This is probably the most complete discussion on the the bug/feature that
allowed the selectors to see the election result early and adjust the
selection accordingly:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter/Drafting_Committee/Elections#Community_election_results_leaked.
..
On Tue,
It would have been nice to see a list without many long term "names" who
will by default be entrenched in current systems and group think.
It's great that old timers, and those who have careers within the WMF or
Affiliates are involved and help with reviews, but it is worth considering
the
Which bug, Philip?
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 1:58 PM Philip Kopetzky
wrote:
> Some people here seem to think that because the outcome had at least most
> regions represented, that the process itself ensured this. This is not the
> case - we only got this outcome because of a bug/feature in the
>
> we only got this outcome because of a bug/feature in the election software.
Wow. I am definitely missing something. Can you please point me to a
reference/resource to learn more about this?
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 3:58 PM Philip Kopetzky
wrote:
> Some people here seem to think that because
>
> I'm curious as to what the ideal distribution of members might have
been?
To me I would have thought that each region picked 2 representatives giving
each equality with the WMF, not that it would be equity given the
difference in numbers and purpose. I accept that with more than 300
People with multiple expertise and background would have been the way to
go, but unless we have decided for the fully appointed body (which was
opposed by pretty much everybody) it is unclear how this could be realized.
Best
Yaroslav
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 1:24 PM Mike Peel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
Hi all,
I'm curious as to what the ideal distribution of members might have
been? NWE has 3 members, which seems like an outlier, but all the others
were 1 or 2 - so which would you have picked to have 1 member rather
than 2? Or should there just be more members overall (good for the
global
I tend to agree that this was a failed process especially around the
affiliate selections because once the selector was chosen there was no
input by the affiliates as to who was chosen to represent them. I think it
would have been much better for each affiliate region to have chosen their
Some people here seem to think that because the outcome had at least most
regions represented, that the process itself ensured this. This is not the
case - we only got this outcome because of a bug/feature in the election
software.
Just in case anyone else thinks that this kind of process would be
Hi Yaroslav,
Personally, I was also in favor of proactively seek and build an efficient
team so that the process starts quickly. Different recommendation working
groups had already discussed a lot for more than a year on how a movement
charter would look like while drafting their recommendations
Well stated Yaroslav, and congratulation to the people
elected/selected/appointed
I see this election process as the best yet in the movement. I believe
the election/selection/ appointed worked very well and gave a well
balanced group. Looking through the stages of the Single Transferable
Dear Bodhisattwa,
this is an issue which has been raised at the strategy transition group I
was part of, and also during the events following these discussions which
were intended to shape the specific process to draft the Charter.
Basically, the choice was between two options - either have a
Hi Samuel,
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 at 21:35, Samuel Klein wrote:
>
> I don't believe the idea is for anyone to explicitly represent their
> geography, affiliations, or organizations -- rather to draft a meaningful
> and empowering starting point for us all.
>
People develop their perspectives based
Thank you Kaarel, and kudos to the committee; may the work get off to a
solid start.
Bodhisattwa Mandal writes:
> Coming from South Asia and looking at ESEAP, I am not at all excited
> considering the geographical representation of the committee as per
> Wikimedia regions[1], excluding WMF
Hello,
Coming from South Asia and looking at ESEAP, I am not at all excited
considering the geographical representation of the committee as per
Wikimedia regions[1], excluding WMF appointed candidates who will represent
WMF instead of the regions itself, we have
- United States and Canada - 2
Congratulations to all elected, selected and appointed
Mohsen
On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 3:47 PM Kaarel Vaidla wrote:
> Dear movement colleagues,
>
> I am happy to announce that the Movement Charter Drafting Committee
> election and selection processes are complete.
>
>-
>
>1018
16 matches
Mail list logo
