Wikimedia Foundation elections/Board elections/Ineligible voters

If you are ineligible to vote in a Board election, feel free to leave a comment or suggestion here.

This page started from a discussion with people who didn't feel there was a place for them to share their thoughts on the election if they had no vote -- and from a comment on the 2009 elections talk page:

600 edits is way too much.The requirements should rather be that a person joined wikipedia at least a year before 2009 - and has made, lets say 50-100 edits before 2009.Some kind of an edit recorder or such would be very helpful to determine the length and original content of these edits. Most wikipedians, under these conditions cannot vote.If a person does not spend a lot of time here doesn not mean he is less intelligent or he's opinion is any less informed or valuable?

voting requirements

2009

600 edits + 50 in the 6 months before an election is announced. There is an assumption of one vote per person.

Past years

In the past voting requirements have been lower; there is an implicit assumption that as the projects grow and as attention to the elections grows the incentives for people to spoof them may also grow. On the other hand, last year's election drew more attention than this year's. Voting requirements for major elections on other wikiprojects are worth considering as well.

motivations

• Reducing possible voter fraud
• Limiting the input of voters who might be less involved with the projects, which could encourage unwanted canvassing.
• Limiting the input of voters who might know less about what is good for the projects.

suggestions

• Direct ineligible voters who follow the "please vote" link and are rejected to a page like this, with a friendly message inviting their input. Offer other ways that they can be involved with the election process - from asking questions of candidates to spreading the word to eligible voters on their home wikis [provide a tool that lets them find eligible voters].

  NB: Some people have said that voters who don't see the sitewide notice and follow it aren't engaged enough to be good voters.

• make other methods available for voters who want to demonstrate their authenticity.
• define other ways to determine engagement and interest of voters. racking up an edit count is more 'cool' today on certain projects than on others, and the easiest way to acquire edits is to use scripts that allow you to make lots of minor edits - not necessarily a sign of general project involvement.