On 29 April 2013 18:48, Asaf Bartov <abar...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 2:37 AM, Itzik Edri <it...@infra.co.il> wrote: > > > I agree. We should limit it to only community members, or to give equal > > right to everyone. > > > > Asaf, you right, but we are talking also about the FDC elections. a > > processes where we are not granting chapters and others organizations the > > right to vote but granting to the WMF. Giving only WMF staff, and not > > chapters staff the right to vote in community process, it's like saying > the > > first are part of the community, but the second are not. I don't even > want > > to refer to the sensitive issue of the staff voting for their "bosses".. > > > > That's a very good point, and I think the chapter board members and staff > definitely _should_ be given a voice _at least_ in the FDC elections. I > leave it to the Elections Committee to propose solutions. > > >
The Elections Committee posted its plan weeks before the election started, with hardly any commentary at all; it is only now, after candidates may start entering the race, that people are complaining that we've failed to give the "right" people a vote (or alternately, that we've given too many people a vote). There is almost no variation between the voter eligibility this year and in the previous election; the only relevant changes are dates for eligibility and the developer commit process (which was changed because the Engineering Department changed the way that commits were done). I suggest that those who would like to see changes at the next election post on the election post mortem page[1] now, so that these ideas aren't lost to time. Risker (Election Committee Member) [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2013/Post_mortem _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l