[Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
73 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Marc-Andre
On 15-04-22 11:54 AM, Sydney Poore wrote:
> I fully support allowing our talented and dedicated WMF staff to have the
> opportunity to choose the people who guide the direction of the WMF.

I'd like to add to this that the (pretty small) set of staffers that
would not otherwise have had eligibility to vote are generally in
administrative, finance and legal positions - all of which bring other
perspectives to evaluation of the candidates that may be valuable.

But, more importantly, they share our values and commitment to the
ideals behind the movement.  They wouldn't be working at the Foundation
if they didn't because our internal culture is - literally - all about
the mission.

Disclaimer: I'm staff myself, but eligible to vote as a volunteer.

-- Marc


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Aleksey Bilogur
Frankly, I think such views are naive idealism. There is a political
reality that would come about as a result of such a change, one at the
highest level, that need to be understood and addressed. I do not even
believe that this is a discussion that should occur at the community level.
This is a discussion that should occur at the board level.

A former Wikimedian in Residence was recently blocked for constant
copyright violations on the English Wikipedia. I do not want such people
voting on a body which will determine their level of monetary and
non-monetary support---especially now that the requirements for
incorporation as a user-group are dipping still lower.

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On 15-04-22 11:54 AM, Sydney Poore wrote:
> > I fully support allowing our talented and dedicated WMF staff to have the
> > opportunity to choose the people who guide the direction of the WMF.
>
> I'd like to add to this that the (pretty small) set of staffers that
> would not otherwise have had eligibility to vote are generally in
> administrative, finance and legal positions - all of which bring other
> perspectives to evaluation of the candidates that may be valuable.
>
> But, more importantly, they share our values and commitment to the
> ideals behind the movement.  They wouldn't be working at the Foundation
> if they didn't because our internal culture is - literally - all about
> the mission.
>
> Disclaimer: I'm staff myself, but eligible to vote as a volunteer.
>
> -- Marc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Pine W
In reply to this post by Marc-Andre
Personally, I'm less concerned about staff votes than I am about having
only a relatively small number of community members vote. If there is a
substantial turnout of community votes then the enfranchisement of staff is
a non-issue. I think there would be more cause for concern if is only 1800
total votes and of those 400 are from WMF and affiliate staff. I would hope
that community participation would be much higher so that the vote total is
at least 8,000, or around 10 percent of the active editor population.

I say this as someone who was too occupied with other matters to vote last
year, but does plan to vote this year and is encouraging new candidates to
run.

Pine
On Apr 22, 2015 9:11 AM, "Marc A. Pelletier" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 15-04-22 11:54 AM, Sydney Poore wrote:
> > I fully support allowing our talented and dedicated WMF staff to have the
> > opportunity to choose the people who guide the direction of the WMF.
>
> I'd like to add to this that the (pretty small) set of staffers that
> would not otherwise have had eligibility to vote are generally in
> administrative, finance and legal positions - all of which bring other
> perspectives to evaluation of the candidates that may be valuable.
>
> But, more importantly, they share our values and commitment to the
> ideals behind the movement.  They wouldn't be working at the Foundation
> if they didn't because our internal culture is - literally - all about
> the mission.
>
> Disclaimer: I'm staff myself, but eligible to vote as a volunteer.
>
> -- Marc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Gregory Varnum-2
In reply to this post by Aleksey Bilogur
Two quick notes:

1. People with a block on more than one wiki are not eligible to vote.

2. Wikimedia User Groups generally are not incorporated - that is just one
of the ways they vary from other affiliate models. They are recognized by
the AffCom, but are not required to legally incorporate as Chapters and
ThOrgs are. If folks are interested though, there is an active RFC on the
topic of the requirements for that recognition:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/RFCs/Wikimedia_user_groups_approval_process_and_agreements_-_Spring_2015

