[Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

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

[Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Lane Rasberry
Hello,

As of now, 13 of 42 eligible organizations have voted in the 2016 chapters'
election for 2 of 10 Wikimedia Foundation seats on the board of trustees.
In the last election, 1/3 of organizations did not vote. Anyone who wishes
to influence the election could do so by asking sleepier chapters to vote
by the May 7 end of election.

Feel free also to pressure more active chapters to do their duty to support
less organized chapters in voting. Support can mean having
chapter-to-chapter encouragement to vote. All chapters appreciate being
reminded. All eligible organizations are supposed to vote. The election
result is more sound with more votes.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016

yours,

--
Lane Rasberry
user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
206.801.0814
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Andrew Gray-3
Hi Lane,

While I agree that it's good for people to encourage their
chapters/other organizations to vote, we would need to know whether
they've voted before doing this...

As far as I can see, the voting is entirely done on chapterswiki -
which is fair enough, and it's reasonable to have this semi-private.
However, it means that the only people who can tell if a given chapter
has voted or not are people closely associated with the chapters, who
presumably already know whether they've voted or not.

Would it be possible to have a public list of which organizations have
voted and which ones have yet to do so? I don't think this would
materially affect the confidentiality of the vote itself, and it might
help encourage some groups to actually vote.

Andrew.

On 3 May 2016 at 12:43, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> As of now, 13 of 42 eligible organizations have voted in the 2016 chapters'
> election for 2 of 10 Wikimedia Foundation seats on the board of trustees.
> In the last election, 1/3 of organizations did not vote. Anyone who wishes
> to influence the election could do so by asking sleepier chapters to vote
> by the May 7 end of election.
>
> Feel free also to pressure more active chapters to do their duty to support
> less organized chapters in voting. Support can mean having
> chapter-to-chapter encouragement to vote. All chapters appreciate being
> reminded. All eligible organizations are supposed to vote. The election
> result is more sound with more votes.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016
>
> yours,
>
> --
> Lane Rasberry
> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> 206.801.0814
> [hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Lane Rasberry
Hello,

I am unable to report which chapters voted. The voting process is closed.
Right now I have to recommend encouraging all chapters to vote.

The election rules are decided by chapters and chapters have said closed
election. I do not think this was a well-discussed rule, but whatever the
case, it cannot be changed by the community and needs to be changed by
chapters. Community discussion could influence it. I think that it is a
rule that could change. Asking chapters to have open voting could be
another reason to contact chapters, or open voting might be a problem - I
am not sure.

Even if voting were not completely open, there could be other kinds of
openness, like just a list of who voted. Right now, I cannot provide that.
Any chapter can look at the list and see who voted and who did not.

For the next election (in three years) I will propose a change. I want it
to be easier for chapters to self-report their votes in a public way, if
they choose to do so. Even if the election is closed, enough individual
chapters seem to want to self-disclose.

yours,



On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Andrew Gray <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi Lane,
>
> While I agree that it's good for people to encourage their
> chapters/other organizations to vote, we would need to know whether
> they've voted before doing this...
>
> As far as I can see, the voting is entirely done on chapterswiki -
> which is fair enough, and it's reasonable to have this semi-private.
> However, it means that the only people who can tell if a given chapter
> has voted or not are people closely associated with the chapters, who
> presumably already know whether they've voted or not.
>
> Would it be possible to have a public list of which organizations have
> voted and which ones have yet to do so? I don't think this would
> materially affect the confidentiality of the vote itself, and it might
> help encourage some groups to actually vote.
>
> Andrew.
>
> On 3 May 2016 at 12:43, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > As of now, 13 of 42 eligible organizations have voted in the 2016
> chapters'
> > election for 2 of 10 Wikimedia Foundation seats on the board of trustees.
> > In the last election, 1/3 of organizations did not vote. Anyone who
> wishes
> > to influence the election could do so by asking sleepier chapters to vote
> > by the May 7 end of election.
> >
> > Feel free also to pressure more active chapters to do their duty to
> support
> > less organized chapters in voting. Support can mean having
> > chapter-to-chapter encouragement to vote. All chapters appreciate being
> > reminded. All eligible organizations are supposed to vote. The election
> > result is more sound with more votes.
> >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016
> >
> > yours,
> >
> > --
> > Lane Rasberry
> > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> > 206.801.0814
> > [hidden email]
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>   [hidden email]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>




--
Lane Rasberry
user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
206.801.0814
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Lane Rasberry
Or - I could be wrong. Should the list of voting chapters be reported? What
is the correct interpretation of closed voting in this case?

