[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[effe iets anders]

Thank you Jackie for the update.

I hope (and assume) that you will be able to include this in a list of
decisions to take by the Elections Committee before the next selection
process(es). The level of expected transparency might be a useful standard
decision item anyway?

Warmly,
Lodewijk

On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 3:03 PM Jackie Koerner 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for discussing this topic. It is clear the publication of this
> information is important to some community members. The Elections Committee
> and Board Selection Task Force approved publishing a complete list of
> which affiliate organizations voted in a table
> 
> .
>
> Best,
>
>
> Jackie
>
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 11:45 AM Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>> Of course it's like that Ilario,sometimes some usergroups are
>> "userpersons". and as person involved in the previous ASBS election I
>> politely hinted that aspect as much as possible in the past. Also,
>> sometimes even some chapters are mostly few key persons when relationship
>> with WMF is involved, but it's easier to start from UGs to handle the issue.
>>
>> i had some general idea of what you are supposed to facilitate if you
>> want real transparency in these processes and I felt that was not fully
>> there. Instead of building on previous know-how, the process was restarting
>> again and that do not get great functionality in WMF, usually. It's like
>> knowing for sure that these sort of mails would have happened at the end.
>>
>> I had no time to look carefully, but that was kinda of a feeling and as a
>> result, despite being a first contact and having a decent know-how, I
>> decided not to engage the affiliate in the process. The affiliate I
>> represent is small and fragmented and lacks a strong identity yet, I know
>> for sure that getting to a meaningful ranking would have taken a lot of
>> effort and in May and June I simply had no time. Or it would have resulted
>> in me pushing my ideas in a way or another, and that was not correct. Like,
>> many people are ns-0 users and don't now names, so they trust your side of
>> the story.
>>
>> So I decided to skip it. I was asked a contact for the first step and
>> replied by mail that in May I had no time to even start a thread on meta
>> about deciding whom to select (it would have been me, probably, but I did
>> not feel it was correct).
>>
>> my choice was either focusing properly as a UG on the WIkisummit
>> application or that, and I did at least properly the first one. I could
>> have taken part in the process probably representing 90% myself, nobody
>> would have noticed.
>>
>> Alessandro
>>
>> Il sabato 23 luglio 2022 17:59:01 CEST, Ilario Valdelli <
>> valde...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>>
>>
>> I think that there is a very sensible point here.
>>
>> Sometimes behind some usergroups there is not a specific community but
>> only few people and sometimes some usergroups are "userpersons".
>>
>> Being more transparent helps to demonstrate that the whole process has
>> been conducted appropriately but also to have an overview that affiliates
>> have voted really on what their community proposed.
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 3:28 AM Gnangarra  wrote:
>>
>> I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need
>> to protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members,
>>
>>
>> This is not some functionary volunteer role, nor is it a scholarship to
>> attend some event. The affiliate and the members of the Board of Trustees
>> are both very public facing aspects, when a person is on the Board of
>> Trustees their identity is public
>> https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/board/ .  It is obvious that a
>> truly  vulnerable person would not even put themselves into a BOT
>> position.  It's important for members of the community to know who their
>> affiliate chose to represent them because it's a reflection of that
>> community.  I know some affiliates actually didnt consult their communities
>> for input into the decision process before the fact so knowing after the
>> fact is at least pretending to be transparent in the voting.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 at 06:01, Benjamin Lees  wrote:
>>
>> I don't think there's anything blithe in pointing out that an
>> after-the-fact promise of secrecy serves no one.  Affiliates had to decide
>> whether to vote without knowing whether the list would be published (but
>> hopefully realizing that the username of their voter would be published,
>> although I'm not sure if this was made clear).  The main effect of post-hoc
>> secrecy here would be to sow confusion and set up unrealistic expectations
>> about future votes; in the last affiliate-selected board seat process, not
>> only was the list of voting affiliates published, but *their individual
>> votes were as well*: <
>> 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Jackie Koerner]

Hi all,

Thanks for discussing this topic. It is clear the publication of this
information is important to some community members. The Elections Committee
and Board Selection Task Force approved publishing a complete list of which
affiliate organizations voted in a table

.

Best,


Jackie

On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 11:45 AM Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Of course it's like that Ilario,sometimes some usergroups are
> "userpersons". and as person involved in the previous ASBS election I
> politely hinted that aspect as much as possible in the past. Also,
> sometimes even some chapters are mostly few key persons when relationship
> with WMF is involved, but it's easier to start from UGs to handle the issue.
>
> i had some general idea of what you are supposed to facilitate if you want
> real transparency in these processes and I felt that was not fully there.
> Instead of building on previous know-how, the process was restarting again
> and that do not get great functionality in WMF, usually. It's like knowing
> for sure that these sort of mails would have happened at the end.
>
> I had no time to look carefully, but that was kinda of a feeling and as a
> result, despite being a first contact and having a decent know-how, I
> decided not to engage the affiliate in the process. The affiliate I
> represent is small and fragmented and lacks a strong identity yet, I know
> for sure that getting to a meaningful ranking would have taken a lot of
> effort and in May and June I simply had no time. Or it would have resulted
> in me pushing my ideas in a way or another, and that was not correct. Like,
> many people are ns-0 users and don't now names, so they trust your side of
> the story.
>
> So I decided to skip it. I was asked a contact for the first step and
> replied by mail that in May I had no time to even start a thread on meta
> about deciding whom to select (it would have been me, probably, but I did
> not feel it was correct).
>
> my choice was either focusing properly as a UG on the WIkisummit
> application or that, and I did at least properly the first one. I could
> have taken part in the process probably representing 90% myself, nobody
> would have noticed.
>
> Alessandro
>
> Il sabato 23 luglio 2022 17:59:01 CEST, Ilario Valdelli <
> valde...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
>
> I think that there is a very sensible point here.
>
> Sometimes behind some usergroups there is not a specific community but
> only few people and sometimes some usergroups are "userpersons".
>
> Being more transparent helps to demonstrate that the whole process has
> been conducted appropriately but also to have an overview that affiliates
> have voted really on what their community proposed.
>
> Kind regards
>
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 3:28 AM Gnangarra  wrote:
>
> I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need
> to protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members,
>
>
> This is not some functionary volunteer role, nor is it a scholarship to
> attend some event. The affiliate and the members of the Board of Trustees
> are both very public facing aspects, when a person is on the Board of
> Trustees their identity is public
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/board/ .  It is obvious that a
> truly  vulnerable person would not even put themselves into a BOT
> position.  It's important for members of the community to know who their
> affiliate chose to represent them because it's a reflection of that
> community.  I know some affiliates actually didnt consult their communities
> for input into the decision process before the fact so knowing after the
> fact is at least pretending to be transparent in the voting.
>
>
>
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 at 06:01, Benjamin Lees  wrote:
>
> I don't think there's anything blithe in pointing out that an
> after-the-fact promise of secrecy serves no one.  Affiliates had to decide
> whether to vote without knowing whether the list would be published (but
> hopefully realizing that the username of their voter would be published,
> although I'm not sure if this was made clear).  The main effect of post-hoc
> secrecy here would be to sow confusion and set up unrealistic expectations
> about future votes; in the last affiliate-selected board seat process, not
> only was the list of voting affiliates published, but *their individual
> votes were as well*: <
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asbs_presentation_matches_with_stv_py_results.pdf>,
> and for the reasons Lodewijk describes, we might well wish to return to
> such full transparency in the future.
>
> If a decision either way had been made and communicated beforehand,
> affiliate voters could have made an informed decision, but as with most of
> the rules for this election, it was announced in the middle of the
> election, rather than in the many 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l]

