[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
|

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

Gnangarra
We should be careful in not shaming communities to vote poorly to save
face, or even vote for people they dont want as some may truly feel that
the candidates who have nominated wont be a good representative of the
community.

The individual votes are visable to every affiliate who has access to vote
and we all know that the more people who have access the more likely it'll
be shared anyway either in part or in full.

On 4 May 2016 at 00:24, 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>
>



--
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...

Brill Lyle
In reply to this post by Pharos-3
Agree wholeheartedly. Don't need details but a summary list of chapters and
the record of who voted would be very welcome.

I was dismayed that this information was private. It seems like
transparency of basic information like this should be the goal here. I
don't think detailed information is necessary.

Like WM UK, WM NYC was transparent about the process and outcome of its
voting. It would be a real drag to have to look at each chapter's recent
events to see if this information is recorded locally.

Why not have it publicly viewable, collected in one place? I don't see a
downside here.

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC>

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Pharos <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> 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>
>
_______________________________________________
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...

Ilya Korniyko
In reply to this post by Sam Klein
Dear Sam,
dear all,

It was mainly my idea that we decided to talk to all candidates.

I was under impression that we would have the opportunity to talk with all
candidates in Berlin.
I did get the reasoning that it would be too expensive to do it (in fact,
all you have to do to get to WMCON is to apply for BoT and be endorsed by
some chapter), but I really wanted to make the decision at least fairly...

If we are not interested in people who may be our future members of WMF
Board, how can we expect that they are interested in us?
There are some excellent people nominating themselves, asking for our trust
that they can do better,
but we do not know them at all. And if we are voting only based on our
personal connections, we would always vote for the same people. I thought
it was wrong.

We have struggled to find the balance between talking to people via
skype/hangouts and not doing that.
And this is the best solution we came up with.
Maybe if I did not have the idea that we are going to have all candidates
present during WMCON,
I would try to do something else... But I did have that impression.

We understand the difficulties of the process we decided to follow. I
understand the concerns.
But some crucial things about the candidates you can learn only in such a
way:
- are they willing to communicate with affiliates?
- how they answer in real life?
- how clearly they explain their thoughts?
etc.

And even the level of English is important. These people are going to
represent (to some extent) our movement.

Best regards,
Ilya /  ILLIA KORNIIKO
Chair
Wikimedia Ukraine

З повагою,
Ілля Корнійко
Голова Правління ГО «Вікімедіа Україна»
+38 067 65 66 177
http://ua.wikimedia.org

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:05 PM, 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>
>
_______________________________________________
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...

Lodewijk
Indeed only two or three candidates were present in Berlin (unfortunately
we were not allowed to join, not even at our own expense). It would become
quite problematic if 40 organisations would all want to chat for an hour -
but at the same time, I do believe in being approachable. I'm more than
happy to chat with anyone who wants to, if the agenda permits. Now, and
through the year. Chapter or no chapter. If you think a chat will give you
something helpful (insight or whatever), just schedule something! Be bold.

Best,
Lodewijk

2016-05-03 19:30 GMT+02:00 Ilya Korniyko <[hidden email]>:

> Dear Sam,
> dear all,
>
> It was mainly my idea that we decided to talk to all candidates.
>
> I was under impression that we would have the opportunity to talk with all
> candidates in Berlin.
> I did get the reasoning that it would be too expensive to do it (in fact,
> all you have to do to get to WMCON is to apply for BoT and be endorsed by
> some chapter), but I really wanted to make the decision at least fairly...
>
> If we are not interested in people who may be our future members of WMF
> Board, how can we expect that they are interested in us?
> There are some excellent people nominating themselves, asking for our trust
> that they can do better,
> but we do not know them at all. And if we are voting only based on our
> personal connections, we would always vote for the same people. I thought
> it was wrong.
>
> We have struggled to find the balance between talking to people via
> skype/hangouts and not doing that.
> And this is the best solution we came up with.
> Maybe if I did not have the idea that we are going to have all candidates
> present during WMCON,
> I would try to do something else... But I did have that impression.
>
> We understand the difficulties of the process we decided to follow. I
> understand the concerns.
> But some crucial things about the candidates you can learn only in such a
> way:
> - are they willing to communicate with affiliates?
> - how they answer in real life?
> - how clearly they explain their thoughts?
> etc.
>
> And even the level of English is important. These people are going to
> represent (to some extent) our movement.
>
> Best regards,
> Ilya /  ILLIA KORNIIKO
> Chair
> Wikimedia Ukraine
>
> З повагою,
> Ілля Корнійко
> Голова Правління ГО «Вікімедіа Україна»
> +38 067 65 66 177
> http://ua.wikimedia.org
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:05 PM, 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>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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...

