Talk:Wikimedia Foundation elections/2017/Post mortem/Report

Thanks for this very thorough report! Good to see so much thought has gone into this from the staff and the Election Committee. I have one comment on the recommendation related to collation of questions and potentially disallowing candidates from answering questions that aren't in the collated selection. While I understand the intention, I'm not sure this will work. I found that there were conversations about the election not only on Meta but also several Wikipedias (German and Ukrainian) and on the Wikipedia Weekly Facebook group, as well as candidates' own Facebook pages. Presumably, communication about the election in any forum is a good thing - and even if it is desirable to stop candidates participating in that communication (which I doubt), it's difficult to police that. For instance, someone wrote a voter guide on the German Wikipedia which I felt misrepresented something I'd been involved in, and naturally I posted my perspective in the discussion of the guide. Would that be ruled out of order? Regards, Chris Keating (The Land) (talk) 20:05, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Hey Chris! Thanks for the kind words. This report is intended to collate the feedback the committee received during the feedback period immediately following the election. Recommendations in this report aren't set in stone and many - as you rightly point out! - are infeasible or nonenforceable. We as a committee will use the report going forward to improve conditions in the next cycle - currently set for 2019. Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 22:29, 17 October 2017 (UTC)