In fact, for those who have access to it, there is a list of statements at
the bottom of that page, listing statements from each chapthorg on their
method and time of voting:

https://chapters.wikimedia.ch/Appointment_process/2016/Voting#Statements

For example, our entry says:

"NYC: Decided by open public meeting on April 13, 2016."

I think it might be best to make that whole section publicly viewable.

Thanks,
Pharos

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Andrew Gray <andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk>
wrote:

> Yes, for clarity, this is what I meant - a public list of who has
> voted so far (or who hasn't - it's much the same thing, as the overall
> electorate is known), but not a list of the votes.
>
> I'm quite happy with confidential voting - either fully secret or, as
> Itzik says, just confidential until the end of the vote.
>
> But knowing *who* has voted would be quite useful. Ultimately, the
> chapters represent large chunks of the community, and if the chapter
> isn't doing its job then it's good their members know about it in
> order to chase them. Discovering afterwards that your chapter hasn't
> voted is interesting, but not very useful at making sure votes get
> cast while there's still time - and ultimately, I think that last part
> is what we all want to achieve :-)
>
> A.
>
> On 3 May 2016 at 16:21, Liam Wyatt <liamwy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It seems like people are talking about two separate things at the same
> time:
> >
> > - Some people are taking about publishing *the votes* (either before, or
> > after the election has finished)
> >
> > - Some people are talking about publishing *the list of who has voted*
> > right now.
> >
> > It is this second thing that I understood to be the request being made,
> and
> > it is also completely consistent with the way the community-election
> works
> > (where the voter, but not their vote, is published immediately). I also
> > wouldn't think that publishing the names of the Chapters that have voted
> > (and therefore identifying which ones have not yet) is still consistent
> > with the preference that the *vote itself* remain private.
> >
> > So, in order for the community (and those of us who are members of
> Chapters
> > in particular) to encourage the chapters have not yet voted to do so,
> would
> > it be possible to please publish a table on Meta of the list of
> > voting-eligible organisations, and a "tick" next to their name if they
> have
> > indeed already submitted their vote. [NOT who they voted for]
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Liam
> >
> >
> > --
> > wittylama.com
> > Peace, love & metadata
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>
>
>
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>   andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
>
_______________________________________________
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