I d really love to have a simple voting right without exceptions, simple to explain. This than could be adopted as well by chapters and thematic orgs to distinguish between active and other members. I.e. have a number of billable contributions to Wikipedia or commons or be a registered developer. To make it an incentive more to contribute.
Rupert On Oct 6, 2014 1:55 PM, "Lodewijk" <[email protected]> wrote: > Do you know which users were among these 534? Would it be possible to > randomly approach 20-30 of them and ask why they didn't vote? It would be > helpful to learn, I guess. This is, assuming such a mini-survey was not > attempted yet. > > Best, > Lodewijk > > 2014-10-06 8:46 GMT+02:00 James Alexander <[email protected]>: > > > On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 5:12 AM, James Alexander < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > A completely un deduped (and so is double+ counting anyone who is > > eligible > > > on multiple wikis because of activity there) number is 207911 for 2013. > > > > > > Caveats: > > > > > > This number is quick and dirty and 'reasonable' as a starting point but > > > far from perfect, among other things: > > > > > > - It doesn't include 100% of the staff or developers, only the staff > > > who had staff rights or asked and developers who asked because they > > > couldn't vote in other ways). This is a relatively small amount of > > missing > > > people. > > > - It still includes bots and blocked users, because that was checked > > > later in the process. I, again, think this is a relatively small > > amount > > > given number of bots + blocked users with more then 300 edits > > relative to > > > the total. It is possible some of the bots are very active across > the > > board > > > though which will be helped by the de dupping. > > > - It is not de dupped meaning it double+ counts people who were > active > > > on many wikis or accounts, sometimes a lot (for example there are 7 > > entries > > > for my personal account, 7 for my work account, and 69 for the > steward > > > DerHexer given global work). Sorting through the crap that the > script > > spat > > > out is more then I'm willing to do at 5am but I will try to do this > > later > > > today and get this number down. My guess is this is in the 10k > range. > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I was wrong about the extent of the de duplication. In the end there > > were about *50124* unique people marked off on the voter list (again, > like > > above, that does still include some bots/blocked on multiple wiki users > but > > they are only counted once each) so call it 50k. > > > > Using that number: > > > > - With a total of 1809 valid votes that is about a 3.6% turnout. > > - We know that another 534 people authenticated to vote but did not > > actually cast a valid vote (and so most likely left after seeing the > > ballot)[1]. That would account for an additional 1% > > > > > > [1] > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2013/Post_mortem#Voter_participation > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > [email protected] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