3. At this exact moment in time, Wikimedia User Groups do not have a vote
in the affiliate elections.

-greg

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Aleksey Bilogur <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Frankly, I think such views are naive idealism. There is a political
> reality that would come about as a result of such a change, one at the
> highest level, that need to be understood and addressed. I do not even
> believe that this is a discussion that should occur at the community level.
> This is a discussion that should occur at the board level.
>
> A former Wikimedian in Residence was recently blocked for constant
> copyright violations on the English Wikipedia. I do not want such people
> voting on a body which will determine their level of monetary and
> non-monetary support---especially now that the requirements for
> incorporation as a user-group are dipping still lower.
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > On 15-04-22 11:54 AM, Sydney Poore wrote:
> > > I fully support allowing our talented and dedicated WMF staff to have
> the
> > > opportunity to choose the people who guide the direction of the WMF.
> >
> > I'd like to add to this that the (pretty small) set of staffers that
> > would not otherwise have had eligibility to vote are generally in
> > administrative, finance and legal positions - all of which bring other
> > perspectives to evaluation of the candidates that may be valuable.
> >
> > But, more importantly, they share our values and commitment to the
> > ideals behind the movement.  They wouldn't be working at the Foundation
> > if they didn't because our internal culture is - literally - all about
> > the mission.
> >
> > Disclaimer: I'm staff myself, but eligible to vote as a volunteer.
> >
> > -- Marc
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Gregory Varnum-2
That was three notes - not two - sorry. ;P

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Gregory Varnum <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Two quick notes:
>
> 1. People with a block on more than one wiki are not eligible to vote.
>
> 2. Wikimedia User Groups generally are not incorporated - that is just one
> of the ways they vary from other affiliate models. They are recognized by
> the AffCom, but are not required to legally incorporate as Chapters and
> ThOrgs are. If folks are interested though, there is an active RFC on the
> topic of the requirements for that recognition:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/RFCs/Wikimedia_user_groups_approval_process_and_agreements_-_Spring_2015
>
> 3. At this exact moment in time, Wikimedia User Groups do not have a vote
> in the affiliate elections.
>
> -greg
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Aleksey Bilogur <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Frankly, I think such views are naive idealism. There is a political
>> reality that would come about as a result of such a change, one at the
>> highest level, that need to be understood and addressed. I do not even
>> believe that this is a discussion that should occur at the community
>> level.
>> This is a discussion that should occur at the board level.
>>
>> A former Wikimedian in Residence was recently blocked for constant
>> copyright violations on the English Wikipedia. I do not want such people
>> voting on a body which will determine their level of monetary and
>> non-monetary support---especially now that the requirements for
>> incorporation as a user-group are dipping still lower.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On 15-04-22 11:54 AM, Sydney Poore wrote:
>> > > I fully support allowing our talented and dedicated WMF staff to have
>> the
>> > > opportunity to choose the people who guide the direction of the WMF.
>> >
>> > I'd like to add to this that the (pretty small) set of staffers that
>> > would not otherwise have had eligibility to vote are generally in
>> > administrative, finance and legal positions - all of which bring other
>> > perspectives to evaluation of the candidates that may be valuable.
>> >
>> > But, more importantly, they share our values and commitment to the
>> > ideals behind the movement.  They wouldn't be working at the Foundation
>> > if they didn't because our internal culture is - literally - all about
>> > the mission.
>> >
>> > Disclaimer: I'm staff myself, but eligible to vote as a volunteer.
>> >
>> > -- Marc
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > [hidden email]
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> [hidden email]
>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@...>
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Sydney Poore
In reply to this post by Aleksey Bilogur
I was speaking in support of keeping the current policy which allows WMF
staff to vote even if they do not meet the eligibility guidelines with a
volunteer account.

The issue of allowing staff in affiliated organizations who are not
volunteers vote is more complex because they could have minimal involvement
with the larger movement, and in some cases already have the ability to
select WMF BoT.

But, I would be inclined to encourage more voices to be heard by inviting
everyone who is part of the wikimedia movement to vote in the WMF BoT
elections.