 Of course it's like that Ilario,sometimes some usergroups are "userpersons". 
and as person involved in the previous ASBS election I politely hinted that 
aspect as much as possible in the past. Also, sometimes even some chapters are 
mostly few key persons when relationship with WMF is involved, but it's easier 
to start from UGs to handle the issue.

i had some general idea of what you are supposed to facilitate if you want real 
transparency in these processes and I felt that was not fully there. Instead of 
building on previous know-how, the process was restarting again and that do not 
get great functionality in WMF, usually. It's like knowing for sure that these 
sort of mails would have happened at the end.

I had no time to look carefully, but that was kinda of a feeling and as a 
result, despite being a first contact and having a decent know-how, I decided 
not to engage the affiliate in the process. The affiliate I represent is small 
and fragmented and lacks a strong identity yet, I know for sure that getting to 
a meaningful ranking would have taken a lot of effort and in May and June I 
simply had no time. Or it would have resulted in me pushing my ideas in a way 
or another, and that was not correct. Like, many people are ns-0 users and 
don't now names, so they trust your side of the story.

So I decided to skip it. I was asked a contact for the first step and replied 
by mail that in May I had no time to even start a thread on meta about deciding 
whom to select (it would have been me, probably, but I did not feel it was 
correct). 

my choice was either focusing properly as a UG on the WIkisummit application or 
that, and I did at least properly the first one. I could have taken part in the 
process probably representing 90% myself, nobody would have noticed.
Alessandro

Il sabato 23 luglio 2022 17:59:01 CEST, Ilario Valdelli 
 ha scritto:  
 
 I think that there is a very sensible point here.
Sometimes behind some usergroups there is not a specific community but only few 
people and sometimes some usergroups are "userpersons".
Being more transparent helps to demonstrate that the whole process has been 
conducted appropriately but also to have an overview that affiliates have voted 
really on what their community proposed.
Kind regards

On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 3:28 AM Gnangarra  wrote:


I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need to 
protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members, 

This is not some functionary volunteer role, nor is it a scholarship to attend 
some event. The affiliate and the members of the Board of Trustees are both 
very public facing aspects, when a person is on the Board of Trustees their 
identity is public https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/board/ .  It is obvious 
that a truly  vulnerable person would not even put themselves into a BOT 
position.  It's important for members of the community to know who their 
affiliate chose to represent them because it's a reflection of that community.  
I know some affiliates actually didnt consult their communities for input into 
the decision process before the fact so knowing after the fact is at least 
pretending to be transparent in the voting.


On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 at 06:01, Benjamin Lees  wrote:

I don't think there's anything blithe in pointing out that an after-the-fact 
promise of secrecy serves no one.  Affiliates had to decide whether to vote 
without knowing whether the list would be published (but hopefully realizing 
that the username of their voter would be published, although I'm not sure if 
this was made clear).  The main effect of post-hoc secrecy here would be to sow 
confusion and set up unrealistic expectations about future votes; in the last 
affiliate-selected board seat process, not only was the list of voting 
affiliates published, but their individual votes were as well: 
,
 and for the reasons Lodewijk describes, we might well wish to return to such 
full transparency in the future.
If a decision either way had been made and communicated beforehand, affiliate 
voters could have made an informed decision, but as with most of the rules for 
this election, it was announced in the middle of the election, rather than in 
the many months before it.  In any event, I agree with SJ that this is a 
decision to be made by the elections committee, not WMF staff.


On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 4:45 PM Robert Fernandez  wrote:

I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need to 
protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members, especially 
in a community that usually prides itself on the ability to participate 
anonymously.
That said, perhaps we could publish the names of participating affiliates who 
affirm the wish to be named publicly. 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Ilario Valdelli]

I think that there is a very sensible point here.

Sometimes behind some usergroups there is not a specific community but only
few people and sometimes some usergroups are "userpersons".

Being more transparent helps to demonstrate that the whole process has been
conducted appropriately but also to have an overview that affiliates have
voted really on what their community proposed.

