[Foundation-l] Update on struck votes issue on SecurePoll
Earlier today a number of adjustments were made to votes which had been previously struck in the election for Wikimedia Board of Trustees. We believe the votes that are still struck are validly struck; if there is a dispute, any user is encouraged to contact the Election Committee (board-electi...@lists.wikimedia.org) or any member personally for clarification. The current list of votes can be found at https://wikimedia.spi-inc.org/index.php/Special:SecurePoll/list/17 For the committee, Philippe ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Update on struck votes issue on SecurePoll
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: Earlier today a number of adjustments were made to votes which had been previously struck in the election for Wikimedia Board of Trustees. We believe the votes that are still struck are validly struck; if there is a dispute, any user is encouraged to contact the Election Committee (board-electi...@lists.wikimedia.org) or any member personally for clarification. The current list of votes can be found at https://wikimedia.spi-inc.org/index.php/Special:SecurePoll/list/17 Probably, I missed that fact, but how many Wikimedians eligible to vote did we have for elections this time? And is there some data about those numbers from last elections? I found just numbers of voters [1]. [1] - http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections_history ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Update on struck votes issue on SecurePoll
Hoi, First order of business is learning the results and making sure that the people most involved know. I can tell you that I am anxious to learn the result. When it transpires that I have been elected, I would like a moment to collect my thoughts. Statistics are relevant and I am sure that what meaning can be gleaned from them will be. Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/10 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: Earlier today a number of adjustments were made to votes which had been previously struck in the election for Wikimedia Board of Trustees. We believe the votes that are still struck are validly struck; if there is a dispute, any user is encouraged to contact the Election Committee (board-electi...@lists.wikimedia.org) or any member personally for clarification. The current list of votes can be found at https://wikimedia.spi-inc.org/index.php/Special:SecurePoll/list/17 Probably, I missed that fact, but how many Wikimedians eligible to vote did we have for elections this time? And is there some data about those numbers from last elections? I found just numbers of voters [1]. [1] - http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections_history ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Update on struck votes issue on SecurePoll
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: Earlier today a number of adjustments were made to votes which had been previously struck in the election for Wikimedia Board of Trustees. We believe the votes that are still struck are validly struck; if there is a dispute, any user is encouraged to contact the Election Committee (board-electi...@lists.wikimedia.org) or any member personally for clarification. Is there any reason why some, but not all, super-seeded votes have also been struck? There are a number of cases, but picking one I know personally, strikeDetails 15:49, 28 July 2009 Ragesoss en.wikipedia.org/strike Details 14:06, 9 August 2009Ragesossen.wikipedia.org ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Update on struck votes issue on SecurePoll
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: Earlier today a number of adjustments were made to votes which had been previously struck in the election for Wikimedia Board of Trustees. We believe the votes that are still struck are validly struck; if there is a dispute, any user is encouraged to contact the Election Committee (board-electi...@lists.wikimedia.org) or any member personally for clarification. Is there any reason why some, but not all, super-seeded votes have also been struck? There are a number of cases, but picking one I know personally, strikeDetails 15:49, 28 July 2009 Ragesossen.wikipedia.org /strike Details 14:06, 9 August 2009Ragesossen.wikipedia.org Yeah, I noticed this quite a bit also. If a voter voted more that once, it seems like all but their last vote is greyed out usually - only sometimes are first votes struck. Not sure if second/third/etc. votes need to be struck just because the user voted again or not, based on that. -- Ryan User:Rjd0060 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Update on struck votes issue on SecurePoll
Hoi, When a person wants to change his vote he can. When he is entitled to vote only once, it is anybodies guess which vote to retain. It seems to me best to decide on an obvious algorithm. I think that the last expressed vote will do just fine. It certainly fits the people who change their vote and we can not decide anything obvious for someone who votes twice. Some people have sock puppets, would it make sense to register them when known ? Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/10 Rjd0060 rjd0060.w...@gmail.com On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: Earlier today a number of adjustments were made to votes which had been previously struck in the election for Wikimedia Board of Trustees. We believe the votes that are still struck are validly struck; if there is a dispute, any user is encouraged to contact the Election Committee (board-electi...@lists.wikimedia.org) or any member personally for clarification. Is there any reason why some, but not all, super-seeded votes have also been struck? There are a number of cases, but picking one I know personally, strikeDetails 15:49, 28 July 2009 Ragesossen.wikipedia.org /strike Details 14:06, 9 August 2009Ragesossen.wikipedia.org Yeah, I noticed this quite a bit also. If a voter voted more that once, it seems like all but their last vote is greyed out usually - only sometimes are first votes struck. Not sure if second/third/etc. votes need to be struck just because the user voted again or not, based on that. -- Ryan User:Rjd0060 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Update on struck votes issue on SecurePoll
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Rjd0060rjd0060.w...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: Earlier today a number of adjustments were made to votes which had been previously struck in the election for Wikimedia Board of Trustees. We believe the votes that are still struck are validly struck; if there is a dispute, any user is encouraged to contact the Election Committee (board-electi...@lists.wikimedia.org) or any member personally for clarification. Is there any reason why some, but not all, super-seeded votes have also been struck? There are a number of cases, but picking one I know personally, strikeDetails 15:49, 28 July 2009 Ragesoss en.wikipedia.org /strike Details 14:06, 9 August 2009 Ragesoss en.wikipedia.org Yeah, I noticed this quite a bit also. If a voter voted more that once, it seems like all but their last vote is greyed out usually - only sometimes are first votes struck. Not sure if second/third/etc. votes need to be struck just because the user voted again or not, based on that. What happened with my vote, which Phoebe noticed and brought to both my and the election committee's attention, is that my first vote was initially struck out without being superseded. Phoebe and I speculated that this might have been because I accessed the voting page again without casting a second vote (and then, yesterday, accessed it a third time and voted a second time). -Sage ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Update on struck votes issue on SecurePoll
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 4:35 AM, Milos Rancicmill...@gmail.com wrote: And is there some data about those numbers from last elections? A page with a large number of stats[1] was linked from the Results[2] page last year. I think that's what you want. Well, actually, it gives a lot of statistics... but seems to be missing one of the most important ones: number of eligible voters. [1]http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2008/Votes/en [2]http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2008/Results/en -- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Update on struck votes issue on SecurePoll
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Casey Brownli...@caseybrown.org wrote: On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 4:35 AM, Milos Rancicmill...@gmail.com wrote: And is there some data about those numbers from last elections? A page with a large number of stats[1] was linked from the Results[2] page last year. I think that's what you want. Well, actually, it gives a lot of statistics... but seems to be missing one of the most important ones: number of eligible voters. There exists a pre-calculated list of eligible voters used to authorize access to the polls. Is there any reason that this couldn't be made public as soon as it is generated? With good eligibility data available spiffy graphs like mine from 2007 can be generated: http://toolserver.org/~gmaxwell/election_analysis/ivote3/graphs.html ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Update on struck votes issue on SecurePoll
Gregory Maxwell wrote: There exists a pre-calculated list of eligible voters used to authorize access to the polls. Is there any reason that this couldn't be made public as soon as it is generated? That particular list file contains non-public information, i.e. an account email address. Whether a redacted version can be made public, *shrug*. KTC -- Experience is a good school but the fees are high. - Heinrich Heine PGP.sig Description: PGP signature ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
