[Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
38 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Itzik Edri
As you know, the Wikimedia Foundation elections is approaching. As always,
the voters will be the community, developers, current board member and..
WMF staff and contractors. Nothing changed. same as two years ago.

But I wonder - we had this policy when the chapters and others recognized
Wikimedia organization doesn't been really part of the equation.

Yes, many of the chapters board and staff are community members and have
the right the vote - but this is also the case with many of the WMF
employees, but still we giving some of them the right to vote even if they
hardly ever edit on the projects. But we not giving the same right to our's
board and chapters staff, who are also part of the movement.

I'm raising this issue, and asking if should chapter (and
thematic organization) staff and board members should be granted the right
to vote in the movement elections, in the same way as Foundation staff and
board members have right now? To me it's making sense.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Nathan Awrich
I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
community. Presumably that would include most members of most
organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
workers who also participate as volunteers.

Most chapter members and representatives participate not only in the
community elections but also in the selection of chapter-nominated
board seats. It doesn't seem like chapters as a group are at all
disenfranchised.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Federico Leva (Nemo)
Nathan, 27/04/2013 21:34:
> I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
> workers who also participate as volunteers.

I agree with Nathan, simplifying the rules is useful while complicating
them for a few dozens voters is not.

Nemo

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Asaf Bartov-2
Also agree with Nathan.  Those chapter board members who are not active on
the projects already have a far greater relative weight in selecting the
chapter-selected board seats.

   A.


On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Nathan, 27/04/2013 21:34:
>
>  I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
>> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
>> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
>> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
>> workers who also participate as volunteers.
>>
>
> I agree with Nathan, simplifying the rules is useful while complicating
> them for a few dozens voters is not.
>
> Nemo
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

rupert THURNER-2
also agree to simplify the rules. what i'd really love would be to
better standardize and with it simplify "volunteer community", for all
elections and votes. and at least my wish would be that people who
donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
essential to run the site are included.

rupert.

On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Also agree with Nathan.  Those chapter board members who are not active on
> the projects already have a far greater relative weight in selecting the
> chapter-selected board seats.
>
>    A.
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
>> Nathan, 27/04/2013 21:34:
>>
>>  I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
>>> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
>>> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
>>> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
>>> workers who also participate as volunteers.
>>>
>>
>> I agree with Nathan, simplifying the rules is useful while complicating
>> them for a few dozens voters is not.
>>
>> Nemo
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>>
>
>
>
> --
>     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
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Dariusz Jemielniak-3
agreed - I actually don't see a reason why the elections should not be
limited to Wikimedia editors with some edit count. I would assume that if
there are people in other categories currently eligible to vote, who would
lose this privilege if they were required to do some minimal amount of
editing, it is not too much of a burden to ask them to start editing, if
they indeed want to participate in the community also through elections.

best,

dj / pundit


On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 7:15 AM, rupert THURNER <[hidden email]>wrote:

> also agree to simplify the rules. what i'd really love would be to
> better standardize and with it simplify "volunteer community", for all
> elections and votes. and at least my wish would be that people who
> donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
> essential to run the site are included.
>
> rupert.
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > Also agree with Nathan.  Those chapter board members who are not active
> on
> > the projects already have a far greater relative weight in selecting the
> > chapter-selected board seats.
> >
> >    A.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <
> [hidden email]>wrote:
> >
> >> Nathan, 27/04/2013 21:34:
> >>
> >>  I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
> >>> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
> >>> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
> >>> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
> >>> workers who also participate as volunteers.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I agree with Nathan, simplifying the rules is useful while complicating
> >> them for a few dozens voters is not.
> >>
> >> Nemo
> >>
> >>
> >> ______________________________**_________________
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> >> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >     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
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>



--

__________________________
dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
profesor zarządzania
kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego
i centrum badawczego CROW
Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Benjamin Lees
In reply to this post by rupert THURNER-2
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 1:15 AM, rupert THURNER <[hidden email]>wrote:

> and at least my wish would be that people who
> donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
> essential to run the site are included.
>

In the 2011 election, anyone active with commit access (that is, the
ability to change code in the software repository) also got a vote.  It
looks like that will be the case for this election, too.