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I am unable to report which chapters voted. The voting process is closed.
> Right now I have to recommend encouraging all chapters to vote.
>
> The election rules are decided by chapters and chapters have said closed
> election. I do not think this was a well-discussed rule, but whatever the
> case, it cannot be changed by the community and needs to be changed by
> chapters. Community discussion could influence it. I think that it is a
> rule that could change. Asking chapters to have open voting could be
> another reason to contact chapters, or open voting might be a problem - I
> am not sure.
>
> Even if voting were not completely open, there could be other kinds of
> openness, like just a list of who voted. Right now, I cannot provide that.
> Any chapter can look at the list and see who voted and who did not.
>
> For the next election (in three years) I will propose a change. I want it
> to be easier for chapters to self-report their votes in a public way, if
> they choose to do so. Even if the election is closed, enough individual
> chapters seem to want to self-disclose.
>
> yours,
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Andrew Gray <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lane,
>>
>> While I agree that it's good for people to encourage their
>> chapters/other organizations to vote, we would need to know whether
>> they've voted before doing this...
>>
>> As far as I can see, the voting is entirely done on chapterswiki -
>> which is fair enough, and it's reasonable to have this semi-private.
>> However, it means that the only people who can tell if a given chapter
>> has voted or not are people closely associated with the chapters, who
>> presumably already know whether they've voted or not.
>>
>> Would it be possible to have a public list of which organizations have
>> voted and which ones have yet to do so? I don't think this would
>> materially affect the confidentiality of the vote itself, and it might
>> help encourage some groups to actually vote.
>>
>> Andrew.
>>
>> On 3 May 2016 at 12:43, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > As of now, 13 of 42 eligible organizations have voted in the 2016
>> chapters'
>> > election for 2 of 10 Wikimedia Foundation seats on the board of
>> trustees.
>> > In the last election, 1/3 of organizations did not vote. Anyone who
>> wishes
>> > to influence the election could do so by asking sleepier chapters to
>> vote
>> > by the May 7 end of election.
>> >
>> > Feel free also to pressure more active chapters to do their duty to
>> support
>> > less organized chapters in voting. Support can mean having
>> > chapter-to-chapter encouragement to vote. All chapters appreciate being
>> > reminded. All eligible organizations are supposed to vote. The election
>> > result is more sound with more votes.
>> >
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016
>> >
>> > yours,
>> >
>> > --
>> > Lane Rasberry
>> > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
>> > 206.801.0814
>> > [hidden email]
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > New messages to: [hidden email]
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Andrew Gray
>>   [hidden email]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Lane Rasberry
> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> 206.801.0814
> [hidden email]
>



--
Lane Rasberry
user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
206.801.0814
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

John Mark Vandenberg
In reply to this post by Lane Rasberry
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]> wrote:
>..
> For the next election (in three years) I will propose a change. I want it
> to be easier for chapters to self-report their votes in a public way, if
> they choose to do so. Even if the election is closed, enough individual
> chapters seem to want to self-disclose.

This is a bit odd.  I vaguely remember that in previous years that
some chapters held discussions with their members online, and publicly
published the chapter decision before it was recorded on chapters
wiki.  Is that no longer possible?

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Lane Rasberry
It is possible to self disclose now - it is a wiki. The problem is that
there is no table set up for anyone to do it, and then it is confusing to
tell people to report in two places.

We could ask now, "who wants to self-disclose?" then copy those votes into
a public space.

The ideal way would be to have a way to note intent to self disclose in the
one voting location, then anyone on the chapters wiki could report those
votes publicly. I think it is too much to ask to have voting organizations
take more than one action to vote. I do not want voting to be complicated.