Kind regards

On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 3:28 AM Gnangarra  wrote:

> I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need
>> to protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members,
>
>
> This is not some functionary volunteer role, nor is it a scholarship to
> attend some event. The affiliate and the members of the Board of Trustees
> are both very public facing aspects, when a person is on the Board of
> Trustees their identity is public
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/board/ .  It is obvious that a
> truly  vulnerable person would not even put themselves into a BOT
> position.  It's important for members of the community to know who their
> affiliate chose to represent them because it's a reflection of that
> community.  I know some affiliates actually didnt consult their communities
> for input into the decision process before the fact so knowing after the
> fact is at least pretending to be transparent in the voting.
>
>
>
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 at 06:01, Benjamin Lees  wrote:
>
>> I don't think there's anything blithe in pointing out that an
>> after-the-fact promise of secrecy serves no one.  Affiliates had to decide
>> whether to vote without knowing whether the list would be published (but
>> hopefully realizing that the username of their voter would be published,
>> although I'm not sure if this was made clear).  The main effect of post-hoc
>> secrecy here would be to sow confusion and set up unrealistic expectations
>> about future votes; in the last affiliate-selected board seat process, not
>> only was the list of voting affiliates published, but *their individual
>> votes were as well*: <
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asbs_presentation_matches_with_stv_py_results.pdf>,
>> and for the reasons Lodewijk describes, we might well wish to return to
>> such full transparency in the future.
>>
>> If a decision either way had been made and communicated beforehand,
>> affiliate voters could have made an informed decision, but as with most of
>> the rules for this election, it was announced in the middle of the
>> election, rather than in the many months before it.  In any event, I agree
>> with SJ that this is a decision to be made by the elections committee, not
>> WMF staff.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 4:45 PM Robert Fernandez 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the
>>> need to protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members,
>>> especially in a community that usually prides itself on the ability to
>>> participate anonymously.
>>>
>>> That said, perhaps we could publish the names of participating
>>> affiliates who affirm the wish to be named publicly.
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> Public archives at
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LNXPN2Z5TY35SJOV6MOLB7ASOQL57GGF/
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/DNDMKF4NKNDFEKC5FFHXWB24FISK4NCA/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>
>
> --
> GN.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/27TMCRTG33NLTXSSN4P5JZFVX7OEEIFS/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



-- 
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Wikipedia: Ilario 
Skype: valdelli
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Gnangarra]

>
> I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need
> to protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members,


This is not some functionary volunteer role, nor is it a scholarship to
attend some event. The affiliate and the members of the Board of Trustees
are both very public facing aspects, when a person is on the Board of
Trustees their identity is public
https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/board/ .  It is obvious that a
truly  vulnerable person would not even put themselves into a BOT
position.  It's important for members of the community to know who their
affiliate chose to represent them because it's a reflection of that
community.  I know some affiliates actually didnt consult their communities
for input into the decision process before the fact so knowing after the
fact is at least pretending to be transparent in the voting.



On Sat, 23 Jul 2022 at 06:01, Benjamin Lees  wrote:

> I don't think there's anything blithe in pointing out that an
> after-the-fact promise of secrecy serves no one.  Affiliates had to decide
> whether to vote without knowing whether the list would be published (but
> hopefully realizing that the username of their voter would be published,
> although I'm not sure if this was made clear).  The main effect of post-hoc
> secrecy here would be to sow confusion and set up unrealistic expectations
> about future votes; in the last affiliate-selected board seat process, not
> only was the list of voting affiliates published, but *their individual
> votes were as well*: <
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asbs_presentation_matches_with_stv_py_results.pdf>,
> and for the reasons Lodewijk describes, we might well wish to return to
> such full transparency in the future.
>
> If a decision either way had been made and communicated beforehand,
> affiliate voters could have made an informed decision, but as with most of
> the rules for this election, it was announced in the middle of the
> election, rather than in the many months before it.  In any event, I agree
> with SJ that this is a decision to be made by the elections committee, not
> WMF staff.
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 4:45 PM Robert Fernandez 
> wrote:
>
>> I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need
>> to protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members,
>> especially in a community that usually prides itself on the ability to
>> participate anonymously.
>>
>> That said, perhaps we could publish the names of participating affiliates
>> who affirm the wish to be named publicly.
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LNXPN2Z5TY35SJOV6MOLB7ASOQL57GGF/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/DNDMKF4NKNDFEKC5FFHXWB24FISK4NCA/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



-- 
GN.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/27TMCRTG33NLTXSSN4P5JZFVX7OEEIFS/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Benjamin Lees]

I don't think there's anything blithe in pointing out that an
after-the-fact promise of secrecy serves no one.  Affiliates had to decide
whether to vote without knowing whether the list would be published (but
hopefully realizing that the username of their voter would be published,
although I'm not sure if this was made clear).  The main effect of post-hoc
secrecy here would be to sow confusion and set up unrealistic expectations
about future votes; in the last affiliate-selected board seat process, not
only was the list of voting affiliates published, but *their individual
votes were as well*: <
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asbs_presentation_matches_with_stv_py_results.pdf>,
and for the reasons Lodewijk describes, we might well wish to return to
such full transparency in the future.

If a decision either way had been made and communicated beforehand,
affiliate voters could have made an informed decision, but as with most of
the rules for this election, it was announced in the middle of the
election, rather than in the many months before it.  In any event, I agree
with SJ that this is a decision to be made by the elections committee, not
WMF staff.


On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 4:45 PM Robert Fernandez 
wrote:

> I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need
> to protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members,
> especially in a community that usually prides itself on the ability to
> participate anonymously.
>
> That said, perhaps we could publish the names of participating affiliates
> who affirm the wish to be named publicly.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LNXPN2Z5TY35SJOV6MOLB7ASOQL57GGF/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/DNDMKF4NKNDFEKC5FFHXWB24FISK4NCA/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Robert Fernandez]

I am disturbed to see some community members blithely dismissing the need
to protect the well-being of potentially vulnerable community members,
especially in a community that usually prides itself on the ability to
participate anonymously.

That said, perhaps we could publish the names of participating affiliates
who affirm the wish to be named publicly.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LNXPN2Z5TY35SJOV6MOLB7ASOQL57GGF/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Samuel Klein]

> This has been a question those of us on the team supporting the election
asked ourselves: do we publish the participants publicly, or no?

This is the sort of question, analysis, decision, and communication that I
would very much like to see handled by a community-led election committee,
discussing and commemorating their decisions in public.  Might someone from
the committee weigh in?

