Consiglio di fondazione di Wikimedia Foundation/Richiesta di feedback: seggi del Consiglio di comunità/Elezione di candidati confermati

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Outdated translations are marked like this.
Other languages:
Deutsch • ‎English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎italiano • ‎русский • ‎العربية


Richiesta di feedback: seggi del Consiglio di comunità
Pagina principale
Come partecipare
Idee del Consiglio
Idee comunitarie
Conversazioni
Rapporti
Sequenza temporale

Il Consiglio riconosce l'importanza di un ampio voto comunitario come parte del processo di selezione del trustee. Il Consiglio non ha intenzione di implementare un nuovo processo per la selezione di fiduciari selezionati dalla comunità e dagli affiliati che non implichi il voto di comunità.

Sei invitato a condividere i motivi per cui un voto comunitario sui candidati trustee è importante per te. Ad esempio, come si confronta il voto sui candidati confermati con la nomina diretta dei candidati confermati? Comprendere il ragionamento alla base della preferenza per un voto aiuterà il Consiglio a incorporare correttamente il voto nel processo di selezione del trustee.

Riepilogo del feedback in corso

Il team di facilitazione aggiorna questa sezione con le informazioni tratte dai rapporti.

Direct elections have received considerably more support than an indirect system mediated through a selection committee. The exceptional cases of volunteers preferring an indirect system have been documented in the “Selection committee” section above.

  • Most participants expressed their preference for Board elections when discussing related ideas like quotas, the vetting of candidates or the selection committee. Even when these ideas would be introduced, they expected elections to remain.
  • Wikimedia CH (Switzerland) emphasized the importance of a direct community vote.
  • At a European community conversation, one person said that community votes are important as they can readjust approaches of the Board and its inner circle, creating new topics and enforcing different points of view.
    • Another participant said that democracy is a better working principle than any elitist approach.
    • Another participant added that broad elections are safer, as they allow different and critical perspectives to enter the Board.
  • The ED of an European affiliate welcomed any combination of ideas preserving the direct involvement of the communities with a process ensuring skills and diversity.
    • She said that enforcing skills and diversity should not lead to a loss of involvement of the community in selection processes.
    • To her knowledge, this view was shared by a vast majority of the "Roles & Responsibilities" Movement Strategy working group.
  • The ED of another European affiliate said that community involvement is important due to shared ownership in the movement.
  • A member of Wikimedia Norway said that a lot of work within the movement is done by volunteers, so they should be a major part of the selection process, as decisions influence their work a lot.
  • Some participants said that Board elections were essential, and expressed their preference to convert some or all directly appointed seats into elected seats.