Sue writes:
"Interesting thread, Itzik --- to be honest, I had forgotten that staff had > been granted the right to vote regardless of edit count. I wouldn't be > surprised if the only staff members who do vote are those who would qualify > under the edit count requirement anyway. > > "Seems to me that rather than creating new exemptions from the edit count > requirement, we might be better off to lower the number of edits required > so that anybody who's demonstrated interest in the projects would qualify. > If edits on meta, mediawiki, outreach, etc., qualify, and we were to lower > the edit count requirement, then I think that would be inclusive of > most/all contributors. Would something like that make sense?" > It makes sense to me. I think many thoughtful people recognize that the edit-count requirement is a fairly weak metric of engagement in the Wikimedia community. I also think the exemptions actually have reflected the same recognition -- that someone who is not a dedicated editor may be a committed and contributing member of the community in other ways than super-numerous recent edits. That there should be some threshold of engagement I think is necessary to prevent capture of WMF board, but I'm not sure it needs to be as high as it is right now. FWIW, when I was on staff I did not vote for WMF board positions, even though I could, because I thought it was important in the role I was playing to recuse myself from engagement in the elections. I don't think that reasoning would apply to all staff members, but it felt applicable in my particular case. --Mike _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
