Hi, IMHO, for a person to be in a committee which will shape the movement charter, he/she needs to be experienced enough to have a broad understanding of the movement. Newcomers without any insight of the historical context will not be able to draft a charter effectively. Also, popular elections don't properly judge the weightage of different candidates; it puts every candidate to the same level, which they are not. It would be absolutely unfair to put a Wikimedian with 10-15 years of experience and having a good standing with the larger community and a complete newcomer who is almost unknown to the community on the same ballot box. It was not at all necessary to bring all the 70 candidates to the same table. A certain threshold could be determined first and then candidates could be filtered out before election. Plus, drafting movement charter is not a capacity building program for newcomers, it will shape the future of the movement, so quality control was necessary. I am not sure if these points will be taken into consideration while (s)electing the committee members, but if not, I am sure, it will frustrate many Wikimedians who care about the movement.
Regards, Bodhisattwa On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 at 11:24, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: > I still believe that a screening phase where people with limited support below > a certain threshold can quit the race or be removed is the best way to > have a functional ballot... to me it's just simpler this way. Even at > real-life elections you need to show some signatures to access the race. > > If, after weeks of debate, a person get 1/5th of the support of an average > candidate, it simply does not have a real chance. I point out again here, > this would not be an additional phase, it's just something that can be done > in parallel to the presentation of the candidates. For example, at the nth > support signature, you enter the ballot. > > For some reasons, some people assume that "plurality" means that everybody > can join, but a crowded ballot is just chaotic. For n places to be > selected, you should not give more than 2n-3n candidates on a final ballot, > IMHO. Especially if you want to use certain electoral methods. > > I tried to revise all 70 profiles and it was really boring. So after a > while, I just put 10 names I kinda liked and that's it, I probably missed > some of them. I also had negative feedback... which went wasted but could > have also helped. Maybe in this scenario, the old method of > "positive-neutral-negative" tipping box per each candidate could have also > worked better than a STV ranking. > > In any case with the other election I could more or less predict the > probable final output (gender balanced, with actual limited chance for > so-called GS), here it's almost impossible, the vote will be diluted so > much and I really cannot focus on all the candidates. This ould probably > mean that bugs of UI (fixed display of candidates, problem of selecting > from menu if initial letter has an unusual accent...) might influence the > outcome more than usual. > > Alessandro > > > Il martedì 19 ottobre 2021, 06:41:56 CEST, Anupam Dutta < > anupamdutt...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > Hi all, > > To me, a slightly better approach would have been to divide the 70 > candidates into 7 blocks of 10 each, chosen in a random way, but the block > remaining fixed. Then force the voter to visit each block and view the > candidates ( so that nobody has any undue advantage). After that, the voter > will have the choice to choose any or all or none...... > > (Disclaimer : I am one of the candidates). > > Anupamdutta73 > > On Tue, Oct 19, 2021, 08:55 effe iets anders <effeietsand...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Just for quick context: I was mostly trying to say that any *simple* > system may have benefits in the scenario when you don't have the resources > to make a complex system work properly (read: userfriendly). A 7-member > district was intended as shorthand for "out of these 70 people, pick 7 > favorites". That does not allow as much nuance as ranking, but it also has > much less mental load. There are more systems that would have been easier > on the voter, most likely. I fear that with the 'rank these 70 people into > an order of 70' will scare away too many participants. > > Lodewijk > > On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 7:40 PM Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote: > > <snip> > I am curious what is meant by a "7-member district". Lodewijk, could you > explain in more detail? > <snip> > > > Risker/Anne > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W3XYWFSUTJ2XSFIUHZAPNMOQPECZTOTV/ > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/CV3LSFVZT3GBUTV7CC752BYHFPGQFRZS/ > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/M32MI4FY6EK6MGMJA52NPWBNMYT3WT5L/ > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/VV2M5ZHYDX4VIUCQ3UOXBSD6PARV77FK/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
