Iran.  Including comments that the Iranian government might arrest and
> torture him for his access, or that he might otherwise feel compelled
> to co-operate with them.
>
> Similar concerns were also voiced about a Chinese candidate, but that
> candidate already has significant opposition for other reasons, and so
> the political comments do not seem to be a major factor.
>
> [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Mardetanha
>
> -Robert Rohde
>
>  
I dislike this argument very much. People cannot choose that they are
born in Iran or in China, or in the USA or Europe. Use such a trait that
cannot be influence by a person against him is a kind of discrimination.
So long as the person doesn't handle against the rule there is no reason
to assume that he would do that. Keep a good faith is one of the
principles of how Wikimedians should meet each other.

Ting

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Al Tally
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Ting Chen <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I dislike this argument very much...


You were expecting good arguments? :)

--
Alex
(User:Majorly)
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Nathan Awrich
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Al Tally <[hidden email]>wrote:

>
> You were expecting good arguments? :)
>
> -


On meta elections? Not me.


--
Your donations keep Wikipedia running! Support the Wikimedia Foundation
today: http://www.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

geni
In reply to this post by Ting Chen-2
2009/2/9 Ting Chen <[hidden email]>:
> I dislike this argument very much. People cannot choose that they are
> born in Iran or in China, or in the USA or Europe. Use such a trait that
> cannot be influence by a person against him is a kind of discrimination.

True but it's based on reality rather than predudice.

> So long as the person doesn't handle against the rule there is no reason
> to assume that he would do that. Keep a good faith is one of the
> principles of how Wikimedians should meet each other.

Good faith is one thing but we also assume the person we are dealing
with is human. Realistically the Iranian government is able to put
enough ah pressure on it's citizens to arrange for them to cooperate
(this is true for most governments). It is also the case that the
Iranian government is more likely to do so in a problematical manner
than western governments.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Thomas Dalton
2009/2/9 geni <[hidden email]>:

> 2009/2/9 Ting Chen <[hidden email]>:
>> I dislike this argument very much. People cannot choose that they are
>> born in Iran or in China, or in the USA or Europe. Use such a trait that
>> cannot be influence by a person against him is a kind of discrimination.
>
> True but it's based on reality rather than predudice.
>
>> So long as the person doesn't handle against the rule there is no reason
>> to assume that he would do that. Keep a good faith is one of the
>> principles of how Wikimedians should meet each other.
>
> Good faith is one thing but we also assume the person we are dealing
> with is human. Realistically the Iranian government is able to put
> enough ah pressure on it's citizens to arrange for them to cooperate
> (this is true for most governments). It is also the case that the
> Iranian government is more likely to do so in a problematical manner
> than western governments.

I agree, but it's pretty unlikely. And even if they do, stewards
aren't *that* powerful. I'm not really sure what they would do. A
vandal getting steward access could cause a hell of a mess, but why
would Iran want to do that? They can't shut us down or censor us with
just a steward account.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Ziko van Dijk
In reply to this post by Ting Chen-2
If I understand it right, Wikimedia or other stewards can trace what a
single steward is doing. Even if a dictatorship forces a local steward to do
something, there is the danger that this becomes public.
Ziko


2009/2/9 Ting Chen <[hidden email]>

> Robert Rohde wrote:
> > Looking at the summary and comments, I am struck by the fact that
> > Mardetanha [1] is getting a significant number of oppose votes from
> > people who believe it is fundamentally unsafe for a Steward to live in
> > Iran.  Including comments that the Iranian government might arrest and
> > torture him for his access, or that he might otherwise feel compelled
> > to co-operate with them.
> >
> > Similar concerns were also voiced about a Chinese candidate, but that
> > candidate already has significant opposition for other reasons, and so
> > the political comments do not seem to be a major factor.
> >
> > [1]
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/elections_2009/statements/Mardetanha
> >
> > -Robert Rohde
> >
> >
> I dislike this argument very much. People cannot choose that they are
> born in Iran or in China, or in the USA or Europe. Use such a trait that
> cannot be influence by a person against him is a kind of discrimination.
> So long as the person doesn't handle against the rule there is no reason
> to assume that he would do that. Keep a good faith is one of the
> principles of how Wikimedians should meet each other.
>
> Ting
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Ziko van Dijk
NL-Silvolde
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

geni
2009/2/9 Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]>:
> If I understand it right, Wikimedia or other stewards can trace what a
> single steward is doing. Even if a dictatorship forces a local steward to do
> something, there is the danger that this becomes public.
> Ziko

Thats the danger for a western government. In the case of the Iranian
one I doubt it would be too worried.


