Re: [Wikimedia-l] Results of 2015 WMF Board elections

Congratulations to the winners! However I must say that the results of this election are hilarious. The person with the most support votes doesn't win because of oppose votes :D El sáb., 6 de jun. de 2015 3:22, Johan Jönsson escribió: > Congratulations, Dariusz, James and Denny! > > And thanks,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What's cool?

I felt that this year's elections went remarkably smoothly. I believe that we have the Elections Committee and its tireless leader Varnet, project manager James Alexander, and the SecurePoll devs to thank. There were a few technical issues but overall I feel that everyone did a very fine job. Pine

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Results of 2015 WMF Board elections

many thanks! I extend my warm congratulations to Denny and James, and would like to sincerely thank SJ, Maria, and Phoebe, and hope to be able to draw on their tremendous experience and knowledge. best, dj On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Gregory Varnum wrote: > Greetings, > > The certified res

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Results of 2015 WMF Board elections

David Cuenca Tudela skrev den 2015-06-06 09:01: However I must say that the results of this election are hilarious. The person with the most support votes doesn't win because of oppose votes :D Why hilarious? We had a full consensus in the election Committee to go for S/N/O voting, it is a kin

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Results of 2015 WMF Board elections

Congratulations to the new Board members - I am sure you will do a great job. And commiserations to those who will be leaving the Board - thank you for all your hard work over many years. Also it is good to see a much higher turnout in this year's elections than in 2013 - well done to those involv

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Results of 2015 WMF Board elections

I have a lot of personal opinions on the method, questions process, etc. Many of them will be shared in the committee's post mortem (others I will be discarding as I now process the last several weeks). Also, we are beginning to post some statistics that folks may find helpful: https://meta.wikime

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Results of 2015 WMF Board elections

On 06.06.2015 12:19, Chris Keating wrote: 2) There is nothing in the process to produce any diversity in the result. Say that there was a 2/3 to 1/3 split in the electorate on some important issue. The right answer would surely be that you elect 2 people with one view and 1 with the other. How

[Wikimedia-l] Board diversity

[ Split from "Results of 2015 WMF Board elections‏" ] 2015-06-06 13:19 GMT+03:00 Chris Keating : > 2) There is nothing in the process to produce any diversity in the result. Indeed. I don't see much active effort to encourage diversity in gender, professional skills, economic background, language

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost -- Volume 11, Issue 21 -- 27 May 2015

Hi, Just for your information, the last issue of The Signpost has been quoted in an article in *El Periódico* about gender gap ;) http://www.elperiodico.com/es/noticias/opinion/mujeres-wikipedia-4249746 David Parreño Mont Communications A

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Results of 2015 WMF Board elections

Congratulations Dariusz, Denny and James.. -Hasive Wikimedia Bangladesh On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Ilario Valdelli wrote: > > On 06.06.2015 12:19, Chris Keating wrote: > >> >> >> 2) There is nothing in the process to produce any diversity in the result. >> Say that there was a 2/3 to 1/3

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board diversity

Yes. Actively inviting people with mixed backgrounds - which started to happen this year - is a step in the right direction. But we might look for ways to explicitly aim for more thorough geo + culture + language diversity, since these map directly onto awareness of knowledge resources & practice

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What's cool?

> On 6 jun. 2015, at 17:25, Quim Gil wrote: > > Hi, just in case you have missed this thread in Wikimedia where I mentioned > you, and now SJ asks. > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Sam Klein mailto:sjkl...@hcs.harvard.edu>> > Date: Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 2:26 AM > Subject: Re:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ContentTranslation gets to 2000

Hi Jane, Thanks for trying ContentTranslation and providing feedback. Replies inline. > I decided to translate a short article from Spanish to English Currently the extension is configured for translation *from* English, but not *to* English. This will probably be changed soon to allow translati

[Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

Moving this discussion into a separate thread, to leave the main one for best wishes and similar :) Before I start talking about the voting system itself, I have to say that, from my personal perspective, I wouldn't imagine better outcome: a Polish steward (my favorite Wikimedian group :) ), a Cro

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ContentTranslation gets to 2000

Thanks for your thoughtful answerrs, which are certainly enlightening. I tried it again today, this time to translate an article from English to Dutch. Again, the same problem with the infobox and lead image, but there was a gallery that popped over and I was quite pleased with that. I published th

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

Negative votes exist for a reason. Or, let's make voters choose between "support" and "support"? Il 06/06/2015 19:15, Milos Rancic ha scritto: Moving this discussion into a separate thread, to leave the main one for best wishes and similar :) Before I start talking about the voting system itsel