Andrew Gray-3
In reply to this post by Gnangarra
On 3 May 2016 at 17:34, Gnangarra <[hidden email]> wrote:
> We should be careful in not shaming communities to vote poorly to save
> face, or even vote for people they dont want as some may truly feel that
> the candidates who have nominated wont be a good representative of the
> community.

I agree with the first part, but on the second, it's worth noting that
"none" is an acceptable vote in this election. For myself I think
you'd be hard pressed to find *no* candidates you can support from
this round - they seem a pretty good selection - but others no doubt
differ :-).

A.

--
- 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...

Tomasz Ganicz
I think it is rather a subject that there are chapters which are "zombies"
- I mean having no or very little activity. On the other hand we have a
number of quite active usergroups which cannot vote.  By the way, the
overal number of non-voting chapters can be a good measure of the number of
"zombie" chapters...



2016-05-03 21:14 GMT+02:00 Andrew Gray <[hidden email]>:

> On 3 May 2016 at 17:34, Gnangarra <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > We should be careful in not shaming communities to vote poorly to save
> > face, or even vote for people they dont want as some may truly feel that
> > the candidates who have nominated wont be a good representative of the
> > community.
>
> I agree with the first part, but on the second, it's worth noting that
> "none" is an acceptable vote in this election. For myself I think
> you'd be hard pressed to find *no* candidates you can support from
> this round - they seem a pretty good selection - but others no doubt
> differ :-).
>
> A.
>
> --
> - 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>
>



--
Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
_______________________________________________
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...

Benjamin Lees
In reply to this post by Gnangarra
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Gnangarra <[hidden email]> wrote:
> We should be careful in not shaming communities to vote poorly to save
> face,

Well, that might be said of any sort of shaming, but we still do it:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2016/Eligibility_Criteria#Overview_Eligibility_Statuses_of_Chapters.2C_Thematic_Organizations.2C_User_Groups_and_Others
(Interestingly, it seems that chapters which have been violating their
agreements with the WMF for years are still eligible to vote, though I
suppose they probably don't.)

The alternative to releasing this list is the status quo, in which
those who are well-connected enough to have someone share the list
with them can know who to canvass.  Is this how we want to choose our
board?

_______________________________________________
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...

Andreas Kolbe-2
In reply to this post by Lane Rasberry
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM, 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.
>


Lane,

A procedural question: Is the chapters' vote binding on the board, or is it
the same as for the three community board seats, where the community
members selected in the community vote are merely recommendations that the
sitting board is free to accept or reject?

If the winners' actually joining the board is dependent on the sitting
board's approval of these candidates, then it's not really a chapter
"election" for those board seats: it would be more precise to speak of the
chapters' vote as a vote to identify chapter-recommended candidates for
those two board seats.

While that's more clunky – if that's what it really is, then I think it's
important that we use language that accurately reflects the process by
which community- and chapter-selected candidates end up on the board.

Best,
Andreas
_______________________________________________
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...

Chris Keating-2
>
> A procedural question: Is the chapters' vote binding on the board, or is it
> the same as for the three community board seats, where the community
> members selected in the community vote are merely recommendations that the
> sitting board is free to accept or reject?
>

As with the community elections, the WMF board needs to appoint the elected
candidates by resolution, and reserves the power not to do so. (I'd be
surprised if as keen an observer of the WMF board as yourself wasn't
already aware of this - it is quite well documented.)

Indeed, there are some circumstances where they should definitely not do
so. Imagine a candidate won in the election and then it was subsequently
revealed they had committed a serious fraud. It would be ridiculous to
expect the WMF Board to seat them in the light of that news.

I take the point that the WMF is not greatly clear about its expectations
of trustee behaviour and a lot of it appears to rely on unwritten rules and
the views of other Board members. As a result it is not particular clear in
what range of circumstances the WMF board might exercise its power not to
appoint a candidate who'd been successful in the election, or to remove a
sitting Board member. (We have one case recently where people have been
outraged that someone was removed, and another case where people have been
outraged that it took a matter of weeks to remove someone else). However, I
think addressing that issue is rather more important than splitting the
semantic hairs about "selection", "election" and the like.

Regards,

Chris
(selection/election/suggestion/whatever facilitator)
_______________________________________________
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...