On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 12:14 AM Jackie Koerner 
wrote:

> Hi Alice and Adamw,
>
> Thanks for this question. This has been a question those of us on the team
> supporting the election asked ourselves: do we publish the participants
> publicly, or no?
>
> Movement Strategy and Governance is made up of facilitators from around
> the world. We all have a broad experience with cultures and community
> experiences. Several facilitators said some affiliates from their regions
> decided not to participate to avoid the risk of being labeled and accused
> of engaging with a foreign organization. The aim is to protect those
> organizations and individuals who did participate from extra attention that
> might have real and lasting effects for them.
>
> For the reason above, making the list of participants more obvious is not
> something that we wish to do so we can protect the people in our
> communities who are vulnerable to just how political participating in free
> knowledge still is in much of the world.
>
> If any organization needs to have documentation of their participation, we
> can gladly supply that on an individual basis.
>
> Best,
>
> Jackie
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 6:46 AM Adam Wight 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 to this question, and whether we can make the list of voting
>> affiliates public in the same way that we publicize the voting rolls for
>> individuals participating in Community [S]elections.  The results page [1]
>> shows that 112 affiliate organizations each cast one vote.
>>
>> Regards,
>> [[meta:User:Adamw]]
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Results/Affiliate_organization_voting
>> On 7/19/22 21:11, Alice Wiegand wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jackie,
>> Thanks for sharing the result. Where can we find information about how
>> many chapters/thematic organizations and usergroups have casted their votes?
>>
>> Alice.
>>
>> Am 19.07.2022 um 19:32 schrieb Jackie Koerner :
>>
>> *You can find this message translated into additional languages on
>> Meta-wiki.
>> *
>>  Please help translate to your language
>> 
>> Hi everyone,
>> The Affiliate voting process has concluded. Representatives from each
>> Affiliate organization learned about the candidates by reading candidates’
>> statements, reviewing candidates’ answers to questions, and considering the
>> candidates’ ratings provided by the Analysis Committee. The selected 2022
>> Board of Trustees candidates are:
>>
>>- Tobechukwu Precious Friday (Tochiprecious
>>)
>>- Farah Jack Mustaklem (Fjmustak
>>)
>>- Shani Evenstein Sigalov (Esh77
>>)
>>- Kunal Mehta (Legoktm )
>>- Michał Buczyński (Aegis Maelstrom
>>)
>>- Mike Peel (Mike Peel
>>)
>>
>> You may see more information about the Results
>> 
>>  and Statistics
>> 
>>  of
>> this Board election.
>> Please take a moment to appreciate the Affiliate Representatives and
>> Analysis Committee members for taking part in this process and helping to
>> grow the Board of Trustees in capacity and diversity. These hours of
>> volunteer work connect us across understanding and perspective. Thank you
>> for your participation.
>> Thank you to the community members who put themselves forward as
>> candidates for the Board of Trustees. Considering joining the Board of
>> Trustees is no small decision. The time and dedication candidates have
>> shown to this point speaks to their commitment to this movement.
>> Congratulations to those candidates who have been selected. A great amount
>> of appreciation and gratitude for those candidates not selected. Please
>> continue to share your leadership with Wikimedia.
>> Thank you to those who followed the Affiliate process for this Board
>> election. You may review the results of 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[effe iets anders]

I appreciate that there are some concerns for the wellbeing of individuals
and affiliates. I'm sure there are always all kind of accusations about
engaging with foreign organizations, and if that would hold us back, we
could equally not allow ourselves to publish annual reports to the
movement, or what grants have been requested. My intuition would say that
if an affiliate does not feel that they can safely engage in global
governance because they could meet repercussions for this, maybe the wise
thing is not to engage in that global governance, rather than trying to
hide it (which is always vulnerable to breaches). However, I don't know how
widespread or permanent this kind of problem is - I do find it problematic
that we discuss this only after the election, and this kind of transparency
should have been decided up front. But maybe I missed something, and this
has actually been discussed in advance (?).

Jackie, have any commitments/promises been made to voters about secrecy or
transparency? You describe in your email what your facilitators have heard,
but I don't read what they have promised.

Currently there is only a public list of individuals that has voted, rather
than which organizations. This still allows people to kind of puzzle
together which organizations have voted, without the advantage of actual
transparency. Seems the worst of both worlds to me.

I already find it doubtful that we don't publish which organization has
voted what way, given that this is the only way that members of such
organizations can hold their leadership accountable.

Warmly,
Lodewijk

On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 9:14 PM Jackie Koerner 
wrote:

> Hi Alice and Adamw,
>
> Thanks for this question. This has been a question those of us on the team
> supporting the election asked ourselves: do we publish the participants
> publicly, or no?
>
> Movement Strategy and Governance is made up of facilitators from around
> the world. We all have a broad experience with cultures and community
> experiences. Several facilitators said some affiliates from their regions
> decided not to participate to avoid the risk of being labeled and accused
> of engaging with a foreign organization. The aim is to protect those
> organizations and individuals who did participate from extra attention that
> might have real and lasting effects for them.
>
> For the reason above, making the list of participants more obvious is not
> something that we wish to do so we can protect the people in our
> communities who are vulnerable to just how political participating in free
> knowledge still is in much of the world.
>
> If any organization needs to have documentation of their participation, we
> can gladly supply that on an individual basis.
>
> Best,
>
> Jackie
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 6:46 AM Adam Wight 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 to this question, and whether we can make the list of voting
>> affiliates public in the same way that we publicize the voting rolls for
>> individuals participating in Community [S]elections.  The results page [1]
>> shows that 112 affiliate organizations each cast one vote.
>>
>> Regards,
>> [[meta:User:Adamw]]
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Results/Affiliate_organization_voting
>> On 7/19/22 21:11, Alice Wiegand wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jackie,
>> Thanks for sharing the result. Where can we find information about how
>> many chapters/thematic organizations and usergroups have casted their votes?
>>
>> Alice.
>>
>> Am 19.07.2022 um 19:32 schrieb Jackie Koerner :
>>
>> *You can find this message translated into additional languages on
>> Meta-wiki.
>> *
>>  Please help translate to your language
>> 
>> Hi everyone,
>> The Affiliate voting process has concluded. Representatives from each
>> Affiliate organization learned about the candidates by reading candidates’
>> statements, reviewing candidates’ answers to questions, and considering the
>> candidates’ ratings provided by the Analysis Committee. The selected 2022
>> Board of Trustees candidates are:
>>
>>- Tobechukwu Precious Friday (Tochiprecious
>>)
>>- Farah Jack Mustaklem (Fjmustak
>>)
>>- Shani Evenstein Sigalov (Esh77
>>)
>>- Kunal Mehta (Legoktm )
>>- Michał Buczyński (Aegis Maelstrom
>>)
>>- Mike Peel (Mike Peel
>>)
>>
>> You may see more 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Ilario Valdelli]

Considering this list, there is no sense to don't make public which
affiliated has voted.