In principle, I would expect more people to be eligible to vote as
developers this time, because the new version control system (Git instead
of Subversion) doesn't have the same barriers to access.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Katie Chan
In reply to this post by rupert THURNER-2
On 28/04/2013 06:15, rupert THURNER wrote:
> also agree to simplify the rules. what i'd really love would be to
> better standardize and with it simplify "volunteer community", for all
> elections and votes. and at least my wish would be that people who
> donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
> essential to run the site are included.

Erm...

"Developers qualify to vote if they:

....

Have commit access and have made at least one merged commit in git
between 1 May 2012 and 30 April 2013."

--
Katie Chan
Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the
author is associated with or employed by.


Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
     - Heinrich Heine

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Itzik Edri
In reply to this post by Nathan Awrich
I agree. We should limit it to only community members, or to give equal
right to everyone.

Asaf, you right, but we are talking also about the FDC elections. a
processes where we are not granting chapters and others organizations the
right to vote but granting to the WMF. Giving only WMF staff, and not
chapters staff the right to vote in community process, it's like saying the
first are part of the community, but the second are not. I don't even want
to refer to the sensitive issue of the staff voting for their "bosses"..


On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
> workers who also participate as volunteers.
>
> Most chapter members and representatives participate not only in the
> community elections but also in the selection of chapter-nominated
> board seats. It doesn't seem like chapters as a group are at all
> disenfranchised.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Huib Laurens
I would say my view on the voting rules also, like last year where I was a
active editor but wasn't allowed to vote because of the rule that you can't
be blocked on more then one project.

I was that year a administrator, list administrator and member of the
LangCom. But was blocked on a project where I was active before and on a
project where I never editted.. This made me not able to vote.

With the rule of being blocked it will be very EASY to remove people you
don't want to vote... Just block them for a while and they can't vote.

The rules of the voting should be changed, so that it would be more easy
for people to vote and not let there be a change that people can be
excluded from voting by just random facts.

Huib


On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Itzik Edri <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I agree. We should limit it to only community members, or to give equal
> right to everyone.
>
> Asaf, you right, but we are talking also about the FDC elections. a
> processes where we are not granting chapters and others organizations the
> right to vote but granting to the WMF. Giving only WMF staff, and not
> chapters staff the right to vote in community process, it's like saying the
> first are part of the community, but the second are not. I don't even want
> to refer to the sensitive issue of the staff voting for their "bosses"..
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
> > for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
> > community. Presumably that would include most members of most
> > organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
> > workers who also participate as volunteers.
> >
> > Most chapter members and representatives participate not only in the
> > community elections but also in the selection of chapter-nominated
> > board seats. It doesn't seem like chapters as a group are at all
> > disenfranchised.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>



--
Met vriendelijke groet,

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Andrew Gray-3
In reply to this post by rupert THURNER-2
On 28 April 2013 06:15, rupert THURNER <[hidden email]> wrote:
> also agree to simplify the rules. what i'd really love would be to
> better standardize and with it simplify "volunteer community", for all
> elections and votes. and at least my wish would be that people who
> donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
> essential to run the site are included.

The first elections (in 2004) had a simple "three months in the
community" rule. After that, we added edit count restrictions. The
first election with any "complicated" rules - allowing people in
without passing the edit count limits - was 2008, when WMF staff,
ex-Board members, *and* "Wikimedia server administrators with shell
access" were added. In 2011, this got extended to people who "have
commit access and have made at least one commit between 15 May 2010
and 15 May 2011."

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2008/en
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en

So we've already got those in :-)

I'm ambivalent about whether it's appropriate to have staff members
(those who don't independently qualify as "community members") voting
or not, but I think in principle Itzik has a very good point - either
*both* WMF and Chapter staff should be able to vote, or *neither*
should. I can't see any reason that it's right for a staffer in San
Francisco to participate in the election, but it isn't right for one
in Berlin!