--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Ting Chen-2
In reply to this post by geni
geni schrieb:

> 2009/2/9 Ting Chen <[hidden email]>:
>  
>> I dislike this argument very much. People cannot choose that they are
>> born in Iran or in China, or in the USA or Europe. Use such a trait that
>> cannot be influence by a person against him is a kind of discrimination.
>>    
>
> True but it's based on reality rather than predudice.
>
>  
>> So long as the person doesn't handle against the rule there is no reason
>> to assume that he would do that. Keep a good faith is one of the
>> principles of how Wikimedians should meet each other.
>>    
>
> Good faith is one thing but we also assume the person we are dealing
> with is human. Realistically the Iranian government is able to put
> enough ah pressure on it's citizens to arrange for them to cooperate
> (this is true for most governments). It is also the case that the
> Iranian government is more likely to do so in a problematical manner
> than western governments.
>
>  
Surely is this a prejudice. Because there is no data that support such
an assumption. In the eight years since the being of Wikipedia I don't
know any such case happend on any Wikimedia project.

Ting

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Ting Chen-2
In reply to this post by geni
geni wrote:

> 2009/2/9 Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]>:
>  
>> If I understand it right, Wikimedia or other stewards can trace what a
>> single steward is doing. Even if a dictatorship forces a local steward to do
>> something, there is the danger that this becomes public.
>> Ziko
>>    
>
> Thats the danger for a western government. In the case of the Iranian
> one I doubt it would be too worried.
>
>
>  

If there's any sign that a steward had misused his previlege, for what
ever reason, he would instantly lost that previlege.

Ting

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Tomasz Ganicz
In reply to this post by Ziko van Dijk
2009/2/9 Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]>:
> If I understand it right, Wikimedia or other stewards can trace what a
> single steward is doing. Even if a dictatorship forces a local steward to do
> something, there is the danger that this becomes public.

The "real danger" is that stewards have access to global checkuser, so
they can theoretically be used to trace users when forced by secret
police of an non-democratic country.  However, various special forces
and secret services of democratic countries also use to force their
citizens (and other countries citizens as well) to reveal various
information, so we can use this argument against almost any country.
Maybe global checkuser function should be given to Wikimedia Office?
(Like Wikimedia Office actions function?)

--
Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
http://www.ptchem.lodz.pl/en/TomaszGanicz.html

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Ziko van Dijk
In reply to this post by Ting Chen-2
>
> > 2009/2/9 Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]>:
> >
> >> If I understand it right, Wikimedia or other stewards can trace what a
> >> single steward is doing. Even if a dictatorship forces a local steward
> to do
> >> something, there is the danger that this becomes public.
> >> Ziko
>
> If there's any sign that a steward had misused his previlege, for what
> ever reason, he would instantly lost that previlege.
>
> Ting
>

I see now that my statement can be misunderstood. Yes, Ting, that's what I
mean, it would not be a good idea of a dictatorship to try to have influence
on Wikipedia this way. Therefore I don't see a problem to have a steward
from such a country, unless they are all from the same.
Kind regards
Ziko


--
Ziko van Dijk
NL-Silvolde
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

geni
In reply to this post by Ting Chen-2
2009/2/9 Ting Chen <[hidden email]>:
> Surely is this a prejudice. Because there is no data that support such
> an assumption. In the eight years since the being of Wikipedia I don't
> know any such case happend on any Wikimedia project.
>
> Ting

Prejudice? We know Iran's record on human rights and we know Iran's
record of responding to speech they do not like (calling for the
assassination the citizen of another country for example).

The available evidence is that the Iranian government is a potential
threat and unlike western governments don't have to worry about
annoying laws and bad PR if they try anything.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

Jesse (Pathoschild)
In reply to this post by Cary Bass-4
Cary Bass <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I would suggest that the "current tendency to remove 14 current
> stewards" is inaccurate--firstly, the retention requirement should not
> be the same as to pass initially, and this chart uses a 78% percentage
> to pass in both cases, whereas a 50% tendency should be sufficient for
> steward reconfirmation.