Kind regards


On Thu, 21 Jul 2022, 16:09 Jan Ainali,  wrote:

> I think that what was requested was which affiliates that voted, not which
> individuals.
>
> But we should note, that the list of users who represented the
> affiliations and voted is already public here:
> https://vote.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:SecurePoll/list/1350
>
> /Jan Ainali
>
> Den tors 21 juli 2022 kl 06:14 skrev Jackie Koerner <
> jkoer...@wikimedia.org>:
>
>> Hi Alice and Adamw,
>>
>> Thanks for this question. This has been a question those of us on the
>> team supporting the election asked ourselves: do we publish the
>> participants publicly, or no?
>>
>> Movement Strategy and Governance is made up of facilitators from around
>> the world. We all have a broad experience with cultures and community
>> experiences. Several facilitators said some affiliates from their regions
>> decided not to participate to avoid the risk of being labeled and accused
>> of engaging with a foreign organization. The aim is to protect those
>> organizations and individuals who did participate from extra attention that
>> might have real and lasting effects for them.
>>
>> For the reason above, making the list of participants more obvious is not
>> something that we wish to do so we can protect the people in our
>> communities who are vulnerable to just how political participating in free
>> knowledge still is in much of the world.
>>
>> If any organization needs to have documentation of their participation,
>> we can gladly supply that on an individual basis.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jackie
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 6:46 AM Adam Wight 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 to this question, and whether we can make the list of voting
>>> affiliates public in the same way that we publicize the voting rolls for
>>> individuals participating in Community [S]elections.  The results page [1]
>>> shows that 112 affiliate organizations each cast one vote.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> [[meta:User:Adamw]]
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Results/Affiliate_organization_voting
>>> On 7/19/22 21:11, Alice Wiegand wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jackie,
>>> Thanks for sharing the result. Where can we find information about how
>>> many chapters/thematic organizations and usergroups have casted their votes?
>>>
>>> Alice.
>>>
>>> Am 19.07.2022 um 19:32 schrieb Jackie Koerner :
>>>
>>> *You can find this message translated into additional languages on
>>> Meta-wiki.
>>> *
>>>  Please help translate to your language
>>> 
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> The Affiliate voting process has concluded. Representatives from each
>>> Affiliate organization learned about the candidates by reading candidates’
>>> statements, reviewing candidates’ answers to questions, and considering the
>>> candidates’ ratings provided by the Analysis Committee. The selected 2022
>>> Board of Trustees candidates are:
>>>
>>>- Tobechukwu Precious Friday (Tochiprecious
>>>)
>>>- Farah Jack Mustaklem (Fjmustak
>>>)
>>>- Shani Evenstein Sigalov (Esh77
>>>)
>>>- Kunal Mehta (Legoktm 
>>>)
>>>- Michał Buczyński (Aegis Maelstrom
>>>)
>>>- Mike Peel (Mike Peel
>>>)
>>>
>>> You may see more information about the Results
>>> 
>>>  and Statistics
>>> 
>>>  of
>>> this Board election.
>>> Please take a moment to appreciate the Affiliate Representatives and
>>> Analysis Committee members for taking part in this process and helping to
>>> grow the Board of Trustees in capacity and diversity. These hours of
>>> volunteer work connect us across understanding and perspective. Thank you
>>> for your participation.
>>> Thank you to the community members who put themselves forward as
>>> candidates for the Board of Trustees. Considering joining the Board of
>>> Trustees is no small decision. The time and dedication candidates have
>>> shown to this point speaks to their commitment to this movement.
>>> Congratulations to those candidates who have been selected. A great amount
>>> of appreciation and gratitude for those candidates not 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Jan Ainali]

I think that what was requested was which affiliates that voted, not which
individuals.

But we should note, that the list of users who represented the affiliations
and voted is already public here:
https://vote.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:SecurePoll/list/1350

/Jan Ainali

Den tors 21 juli 2022 kl 06:14 skrev Jackie Koerner :

