While my first impression of this proposed plan is fairly positive, I do have 
one major concern.

> Wiadomość napisana przez Ramzy Muliawan <ramzymuliawa...@gmail.com> w dniu 
> 24.02.2016, o godz. 11:47:
> 
> - Six regional seats, popularly elected by the regional communities. The
> proposed "regional communities" would be North America, South and Central
> America, Europe, Africa and the Middle East, Central and South Asia, and
> Asia Pacific and Oceania.
> - Five at-large seats, or what we call today as community seats. Like the
> regional one, it will be popularly elected --- but by the whole community.

My concern with the "at-large" seats is that if we’ve looked at the history of 
community Board elections, the electorate is overwhelmingly from the developed 
world.  The candidates are also overwhelmingly from the developed world.  We’ve 
already seen this in the current election, where despite the presence of six 
fine developing world candidates, myself included, the electorate settled on 
three white men (no offense to Dariusz, Denny and James).

Under this proposed plan, Europe and North America will get one seat each.  
Let’s hypothesize that all the elected "at-large" seats went to developed world 
candidates.  And then the affiliate seats have also traditionally gone to 
developed countries as well.  Then we have Jimmy’s seat.  Under this plan, we 
run the risk of having eleven of the fifteen seats dominated by developed 
countries.  So does this mean that the remaining four seats should simply be 
tokens for developing countries, but to which we have no leverage because we 
can easily be outvoted by the other members of the Board?

Last year, I had spoken out against quotas for developing countries, since it 
effectively puts our representation at the mercy of the Board.  I am still 
figuring out what would be the best way to approach this issue, especially 
since voting for community Board seats is by language, not by country, but I’m 
looking at a mixture of temporary quotas (and I stress "temporary"), developing 
stronger mechanisms for getting developing country Wikipedians involved in 
movement governance (through affiliates, stronger consultation mechanisms when 
discussing movement-wide issues, etc.), and weighted voting in favor of certain 
geographies if this is technologically possible.

Josh

JAMES JOSHUA G. LIM
Bachelor of Arts in Political Science
Class of 2013, Ateneo de Manila University
Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines

jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com <mailto:jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com> | +63 (977) 831-7582
Facebook/Twitter: akiestar | Wikimedia: Sky Harbor
http://about.me/josh.lim <http://about.me/josh.lim>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to