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

I still think it was a big mistake (of the electcom? I don't remember, but /someone/ pushed it through without discussions) in the 2013 election to abolish the Schulze method. Am 06.06.2015 19:16 schrieb "Milos Rancic" : > Moving this discussion into a separate thread, to leave the main one > for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

The result could also be interpreted as a thundering success for the voting method being used. We have now the last year and two seen major improvement in professionalism in WMF (thanks Lila) and the chapters and their boards (thanks local ECs and boards, FDC members, Katy and Winnifred). But

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost -- Volume 11, Issue 22 -- 03 June 2015

News and notes: Three new community-elected trustees announced, incumbents out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-06-03/News_and_notes Blog: How Wikipedia covered Caitlyn Jenner’s transition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-06-03/Blog Di

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

The Schulze method that was being used is the one that is specifically intended to give only one winner; probably most people don't know that Schulze also created a separate system that was intended to give multiple winners. It is a very confusing system and many people unintentionally gave suppo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

On 06.06.2015 20:30, Risker wrote: I find it interesting that nobody seems all that worried about the FDC election (where 5 of 11 candidates got seats) or the FDC Ombud election (where both candidates came forward in the last 24 hours before nominations closed). These two elections suggest some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

I'm happy with S/N/O and with the election winners, but concerned about the diversity of the Board. I wonder if rethinking the entire board structure is in order, for example we could have: 1. One seat per continent, elected by the whole voting community 2. Two affiliate seats chosen by all affili

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 8:26 PM, Anders Wennersten wrote: > The result could also be interpreted as a thundering success for the voting > method being used. Just to be clear: I think you (Election committee) did very good job. Inside of the stable circumstances, like they are now, It's very useful

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

I basically agree with the whole of Risker's post but want to expand in this bit: On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Risker wrote: > There are not very many systems, though, > that are specifically designed to give multiple winners when one of the > conditions is that they *not* be running on a s

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Pine W wrote: > I'm happy with S/N/O and with the election winners, but concerned about the > diversity of the Board. I wonder if rethinking the entire board structure > is in order, for example we could have: > > 1. One seat per continent, elected by the whole voti

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

On 6 June 2015 at 14:58, Pine W wrote: > I'm happy with S/N/O and with the election winners, but concerned about the > diversity of the Board. I wonder if rethinking the entire board structure > is in order, for example we could have: > > 1. One seat per continent, elected by the whole voting com

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

Milos Rancic skrev den 2015-06-06 21:00: I think also that it's valid idea that EC chooses voting system according to the needs of particular point of time. For example, this time it was about giving opportunity to the new candidates. Next time it could be more balanced. If you notice that Boar

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

Well, the funny thing with current system is that if people had voted in most rational way - i.e. to maximize the impact of their votes - the results would have been negative for all candidates - as this year none of them got more than 50% of positive votes. But in fact if all people would vote in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Tomasz Ganicz wrote: > Well, the funny thing with current system is that if people had voted in > most rational way - i.e. to maximize the impact of their votes - the > results would have been negative for all candidates - as this year none of > them got more than

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

[For the record I'm running the vote dumps now that should allow some of that analysis to be done by those interested. No exact promises on timing because while I'll send it out today it will take some time to approve for anonymization etc.] James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ContentTranslation gets to 2000

> Again, the same problem with the infobox and lead image, but there > was a gallery that popped over and I was quite pleased with that. I'm glad to hear, thank you :) > I published the article with no categories, because the categories didn't > line up this time as they did in the Spanish-Dutch

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

On 6 June 2015 at 19:58, Pine W wrote: > I'm happy with S/N/O and with the election winners, but concerned about the > diversity of the Board. I wonder if rethinking the entire board structure > is in order, for example we could have: > > 1. One seat per continent, elected by the whole voting com

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Voting system (was: Results of 2015 WMF Board elections)

I think this is dancing around the perceived problem. You can either have open, democratic, and fair elections with a result that represents the will of the electorate, or you can have a group of people who are diverse in terms of nationality, gender, ethnicity, etcetera. Not both. And I don't t

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimania Discussion Room: we need your ideas!

(Spanish below) Dear all, Wikimania is not only about presentations - but also about meeting your colleagues from around the world, and having encouraging, inspiring and impactful discussions. To this end, we will organise again the 'Discussion Room' at Wikimania, a structured track of round table