(It may be too late to change anything for this time around, of
course, but it would be great if we could ensure consistency in future
elections)

- Andrew.


> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Also agree with Nathan.  Those chapter board members who are not active on
>> the projects already have a far greater relative weight in selecting the
>> chapter-selected board seats.
>>
>>    A.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]>wrote:
>>
>>> Nathan, 27/04/2013 21:34:
>>>
>>>  I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
>>>> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
>>>> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
>>>> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
>>>> workers who also participate as volunteers.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I agree with Nathan, simplifying the rules is useful while complicating
>>> them for a few dozens voters is not.
>>>
>>> Nemo
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>     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
>> [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Sue Gardner-2
Interesting thread, Itzik --- to be honest, I had forgotten that staff had
been granted the right to vote regardless of edit count. I wouldn't be
surprised if the only staff members who do vote are those who would qualify
under the edit count requirement anyway.

Seems to me that rather than creating new exemptions from the edit count
requirement, we might be better off to lower the number of edits required
so that anybody who's demonstrated interest in the projects would qualify.
If edits on meta, mediawiki, outreach, etc., qualify, and we were to lower
the edit count requirement, then I think that would be inclusive of
most/all contributors. Would something like that make sense?

Thanks,
Sue
On Apr 28, 2013 1:26 PM, "Andrew Gray" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 28 April 2013 06:15, rupert THURNER <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > also agree to simplify the rules. what i'd really love would be to
> > better standardize and with it simplify "volunteer community", for all
> > elections and votes. and at least my wish would be that people who
> > donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
> > essential to run the site are included.
>
> The first elections (in 2004) had a simple "three months in the
> community" rule. After that, we added edit count restrictions. The
> first election with any "complicated" rules - allowing people in
> without passing the edit count limits - was 2008, when WMF staff,
> ex-Board members, *and* "Wikimedia server administrators with shell
> access" were added. In 2011, this got extended to people who "have
> commit access and have made at least one commit between 15 May 2010
> and 15 May 2011."
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2008/en
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en
>
> So we've already got those in :-)
>
> I'm ambivalent about whether it's appropriate to have staff members
> (those who don't independently qualify as "community members") voting
> or not, but I think in principle Itzik has a very good point - either
> *both* WMF and Chapter staff should be able to vote, or *neither*
> should. I can't see any reason that it's right for a staffer in San
> Francisco to participate in the election, but it isn't right for one
> in Berlin!
>
> (It may be too late to change anything for this time around, of
> course, but it would be great if we could ensure consistency in future
> elections)
>
> - Andrew.
>
>
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >> Also agree with Nathan.  Those chapter board members who are not active
> on
> >> the projects already have a far greater relative weight in selecting the
> >> chapter-selected board seats.
> >>
> >>    A.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <
> [hidden email]>wrote:
> >>
> >>> Nathan, 27/04/2013 21:34:
> >>>
> >>>  I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
> >>>> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
> >>>> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
> >>>> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
> >>>> workers who also participate as volunteers.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I agree with Nathan, simplifying the rules is useful while complicating
> >>> them for a few dozens voters is not.
> >>>
> >>> Nemo
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ______________________________**_________________
> >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> >>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> >>> Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>     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
> >> [hidden email]
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
>
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>   [hidden email]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Sarah Stierch-2
I think it's a good idea Sue. Wikipedians are different than Wikimedians,
etc.. There are many people on boards of chapters and involved in the
community that might not "edit" on wiki spaces, making them perhaps unable
to vote. And there are a lot of people involved in the community that
aren't editors or active on wiki, but, are strong voices involved in
helping to shape the movement into what it is.

I also think, culturally, it's critical that we consider moving away from
assuming people with high edit counts are more "important" than those
without. (bytes versus edit counts)

Regarding staff members who vote - I have a feeling most staff members who
do not contribute to the projects outside of their work obligations
probably won't vote. Just a guess (based on what I gather around the office
- just because you work for Wikimedia doesn't mean you contribute to our
projects outside of work hours).