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 8:09 AM, John Mark Vandenberg <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >..
> > For the next election (in three years) I will propose a change. I want it
> > to be easier for chapters to self-report their votes in a public way, if
> > they choose to do so. Even if the election is closed, enough individual
> > chapters seem to want to self-disclose.
>
> This is a bit odd.  I vaguely remember that in previous years that
> some chapters held discussions with their members online, and publicly
> published the chapter decision before it was recorded on chapters
> wiki.  Is that no longer possible?
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--
Lane Rasberry
user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
206.801.0814
[hidden email]
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Gregory Varnum-2
I can appreciate chapters wanting their vote to be confidential. However, publishing who has voted seems reasonable - and in line with our other elections (where you can see who voted, but not how they voted).

Since before I served on AffCom, I have heard from affiliates how important it is to them to have a voice in WMF Governance. This is a great opportunity for that, and I am a little disappointed the turnout is, so far, rather low. Seeking these opportunities is less than half the effort, actually utilizing them when offered is perhaps even more important (IMHO).

-greg (User:Varnent)


> On May 3, 2016, at 8:32 AM, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> It is possible to self disclose now - it is a wiki. The problem is that
> there is no table set up for anyone to do it, and then it is confusing to
> tell people to report in two places.
>
> We could ask now, "who wants to self-disclose?" then copy those votes into
> a public space.
>
> The ideal way would be to have a way to note intent to self disclose in the
> one voting location, then anyone on the chapters wiki could report those
> votes publicly. I think it is too much to ask to have voting organizations
> take more than one action to vote. I do not want voting to be complicated.
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 8:09 AM, John Mark Vandenberg <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>> ..
>>> For the next election (in three years) I will propose a change. I want it
>>> to be easier for chapters to self-report their votes in a public way, if
>>> they choose to do so. Even if the election is closed, enough individual
>>> chapters seem to want to self-disclose.
>>
>> This is a bit odd.  I vaguely remember that in previous years that
>> some chapters held discussions with their members online, and publicly
>> published the chapter decision before it was recorded on chapters
>> wiki.  Is that no longer possible?
>>
>> --
>> John Vandenberg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lane Rasberry
> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> 206.801.0814
> [hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [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
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Itzik - Wikimedia Israel
In reply to this post by Lane Rasberry
I'm against publishing the chapters votes before the end of the elections.
More than that - I even offered before the election started that the
chapters votes will be confidential between them and be collected by
the moderators.

I believe that each chapter needs to vote as he think, not be looking on
others votes and decide by the way the wind's blowing. This is the way most
elections are done.

After the election, I don't have problem that the chapters votes will be
publish publicly.





*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 Tue, May 3, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I am unable to report which chapters voted. The voting process is closed.
> Right now I have to recommend encouraging all chapters to vote.
>
> The election rules are decided by chapters and chapters have said closed
> election. I do not think this was a well-discussed rule, but whatever the
> case, it cannot be changed by the community and needs to be changed by
> chapters. Community discussion could influence it. I think that it is a
> rule that could change. Asking chapters to have open voting could be
> another reason to contact chapters, or open voting might be a problem - I
> am not sure.
>
> Even if voting were not completely open, there could be other kinds of
> openness, like just a list of who voted. Right now, I cannot provide that.
> Any chapter can look at the list and see who voted and who did not.
>
> For the next election (in three years) I will propose a change. I want it
> to be easier for chapters to self-report their votes in a public way, if
> they choose to do so. Even if the election is closed, enough individual
> chapters seem to want to self-disclose.
>
> yours,
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Andrew Gray <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Lane,
> >
> > While I agree that it's good for people to encourage their
> > chapters/other organizations to vote, we would need to know whether
> > they've voted before doing this...
> >
> > As far as I can see, the voting is entirely done on chapterswiki -
> > which is fair enough, and it's reasonable to have this semi-private.
> > However, it means that the only people who can tell if a given chapter
> > has voted or not are people closely associated with the chapters, who
> > presumably already know whether they've voted or not.
> >
> > Would it be possible to have a public list of which organizations have
> > voted and which ones have yet to do so? I don't think this would
> > materially affect the confidentiality of the vote itself, and it might
> > help encourage some groups to actually vote.
> >
> > Andrew.
> >
> > On 3 May 2016 at 12:43, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > As of now, 13 of 42 eligible organizations have voted in the 2016
> > chapters'
> > > election for 2 of 10 Wikimedia Foundation seats on the board of
> trustees.
> > > In the last election, 1/3 of organizations did not vote. Anyone who
> > wishes
> > > to influence the election could do so by asking sleepier chapters to
> vote
> > > by the May 7 end of election.
> > >
> > > Feel free also to pressure more active chapters to do their duty to
> > support
> > > less organized chapters in voting. Support can mean having
> > > chapter-to-chapter encouragement to vote. All chapters appreciate being
> > > reminded. All eligible organizations are supposed to vote. The election
> > > result is more sound with more votes.
> > >
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016
> > >
> > > yours,
> > >
> > > --
> > > Lane Rasberry
> > > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> > > 206.801.0814
> > > [hidden email]
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - Andrew Gray
> >   [hidden email]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Lane Rasberry
> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> 206.801.0814
> [hidden email]
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [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
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Dariusz Jemielniak-3
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm against publishing the chapters votes before the end of the elections.
> More than that - I even offered before the election started that the
> chapters votes will be confidential between them and be collected by
> the moderators.
>
> I believe that each chapter needs to vote as he think, not be looking on
> others votes and decide by the way the wind's blowing. This is the way most
> elections are done.
>
> After the election, I don't have problem that the chapters votes will be
> publish publicly.
>
>
Itzik, just for clarity - I think Lane suggested that it would be optimal
to release the information WHO voted (to enable encouraging those who have
not), rather than HOW they voted.

