User talk:Alecmconroy/VoterGuide2011

Well, you seemed to have serious doubts about some things, so I guess you should have tried to understand the reasons of my block and read everything I have written about it, especially the bottom of my talk page with WizardofOz, but I guess it takes too much time and will to have real information about what happens. I am sorry you do not wish to at least inform yourself about this and I am afraid that you already made your choices before asking all these questions, I was foolish to lose my time (I have precious things to do like editing in Occitan which really needs me more than anything else...) answering then since I did not stand a chance at being judged fairly. Take care, your questions were really interesting... I hope you made the right decisions, time will tell, Capsot 08:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Just in case you might prove curious some day in the future and willing to learn what really happened; it's just a small piece of information, I do not have enough time (I have to write some entries in the Wikiccionari right now, I have done nearly nothing yesterday...): [1]

Gah! See, this is the downside of a wiki. Absolutely nothing is decided-- the election lasts for quite some time yet and people can always revote. A main point of even doing a guide like this is to try to generate an inter-project discussion about the candidates and the movement. Ideally there will be a _lot_ discussion between now and when people cast their final votes.

I've added some caveats to the one line about you. It's not a finished rationale, it's definitely not a decision. It's just a negative red flag I thought voters should probably be researching. I liked your statement very much and I have reached absolutely no conclusions about whether your block was justified. What we really need is to set up per-candidate discussion pages like En.Wiki does, so that we can have extended multi-party discussions of these kinds of issues. There are a _lot_ of candidates to investigate and it's a little overwhelming to have the election already started with such few questions and such little discussion, such that it's up to me to try to start drumming up discussion. --Alecmconroy 09:19, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks I really appreciate it. My biggest problem with all of this is that the elections and the upper structures are not a general concern among editors (I would daresay we probably reach 20% and less people voting) so I really appreciated your initiative trying to foster a wider interest because I think we are all concerned by what is going on (when I was campaigning about the Catalan Chapters in the Wikipedias, I realized many people did not even know what was a Chapter... so it is really bothering me... how can you be an emanation of the community if people do not care or even do not know that you exist up there...) and where we will be going in the future. Unfortunately many people among the potential voters will vote for the "known people" just because they have not done anything (terribly) wrong (even if they have been pretty passive...), that is 1) the members of the current board and 2) then people from the Chapcom (which are really active or prominent actors) or 3) the other organizations of the Wikimedia (visible people too) and leave little place for newbies and I am really sorry for people like Urs, William or Jane which probably are hardly read even if they spend much time answering and trying to make their opinions and positions known; the fact is that little people read what you write. On the other hand you could wonder if being active in organizations is not some kind of opportunism to get at the top some day... To speak the truth I am not really concerned about being elected or not (actually I have so many things to do, with my family, personally or professionally that I do not know if I could have a good dedication to the cause; I think that many candidates are much better than I am... I would suggest that if you had the time you really tried to figure out what Gomà has done, in my opinion he has been a major player in some fields even if he is not among the "known" people), I am basically here to make my message heard, "things are going wrong in many places and they need some fixing" (this will end soon since I am bound to be blocked again in Meta after the elections...) and I think we agree in this, and that was the cause of my block mainly because I happen to be a threat because of my big mouth and want for transparency and so on... I know for sure who won't vote for me, the ones I bother so much, but well the incognite factors are whether the minorities I am so devoted to defend will participate much (generally they feel at least forgotten or worse ill-treated by the other Wikipedias or the Wikimedia structures) and if I can capitalize votes from people who really crave for changes, more power to the communities, justice and transparency (though I am afraid these people do not trust the system and will not vote unfortunately...). Again, thanks for your change and I hope your work, that I really appreciate and I am grateful for your efforts, the time and energy you spend here, will help an increase in participation and awareness of what is cooking. Sorry if I write too much... Bye, take real care and keep on asking questions (we are all bound to give honest answers...), Claudi/Capsot 11:12, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Still about my case you also had this not that long ago: (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Board_elections)/2011#Eligibility_of_Capsot) but feel free to contact me if you really intend to understand what happened, I will be glad to answer the best I can. Capsot 11:17, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I think your new initiative is really interesting (sorry to say this, but about the rest I think that your other statements need complementary data, and in the meanwhile they can encourage voters to vote for your favorite candidate(s) while you haven't said a word about many of the other candidates (you see I am not complaining about me since you took care of me...) and well... the elections are on their way... and I think that everyone should be treated on the same level for bad or for good, at least some basic lines you could develop later... thanks!). While I was trying to find some information I stumbled upon this (pretty useful toy actually...):