-Sarah


On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Sue Gardner <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Interesting thread, Itzik --- to be honest, I had forgotten that staff had
> been granted the right to vote regardless of edit count. I wouldn't be
> surprised if the only staff members who do vote are those who would qualify
> under the edit count requirement anyway.
>
> Seems to me that rather than creating new exemptions from the edit count
> requirement, we might be better off to lower the number of edits required
> so that anybody who's demonstrated interest in the projects would qualify.
> If edits on meta, mediawiki, outreach, etc., qualify, and we were to lower
> the edit count requirement, then I think that would be inclusive of
> most/all contributors. Would something like that make sense?
>
> Thanks,
> Sue
> On Apr 28, 2013 1:26 PM, "Andrew Gray" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On 28 April 2013 06:15, rupert THURNER <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > also agree to simplify the rules. what i'd really love would be to
> > > better standardize and with it simplify "volunteer community", for all
> > > elections and votes. and at least my wish would be that people who
> > > donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
> > > essential to run the site are included.
> >
> > The first elections (in 2004) had a simple "three months in the
> > community" rule. After that, we added edit count restrictions. The
> > first election with any "complicated" rules - allowing people in
> > without passing the edit count limits - was 2008, when WMF staff,
> > ex-Board members, *and* "Wikimedia server administrators with shell
> > access" were added. In 2011, this got extended to people who "have
> > commit access and have made at least one commit between 15 May 2010
> > and 15 May 2011."
> >
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2008/en
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en
> >
> > So we've already got those in :-)
> >
> > I'm ambivalent about whether it's appropriate to have staff members
> > (those who don't independently qualify as "community members") voting
> > or not, but I think in principle Itzik has a very good point - either
> > *both* WMF and Chapter staff should be able to vote, or *neither*
> > should. I can't see any reason that it's right for a staffer in San
> > Francisco to participate in the election, but it isn't right for one
> > in Berlin!
> >
> > (It may be too late to change anything for this time around, of
> > course, but it would be great if we could ensure consistency in future
> > elections)
> >
> > - Andrew.
> >
> >
> > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >> Also agree with Nathan.  Those chapter board members who are not
> active
> > on
> > >> the projects already have a far greater relative weight in selecting
> the
> > >> chapter-selected board seats.
> > >>
> > >>    A.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <
> > [hidden email]>wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Nathan, 27/04/2013 21:34:
> > >>>
> > >>>  I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
> > >>>> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
> > >>>> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
> > >>>> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
> > >>>> workers who also participate as volunteers.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I agree with Nathan, simplifying the rules is useful while
> complicating
> > >>> them for a few dozens voters is not.
> > >>>
> > >>> Nemo
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ______________________________**_________________
> > >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > >>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> > >>> Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >>     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
> > >> [hidden email]
> > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - Andrew Gray
> >   [hidden email]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>



--
--
*Sarah Stierch*
*Museumist, open culture advocate, and Wikimedian*
*www.sarahstierch.com*
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Pavel Richter-2
In reply to this post by Sue Gardner-2
2013/4/28 Sue Gardner <[hidden email]>

> If edits on meta, mediawiki, outreach, etc., qualify, and we were to lower
> the edit count requirement, then I think that would be inclusive of
> most/all contributors. Would something like that make sense?
>
> Yes, that would be a very good solution!

