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

We are now up to 36 votes and 3 more are expected today. Still haven't heard from Hungary, Macedonia or Macau but this is now the best turnout in an ASBS process. Chris On 6 May 2016 16:59, "Andrew Gray" wrote: > Many apologies - I for some reason thought today was

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

Many apologies - I for some reason thought today was the 7th! I entirely retract my scaremongering about tonight :-) Andrew. On 6 May 2016 at 16:05, Dennis Tobar wrote: > Chris: > > Thanks for the clarification. When I read Andrew's message "tonight ends", > I'm read it

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

Hi, On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Chris Keating wrote: > 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. > AFAIAA, WMCZ Board has

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

Chris: Thanks for the clarification. When I read Andrew's message "tonight ends", I'm read it like as "the end of the world is near", because we will cast our vote tonight. Regards! El vie., 6 de may. de 2016 a la(s) 11:59, Chris Keating < chriskeatingw...@gmail.com> escribió: > As it says on

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

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 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)

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

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 < andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk> escribió: > Hi Chris, > > Thanks for the update. So we're at 62% voted, another 21% > probably-voting, and 17%

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

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 wrote: > Just an update on this: > > Currently 26 of

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

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

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

Thanks for doing this. It is much appreciated. - Erika *Erika Herzog* Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* Secretary, Wikimedia NYC On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Gregory Varnum

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

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

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

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

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

@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

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

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

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

> > >> 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.

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

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

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

> > 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

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

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Lane Rasberry 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'

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

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

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

On 3 May 2016 at 17:34, Gnangarra 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:52 AM, attolippip 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 < it...@wikimedia.org.il> wrote: > I'm against publishing the chapters votes before the end of the

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

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel < it...@wikimedia.org.il> 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Lane Rasberry 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

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

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 wrote: > Hello, > > I am unable to report which chapters voted. The voting process is

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

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

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

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

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

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