This could happen by the affiliate organizations encouraging all staff to
become volunteers by giving them time to edit in a volunteer capacity
several hours a month,

or by allowing affiliated organizations to identify a list of staff who are
not on site volunteers but who are part of the wikimedia movement.

Additionally, a strong effort to get more volunteer community members
running for positions as well as voting.

Sydney

Sydney Poore
User:FloNight
Wikipedian in Residence
at Cochrane Collaboration

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Aleksey Bilogur <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Frankly, I think such views are naive idealism. There is a political
> reality that would come about as a result of such a change, one at the
> highest level, that need to be understood and addressed. I do not even
> believe that this is a discussion that should occur at the community level.
> This is a discussion that should occur at the board level.
>
> A former Wikimedian in Residence was recently blocked for constant
> copyright violations on the English Wikipedia. I do not want such people
> voting on a body which will determine their level of monetary and
> non-monetary support---especially now that the requirements for
> incorporation as a user-group are dipping still lower.
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > On 15-04-22 11:54 AM, Sydney Poore wrote:
> > > I fully support allowing our talented and dedicated WMF staff to have
> the
> > > opportunity to choose the people who guide the direction of the WMF.
> >
> > I'd like to add to this that the (pretty small) set of staffers that
> > would not otherwise have had eligibility to vote are generally in
> > administrative, finance and legal positions - all of which bring other
> > perspectives to evaluation of the candidates that may be valuable.
> >
> > But, more importantly, they share our values and commitment to the
> > ideals behind the movement.  They wouldn't be working at the Foundation
> > if they didn't because our internal culture is - literally - all about
> > the mission.
> >
> > Disclaimer: I'm staff myself, but eligible to vote as a volunteer.
> >
> > -- Marc
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Asaf Bartov-2
In reply to this post by Sydney Poore
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I find the WMF staff who I interact with to be an inspiration to me with
> their dedication to the mission to the global wikimedia movement.
>

So do I. :)


> Perhaps the reason that many of them are not volunteering as on site
> contributors is because they are too busy with a day job that is solely
> focused on the mission of the movement.
>

Eh, no, that's not a valid argument.  Everybody is busy, most Wikimedians
have day jobs or demanding schoolwork of some sort.  People manage to
contribute to the projects if they want to.  It's a matter of
prioritization, as always in life.  So we mustn't accept "maybe they're
just too busy" as an excuse for why staffers purportedly "can't" edit.
Many staffers do.  Some don't.  In both cases, it's by choice and
preference.


> I fully support allowing our talented and dedicated WMF staff to have the
> opportunity to choose the people who guide the direction of the WMF.
>

Meeting the suffrage bar as a community member is not difficult.  Those
(few) staffers who aren't already eligible to vote as either developers or
content contributors, further filtered by the criterion "cares sufficiently
to read about candidates and figure out voting" -- which I guesstimate to
be under 20, and probably under 10 -- could have, and therefore should
have, simply edited a bit, on any of the projects, to get suffrage.  I
don't think there's any disenfranchisement if they don't get an automatic
vote.

   A.
--
    Asaf Bartov
    Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Aleksey Bilogur
Re: Gregory. I did not mean incorporation in the legal sense, rather, I
meant it in the community sense, sorry for not being clear :). To clarify,
I am not opposed to lowering the barriers to entry, I am opposed to doing
both that and this, too.

I see two threads of thought here, automatically granting WMF staff voting
privileges (which I weakly oppose, largely per Asaf) and automatically
granting chapter and organization staff voting privileges (which I am
opposed to most strongly).