Pavel


> Thanks,
> Sue
> On Apr 28, 2013 1:26 PM, "Andrew Gray" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On 28 April 2013 06:15, rupert THURNER <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > also agree to simplify the rules. what i'd really love would be to
> > > better standardize and with it simplify "volunteer community", for all
> > > elections and votes. and at least my wish would be that people who
> > > donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
> > > essential to run the site are included.
> >
> > The first elections (in 2004) had a simple "three months in the
> > community" rule. After that, we added edit count restrictions. The
> > first election with any "complicated" rules - allowing people in
> > without passing the edit count limits - was 2008, when WMF staff,
> > ex-Board members, *and* "Wikimedia server administrators with shell
> > access" were added. In 2011, this got extended to people who "have
> > commit access and have made at least one commit between 15 May 2010
> > and 15 May 2011."
> >
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2008/en
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en
> >
> > So we've already got those in :-)
> >
> > I'm ambivalent about whether it's appropriate to have staff members
> > (those who don't independently qualify as "community members") voting
> > or not, but I think in principle Itzik has a very good point - either
> > *both* WMF and Chapter staff should be able to vote, or *neither*
> > should. I can't see any reason that it's right for a staffer in San
> > Francisco to participate in the election, but it isn't right for one
> > in Berlin!
> >
> > (It may be too late to change anything for this time around, of
> > course, but it would be great if we could ensure consistency in future
> > elections)
> >
> > - Andrew.
> >
> >
> > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >> Also agree with Nathan.  Those chapter board members who are not
> active
> > on
> > >> the projects already have a far greater relative weight in selecting
> the
> > >> chapter-selected board seats.
> > >>
> > >>    A.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <
> > [hidden email]>wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Nathan, 27/04/2013 21:34:
> > >>>
> > >>>  I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
> > >>>> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
> > >>>> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
> > >>>> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
> > >>>> workers who also participate as volunteers.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I agree with Nathan, simplifying the rules is useful while
> complicating
> > >>> them for a few dozens voters is not.
> > >>>
> > >>> Nemo
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ______________________________**_________________
> > >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > >>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> > >>> Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >>     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
> > >> [hidden email]
> > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - Andrew Gray
> >   [hidden email]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

MF-Warburg-2
2013/4/28 Pavel Richter <[hidden email]>

> 2013/4/28 Sue Gardner <[hidden email]>
>
> > If edits on meta, mediawiki, outreach, etc., qualify, and we were to
> lower
> > the edit count requirement, then I think that would be inclusive of
> > most/all contributors. Would something like that make sense?
> >
> > Yes, that would be a very good solution!
>
> Pavel
>
>

That's probably why edits on all wikis count already.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2013#Requirements
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Risker
In reply to this post by Sue Gardner-2
I'd actually suggest the opposite:  That the only people eligible to vote
for the three elected seats be active participants within the Wikimedia
projects.  That would drop the staff/contractor and advisory board
eligibility.  Alternately, let's make everyone eligible, including chapter
staff....but eliminate the chapter-appointed seats and have an election
every year that involves the entire community.

Risker




On 28 April 2013 16:43, Sue Gardner <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Interesting thread, Itzik --- to be honest, I had forgotten that staff had
> been granted the right to vote regardless of edit count. I wouldn't be
> surprised if the only staff members who do vote are those who would qualify
> under the edit count requirement anyway.
>
> Seems to me that rather than creating new exemptions from the edit count
> requirement, we might be better off to lower the number of edits required
> so that anybody who's demonstrated interest in the projects would qualify.
> If edits on meta, mediawiki, outreach, etc., qualify, and we were to lower
> the edit count requirement, then I think that would be inclusive of
> most/all contributors. Would something like that make sense?
>
> Thanks,
> Sue
> On Apr 28, 2013 1:26 PM, "Andrew Gray" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On 28 April 2013 06:15, rupert THURNER <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > also agree to simplify the rules. what i'd really love would be to
> > > better standardize and with it simplify "volunteer community", for all
> > > elections and votes. and at least my wish would be that people who
> > > donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
> > > essential to run the site are included.
> >
> > The first elections (in 2004) had a simple "three months in the
> > community" rule. After that, we added edit count restrictions. The
> > first election with any "complicated" rules - allowing people in
> > without passing the edit count limits - was 2008, when WMF staff,
> > ex-Board members, *and* "Wikimedia server administrators with shell
> > access" were added. In 2011, this got extended to people who "have
> > commit access and have made at least one commit between 15 May 2010
> > and 15 May 2011."
> >
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2008/en
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en
> >
> > So we've already got those in :-)
> >
> > I'm ambivalent about whether it's appropriate to have staff members
> > (those who don't independently qualify as "community members") voting
> > or not, but I think in principle Itzik has a very good point - either
> > *both* WMF and Chapter staff should be able to vote, or *neither*
> > should. I can't see any reason that it's right for a staffer in San
> > Francisco to participate in the election, but it isn't right for one
> > in Berlin!
> >
> > (It may be too late to change anything for this time around, of
> > course, but it would be great if we could ensure consistency in future
> > elections)
> >
> > - Andrew.
> >
> >
> > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >> Also agree with Nathan.  Those chapter board members who are not
> active
> > on
> > >> the projects already have a far greater relative weight in selecting
> the
> > >> chapter-selected board seats.
> > >>
> > >>    A.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <
> > [hidden email]>wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Nathan, 27/04/2013 21:34:
> > >>>
> > >>>  I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the election
> > >>>> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
> > >>>> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
> > >>>> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
> > >>>> workers who also participate as volunteers.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I agree with Nathan, simplifying the rules is useful while
> complicating
> > >>> them for a few dozens voters is not.
> > >>>
> > >>> Nemo
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ______________________________**_________________
> > >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > >>> [hidden email].**org <[hidden email]>
> > >>> Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >>     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
> > >> [hidden email]
> > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - Andrew Gray
> >   [hidden email]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Steven Walling
On Sunday, April 28, 2013, Risker wrote:

> I'd actually suggest the opposite:  That the only people eligible to vote
> for the three elected seats be active participants within the Wikimedia
> projects.  That would drop the staff/contractor and advisory board
> eligibility.  Alternately, let's make everyone eligible, including chapter
> staff....but eliminate the chapter-appointed seats and have an election
> every year that involves the entire community.
>
> Risker


Speaking personally, I agree with Risker.


>
>
>
>
> On 28 April 2013 16:43, Sue Gardner <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Interesting thread, Itzik --- to be honest, I had forgotten that staff
> had
> > been granted the right to vote regardless of edit count. I wouldn't be
> > surprised if the only staff members who do vote are those who would
> qualify
> > under the edit count requirement anyway.
> >
> > Seems to me that rather than creating new exemptions from the edit count
> > requirement, we might be better off to lower the number of edits required
> > so that anybody who's demonstrated interest in the projects would
> qualify.
> > If edits on meta, mediawiki, outreach, etc., qualify, and we were to
> lower
> > the edit count requirement, then I think that would be inclusive of
> > most/all contributors. Would something like that make sense?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Sue
> > On Apr 28, 2013 1:26 PM, "Andrew Gray" <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On 28 April 2013 06:15, rupert THURNER <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > > also agree to simplify the rules. what i'd really love would be to
> > > > better standardize and with it simplify "volunteer community", for
> all
> > > > elections and votes. and at least my wish would be that people who
> > > > donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
> > > > essential to run the site are included.
> > >
> > > The first elections (in 2004) had a simple "three months in the
> > > community" rule. After that, we added edit count restrictions. The
> > > first election with any "complicated" rules - allowing people in
> > > without passing the edit count limits - was 2008, when WMF staff,
> > > ex-Board members, *and* "Wikimedia server administrators with shell
> > > access" were added. In 2011, this got extended to people who "have
> > > commit access and have made at least one commit between 15 May 2010
> > > and 15 May 2011."
> > >
> > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2008/en
> > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/en
> > >
> > > So we've already got those in :-)
> > >
> > > I'm ambivalent about whether it's appropriate to have staff members
> > > (those who don't independently qualify as "community members") voting
> > > or not, but I think in principle Itzik has a very good point - either
> > > *both* WMF and Chapter staff should be able to vote, or *neither*
> > > should. I can't see any reason that it's right for a staffer in San
> > > Francisco to participate in the election, but it isn't right for one
> > > in Berlin!
> > >
> > > (It may be too late to change anything for this time around, of
> > > course, but it would be great if we could ensure consistency in future
> > > elections)
> > >
> > > - Andrew.
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >> Also agree with Nathan.  Those chapter board members who are not
> > active
> > > on
> > > >> the projects already have a far greater relative weight in selecting
> > the
> > > >> chapter-selected board seats.
> > > >>
> > > >>    A.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <
> > > [hidden email]>wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Nathan, 27/04/2013 21:34:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>  I would go the other way, and limit the participants in the
> election
> > > >>>> for the community seat to people who are members of the volunteer
> > > >>>> community. Presumably that would include most members of most
> > > >>>> organizational boards, but only include those staff and other paid
> > > >>>>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

