Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-05-20/From the editor
Your voice is needed: strategic voting in the WMF election
The Wikimedia Foundation's biennial Board of Trustees election is open for voting. Of the ten seats on the board, three are elected representatives of the global Wikimedia community—you.
The relationship between the WMF and the community has been strained in recent times, perhaps most notably after the introduction of superprotect on the German Wikipedia and the VisualEditor on the English. As such, Wikipedia editors love to gripe about the WMF. Often, this complaining is justified, but voting in this election is one of the primary outlets by which Wikipedians can shape the strategic direction of the WMF. The board hires the executive director, approves the annual budget, and generally oversees the organization. We need to seize the opportunity to help shape the WMF's responses to the challenges it faces and will face in the coming years.
You can get to know the candidates through several methods. Last week's Signpost special asked them to rank their answers on a numerical scale, making it a quick and easy way to see the candidate's positions on various issues. For those looking to make a more in-depth assessment, the main questions page on Meta has 35 questions (as of publishing time) to read through.
How should you vote? We are not in a place to tell you who to vote for, but as the system used is a modified form of an approval vote, you can maximize your impact by liberally voting no. As Dirk Franke explains (minor changes for readability):
“ | To give you some examples with small numbers:
In this case person A would be the winner although in total numbers he has only half the support of person B. In this scenario the candidate needs 9 support votes to make up for one oppose vote. This of course works for bigger numbers as well:
A wins
A wins The higher the approval rate for the top candidates is in general, the higher is the impact of a negative vote. With an approval rate of 90% for the top candidates voting nay has 9 times more impact than voting yes. Around 80% approval rate the impact of a nay is 4 times as big, around 70% approval rate the factor is below 3 and around 50% the factor is just one. Below 50%, the support votes become more influential than nays. Given normal circumstances in such an election the approval rates for the top three candidates should be over 70 or 80%; so a negative given has three to four times than impact than a positive vote given. For you as tactical voter this means: don't waste nay-votes. Don't vote neutral. |
” |
Vote now and make a difference. The people selected in this election will quite possibly help make significant decisions for the future of our movement.
Discuss this story
(Tangent) Nice to see one of my Welcome 19th C. lithograph uploads illustrating the story. --Fæ (talk) 08:54, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]