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > I find the WMF staff who I interact with to be an inspiration to me with
> > their dedication to the mission to the global wikimedia movement.
> >
>
> So do I. :)
>
>
> > Perhaps the reason that many of them are not volunteering as on site
> > contributors is because they are too busy with a day job that is solely
> > focused on the mission of the movement.
> >
>
> Eh, no, that's not a valid argument.  Everybody is busy, most Wikimedians
> have day jobs or demanding schoolwork of some sort.  People manage to
> contribute to the projects if they want to.  It's a matter of
> prioritization, as always in life.  So we mustn't accept "maybe they're
> just too busy" as an excuse for why staffers purportedly "can't" edit.
> Many staffers do.  Some don't.  In both cases, it's by choice and
> preference.
>
>
> > I fully support allowing our talented and dedicated WMF staff to have the
> > opportunity to choose the people who guide the direction of the WMF.
> >
>
> Meeting the suffrage bar as a community member is not difficult.  Those
> (few) staffers who aren't already eligible to vote as either developers or
> content contributors, further filtered by the criterion "cares sufficiently
> to read about candidates and figure out voting" -- which I guesstimate to
> be under 20, and probably under 10 -- could have, and therefore should
> have, simply edited a bit, on any of the projects, to get suffrage.  I
> don't think there's any disenfranchisement if they don't get an automatic
> vote.
>
>    A.
> --
>     Asaf Bartov
>     Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
> https://donate.wikimedia.org
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Nathan Awrich
The idea of community elected seats is just that; the electors are members
of the community. So if we decide that employees of community
organizations, like the WMF, are part of the Wikimedia community... then
they should have the right to vote on community seats of the Board of
Trustees. Whether any individual member of the community has a second
opportunity to influence the composition of the board is irrelevant to
determining whether they should have suffrage as a member of the global
community.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but there are many people eligible to
vote in the election that also have chapter affiliations which give them a
voice in the chapter-appointed seats. Since we don't disenfranchise them
for their "double vote" power, we should not disenfranchise other people
that meet our working definition of who counts as a member of the
community. Either staff employed on behalf of the movement count
everywhere, or they don't count at all; there is no reason I can see that
employees of the WMF are more entitled to vote than, say, employees of
WMDE.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Marc-Andre
In reply to this post by Asaf Bartov-2
On 15-04-22 01:49 PM, Asaf Bartov wrote:
> Everybody is busy, most Wikimedians
> have day jobs or demanding schoolwork of some sort.

Except that for most people, editing Wikipedia (or involving oneself in
some manner around the project) is a /diversion/ from their jobs and
whatnot whereas for someone who works at the Foundation it often ends up
being "bringing work home" - which is very different.

I don't think it's fair to paint any group with a broad brush.

-- Marc


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Aleksey Bilogur
In reply to this post by Nathan Awrich
Employees of WMDE, a large chunk of whose funding is dependent on the
decisions of the body they have just been enfranchised to vote for.

Yeah, no COI there *at all*.

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The idea of community elected seats is just that; the electors are members
> of the community. So if we decide that employees of community
> organizations, like the WMF, are part of the Wikimedia community... then
> they should have the right to vote on community seats of the Board of
> Trustees. Whether any individual member of the community has a second
> opportunity to influence the composition of the board is irrelevant to
> determining whether they should have suffrage as a member of the global
> community.
>
> Not to put too fine a point on it, but there are many people eligible to
> vote in the election that also have chapter affiliations which give them a
> voice in the chapter-appointed seats. Since we don't disenfranchise them
> for their "double vote" power, we should not disenfranchise other people
> that meet our working definition of who counts as a member of the
> community. Either staff employed on behalf of the movement count
> everywhere, or they don't count at all; there is no reason I can see that
> employees of the WMF are more entitled to vote than, say, employees of
> WMDE.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Nathan Awrich
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Aleksey Bilogur <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Employees of WMDE, a large chunk of whose funding is dependent on the
> decisions of the body they have just been enfranchised to vote for.
>
> Yeah, no COI there *at all*.
>
>
Er, no more than any staff member of the WMF. And for both organizations,
any of them who edit can already vote.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Sydney Poore
In reply to this post by Asaf Bartov-2
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > I find the WMF staff who I interact with to be an inspiration to me with
> > their dedication to the mission to the global wikimedia movement.
> >
>
> So do I. :)
>
>
> > Perhaps the reason that many of them are not volunteering as on site
> > contributors is because they are too busy with a day job that is solely
> > focused on the mission of the movement.
> >
>
> Eh, no, that's not a valid argument.  Everybody is busy, most Wikimedians
> have day jobs or demanding schoolwork of some sort.  People manage to
> contribute to the projects if they want to.  It's a matter of
> prioritization, as always in life.  So we mustn't accept "maybe they're
> just too busy" as an excuse for why staffers purportedly "can't" edit.
> Many staffers do.  Some don't.  In both cases, it's by choice and
> preference.
>
I respect the decision of WMF staff to go home and take care of their
personal business, or be involved in other outside activities, and then
come back to work refreshed and ready to work on issues related to WMF and
wikimedia movement.

