Election results, Voting has begun Options

It looks like at least some of this election is going to descend into outright farce. I think one way to fix this, as Gomi suggested in another thread, is to use secret balloting. Although it won't prevent canvassing, it would make it harder to game the system by tactical opposes/supports and it would help prevent pile-on voting like what happened with Ryan's comments on CHL's and Neil's pages. The final vote tallies would just need to be announced before Jimbo made his appointment announcement.

Mass canvassing will be easier this way. This kind of things should not be repeated, but people must understand that what is going on here has nothing to do with editing conflict. He said he will recuse in AA matters, and he could for other matters. It is a question of trust on his access to the arbitration mailing list and CU.

This post has been edited by Xidaf: Thu 4th December 2008, 6:16am

ChrisO comment on Jayvdb page is incredibly stupid, making it appear that the opposition against him is due to some conflicts between Azeri and Iranian users. Just because he had some problem with some Iranian users he's making an ignorant and misleading comment. Well ChrisO, if you happen to read here, ask John what was behind his work on legislations regulating copyright in Azerbaijan on Wikisource. Ask him why he killed a formal mediation between a group of users, or his ''innocent'' contributions about Caucasian Albanian matters in support of a documentable lobbying organization established on Wikipedia. Invite him here at WR so that he dare making the claims he makes on his page about AA affairs and see how he's been dishonest.

If you are really fighting to have accurate content on Wikipedia you will put aside your personal vendetta's and search the real rational behind the opposition.

If you check, you will see the oppositions comming from Armenian, Assyrian, Persian, Kurdish and Greek etc. members, because he had acted hand in hand with an ultranationalist Azerbaijani organization who is pushing fringe theories over Wikipedia. You're voting to give such a user access to the arbitration mailing list as well as CU access.

There appears to be some canvassing going on among a certain group of editors trying to sink John's candidacy. Seven editors showed up today to oppose who didn't meet the eligibility criteria. That's a smoking gun.

Were they Caucasian Albanians or Baltic Albanians? Or Armenians? Wait-- it's got to be those heavily-Russified Caucasus Germans still living in Azerbaijan. There's nothing like the ultranationalist Russified CaucasioGerman-Azerbaijani. If you haven't experienced it, you don't want to.

Were they Caucasian Albanians or Baltic Albanians? Or Armenians? Wait-- it's got to be those heavily-Russified Caucasus Germans still living in Azerbaijan. There's nothing like the ultranationalist Russified CaucasioGerman-Azerbaijani.

Well, you shouldn't confuse Armenians with Muslims, Slavic or otherwise. That's just wrong!

I mean, you might as well confuse Iowans with these so-called "people" from Missouri. Sheesh!

Were they Caucasian Albanians or Baltic Albanians? Or Armenians? Wait-- it's got to be those heavily-Russified Caucasus Germans still living in Azerbaijan. There's nothing like the ultranationalist Russified CaucasioGerman-Azerbaijani.

Well, you shouldn't confuse Armenians with Muslims, Slavic or otherwise. That's just wrong!

I mean, you might as well confuse Iowans with these so-called "people" from Missouri. Sheesh!

True, they're Raelian.

This post has been edited by Xidaf: Thu 4th December 2008, 7:24am

Haha, I just tried voting in the elections and had all my votes removed as I voted from a different account (I don't remember the password; sue me). Apparently as the vote counters are too lazy to confirm this via email I'm banned from voting. Regardless of the fact that I've helped write featured articles, GAs, etc, I get told in IRC not to 'bother' them with it. And I got reverted by a user that does nothing but use bots. I suddenly realise how Peter Damian must have felt. WP really does not give a shit about you or your contributions. It's like.. a revelation to me. You give hours and hours of your time and effort to the project and it's like.. you're not even worth the two seconds it would take to confirm you have suffrage to vote in the elections for the de-facto governing body?

I was half-minded to begin writing articles again (my main intention in registering an account), but stuff like this is just a complete slap in the face. Basically what I'm trying to say here is: Fuck you, Wikipedia.

I have better things to do with my time.

Haha, I just tried voting in the elections and had all my votes removed as I voted from a different account (I don't remember the password; sue me). Apparently as the vote counters are too lazy to confirm this via email I'm banned from voting. Regardless of the fact that I've helped write featured articles, GAs, etc, I get told in IRC not to 'bother' them with it. And I got reverted by a user that does nothing but use bots. I suddenly realise how Peter Damian must have felt. WP really does not give a shit about you or your contributions. It's like.. a revelation to me.

dah!

Haha, I just tried voting in the elections and had all my votes removed as I voted from a different account (I don't remember the password; sue me). Apparently as the vote counters are too lazy to confirm this via email I'm banned from voting. Regardless of the fact that I've helped write featured articles, GAs, etc, I get told in IRC not to 'bother' them with it. And I got reverted by a user that does nothing but use bots. I suddenly realise how Peter Damian must have felt. WP really does not give a shit about you or your contributions. It's like.. a revelation to me. You give hours and hours of your time and effort to the project and it's like.. you're not even worth the two seconds it would take to confirm you have suffrage to vote in the elections for the de-facto governing body?

I was half-minded to begin writing articles again (my main intention in registering an account), but stuff like this is just a complete slap in the face. Basically what I'm trying to say here is: Fuck you, Wikipedia.

I have better things to do with my time.

Or, in other words, "No worries"?

Or, in other words, "No worries"?