> Hi Alice and Adamw,
>
> Thanks for this question. This has been a question those of us on the team
> supporting the election asked ourselves: do we publish the participants
> publicly, or no?
>
> Movement Strategy and Governance is made up of facilitators from around
> the world. We all have a broad experience with cultures and community
> experiences. Several facilitators said some affiliates from their regions
> decided not to participate to avoid the risk of being labeled and accused
> of engaging with a foreign organization. The aim is to protect those
> organizations and individuals who did participate from extra attention that
> might have real and lasting effects for them.
>
> For the reason above, making the list of participants more obvious is not
> something that we wish to do so we can protect the people in our
> communities who are vulnerable to just how political participating in free
> knowledge still is in much of the world.
>
> If any organization needs to have documentation of their participation, we
> can gladly supply that on an individual basis.
>
> Best,
>
> Jackie
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 6:46 AM Adam Wight 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 to this question, and whether we can make the list of voting
>> affiliates public in the same way that we publicize the voting rolls for
>> individuals participating in Community [S]elections.  The results page [1]
>> shows that 112 affiliate organizations each cast one vote.
>>
>> Regards,
>> [[meta:User:Adamw]]
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Results/Affiliate_organization_voting
>> On 7/19/22 21:11, Alice Wiegand wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jackie,
>> Thanks for sharing the result. Where can we find information about how
>> many chapters/thematic organizations and usergroups have casted their votes?
>>
>> Alice.
>>
>> Am 19.07.2022 um 19:32 schrieb Jackie Koerner :
>>
>> *You can find this message translated into additional languages on
>> Meta-wiki.
>> *
>>  Please help translate to your language
>> 
>> Hi everyone,
>> The Affiliate voting process has concluded. Representatives from each
>> Affiliate organization learned about the candidates by reading candidates’
>> statements, reviewing candidates’ answers to questions, and considering the
>> candidates’ ratings provided by the Analysis Committee. The selected 2022
>> Board of Trustees candidates are:
>>
>>- Tobechukwu Precious Friday (Tochiprecious
>>)
>>- Farah Jack Mustaklem (Fjmustak
>>)
>>- Shani Evenstein Sigalov (Esh77
>>)
>>- Kunal Mehta (Legoktm )
>>- Michał Buczyński (Aegis Maelstrom
>>)
>>- Mike Peel (Mike Peel
>>)
>>
>> You may see more information about the Results
>> 
>>  and Statistics
>> 
>>  of
>> this Board election.
>> Please take a moment to appreciate the Affiliate Representatives and
>> Analysis Committee members for taking part in this process and helping to
>> grow the Board of Trustees in capacity and diversity. These hours of
>> volunteer work connect us across understanding and perspective. Thank you
>> for your participation.
>> Thank you to the community members who put themselves forward as
>> candidates for the Board of Trustees. Considering joining the Board of
>> Trustees is no small decision. The time and dedication candidates have
>> shown to this point speaks to their commitment to this movement.
>> Congratulations to those candidates who have been selected. A great amount
>> of appreciation and gratitude for those candidates not selected. Please
>> continue to share your leadership with Wikimedia.
>> Thank you to those who followed the Affiliate process for this Board
>> election. You may review the results of the Affiliate selection process.
>> The next part of the Board election process is the community voting
>> period. You 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Gnangarra]

Hi

We are seeing alot of these

>  ''making the list of participants more obvious is not something that we
> wish to do so we can protect the people in our communities who are
> vulnerable to just how political participating in free knowledge still is
> in much of the world.''


type comments. The reality is if they had succeed they would have to be
public so its not like they weren't aware that their nomination was placing
them in a potential risk situation anyway.  I see no issue here in being
transparent in this process.

Regards
Gnangarra

On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 at 20:25, Ilario Valdelli  wrote:

> For transparency purposes there is no question to ask. Surely the list
> must be public.
>
> Is WMF a transparent organization?
>
> Kind regards
>
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2022, 06:14 Jackie Koerner,  wrote:
>
>> Hi Alice and Adamw,
>>
>> Thanks for this question. This has been a question those of us on the
>> team supporting the election asked ourselves: do we publish the
>> participants publicly, or no?
>>
>> Movement Strategy and Governance is made up of facilitators from around
>> the world. We all have a broad experience with cultures and community
>> experiences. Several facilitators said some affiliates from their regions
>> decided not to participate to avoid the risk of being labeled and accused
>> of engaging with a foreign organization. The aim is to protect those
>> organizations and individuals who did participate from extra attention that
>> might have real and lasting effects for them.
>>
>> For the reason above, making the list of participants more obvious is not
>> something that we wish to do so we can protect the people in our
>> communities who are vulnerable to just how political participating in free
>> knowledge still is in much of the world.
>>
>> If any organization needs to have documentation of their participation,
>> we can gladly supply that on an individual basis.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jackie
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 6:46 AM Adam Wight 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 to this question, and whether we can make the list of voting
>>> affiliates public in the same way that we publicize the voting rolls for
>>> individuals participating in Community [S]elections.  The results page [1]
>>> shows that 112 affiliate organizations each cast one vote.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> [[meta:User:Adamw]]
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Results/Affiliate_organization_voting
>>> On 7/19/22 21:11, Alice Wiegand wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jackie,
>>> Thanks for sharing the result. Where can we find information about how
>>> many chapters/thematic organizations and usergroups have casted their votes?
>>>
>>> Alice.
>>>
>>> Am 19.07.2022 um 19:32 schrieb Jackie Koerner :
>>>
>>> *You can find this message translated into additional languages on
>>> Meta-wiki.
>>> *
>>>  Please help translate to your language
>>> 
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> The Affiliate voting process has concluded. Representatives from each
>>> Affiliate organization learned about the candidates by reading candidates’
>>> statements, reviewing candidates’ answers to questions, and considering the
>>> candidates’ ratings provided by the Analysis Committee. The selected 2022
>>> Board of Trustees candidates are:
>>>
>>>- Tobechukwu Precious Friday (Tochiprecious
>>>)
>>>- Farah Jack Mustaklem (Fjmustak
>>>)
>>>- Shani Evenstein Sigalov (Esh77
>>>)
>>>- Kunal Mehta (Legoktm 
>>>)
>>>- Michał Buczyński (Aegis Maelstrom
>>>)
>>>- Mike Peel (Mike Peel
>>>)
>>>
>>> You may see more information about the Results
>>> 
>>>  and Statistics
>>> 
>>>  of
>>> this Board election.
>>> Please take a moment to appreciate the Affiliate Representatives and
>>> Analysis Committee members for taking part in this process and helping to
>>> grow the Board of Trustees in capacity and diversity. These hours of
>>> volunteer work connect us across understanding and perspective. Thank you
>>> for your participation.
>>> Thank you to the community members who put themselves forward as
>>> candidates for the Board of Trustees. Considering joining the Board of
>>> 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Ilario Valdelli]

For transparency purposes there is no question to ask. Surely the list must
be public.

Is WMF a transparent organization?

