I agree that these are valid concerns, as is the point that we should
consider how the 'homewiki' (or whatever demographic you choose to follow)
distribution across those votes impacts the outcome. I think there will be
general agreement that more participation would be great (although I feel
that I have to admit, that this time around I didn't vote myself: just
didn't get to reading the proposals carefully enough this time.)
There are a few things I do wonder about, which are not clear from the
conversation/statistics:
- is the approval rating significantly different among voters from smaller
projects than in larger projects? I don't know if the voting infrastructure
even allows for such a breakdown.
- are within projects, certain types of users over represented? For
example, I would love some breakdown along tenure (how long have editors
been around), rights holders (admin, arbcom, etc) and how those compare to
the populations in their respective communities.
A turnout this size is maybe not a high percentage of eligible voters, but
note that we intentionally set our eligibility criteria low. A low
percentage is then only a natural outcome. I do wonder: what kind of
percentage would make colleagues more confident? And how could we
realistically achieve those percentages?
Best,
Lodewijk
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 7:55 PM <Adel.nehaoua.wiki@gmail.com> wrote:
> ??????? ??? ??????? ??? ??????? ?? ???????? ?? ????? ?? ??? ??? ?? ???????
> ????????? ??????? ?????? ???????? ??? ??? ??? ????????? ??? ??????? ????
> ??? ???????:
> * ???? ???????? ??? ????? ???? ?????? 3097 ?????? ?? ??? 68745 ???? ????
> * ??? ????????? ??? ??????? 2,290 ???? ????? ????? ??? 4% ?? ???????
> ??????? ?????
> * ??????? 3 ??????? ??? ??? ???? ?? ??? ??????? ???? ????????? ?????? ??
> ????? ??????? ??????? ????????
> ????????:
> * ????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ????? ???? ???
> ????????? ???? ??? ???? ????????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ???????? ????? ???
> ??? ????? ?? ?? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???????? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ??
> ???? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ?? ?? ???????? ???? ?????? ????
> * ?? ?????? ????????? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ??????? ?????? ?????? ????????
> * ?? ??? ?????? ????????? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ??
> ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ????
> ????? ?? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ??????? ??????? ??????? ?????? ??????
> ?????? ??? ??????? ???????? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ???????
> ?????
> ??????
> _______________________________________________
> 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/BITDAPENFZSAYHRFR3HDPNNLOD54TWWR/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
consider how the 'homewiki' (or whatever demographic you choose to follow)
distribution across those votes impacts the outcome. I think there will be
general agreement that more participation would be great (although I feel
that I have to admit, that this time around I didn't vote myself: just
didn't get to reading the proposals carefully enough this time.)
There are a few things I do wonder about, which are not clear from the
conversation/statistics:
- is the approval rating significantly different among voters from smaller
projects than in larger projects? I don't know if the voting infrastructure
even allows for such a breakdown.
- are within projects, certain types of users over represented? For
example, I would love some breakdown along tenure (how long have editors
been around), rights holders (admin, arbcom, etc) and how those compare to
the populations in their respective communities.
A turnout this size is maybe not a high percentage of eligible voters, but
note that we intentionally set our eligibility criteria low. A low
percentage is then only a natural outcome. I do wonder: what kind of
percentage would make colleagues more confident? And how could we
realistically achieve those percentages?
Best,
Lodewijk
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 7:55 PM <Adel.nehaoua.wiki@gmail.com> wrote:
> ??????? ??? ??????? ??? ??????? ?? ???????? ?? ????? ?? ??? ??? ?? ???????
> ????????? ??????? ?????? ???????? ??? ??? ??? ????????? ??? ??????? ????
> ??? ???????:
> * ???? ???????? ??? ????? ???? ?????? 3097 ?????? ?? ??? 68745 ???? ????
> * ??? ????????? ??? ??????? 2,290 ???? ????? ????? ??? 4% ?? ???????
> ??????? ?????
> * ??????? 3 ??????? ??? ??? ???? ?? ??? ??????? ???? ????????? ?????? ??
> ????? ??????? ??????? ????????
> ????????:
> * ????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ????? ???? ???
> ????????? ???? ??? ???? ????????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ???????? ????? ???
> ??? ????? ?? ?? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???????? ?? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ??
> ???? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ?? ?? ???????? ???? ?????? ????
> * ?? ?????? ????????? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ??????? ?????? ?????? ????????
> * ?? ??? ?????? ????????? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ??
> ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ????
> ????? ?? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ??????? ??????? ??????? ?????? ??????
> ?????? ??? ??????? ???????? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ???????
> ?????
> ??????
> _______________________________________________
> 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/BITDAPENFZSAYHRFR3HDPNNLOD54TWWR/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org