>
>
> > I fully support allowing our talented and dedicated WMF staff to have the
> > opportunity to choose the people who guide the direction of the WMF.
> >
>
> Meeting the suffrage bar as a community member is not difficult.  Those
> (few) staffers who aren't already eligible to vote as either developers or
> content contributors, further filtered by the criterion "cares sufficiently
> to read about candidates and figure out voting" -- which I guesstimate to
> be under 20, and probably under 10 -- could have, and therefore should
> have, simply edited a bit, on any of the projects, to get suffrage.  I
> don't think there's any disenfranchisement if they don't get an automatic
> vote.
>
>    A.
>

At a time in our movement when we are reaching out to partner organization
(GLAM, universities, etc) to engage them in activities that are outside of
making on wiki edits, I think we need to expand our ideas about who is a
 member of our movement with the standing to select the BoT.

A good start to recognizing a broadening of the movement roles is to
include WMF staff and affiliate staff who do not make onsite edits.

Additionally, I'm not keen on having people go through the motion of making
just enough edits to get the right to vote as a volunteer when their true
value to the wikimedia movement is through their staff work.

Sydney

> --
>     Asaf Bartov
>     Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
> https://donate.wikimedia.org
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Fæ
On 22 April 2015 at 19:26, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]> wrote:
...

> At a time in our movement when we are reaching out to partner organization
> (GLAM, universities, etc) to engage them in activities that are outside of
> making on wiki edits, I think we need to expand our ideas about who is a
>  member of our movement with the standing to select the BoT.
>
> A good start to recognizing a broadening of the movement roles is to
> include WMF staff and affiliate staff who do not make onsite edits.
>
> Additionally, I'm not keen on having people go through the motion of making
> just enough edits to get the right to vote as a volunteer when their true
> value to the wikimedia movement is through their staff work.
>
> Sydney

I find hard to understand the point of view of WMF employees who after
a year in employment, have yet to find an hour to make a minimal
number of edits on Wikipedia, just to see what it is like. I would
compare it to working as a web page designer for a supermarket chain,
and never trying to buy some food from one of the stores using your
staff discount.

Fae
--
[hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Asaf Bartov-2
In reply to this post by Sydney Poore
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Sydney Poore <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I find the WMF staff who I interact with to be an inspiration to me
> with
> > > their dedication to the mission to the global wikimedia movement.
> > >
> >
> > So do I. :)
> >
> > > Perhaps the reason that many of them are not volunteering as on site
> > > contributors is because they are too busy with a day job that is solely
> > > focused on the mission of the movement.
>
> > Eh, no, that's not a valid argument.  Everybody is busy, most Wikimedians
> > have day jobs or demanding schoolwork of some sort.  People manage to
> > contribute to the projects if they want to.  It's a matter of
> > prioritization, as always in life.  So we mustn't accept "maybe they're
> > just too busy" as an excuse for why staffers purportedly "can't" edit.
> > Many staffers do.  Some don't.  In both cases, it's by choice and
> > preference.
> >
> I respect the decision of WMF staff to go home and take care of their
> personal business, or be involved in other outside activities, and then
> come back to work refreshed and ready to work on issues related to WMF and
> wikimedia movement.
>

So do I. :)  (Indeed, I have had occasion to remind, uh, a colleague, that
editing Wikipedia or its sister projects is a bit of an unusual hobby, and
that it's Perfectly Fine to not choose to volunteer to do that on your
personal time.)