dj
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

jmh649
In reply to this post by Itzik - Wikimedia Israel
I think the proposal was to publish whether or not specific chapters have
voted at all, not what their votes specifically were.

J

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm against publishing the chapters votes before the end of the elections.
> More than that - I even offered before the election started that the
> chapters votes will be confidential between them and be collected by
> the moderators.
>
> I believe that each chapter needs to vote as he think, not be looking on
> others votes and decide by the way the wind's blowing. This is the way most
> elections are done.
>
> After the election, I don't have problem that the chapters votes will be
> publish publicly.
>
>
>
>
>
> *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 Tue, May 3, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am unable to report which chapters voted. The voting process is closed.
> > Right now I have to recommend encouraging all chapters to vote.
> >
> > The election rules are decided by chapters and chapters have said closed
> > election. I do not think this was a well-discussed rule, but whatever the
> > case, it cannot be changed by the community and needs to be changed by
> > chapters. Community discussion could influence it. I think that it is a
> > rule that could change. Asking chapters to have open voting could be
> > another reason to contact chapters, or open voting might be a problem - I
> > am not sure.
> >
> > Even if voting were not completely open, there could be other kinds of
> > openness, like just a list of who voted. Right now, I cannot provide
> that.
> > Any chapter can look at the list and see who voted and who did not.
> >
> > For the next election (in three years) I will propose a change. I want it
> > to be easier for chapters to self-report their votes in a public way, if
> > they choose to do so. Even if the election is closed, enough individual
> > chapters seem to want to self-disclose.
> >
> > yours,
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Andrew Gray <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Lane,
> > >
> > > While I agree that it's good for people to encourage their
> > > chapters/other organizations to vote, we would need to know whether
> > > they've voted before doing this...
> > >
> > > As far as I can see, the voting is entirely done on chapterswiki -
> > > which is fair enough, and it's reasonable to have this semi-private.
> > > However, it means that the only people who can tell if a given chapter
> > > has voted or not are people closely associated with the chapters, who
> > > presumably already know whether they've voted or not.
> > >
> > > Would it be possible to have a public list of which organizations have
> > > voted and which ones have yet to do so? I don't think this would
> > > materially affect the confidentiality of the vote itself, and it might
> > > help encourage some groups to actually vote.
> > >
> > > Andrew.
> > >
> > > On 3 May 2016 at 12:43, Lane Rasberry <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > As of now, 13 of 42 eligible organizations have voted in the 2016
> > > chapters'
> > > > election for 2 of 10 Wikimedia Foundation seats on the board of
> > trustees.
> > > > In the last election, 1/3 of organizations did not vote. Anyone who
> > > wishes
> > > > to influence the election could do so by asking sleepier chapters to
> > vote
> > > > by the May 7 end of election.
> > > >
> > > > Feel free also to pressure more active chapters to do their duty to
> > > support
> > > > less organized chapters in voting. Support can mean having
> > > > chapter-to-chapter encouragement to vote. All chapters appreciate
> being
> > > > reminded. All eligible organizations are supposed to vote. The
> election
> > > > result is more sound with more votes.
> > > >
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016
> > > >
> > > > yours,
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Lane Rasberry
> > > > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> > > > 206.801.0814
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > - Andrew Gray
> > >   [hidden email]
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lane Rasberry
> > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> > 206.801.0814
> > [hidden email]
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: [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
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>