Kind regards

On Thu, 21 Jul 2022, 06:14 Jackie Koerner,  wrote:

> Hi Alice and Adamw,
>
> Thanks for this question. This has been a question those of us on the team
> supporting the election asked ourselves: do we publish the participants
> publicly, or no?
>
> Movement Strategy and Governance is made up of facilitators from around
> the world. We all have a broad experience with cultures and community
> experiences. Several facilitators said some affiliates from their regions
> decided not to participate to avoid the risk of being labeled and accused
> of engaging with a foreign organization. The aim is to protect those
> organizations and individuals who did participate from extra attention that
> might have real and lasting effects for them.
>
> For the reason above, making the list of participants more obvious is not
> something that we wish to do so we can protect the people in our
> communities who are vulnerable to just how political participating in free
> knowledge still is in much of the world.
>
> If any organization needs to have documentation of their participation, we
> can gladly supply that on an individual basis.
>
> Best,
>
> Jackie
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 6:46 AM Adam Wight 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 to this question, and whether we can make the list of voting
>> affiliates public in the same way that we publicize the voting rolls for
>> individuals participating in Community [S]elections.  The results page [1]
>> shows that 112 affiliate organizations each cast one vote.
>>
>> Regards,
>> [[meta:User:Adamw]]
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Results/Affiliate_organization_voting
>> On 7/19/22 21:11, Alice Wiegand wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jackie,
>> Thanks for sharing the result. Where can we find information about how
>> many chapters/thematic organizations and usergroups have casted their votes?
>>
>> Alice.
>>
>> Am 19.07.2022 um 19:32 schrieb Jackie Koerner :
>>
>> *You can find this message translated into additional languages on
>> Meta-wiki.
>> *
>>  Please help translate to your language
>> 
>> Hi everyone,
>> The Affiliate voting process has concluded. Representatives from each
>> Affiliate organization learned about the candidates by reading candidates’
>> statements, reviewing candidates’ answers to questions, and considering the
>> candidates’ ratings provided by the Analysis Committee. The selected 2022
>> Board of Trustees candidates are:
>>
>>- Tobechukwu Precious Friday (Tochiprecious
>>)
>>- Farah Jack Mustaklem (Fjmustak
>>)
>>- Shani Evenstein Sigalov (Esh77
>>)
>>- Kunal Mehta (Legoktm )
>>- Michał Buczyński (Aegis Maelstrom
>>)
>>- Mike Peel (Mike Peel
>>)
>>
>> You may see more information about the Results
>> 
>>  and Statistics
>> 
>>  of
>> this Board election.
>> Please take a moment to appreciate the Affiliate Representatives and
>> Analysis Committee members for taking part in this process and helping to
>> grow the Board of Trustees in capacity and diversity. These hours of
>> volunteer work connect us across understanding and perspective. Thank you
>> for your participation.
>> Thank you to the community members who put themselves forward as
>> candidates for the Board of Trustees. Considering joining the Board of
>> Trustees is no small decision. The time and dedication candidates have
>> shown to this point speaks to their commitment to this movement.
>> Congratulations to those candidates who have been selected. A great amount
>> of appreciation and gratitude for those candidates not selected. Please
>> continue to share your leadership with Wikimedia.
>> Thank you to those who followed the Affiliate process for this Board
>> election. You may review the results of the Affiliate selection process.
>> The next part of the Board election process is the community voting
>> period. You may view the Board election timeline here
>> 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Jackie Koerner]

Hi Alice and Adamw,

Thanks for this question. This has been a question those of us on the team
supporting the election asked ourselves: do we publish the participants
publicly, or no?

Movement Strategy and Governance is made up of facilitators from around the
world. We all have a broad experience with cultures and community
experiences. Several facilitators said some affiliates from their regions
decided not to participate to avoid the risk of being labeled and accused
of engaging with a foreign organization. The aim is to protect those
organizations and individuals who did participate from extra attention that
might have real and lasting effects for them.

For the reason above, making the list of participants more obvious is not
something that we wish to do so we can protect the people in our
communities who are vulnerable to just how political participating in free
knowledge still is in much of the world.

If any organization needs to have documentation of their participation, we
can gladly supply that on an individual basis.

Best,

Jackie

On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 6:46 AM Adam Wight  wrote:

> +1 to this question, and whether we can make the list of voting affiliates
> public in the same way that we publicize the voting rolls for individuals
> participating in Community [S]elections.  The results page [1] shows that
> 112 affiliate organizations each cast one vote.
>
> Regards,
> [[meta:User:Adamw]]
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Results/Affiliate_organization_voting
> On 7/19/22 21:11, Alice Wiegand wrote:
>
> Hi Jackie,
> Thanks for sharing the result. Where can we find information about how
> many chapters/thematic organizations and usergroups have casted their votes?
>
> Alice.
>
> Am 19.07.2022 um 19:32 schrieb Jackie Koerner :
>
> *You can find this message translated into additional languages on
> Meta-wiki.
> *
>  Please help translate to your language
> 
> Hi everyone,
> The Affiliate voting process has concluded. Representatives from each
> Affiliate organization learned about the candidates by reading candidates’
> statements, reviewing candidates’ answers to questions, and considering the
> candidates’ ratings provided by the Analysis Committee. The selected 2022
> Board of Trustees candidates are:
>
>- Tobechukwu Precious Friday (Tochiprecious
>)
>- Farah Jack Mustaklem (Fjmustak
>)
>- Shani Evenstein Sigalov (Esh77
>)
>- Kunal Mehta (Legoktm )
>- Michał Buczyński (Aegis Maelstrom
>)
>- Mike Peel (Mike Peel 
>)
>
> You may see more information about the Results
> 
>  and Statistics
> 
>  of
> this Board election.
> Please take a moment to appreciate the Affiliate Representatives and
> Analysis Committee members for taking part in this process and helping to
> grow the Board of Trustees in capacity and diversity. These hours of
> volunteer work connect us across understanding and perspective. Thank you
> for your participation.
> Thank you to the community members who put themselves forward as
> candidates for the Board of Trustees. Considering joining the Board of
> Trustees is no small decision. The time and dedication candidates have
> shown to this point speaks to their commitment to this movement.
> Congratulations to those candidates who have been selected. A great amount
> of appreciation and gratitude for those candidates not selected. Please
> continue to share your leadership with Wikimedia.
> Thank you to those who followed the Affiliate process for this Board
> election. You may review the results of the Affiliate selection process.
> The next part of the Board election process is the community voting
> period. You may view the Board election timeline here
> .
> To prepare for the community voting period, there are several things
> community members can engage with in the following ways:
>
>- Read candidates’ statements
>
> 
>  and
>read the 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Adam Wight]

+1 to this question, and whether we can make the list of voting 
affiliates public in the same way that we publicize the voting rolls for 
individuals participating in Community [S]elections. The results page 
[1] shows that 112 affiliate organizations each cast one vote.