What I am talking about is what happened afterwards when I joined IRC to look at the live data. Someone immediately asked me if I had joined to talk to him about removing my votes. I was like ? and then I noticed that he was currently removing my votes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=255798636

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=255799019

I offered to confirm it via email and was told that the vote counters are too busy to write an email, and to not 'bother them with it'.

C'est la vie. I won't be bothering the so-called 'community' again.

What I am talking about is what happened afterwards when I joined IRC to look at the live data. Someone immediately asked me if I had joined to talk to him about removing my votes. I was like ? and then I noticed that he was currently removing my votes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=255798636

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=255799019

I offered to confirm it via email and was told that the vote counters are too busy to write an email, and to not 'bother them with it'.

C'est la vie. I won't be bothering the so-called 'community' again.

I wasn't around in the channel when this happened, but would have called out all the people that blew you off if I were. In lieu of that, I've smacked around a couple folks who thought "the bot says no!" is a legitimate reason to disenfranchise somebody. I also saw to it that your votes were put back; let me know if you run into any more nonsense.

I wasn't around in the channel when this happened, but would have called out all the people that blew you off if I were. In lieu of that, I've smacked around a couple folks who thought "the bot says no!" is a legitimate reason to disenfranchise somebody. I also saw to it that your votes were put back; let me know if you run into any more nonsense.

Aren't the ultras going to regard this as a disaster? An issue is raised about the evil admins and then someone goes and fixes it. Could someone please go and block the user for forum shopping (and worse to the big bad WR) just so that everyone's belief systems can be saved?

I wasn't around in the channel when this happened, but would have called out all the people that blew you off if I were. In lieu of that, I've smacked around a couple folks who thought "the bot says no!" is a legitimate reason to disenfranchise somebody. I also saw to it that your votes were put back; let me know if you run into any more nonsense.

Welcome, East.718

I wasn't around in the channel when this happened, but would have called out all the people that blew you off if I were. In lieu of that, I've smacked around a couple folks who thought "the bot says no!" is a legitimate reason to disenfranchise somebody. I also saw to it that your votes were put back; let me know if you run into any more nonsense.

Welcome, East.718

He's been around for a while.

And thank you, East.

Edit: Although, the votes I linked above have not actually been restored

He's been around for a while.
And thank you, East.

Oh yes (Nov 2007, not 2008).

I'm actually testing my new signature.

How's that working out?

I think one way to fix this, as Gomi suggested in another thread, is to use secret balloting. Although it won't prevent canvassing, it would make it harder to game the system by tactical opposes/supports and it would help prevent pile-on voting like what happened with Ryan's comments on CHL's and Neil's pages. The final vote tallies would just need to be announced before Jimbo made his appointment announcement.

While I approve entirely of secret balloting in ArbCom elections, I do not understand why people are so upset about canvassing. It's an election! Of course there will be canvassing!

Just how far up your collective asses do you Wikipedians have your collective heads stuck?

I think one way to fix this, as Gomi suggested in another thread, is to use secret balloting. Although it won't prevent canvassing, it would make it harder to game the system by tactical opposes/supports and it would help prevent pile-on voting like what happened with Ryan's comments on CHL's and Neil's pages. The final vote tallies would just need to be announced before Jimbo made his appointment announcement.

While I approve entirely of secret balloting in ArbCom elections, I do not understand why people are so upset about canvassing. It's an election! Of course there will be canvassing!

Just how far up your collective asses do you Wikipedians have your collective heads stuck?

I think being elected to arbcom is supposed to be like being elected Pope.

BTW, I just realized that if you ever became a celebrity the tabs would refer to you as K-Mart.

This post has been edited by Heat: Thu 4th December 2008, 2:18pm

BTW, I just realized that if you ever became a celebrity the tabs would refer to you as K-Mart.

I've been subjected to that nickname both here and at ED for some time now. It's kinda odd that Kellie Martin isn't subjected to it; then again, she's not a very high drama celebrity.

I think one way to fix this, as Gomi suggested in another thread, is to use secret balloting. Although it won't prevent canvassing, it would make it harder to game the system by tactical opposes/supports and it would help prevent pile-on voting like what happened with Ryan's comments on CHL's and Neil's pages. The final vote tallies would just need to be announced before Jimbo made his appointment announcement.

While I approve entirely of secret balloting in ArbCom elections, I do not understand why people are so upset about canvassing. It's an election! Of course there will be canvassing!

Just how far up your collective asses do you Wikipedians have your collective heads stuck?

I've been puzzled by this as well - you have candidates who make statements about how they will reform government to serve the people. Then franchised individuals vote (and not a wikipedian !vote either) in a tactical manner to get their people in. It's a straight political process (well except for the bent godking bit at the end), how can you not expect canvassing in any political process?

BTW, I just realized that if you ever became a celebrity the tabs would refer to you as K-Mart.

I've been subjected to that nickname both here and at ED for some time now. It's kinda odd that Kellie Martin isn't subjected to it; then again, she's not a very high drama celebrity.

K-Mart would probably object to having their trademark diluted.

Welcome, East.718

Shouldn't I be welcoming you, since I've been around longer?

He's been around for a while.

And thank you, East.

Edit: Although, the votes I linked above have not actually been restored

Someone else in the IRC channel (surprise!) didn't notice me chewing everyone out and decided to reindent the votes again. It should be fine now. I think it's pretty demeaning to not take the two minutes required to ensure the suffrage of somebody that's donated enough of their time to have written featured articles, but that just might be me.