Совет Попечителей Фонда Викимедиа/Призыв для отзывов: места в Совете для Сообществ/Выборы подтвержденных кандидатов

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Outdated translations are marked like this.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


Call for feedback: Community Board seats
Main Page
How to participate
Board ideas
Community ideas
Conversations
Reports
Timeline

Совет признает важность широкого общественного голосования в рамках процесса выбора попечителей. Совет не намерен внедрять новый процесс отбора попечителей, отобранных сообществом и аффилиациями, который не предполагает голосования сообществ.

На этой странице вам предлагается поделиться причинами, по которым голосование сообщества по кандидатам в попечители важно для вас. Например, как голосование по подтвержденным кандидатам соотносится с прямым назначением подтвержденных кандидатов? Понимание причин, лежащих в основе предпочтения голоса, поможет Совету должным образом включить голосование в процесс выбора попечителей.

Резюме от текущих отзывах

Группа фасилитаторов обновляет этот раздел информацией из отчетов.

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.