Regards,
[[meta:User:Adamw]]

[1] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Results/Affiliate_organization_voting


On 7/19/22 21:11, Alice Wiegand wrote:

Hi Jackie,
Thanks for sharing the result. Where can we find information about how 
many chapters/thematic organizations and usergroups have casted their 
votes?


Alice.


Am 19.07.2022 um 19:32 schrieb Jackie Koerner :

/You can find this message translated into additional languages
on Meta-wiki.

/Please
help translate to your language



Hi everyone,
The Affiliate voting process has concluded. Representatives from each 
Affiliate organization learned about the candidates by reading 
candidates’ statements, reviewing candidates’ answers to questions, 
and considering the candidates’ ratings provided by the Analysis 
Committee. The selected 2022 Board of Trustees candidates are:


  * Tobechukwu Precious Friday (Tochiprecious
)
  * Farah Jack Mustaklem (Fjmustak
)
  * Shani Evenstein Sigalov (Esh77
)
  * Kunal Mehta (Legoktm )
  * Michał Buczyński (Aegis Maelstrom
)
  * Mike Peel (Mike Peel
)

You may see more information about the Results 
 and 
Statistics 
 of 
this Board election.
Please take a moment to appreciate the Affiliate Representatives and 
Analysis Committee members for taking part in this process and 
helping to grow the Board of Trustees in capacity and diversity. 
These hours of volunteer work connect us across understanding and 
perspective. Thank you for your participation.
Thank you to the community members who put themselves forward as 
candidates for the Board of Trustees. Considering joining the Board 
of Trustees is no small decision. The time and dedication candidates 
have shown to this point speaks to their commitment to this movement. 
Congratulations to those candidates who have been selected. A great 
amount of appreciation and gratitude for those candidates not 
selected. Please continue to share your leadership with Wikimedia.
Thank you to those who followed the Affiliate process for this Board 
election. You may review the results of the Affiliate selection process.
The next part of the Board election process is the community voting 
period. You may view the Board election timeline here 
. 
To prepare for the community voting period, there are several things 
community members can engage with in the following ways:


  * Read candidates’ statements


 and
read the candidates’ answers to the questions posed by the
Affiliate Representatives.
  * Propose and select the 6 questions for candidates to answer
during their video Q

.
  * See the Analysis Committee’s ratings of candidates on each
candidate’s statement

.
  * Propose statements for the Election Compass


 voters
can use to find which candidates best fit their principles.
  * Encourage others in your community to take part in the election.
 *

Best,

Movement Strategy and Governance
/This message was sent on behalf of the Board Selection Task Force 
and the Elections Committee/


--
Jackie Koerner (she/her) Communication Specialist, Movement Strategy 
and Governance Location: Midwestern US (UTC-5)

Wikimedia Foundation 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing the six candidates for the 2022 Board of Trustees election

[Alice Wiegand]

Hi Jackie,
Thanks for sharing the result. Where can we find information about how many 
chapters/thematic organizations and usergroups have casted their votes?

Alice.

> Am 19.07.2022 um 19:32 schrieb Jackie Koerner :
> 
> You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. 
> 
>  Please help translate to your language 
> 
> Hi everyone,
> The Affiliate voting process has concluded. Representatives from each 
> Affiliate organization learned about the candidates by reading candidates’ 
> statements, reviewing candidates’ answers to questions, and considering the 
> candidates’ ratings provided by the Analysis Committee. The selected 2022 
> Board of Trustees candidates are:
> Tobechukwu Precious Friday (Tochiprecious 
> )
> Farah Jack Mustaklem (Fjmustak 
> )
> Shani Evenstein Sigalov (Esh77 )
> Kunal Mehta (Legoktm )
> Michał Buczyński (Aegis Maelstrom 
> )
> Mike Peel (Mike Peel )
> You may see more information about the Results 
> 
>  and Statistics 
> 
>  of this Board election.
> Please take a moment to appreciate the Affiliate Representatives and Analysis 
> Committee members for taking part in this process and helping to grow the 
> Board of Trustees in capacity and diversity. These hours of volunteer work 
> connect us across understanding and perspective. Thank you for your 
> participation.
> Thank you to the community members who put themselves forward as candidates 
> for the Board of Trustees. Considering joining the Board of Trustees is no 
> small decision. The time and dedication candidates have shown to this point 
> speaks to their commitment to this movement. Congratulations to those 
> candidates who have been selected. A great amount of appreciation and 
> gratitude for those candidates not selected. Please continue to share your 
> leadership with Wikimedia.
> Thank you to those who followed the Affiliate process for this Board 
> election. You may review the results of the Affiliate selection process.
> The next part of the Board election process is the community voting period. 
> You may view the Board election timeline here 
> .
>  To prepare for the community voting period, there are several things 
> community members can engage with in the following ways:
> Read candidates’ statements 
> 
>  and read the candidates’ answers to the questions posed by the Affiliate 
> Representatives.
> Propose and select the 6 questions for candidates to answer during their 
> video Q 
> .
> See the Analysis Committee’s ratings of candidates on each candidate’s 
> statement 
> .
> Propose statements for the Election Compass 
> 
>  voters can use to find which candidates best fit their principles.
> Encourage others in your community to take part in the election.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Movement Strategy and Governance
> This message was sent on behalf of the Board Selection Task Force and the 
> Elections Committee
> 
> -- 
> Jackie Koerner (she/her)
> Communication Specialist, Movement Strategy and Governance
> Location: Midwestern US (UTC-5)
> Wikimedia Foundation  
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at 
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/5OB5R3C7TT3GVP4CY6CXQWL5GZJ26WJN/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

___
Wikimedia-l