--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Liam Wyatt
In reply to this post by Itzik - Wikimedia Israel
It seems like people are talking about two separate things at the same time:

- Some people are taking about publishing *the votes* (either before, or
after the election has finished)

- Some people are talking about publishing *the list of who has voted*
right now.

It is this second thing that I understood to be the request being made, and
it is also completely consistent with the way the community-election works
(where the voter, but not their vote, is published immediately). I also
wouldn't think that publishing the names of the Chapters that have voted
(and therefore identifying which ones have not yet) is still consistent
with the preference that the *vote itself* remain private.

So, in order for the community (and those of us who are members of Chapters
in particular) to encourage the chapters have not yet voted to do so, would
it be possible to please publish a table on Meta of the list of
voting-eligible organisations, and a "tick" next to their name if they have
indeed already submitted their vote. [NOT who they voted for]

Thanks,
-Liam


--
wittylama.com
Peace, love & metadata
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Laurentius-2
In reply to this post by John Mark Vandenberg
Il giorno mar, 03/05/2016 alle 19.09 +0700, John Mark Vandenberg ha
scritto:
> This is a bit odd.  I vaguely remember that in previous years that
> some chapters held discussions with their members online, and publicly
> published the chapter decision before it was recorded on chapters
> wiki.  Is that no longer possible?

This is still possible, of course!
Any chapter can choose its internal processes: whether to have a
discussion in their board, in the members' mailing list, or in the
general assembly, or whether to publicly publish their vote or not.

Laurentius



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Laurentius-2
In reply to this post by Lane Rasberry
Il giorno mar, 03/05/2016 alle 08.05 -0400, Lane Rasberry ha scritto:
> Or - I could be wrong. Should the list of voting chapters be reported?
> What is the correct interpretation of closed voting in this case?

At the end of 2015, before starting the election process, there has been
some discussion about this on Meta.
The result was in favour of publishing, after the end of the election,
the list of affiliates who voted.
The idea of publishing a partial list during the voting process was not
proposed; personally I think it's fine and it makes sense, but I'd like
to hear a few opinions about this from the involved affiliates.

Lorenzo



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

attolippip
Dear Lorenzo,

You can ask the chapters that voted already, if they are okay with
publishing the list.
I think. Personally I do not see a problem, but who knows.

JFYI, Wikimedia Ukraine has not voted yet, as we wanted to talk to the
candidates via skype/hangouts before making the final decision [1] [2] [3]
[4] [5] [6]
And during Wikimedia Conference we had a chance to talk only to three
people.
So we shall have a Board sitting on Friday, I hope.

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:B1mbo#Affiliate-selected_Board_seats
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ainali#Affiliate-selected_Board_seats
[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Siska.Doviana#Affiliate-selected_Board_seats
[4]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Effeietsanders#Affiliate-selected_Board_seats
[5]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MADe#Affiliate-selected_Board_seats
[6]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Legoktm#Affiliate-selected_Board_seats

Best regards,
antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
Wikimedia Ukraine

2016-05-03 18:40 GMT+03:00 Laurentius <[hidden email]>:

> Il giorno mar, 03/05/2016 alle 08.05 -0400, Lane Rasberry ha scritto:
> > Or - I could be wrong. Should the list of voting chapters be reported?
> > What is the correct interpretation of closed voting in this case?
>
> At the end of 2015, before starting the election process, there has been
> some discussion about this on Meta.
> The result was in favour of publishing, after the end of the election,
> the list of affiliates who voted.
> The idea of publishing a partial list during the voting process was not
> proposed; personally I think it's fine and it makes sense, but I'd like
> to hear a few opinions about this from the involved affiliates.
>
> Lorenzo
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [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
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Ziko van Dijk-3
In reply to this post by Laurentius-2
Hello,

Actually I favor very much the idea that, after the election, there is
a public list of the chapters that did cast the vote. (Not
necessarily, which chapter supported which candidate, but that is
another discussion. In 2012, the list of candidates was not published
at all, by the way.)