Derek V.Giroulle


On 04-05-16 13:48, Chris Keating wrote:

>> A procedural question: Is the chapters' vote binding on the board, or is it
>> the same as for the three community board seats, where the community
>> members selected in the community vote are merely recommendations that the
>> sitting board is free to accept or reject?
>>
> As with the community elections, the WMF board needs to appoint the elected
> candidates by resolution, and reserves the power not to do so. (I'd be
> surprised if as keen an observer of the WMF board as yourself wasn't
> already aware of this - it is quite well documented.)
>
> Indeed, there are some circumstances where they should definitely not do
> so. Imagine a candidate won in the election and then it was subsequently
> revealed they had committed a serious fraud. It would be ridiculous to
> expect the WMF Board to seat them in the light of that news.
Such an issue should have been addressed and resolved during the
eliligbilty process, not after the fact .
If during a politicla election a candidate is not eliligible he will not
be allowed to campaign let alone be on the condioate list. This issue
was not addressed in a belgian election in the 1930,  and a candidate
was elected out of prison ...

> I take the point that the WMF is not greatly clear about its expectations
> of trustee behaviour and a lot of it appears to rely on unwritten rules and
> the views of other Board members. As a result it is not particular clear in
> what range of circumstances the WMF board might exercise its power not to
> appoint a candidate who'd been successful in the election, or to remove a
> sitting Board member. (We have one case recently where people have been
> outraged that someone was removed, and another case where people have been
> outraged that it took a matter of weeks to remove someone else). However, I
> think addressing that issue is rather more important than splitting the
> semantic hairs about "selection", "election" and the like.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
> (selection/election/suggestion/whatever facilitator)
> _______________________________________________
> 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>

--
Kind regards,
*Derek V. Giroulle*
Wikimedia Belgium vzw.

_______________________________________________
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...

Chris Keating-2
>
>
>> Such an issue should have been addressed and resolved during the
> eliligbilty process, not after the fact .
>

There are actually no eligibility criteria for this election, except that
candidates have received at least one endorsement from a Wikimedia chapter
or Thematic Organisation.

Given sufficient common sense from both the voting affiliates and the WMF
board itself, this isn't a problem.

Chris
_______________________________________________
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...

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by Andreas Kolbe-2
Hoi,
There is a difference between your formality and what actually happens. The
board is unlikely to not accept a chosen representative. I wonder if it
ever did. Given the quality of the people who can be chosen from, do you
really expect this to happen and consequently what is it what you want to
achieve except for airing your formality?
Thanks,
      GerardM


On 4 May 2016 at 12:58, Andreas Kolbe <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM, 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.
> >
>
>
> Lane,
>
> A procedural question: Is the chapters' vote binding on the board, or is it
> the same as for the three community board seats, where the community
> members selected in the community vote are merely recommendations that the
> sitting board is free to accept or reject?
>
> If the winners' actually joining the board is dependent on the sitting
> board's approval of these candidates, then it's not really a chapter
> "election" for those board seats: it would be more precise to speak of the
> chapters' vote as a vote to identify chapter-recommended candidates for
> those two board seats.
>
> While that's more clunky – if that's what it really is, then I think it's
> important that we use language that accurately reflects the process by
> which community- and chapter-selected candidates end up on the board.
>
> Best,
> Andreas
> _______________________________________________
> 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...

Lane Rasberry
@Andreas -

I am serving as an election facilitator in this process. That means I
volunteer to organize the election, but not that I have any rank or power
to set rules or to interpret the process. I have read what I can, and
talked to people, and I can probably answer easy questions about the
election and the nature of the board. I cannot give any authoritative
answer to deep questions like the one you asked.

My perspective is that no one can directly answer your question - not even
the WMF board itself. Whatever else the WMF board is legally, it is also
accountable to the Wikimedia community and must align itself to Wikimedia
community culture every three years or otherwise it seems positioned
because of this election structure to be completely replaced with radical
quickness. If the WMF board takes a position that conflicts with the
Wikimedia community then it could be elected out if the community wants to
correct the perspective. There are no other institutions like this anywhere
that elect 5 of ten board members then appoint the other 4, and have no
permanent touchstone with the board or institution itself. The board was
designed to be elected by Wikimedia community control from inception - 3
directly elected, 2 by authorized organizations, and those 5 appoint
another 4 and they better make a choice the community likes to fulfill
election promises.