James Alexander-3
In reply to this post by Risker
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Risker <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd actually suggest the opposite:  That the only people eligible to vote
> for the three elected seats be active participants within the Wikimedia
> projects.  That would drop the staff/contractor and advisory board
> eligibility.  Alternately, let's make everyone eligible, including chapter
> staff....but eliminate the chapter-appointed seats and have an election
> every year that involves the entire community.
>
> Risker
>


Also speaking personally I'd completely agree. I think the chapter
community, while different, certainly deserves a role in the elections but
have never been fully comfortable with the separation of "chapter seats"
(or, I imagine if they were kept 'organization seats for movement groups
would probably be included too) and 'community seats'. Rather then push the
different community groups apart let us push them together and have them
all vote on all 5 of the community seats. Our community is spread out in to
many different areas but I'd say they are all part of the wider community
and I do not think any one deserves special recognition or status over the
others. These are 'your' board members compared to 'our' board members,
they should all be there to work for the foundation (as they are required
by law to do) and the movement as a whole.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Mike Godwin-2
In reply to this post by Itzik Edri
Sue writes:


"Interesting thread, Itzik --- to be honest, I had forgotten that staff had

> been granted the right to vote regardless of edit count. I wouldn't be
> surprised if the only staff members who do vote are those who would qualify
> under the edit count requirement anyway.
>
> "Seems to me that rather than creating new exemptions from the edit count
> requirement, we might be better off to lower the number of edits required
> so that anybody who's demonstrated interest in the projects would qualify.
> If edits on meta, mediawiki, outreach, etc., qualify, and we were to lower
> the edit count requirement, then I think that would be inclusive of
> most/all contributors. Would something like that make sense?"
>

It makes sense to me. I think many thoughtful people recognize that the
edit-count requirement is a fairly weak metric of engagement in the
Wikimedia community. I also think the exemptions actually have reflected
the same recognition -- that someone who is not a dedicated editor may be a
committed and contributing member of the community in other ways than
super-numerous recent edits.

That there should be some threshold of engagement I think is necessary to
prevent capture of WMF board, but I'm not sure it needs to be as high as it
is right now.

FWIW, when I was on staff I did not vote for WMF board positions, even
though I could, because I thought it was important in the role I was
playing to recuse myself from engagement in the elections. I don't think
that reasoning would apply to all staff members, but it felt applicable in
my particular case.


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why not everyone have the right to vote in the Board & FDC elections?

Ziko van Dijk-2
Hello,
If those three seats are to be elected by the community, then voting should
be restricted actually to the power editors. I could imagine that one of
those three seats - or, instead, a fourth one - is elected by the staff,
maybe plus the members of the Advisory board. E.g. Greenpeace Germany has
1/4 of its board members elected by staff.
With 2 seats selected by the chapters and in future maybe the thorgs, and 3
by the editing community, and 1 by the staff, more than half of the board
members would be not directly coopted.
Many other varieties are possible, of course. The staff could together vote
one elector who would take part in the selection by the chapters, the same
for the Wikimedia User Groups. But then, this voting group should select
ultimately not 2 but 3 seats.
People who don't edit but belong to the movement can have their influence
via the chapters and in future the thorgs.

>
> Kind regards
Ziko


--

-----------------------------------------------------------
Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland
dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter
http://wikimedia.nl

Wikimedia Nederland
Postbus 167
3500 AD Utrecht
-----------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
12