Jump to content

Talk:Affiliations Committee/Candidates/December 2017

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Battleofalma in topic Thank you very much



Since the last candidate cycle led to some criteria being established on who can and who can't join AffCom, wouldn't it be fair to post these criteria here? Is there actually a possibility for current members of AffCom to not be re-elected? It would be great to have way more transparency in terms of documenting the decision process for selecting candidates. Thanks, Braveheart (talk) 09:40, 13 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Seconded, it would be very helpful to have these available so people who wear other hats in the Wikimedia community know whether they are eligible before spending time applying. John Cummings (talk) 15:28, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

What can we learn from affiliate models used by other organisations?


There are many organisations who use affiliate models e.g Amnesty International, Creative Commons, Oxfam Mozilla. What do you think we could learn from the affiliate models used by these and other organisations?


John Cummings (talk) 15:21, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply



It's a bad joke, that the WMF want us to vote, but give just the chance to say yes. This is not an elections. This is pseudo-democratic nonsense. Once more a sign, what the WMF thinks of us. I will not play this game. Marcus Cyron (talk) 12:56, 5 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Marcus, basically agree. The current method isn't decided by WMF though, but by the existing committee which then selects new candidates or re-selects existing candidates. The current process doesn't create a committee that is accountable for its decisions in the way many other governance bodies in Wikimedia are (and should be). This is why I've put myself forward with the aim of moving AffCom to the elected/appointed model most affiliate boards follow. Battleofalma (talk) 17:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)Reply
Which is ironic in a way - one of the few committees that doesn't have seats appointed by WMF is the least transparent... Braveheart (talk) 13:28, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply
Proven below in Andrea's example. Let's wait and see the justification.   ManosHacker talk 05:06, 20 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much


I want to thank the 60 users who gave me their support. Even though I was not elected, I feel very honored to have been, by far, the user who has received the most votes of trust. Users from 26 countries showed me their confidence and for me that is the most valuable thing. Thank you for placing your trust and confidence in my abilities. I feel very grateful to the entire community.--Jalu (talk) 20:52, 19 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

How do you know you were not appointed? Has there been a public announcement? [FYI - it's not an election as you say, these are endorsements, not votes. The existing committee appoints new members according to its own choice]. Wittylama (talk) 22:14, 19 January 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Wittylama: There has not been a public announcement yet (as we are waiting for confirmation from several candidates), but all of the candidates have been individually informed as to the results of the process. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 02:46, 20 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Wittylama, a vote of trust, in my country, means that somebody trust you, not that he voted you as in a presidential election. I said that a lot of users trust me, that is what means "votes of trust", not "votes of an election", is something complety different. In fact, I supported two other users, I was not voting for them.--Jalu (talk) 03:51, 23 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Kirill Lokshin: The process has seen a great improvement in timeliness but results are again being partially revealed before an official announcement. If a successful candidate does not accept, what happens? Does a candidate who has been informed that they are not on the committee get asked again? Battleofalma (talk) 13:29, 23 January 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Battleofalma: We hadn't even considered the registration list as a potential vehicle for the results to be revealed; thank you for bringing it to our attention. In any case, the official announcement has now been published. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 13:51, 23 January 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Kirill Lokshin: Ha, well there are a lot of plates spinning I guess. Thanks for getting the official announcement out.Battleofalma (talk) 14:01, 23 January 2018 (UTC)Reply