• [2]
• [3]
• [4]

Since I know you want to be as impartial as possible I thought they could be some relevant indicators (although not the only ones and these stats are just a part of a more complex reality) of the activity of some of the current Board Trustees. Take care, Claudi/Capsot 11:24, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

minor correction

Hi,

thanks for your kind words. I was just wondering, is there a specific reason why you did not mention me at "Some candidates have held positions of trust at the chapter-level" (considering my being founding board member of Wikimedia Netherlands and five year board membership)? You might have overlooked it perhaps :) Effeietsanders 15:20, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Yep-- just info overload. Thanks for pointing it out, I added it in. :) --Alecmconroy 05:29, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Nice work trying to sink Ting Chen the best you can... Well, don't worry, take your time... you still have a few years before releasing any statements about the outsiders if they happen to be in the next election process... Claudi/Capsot 06:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Ting is very complicated just as Jimmy is very complicated. They've posed problems, but I have huge amounts of goodwill towards them both. To talk about Ting-- I really really really like him and if elected, I won't be pulling my hair out or anything-- he does bring a lot to the table. If I shared Ting's philosophy of our mission and the role of board member, I suspect I'd no doubt support Ting. Since his philosophy is so radical, I don't support him as a community representative.

I totally don't look at this as an attempt to "sink" him though-- that is, I'd feel uncomfortable if I felt my words alone were a decisive force. I'm uncomfortable as it is, because the scarcity of discussion, especially from the global community. --Alecmconroy 18:10, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

You did not really understand me... sorry to see you are so centered on Ting Chen... The biggest issue here, aside from the Ting Chen thing, in my opinion, is the fact that you center your work around a few people, mainly from a certain "establishment" while you seem to fail to realize that the fact that you do not even say a word about Urs, Gomà, Ferdinando, Esteban and the other "outsiders" plays against them (but well, the work Sj, who is not an outsider, has done is not really mentioned either...); but well it is way too late now with three days left. You should realize that outsiders have the enormous problem of not being known so they do not have any "platform" of voters ready to vote for them except in the case of Gomà because he is, to a certain extent, a known figure in the Catalan community and some other places (but well on the other hand this also attracts him negative votes on other sides...). The enormous amount of time you spend/t dealing with Ting Chen will make it really difficult for you to provide enough/interesting data about all the candidates and thus your Voter Guide will probably be incomplete by the end of day 11th and probably in the last day of elections too; and well I guess that about 4/5 of the voters have already voted so far so your Voter Guide will actually be an unfinished Voter Guide... However you at least have the merit to have tried it... and you have probably created the need or the desire to have more debates about the candidates, which is a really good thing... and I hope it will make, some day, the communities more prone to look upwards... Beginning something is always hard and criticism is the easiest part... But, well if you have some minutes, tell us something about the invisible ones, please... Have a nice day, Claudi/Capsot 19:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Alecmconroy, I wasn't planning to vote in this election but your guide made it clear that I had to. I reviewed more of Ting Chen's discussion on the mailing lists and I am only more alarmed. I was also thoroughly disturbed by mvart4u's statement. There are many good candidates in this election, but it seems some truly terrible ones slipped in as well. Conversely, I found Milos Rancic's stance against censorship and the encroachment of regulations on Commons to be reassuring. Thanks again! Dcoetzee 03:46, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

• I second this -- thanks for an amazing work! Guides like this have a huge importance, because it's strange, but I barely can find any discussion on the candidates anywhere. Trycatch 17:50, 10 June 2011 (UTC)