Indeed, you've hit the nail on the head. In the talkpage exchange I already accepted this election is tallied. This is more about fixing the election process now. Something as simple as using a bot to template all non-qualified votes pointing to an easy to follow list of whats needed to achieve technical compliance during a, say, 3-day vote freeze following an election, or even 3 days before it closes would easily be sufficient I think. -Brock
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Keegan Peterzell <[email protected]>wrote: > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Thomas Goldammer <[email protected] > >wrote: > | That's a very simple thing, > > > > the people must be able to verify (at least to a certain extend) that > > you are indeed that user on enwiki, which they were not obviously, so > > your vote was correctly marked invalid. For the next one, just get > > yourself an SUL account and vote with that, or add a link on enwiki to > > your Meta account, and everything is fine. :o) > > > > > Sure, it's very simple if know about meta and the steward election process > and went into detail. In this case we have AKMask not following the letter > of the law to a T, but certainly the spirit in stopping into support a > candidate as a long-time English Wikipedian. > > So often on this list we talk about the reception of new users and the > various ways the wikis operate regarding such. But rarely (comparitively > speaking) do we discuss such biting of other Wikimedians by stopping by > another project. Each one has its own pitfalls in receiving new users > whether it's uploading images, editing another language wiki when you > aren't > fluent in the language if that's not an accepted community norm to work > with > in content creation, not knowing en.wp's 32x3^10 policies, guidelines, and > other rulings, or the eight million other reasons a user would become > disenfranchised with a project after spare usage. AKMask was making a > genuine vote in the steward election and was (fairly, by rule) disqualified > because of the rule. That doesn't make it right in terms of making sense > as > an outsider to meta, the hub of Wikimedia, but still very much invested on > a > Wikimedia Project. It's akin to being on a colony and coming home to vote > only to be informed that the rules were set up while you were on the voyage > "home". I'm good at bad comparisons. > > The email shouldn't be discounted as "try again next time and follow these > simple rules". The issue is fundamental to interwiki relations. > > > -- > ~Keegan > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