If I were to answer your question, I would say to call this process an
election. It was intended to be an election at its founding. The community
of voting organizations and Wikimedia community stakeholders perceive it as
an election, even if some individuals have questions. The nature of the
board is to originate from elected approval from the Wikimedia community
and their closely watched representatives. People can imagine nuance in the
word "election" if they like but I do not know of a better word to call
this than "election". I think it is good to call the community selected
members "elected", despite what happened, and good for the community to
keep rather than divest the power it has always recognized and claimed to
elect the WMF board.

The reason why it is hard to answer your question is because you are asking
a legal question, and Wikimedia processes are designed to be human
understandable even if less legally precise. In human terms, "election" is
what this is called and how it should be imagined. I do not think that
anyone benefits from trying to legally analyze this and instead people
should emphasize the humanity of the process and build the precedent of
what this means in simple, human terms that everyone accepts as a cultural
norm. "Election"

yours,





On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hoi,
> There is a difference between your formality and what actually happens. The
> board is unlikely to not accept a chosen representative. I wonder if it
> ever did. Given the quality of the people who can be chosen from, do you
> really expect this to happen and consequently what is it what you want to
> achieve except for airing your formality?
> Thanks,
>       GerardM
>
>
> On 4 May 2016 at 12:58, Andreas Kolbe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM, 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.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Lane,
> >
> > A procedural question: Is the chapters' vote binding on the board, or is
> it
> > the same as for the three community board seats, where the community
> > members selected in the community vote are merely recommendations that
> the
> > sitting board is free to accept or reject?
> >
> > If the winners' actually joining the board is dependent on the sitting
> > board's approval of these candidates, then it's not really a chapter
> > "election" for those board seats: it would be more precise to speak of
> the
> > chapters' vote as a vote to identify chapter-recommended candidates for
> > those two board seats.
> >
> > While that's more clunky – if that's what it really is, then I think it's
> > important that we use language that accurately reflects the process by
> > which community- and chapter-selected candidates end up on the board.
> >
> > Best,
> > Andreas
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>
>



--
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...

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by Andreas Kolbe-2
Hoi,
There is a difference between your formality and what actually happens. The
board is unlikely to not accept a chosen representative. I wonder if it
ever did. Given the quality of the people who can be chosen from, do you
really expect this to happen and consequently what is it what you want to
achieve except for airing your formality?
Thanks,
     GerardM

On 4 May 2016 at 12:58, Andreas Kolbe <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM, 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.
> >
>
>
> Lane,
>
> A procedural question: Is the chapters' vote binding on the board, or is it
> the same as for the three community board seats, where the community
> members selected in the community vote are merely recommendations that the
> sitting board is free to accept or reject?
>
> If the winners' actually joining the board is dependent on the sitting
> board's approval of these candidates, then it's not really a chapter
> "election" for those board seats: it would be more precise to speak of the
> chapters' vote as a vote to identify chapter-recommended candidates for
> those two board seats.
>
> While that's more clunky – if that's what it really is, then I think it's
> important that we use language that accurately reflects the process by
> which community- and chapter-selected candidates end up on the board.
>
> Best,
> Andreas
> _______________________________________________
> 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...

Gregory Varnum-2
Given the quickly approaching deadline, and the general support for affiliates voluntarily sharing if they voted (not who they voted for) - I went ahead (after chatting with folks that attended WikiCon) and setup a Meta-Wiki page to allow folks to voluntarily report back over the next couple of days:  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016/Voted <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016/Voted>

-greg (User:Varnent)


> On May 4, 2016, at 10:30 AM, Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hoi,
> There is a difference between your formality and what actually happens. The
> board is unlikely to not accept a chosen representative. I wonder if it
> ever did. Given the quality of the people who can be chosen from, do you
> really expect this to happen and consequently what is it what you want to
> achieve except for airing your formality?
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
>
> On 4 May 2016 at 12:58, Andreas Kolbe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM, 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.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Lane,
>>
>> A procedural question: Is the chapters' vote binding on the board, or is it
>> the same as for the three community board seats, where the community
>> members selected in the community vote are merely recommendations that the
>> sitting board is free to accept or reject?
>>
>> If the winners' actually joining the board is dependent on the sitting
>> board's approval of these candidates, then it's not really a chapter
>> "election" for those board seats: it would be more precise to speak of the
>> chapters' vote as a vote to identify chapter-recommended candidates for
>> those two board seats.
>>
>> While that's more clunky – if that's what it really is, then I think it's
>> important that we use language that accurately reflects the process by
>> which community- and chapter-selected candidates end up on the board.
>>
>> Best,
>> Andreas
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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>

_______________________________________________
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...

Brill Lyle
Thanks for doing this. It is much appreciated.