But it that's their choice, they probably don't need to vote for the WMF
Board of Trustees.  Indeed, they probably won't be very informed voters if
they could.

(to be clear, I have been responding specifically to the "staff may not
have time to edit" argument, which I found unconvincing.  I agree WMF staff
(who do get a vote, in the status quo), should not be privileged over
affiliate staff (who don't), i.e. that status quo is broken.)

   A.
--
    Asaf Bartov
    Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Dariusz Jemielniak-3
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 2:10 AM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> So do I. :)  (Indeed, I have had occasion to remind, uh, a colleague, that
> editing Wikipedia or its sister projects is a bit of an unusual hobby, and
> that it's Perfectly Fine to not choose to volunteer to do that on your
> personal time.)
>

if, as Asaf points out, it is an issue of roughly 10 people then it is
probably not really worth a lengthy discussion - it is easier to get voting
rights anyway. All in all, I think it is good that we try to be inclusive,
and WMF people (just as many others professionals employed within our
movement) definitely have an important perspective to add. Yet, it really
is not that difficult to edit a little bit. Voting rights are also a
certain privilege. Even if the only reason staff of WMF and/or chapters are
not automatically eligible to vote is the fact, that there are hypothetical
concerns about some possible political influence, it still may be enough
just because the threshold to get voting rights is really low. So, I think
that as long as the rules are known well ahead in time, it is totally fine
to have universal requirements irrespective of where one is employed.

(btw, I think it is also idealistic to assume that a determined political
group would not make a coordinated effort to gain voting rights to have
influence - just look what happened to Hugo awards and the Sad Puppies
fraction ;)

best,

dariusz "pundit"
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Itzik - Wikimedia Israel
Any response or input from the Election Committee?



*Regards,Itzik Edri*
Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
+972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!


On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 2:10 AM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > So do I. :)  (Indeed, I have had occasion to remind, uh, a colleague,
> that
> > editing Wikipedia or its sister projects is a bit of an unusual hobby,
> and
> > that it's Perfectly Fine to not choose to volunteer to do that on your
> > personal time.)
> >
>
> if, as Asaf points out, it is an issue of roughly 10 people then it is
> probably not really worth a lengthy discussion - it is easier to get voting
> rights anyway. All in all, I think it is good that we try to be inclusive,
> and WMF people (just as many others professionals employed within our
> movement) definitely have an important perspective to add. Yet, it really
> is not that difficult to edit a little bit. Voting rights are also a
> certain privilege. Even if the only reason staff of WMF and/or chapters are
> not automatically eligible to vote is the fact, that there are hypothetical
> concerns about some possible political influence, it still may be enough
> just because the threshold to get voting rights is really low. So, I think
> that as long as the rules are known well ahead in time, it is totally fine
> to have universal requirements irrespective of where one is employed.
>
> (btw, I think it is also idealistic to assume that a determined political
> group would not make a coordinated effort to gain voting rights to have
> influence - just look what happened to Hugo awards and the Sad Puppies
> fraction ;)
>
> best,
>
> dariusz "pundit"
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

James Alexander-4
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Any response or input from the Election Committee?
>
>

I think Greg said it relatively well earlier as the coordinator for the
committee (I am it's staff advisor). At this point the committee has
decided on the voting requirements and it is highly unlikely to change for
the current election cycle. They did have serious discussions about
everything mentioned in this thread both on their list and during the first
committee meeting but in the end decided that they did not believe there
was a strong need for change right now. When this conversation came back up
it was broached whether we wanted to revisit and no one said expressed a
desire to.