Hello Cary,

The confirmations are not decided by support ratio at all, but by the
steward community as a whole considering the arguments. What I meant
by "the current tendency" is the overall opinion of voters, not the
likely result. This wasn't very clear, as someone else already pointed
out; I'll reword it in the second-week summary.

The chart colours are accurate for the elections, but only indicative
for the confirmations (this is explicitly mentioned above the
confirmation table).

--
Yours cordially,
Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

geni
In reply to this post by Tomasz Ganicz
2009/2/9 Tomasz Ganicz <[hidden email]>:
> The "real danger" is that stewards have access to global checkuser, so
> they can theoretically be used to trace users when forced by secret
> police of an non-democratic country.  However, various special forces
> and secret services of democratic countries also use to force their
> citizens (and other countries citizens as well) to reveal various
> information, so we can use this argument against almost any country.
> Maybe global checkuser function should be given to Wikimedia Office?
> (Like Wikimedia Office actions function?)

For a western government the cost of the PR mess is unlikely to
outweigh any benefits. There are also various other issues that mean
that such interference is unlikely (the CIA legally can't touch
wikipedia since it is US based and I doubt any other intelligence
agency wants to annoy the US).

So any attack from western countries is going to have to come through
fairly open legal means. Court orders and the like. Court orders tend
to be public which gives us a chance to react before the problem
rather than after.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

oscar-11
In reply to this post by Ting Chen-2
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Ting Chen <[hidden email]> wrote:

> geni wrote:
>
>
> If there's any sign that a steward had misused his previlege, for what
> ever reason, he would instantly lost that previlege.
>
>
yes indeed.
if i remember correctly it was in 2005 that i removed as a steward someone's
adminbit because it was being 'marketed' (and he was possibly  waiting for
the highest bid or it would have been sold already?), but this luckily
became known very soon and before any harm had occurred.

oscar

--
*edito ergo sum*

www.oscarvandillen.com

******************
The information contained in this message is confidential and may be legally
privileged. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
dissemination, or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return
e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
******************
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

oscar-11
sorry this was ting not geni i quoted...

On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:28 PM, oscar van dillen <[hidden email]>wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Ting Chen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> If there's any sign that a steward had misused his previlege, for what
>> ever reason, he would instantly lost that previlege.
>>
>>
> yes indeed.
> if i remember correctly it was in 2005 that i removed as a steward
> someone's adminbit because it was being 'marketed' (and he was possibly
>  waiting for the highest bid or it would have been sold already?), but this
> luckily became known very soon and before any harm had occurred.
>
> oscar
>
> --
> *edito ergo sum*
>
> www.oscarvandillen.com
>
> ******************
> The information contained in this message is confidential and may be
> legally privileged. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If
> you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
> dissemination, or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return
> e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
> ******************
>



--
*edito ergo sum*

www.oscarvandillen.com

******************
The information contained in this message is confidential and may be legally
privileged. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
dissemination, or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return
e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
******************
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Steward elections: summary, week one

John Mark Vandenberg
In reply to this post by Thomas Dalton
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2009/2/9 geni <[hidden email]>:
>> 2009/2/9 Ting Chen <[hidden email]>:
>>> I dislike this argument very much. People cannot choose that they are
>>> born in Iran or in China, or in the USA or Europe. Use such a trait that
>>> cannot be influence by a person against him is a kind of discrimination.
>>
>> True but it's based on reality rather than predudice.
>>
>>> So long as the person doesn't handle against the rule there is no reason
>>> to assume that he would do that. Keep a good faith is one of the
>>> principles of how Wikimedians should meet each other.
>>
>> Good faith is one thing but we also assume the person we are dealing
>> with is human. Realistically the Iranian government is able to put
>> enough ah pressure on it's citizens to arrange for them to cooperate
>> (this is true for most governments). It is also the case that the
>> Iranian government is more likely to do so in a problematical manner
>> than western governments.
>
> I agree, but it's pretty unlikely. And even if they do, stewards
> aren't *that* powerful. I'm not really sure what they would do. A
> vandal getting steward access could cause a hell of a mess, but why
> would Iran want to do that? They can't shut us down or censor us with
> just a steward account.

It is also not useful for Iran, as Mardetanha has declared that they
will not use the tools in any situation that Iran is likely to be
interested in.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Mardetanha/recusal

The candidate has *asked* that the steward flag be removed if the
account breaks those simple rules.  In most of these rules, breaking
the rules will be immediately spotted before any CU could be run.

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
123