I remember from 2012 that, shortly before the elections, I heard a
chairman from a specific chapter talking with very, very strong
opinions about the movement. It struck me to find out later that that
chapter didn't cast its vote. Isn't it important for a chapter to
influence the movement as a whole?

Also from the year 2012 (and 2013) I remember that many chapters that
we from the WCA contacted did not respond at all. So I am not
surprised to read now that only one third did vote until now.

Lane wrote:
"Feel free also to pressure more active chapters to do their duty to support
less organized chapters in voting."

I usually agree with Lane, but in this case I don't see that "duty".
It is the responsibility of each and every chapter to become active,
not anybody else's responsibility.

Possibly, if a chapter board did not cast a vote, it is interesting
for the members of the chapter to know that. Maybe the board can come
up with a good reason.

Kind regards
Ziko


2016-05-03 17:40 GMT+02:00 Laurentius <[hidden email]>:

> Il giorno mar, 03/05/2016 alle 08.05 -0400, Lane Rasberry ha scritto:
>> Or - I could be wrong. Should the list of voting chapters be reported?
>> What is the correct interpretation of closed voting in this case?
>
> At the end of 2015, before starting the election process, there has been
> some discussion about this on Meta.
> The result was in favour of publishing, after the end of the election,
> the list of affiliates who voted.
> The idea of publishing a partial list during the voting process was not
> proposed; personally I think it's fine and it makes sense, but I'd like
> to hear a few opinions about this from the involved affiliates.
>
> Lorenzo
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [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
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Sam Klein
In reply to this post by attolippip
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:52 AM, attolippip <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> JFYI, Wikimedia Ukraine has not voted yet, as we wanted to talk to the
> candidates via skype/hangouts before making the final decision [1] [2] [3]
> [4] [5] [6]
> And during Wikimedia Conference we had a chance to talk only to three
> people.
>

Does this mean that each candidate is expected to have 40 different 1-hr
Skype chats, one with each chapthorg?  That sounds grueling. I thought the
value of public questions was that candidates could answer once instead of
40 times.

Sam
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Gnangarra
Agree Sam additionally it'd be even more grueling for some candidates who
would be expected to field these calls at 2-3 in the morning and then be
compared to someone who was fortunate enough to have their chat at 2-3 in
the afternoon..

As for publishing a list of who voted I see no issue with that, also not
all that concerned about the way we voted being published either as it is
the result of consultation with our members, within our committee, and with
no further factors to consider raised by the people who attended the Berlin
Conference WMAU committee reconfirmed our votes last night. All which will
be on the public record anyway when our Secretary publishes the minutes
from that meeting

On 4 May 2016 at 00:05, Sam Klein <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:52 AM, attolippip <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >
> > JFYI, Wikimedia Ukraine has not voted yet, as we wanted to talk to the
> > candidates via skype/hangouts before making the final decision [1] [2]
> [3]
> > [4] [5] [6]
> > And during Wikimedia Conference we had a chance to talk only to three
> > people.
> >
>
> Does this mean that each candidate is expected to have 40 different 1-hr
> Skype chats, one with each chapthorg?  That sounds grueling. I thought the
> value of public questions was that candidates could answer once instead of
> 40 times.
>
> Sam
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Andrew Gray-3
In reply to this post by Liam Wyatt
Yes, for clarity, this is what I meant - a public list of who has
voted so far (or who hasn't - it's much the same thing, as the overall
electorate is known), but not a list of the votes.

I'm quite happy with confidential voting - either fully secret or, as
Itzik says, just confidential until the end of the vote.

But knowing *who* has voted would be quite useful. Ultimately, the
chapters represent large chunks of the community, and if the chapter
isn't doing its job then it's good their members know about it in
order to chase them. Discovering afterwards that your chapter hasn't
voted is interesting, but not very useful at making sure votes get
cast while there's still time - and ultimately, I think that last part
is what we all want to achieve :-)

A.