Also as Greg said I think this is a good topic for a permanent election
committee which I very much think should exist.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

Nathan Awrich
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:43 PM, James Alexander <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Any response or input from the Election Committee?
> >
> >
>
> I think Greg said it relatively well earlier as the coordinator for the
> committee (I am it's staff advisor). At this point the committee has
> decided on the voting requirements and it is highly unlikely to change for
> the current election cycle. They did have serious discussions about
> everything mentioned in this thread both on their list and during the first
> committee meeting but in the end decided that they did not believe there
> was a strong need for change right now. When this conversation came back up
> it was broached whether we wanted to revisit and no one said expressed a
> desire to.
>
> Also as Greg said I think this is a good topic for a permanent election
> committee which I very much think should exist.
>
> James Alexander
> Community Advocacy
> Wikimedia Foundation
> (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur


This is a weakness in the process. Itzik raised an issue and was told it
was too early to discuss. He raised it again when the elections approached,
and is being told its too late. Obviously the "committee" conducted its
deliberations on this question in secret, which is a strange approach
considering there have been requests and a desire for open discussion from
the community.

It's also worth pointing out that many of the people in this discussion
agreed that the community requirements are so low that there should be no
reason any interested employee (of the WMF or elsewhere) can't qualify
under other criteria, eliminating the need for a special franchise for WMF
employees.

Unfortunately it appears that anyone interested in adjusting the criteria
will need perfecting timing while broaching this subject next year.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

James Alexander-4
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:43 PM, James Alexander <[hidden email]
> >
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Any response or input from the Election Committee?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I think Greg said it relatively well earlier as the coordinator for the
> > committee (I am it's staff advisor). At this point the committee has
> > decided on the voting requirements and it is highly unlikely to change
> for
> > the current election cycle. They did have serious discussions about
> > everything mentioned in this thread both on their list and during the
> first
> > committee meeting but in the end decided that they did not believe there
> > was a strong need for change right now. When this conversation came back
> up
> > it was broached whether we wanted to revisit and no one said expressed a
> > desire to.
> >
> > Also as Greg said I think this is a good topic for a permanent election
> > committee which I very much think should exist.
> >
> > James Alexander
> > Community Advocacy
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> > (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
>
>
> This is a weakness in the process. Itzik raised an issue and was told it
> was too early to discuss. He raised it again when the elections approached,
> and is being told its too late. Obviously the "committee" conducted its
> deliberations on this question in secret, which is a strange approach
> considering there have been requests and a desire for open discussion from
> the community.
>

I agree, I also wish that the committee had more time to make the decision.
I had hoped to seat them in January and they would have had a lot of time
to discuss this both here and elsewhere. Sadly we were waiting for the
board on a couple things and were unable to seat them until recently and at
that point there was a time crunch and things needed to be decided quickly.
As both Greg and I said however, these arguments were in no way ignored,
when I introduced the topic (in one of the very first emails to the
committee) I listed all of the questions here about staff voting, chapter
staff/board, edit requirements etc and then backed off. The committee
discussed all of those and decided, in the end, that this was the right
decision.



> It's also worth pointing out that many of the people in this discussion
> agreed that the community requirements are so low that there should be no
> reason any interested employee (of the WMF or elsewhere) can't qualify
> under other criteria, eliminating the need for a special franchise for WMF
> employees.
>

On a completely personal level I actually think the requirements could be
lowered. We already had at least 1 individual who I think was a perfect fit
for the FDC for example but was unable to run and had to move himself to
ineligible because of the edit requirements (he may have had over 150 edits
this year and be very active in the movement as a whole but he did not have
the 20 edits in the past 6 months required).  However the committee decided
not to do so and that is their prerogative.

Unfortunately it appears that anyone interested in adjusting the criteria
> will need perfecting timing while broaching this subject next year.


This is why Greg (and myself. and the election committee from last
year who made
a proposal <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Standing_Election_Committee>,
and from what I've seen the election committee from this year)  want to
have the board create a standing committee. That standing committee would
be empowered to have this discussion at any point and to discuss the
positives and negatives both themselves and with the community and make a
decision. They are much less likely to run into the problem that a one off
committee has where decisions need to be discussed and made and quickly so
that they can get other logistics in place.

James Alexander
Community Advocacy
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
1234