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC>

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Gregory Varnum <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Given the quickly approaching deadline, and the general support for
> affiliates voluntarily sharing if they voted (not who they voted for) - I
> went ahead (after chatting with folks that attended WikiCon) and setup a
> Meta-Wiki page to allow folks to voluntarily report back over the next
> couple of days:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016/Voted
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016/Voted
> >
>
> -greg (User:Varnent)
>
>
_______________________________________________
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...

Chris Keating-2
In reply to this post by Lane Rasberry
Just an update on this:

Currently 26 of the eligible affiliates have voted. A further 9 have either
confirmed they are planning to vote, or have engaged substantively in the
process (e.g. by nominating someone or participating in the Wikimedia
Conference session on the subject). I'd expect most of them will do so.

Those whose intentions I don't know at all include Hong Kong, Hungary,
Czech Republic, India, Macedonia, and Macau. At least one of those appears
to be completely inactive.

Regards,

Chris

Many thanks

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM, 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>
_______________________________________________
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 Chris,

Thanks for the update. So we're at 62% voted, another 21%
probably-voting, and 17% silent, with voting ending tonight. An
improvement on last year, at least!

Andrew.

On 6 May 2016 at 15:32, Chris Keating <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Just an update on this:
>
> Currently 26 of the eligible affiliates have voted. A further 9 have either
> confirmed they are planning to vote, or have engaged substantively in the
> process (e.g. by nominating someone or participating in the Wikimedia
> Conference session on the subject). I'd expect most of them will do so.
>
> Those whose intentions I don't know at all include Hong Kong, Hungary,
> Czech Republic, India, Macedonia, and Macau. At least one of those appears
> to be completely inactive.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
> Many thanks
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM, 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>
> _______________________________________________
> 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...

Dennis Tobar
Just for ask: the final day to cast a vote, is tonight (May 6 23:59:59 UTC)
or May 7 23:59:29 UTC?

El vie., 6 de may. de 2016 a la(s) 11:55, Andrew Gray <
[hidden email]> escribió:

> Hi Chris,
>
> Thanks for the update. So we're at 62% voted, another 21%
> probably-voting, and 17% silent, with voting ending tonight. An
> improvement on last year, at least!
>
> Andrew.
>
> On 6 May 2016 at 15:32, Chris Keating <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Just an update on this:
> >
> > Currently 26 of the eligible affiliates have voted. A further 9 have
> either
> > confirmed they are planning to vote, or have engaged substantively in the
> > process (e.g. by nominating someone or participating in the Wikimedia
> > Conference session on the subject). I'd expect most of them will do so.
> >
> > Those whose intentions I don't know at all include Hong Kong, Hungary,
> > Czech Republic, India, Macedonia, and Macau. At least one of those
> appears
> > to be completely inactive.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > Many thanks
> >
> > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM, 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>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>

--

Dennis Tobar Calderón
(Enviado desde un móvil, lamento lo breve o los errores de ortografía)
_______________________________________________
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...

Chris Keating-2
As it says on the voting page:

*Voting will end at* 23:59, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Dennis Tobar <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Just for ask: the final day to cast a vote, is tonight (May 6 23:59:59 UTC)
> or May 7 23:59:29 UTC?
>
> El vie., 6 de may. de 2016 a la(s) 11:55, Andrew Gray <
> [hidden email]> escribió:
>
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > Thanks for the update. So we're at 62% voted, another 21%
> > probably-voting, and 17% silent, with voting ending tonight. An
> > improvement on last year, at least!
> >
> > Andrew.
> >
> > On 6 May 2016 at 15:32, Chris Keating <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > Just an update on this:
> > >
> > > Currently 26 of the eligible affiliates have voted. A further 9 have
> > either
> > > confirmed they are planning to vote, or have engaged substantively in
> the
> > > process (e.g. by nominating someone or participating in the Wikimedia
> > > Conference session on the subject). I'd expect most of them will do so.
> > >
> > > Those whose intentions I don't know at all include Hong Kong, Hungary,
> > > Czech Republic, India, Macedonia, and Macau. At least one of those
> > appears
> > > to be completely inactive.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > > Many thanks
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM, 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>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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>
>
> --
>
> Dennis Tobar Calderón
> (Enviado desde un móvil, lamento lo breve o los errores de ortografía)
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
123