Election results, Voting has begun Options

[Cla68]

If anyone is interested in following the results as the votes roll in, here's a constantly updated table. So far it appears that six different people have a fair shot at the seventh spot.

This post has been edited by Cla68:

[The Wales Hunter]

Jimbo gives admin votes more weight than non-admin wotes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=256105292

I have traditionally looked at %support, and looked at the others carefully to see if they indicate anything particularly interesting or alarming. Another thing I have always looked at is %support by admins because if there is a major deviation between admin support and more general support, this could indicate a number of different kinds of problems. (For example: an external campaign by an activist group attempting to influence the election. For example: a rift between admins and some significant constituency of non-admin users.) As people often say "voting is evil" so what I am looking for is a consensus. And I'm most interested in a consensus of the thoughtful.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

[taiwopanfob]

Jimbo gives admin votes more weight than non-admin wotes:

This is the kind of stupidity -- in effect, he is saying that non-admins might as well not vote -- that blind ballots go a big step towards curing.

[Kelly Martin]

Jimbo gives admin votes more weight than non-admin wotes:

This is the kind of stupidity -- in effect, he is saying that non-admins might as well not vote -- that blind ballots go a big step towards curing.

Jimmy has long weighted votes in the elections; he has made it clear that he will reject a candidate who does well overall but is opposed by his close circle.

This is definitely a very strong argument for the election being a secret ballot; the community should absolutely demand this for the next election.

The SF police are bound to follow the CEO and board, as to who legally physically accesses the server building. And the programmers are hired and fired by the foundation, and they damn-well do what the board says.

As far as I know, the servers are still in Florida and there are no plans to move them.

Jimbo has never understood that he doesn't own Wikimedia. He believes that it's his personal property to use and control; the WMF thing is just a legalistic dodge that doesn't alter his moral right of control. The concept of "fiduciary duty" is completely lost on him, as is the concept of "charitable organization". It's pretty clear that the only thing preserving his control over Wikipedia is the fact that most of the Wikipedia community is teenaged boys who have an innate need for defined hierarchy and clear leaders. Jimbo fills that need for them; he pretends to be their leader and they support him in that role. As long as Wikipedia continues to primarily recruit from that demographic, I don't see this changing.

[Milton Roe]

The SF police are bound to follow the CEO and board, as to who legally physically accesses the server building. And the programmers are hired and fired by the foundation, and they damn-well do what the board says.

As far as I know, the servers are still in Florida and there are no plans to move them.

Doesn't matter. There are apparently 5 different IT managers distributed geographically all over. The headquarters where orders are given, is in SF. The 400 servers are mostly in a server farm in Tampa (you're right), but they sound like they're rented. Fine. They do what the IT people (run by Brion Vibber) tell them, and the IT people answer to WFM, which is run by the CEO, which answers to the board.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/articl...54&pageNumber=1

Jimbo has never understood that he doesn't own Wikimedia. He believes that it's his personal property to use and control; the WMF thing is just a legalistic dodge that doesn't alter his moral right of control. The concept of "fiduciary duty" is completely lost on him, as is the concept of "charitable organization". It's pretty clear that the only thing preserving his control over Wikipedia is the fact that most of the Wikipedia community is teenaged boys who have an innate need for defined hierarchy and clear leaders. Jimbo fills that need for them; he pretends to be their leader and they support him in that role. As long as Wikipedia continues to primarily recruit from that demographic, I don't see this changing.

No doubt. But the question is: how do you keep it from changing? It only takes a one-time collusion of a majority of the WMF board to change everything, forever. For as long as they want. I suppose Brion and Co. could declare loyalty to Jimbo and sabotage the software or in some way stage a passive-aggressive "strike." But strikes can be broken, and it only takes one IT person to defect, also. This whole thing is massively unstable, due to the fact that it's not owned by Jimbo, and is therefore entirely driven by the willing-suspension of disbelief, by the board-audience in their chosen "actor." But an audience is a treacherous thing, as any actor (or speaker) can tell you. Lose your audience, and you're dead, dead, dead.

[Kelly Martin]

the IT people answer to WFM, which is run by the CEO, which answers to the board.

From what I've heard, the CEO (Sue Gardner) does not answer to the board at all, and in fact the board is effectively powerless over her, in part due to a golden parachute in her employment agreement (basically, firing her would bankrupt them). The WMF board is an essentially powerless entity.

It only takes a one-time collusion of a majority of the WMF board to change everything, forever.

Unlikely to happen; nobody gets on the WMF board now without getting personally approved by both Jimmy and Sue. Elected seats now comprise a tiny minority of the board, with the remainder appointed through mechanisms that are entirely controlled by either Jimmy or Sue. In my opinion, this was done in response to the near-coup late last year, in which a vote to "pack" the board with people unfriendly to Jimbo (and which would likely have been followed by a vote to eject Jimbo from the board) failed by a single vote.

For as long as they want. I suppose Brion and Co. could declare loyalty to Jimbo and sabotage the software or in some way stage a passive-aggressive "strike." But strikes can be broken, and it only takes one IT person to defect, also.

Brion is not going to revolt as long as they continue to pay him, and I suspect he'd even remain loyal even if not paid for a while. Just not the sort of person he is. Whatever feelings Brion has on the social and political issues, he keeps very much to himself.

[Milton Roe]

the IT people answer to WFM, which is run by the CEO, which answers to the board.

From what I've heard, the CEO (Sue Gardner) does not answer to the board at all, and in fact the board is effectively powerless over her, in part due to a golden parachute in her employment agreement (basically, firing her would bankrupt them). The WMF board is an essentially powerless entity.

And good heavens, who voted Gardner such a package, when the board members themselves have nothing of the sort? They really must be idiots.

It only takes a one-time collusion of a majority of the WMF board to change everything, forever.

Unlikely to happen; nobody gets on the WMF board now without getting personally approved by both Jimmy and Sue. Elected seats now comprise a tiny minority of the board, with the remainder appointed through mechanisms that are entirely controlled by either Jimmy or Sue. In my opinion, this was done in response to the near-coup late last year, in which a vote to "pack" the board with people unfriendly to Jimbo (and which would likely have been followed by a vote to eject Jimbo from the board) failed by a single vote.

Very interesting. Well, board members can still be bribed by outsider take-over foundations with money. If WMF pays them little and Gardner a lot, again that's very unstable as soon as everybody realizes how they're being screwed.

For as long as they want. I suppose Brion and Co. could declare loyalty to Jimbo and sabotage the software or in some way stage a passive-aggressive "strike." But strikes can be broken, and it only takes one IT person to defect, also.

Brion is not going to revolt as long as they continue to pay him, and I suspect he'd even remain loyal even if not paid for a while. Just not the sort of person he is. Whatever feelings Brion has on the social and political issues, he keeps very much to himself.

And he's famous for editing WP rarely (45 edits last year, 29 this year). Not the admin with fewest edits of all, but second-place. So you can't smell the sewer if you refuse to raise the manhole cover.