On 3 May 2016 at 16:21, Liam Wyatt <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It seems like people are talking about two separate things at the same time:
>
> - Some people are taking about publishing *the votes* (either before, or
> after the election has finished)
>
> - Some people are talking about publishing *the list of who has voted*
> right now.
>
> It is this second thing that I understood to be the request being made, and
> it is also completely consistent with the way the community-election works
> (where the voter, but not their vote, is published immediately). I also
> wouldn't think that publishing the names of the Chapters that have voted
> (and therefore identifying which ones have not yet) is still consistent
> with the preference that the *vote itself* remain private.
>
> So, in order for the community (and those of us who are members of Chapters
> in particular) to encourage the chapters have not yet voted to do so, would
> it be possible to please publish a table on Meta of the list of
> voting-eligible organisations, and a "tick" next to their name if they have
> indeed already submitted their vote. [NOT who they voted for]
>
> Thanks,
> -Liam
>
>
> --
> wittylama.com
> Peace, love & metadata
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Pharos-3
In fact, for those who have access to it, there is a list of statements at
the bottom of that page, listing statements from each chapthorg on their
method and time of voting:

https://chapters.wikimedia.ch/Appointment_process/2016/Voting#Statements

For example, our entry says:

"NYC: Decided by open public meeting on April 13, 2016."

I think it might be best to make that whole section publicly viewable.

Thanks,
Pharos

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Andrew Gray <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Yes, for clarity, this is what I meant - a public list of who has
> voted so far (or who hasn't - it's much the same thing, as the overall
> electorate is known), but not a list of the votes.
>
> I'm quite happy with confidential voting - either fully secret or, as
> Itzik says, just confidential until the end of the vote.
>
> But knowing *who* has voted would be quite useful. Ultimately, the
> chapters represent large chunks of the community, and if the chapter
> isn't doing its job then it's good their members know about it in
> order to chase them. Discovering afterwards that your chapter hasn't
> voted is interesting, but not very useful at making sure votes get
> cast while there's still time - and ultimately, I think that last part
> is what we all want to achieve :-)
>
> A.
>
> On 3 May 2016 at 16:21, Liam Wyatt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > It seems like people are talking about two separate things at the same
> time:
> >
> > - Some people are taking about publishing *the votes* (either before, or
> > after the election has finished)
> >
> > - Some people are talking about publishing *the list of who has voted*
> > right now.
> >
> > It is this second thing that I understood to be the request being made,
> and
> > it is also completely consistent with the way the community-election
> works
> > (where the voter, but not their vote, is published immediately). I also
> > wouldn't think that publishing the names of the Chapters that have voted
> > (and therefore identifying which ones have not yet) is still consistent
> > with the preference that the *vote itself* remain private.
> >
> > So, in order for the community (and those of us who are members of
> Chapters
> > in particular) to encourage the chapters have not yet voted to do so,
> would
> > it be possible to please publish a table on Meta of the list of
> > voting-eligible organisations, and a "tick" next to their name if they
> have
> > indeed already submitted their vote. [NOT who they voted for]
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Liam
> >
> >
> > --
> > wittylama.com
> > Peace, love & metadata
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>   [hidden email]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [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
New messages to: [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] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

Michael Maggs
In reply to this post by Liam Wyatt
Consistent with our commitment to openness, WMUK published our vote on
our website last Friday, the day it was agreed by the board. It's at
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Minutes_2016-04-29 for anyone who may be
interested.

Best regards


Michael


Wikimedia_UK_logo_40px.png

Michael Maggs

Chair, Wikimedia UK



Liam Wyatt wrote:

> It seems like people are talking about two separate things at the same time:
>
> - Some people are taking about publishing *the votes* (either before, or
> after the election has finished)
>
> - Some people are talking about publishing *the list of who has voted*
> right now.
>
> It is this second thing that I understood to be the request being made, and
> it is also completely consistent with the way the community-election works
> (where the voter, but not their vote, is published immediately). I also
> wouldn't think that publishing the names of the Chapters that have voted
> (and therefore identifying which ones have not yet) is still consistent
> with the preference that the *vote itself* remain private.
>
> So, in order for the community (and those of us who are members of Chapters
> in particular) to encourage the chapters have not yet voted to do so, would
> it be possible to please publish a table on Meta of the list of
> voting-eligible organisations, and a "tick" next to their name if they have
> indeed already submitted their vote. [NOT who they voted for]
>
> Thanks,
> -Liam
>
>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
123