Wed 26th November 2008, 1:36pm
QUOTE(everyking @ Wed 26th November 2008, 3:55am)
QUOTE(gomi @ Wed 26th November 2008, 9:24am)
Yes, the bar of 150 main-space edits is pretty low these days, especially given automated tools. I personally know of at least three sock-runners who voted with 4-6 socks each in last year's election, just to see if they could. None of them got caught, to the best of my knowledge. This may not be enough to sway the results, but then who knows how much of it is going on?
The bar is much too low. I'd say something more like 500 mainspace edits to vote, and 5,000 mainspace edits to stand as a candidate (and at least 1,000 of them within the last year). People should have a substantial amount of editing experience before they get involved in wikipolitics, and in any case having a high bar is a pretty effective way to deter sockpuppetry. I also think voters should be rigorously subjected to checkuser, particularly with the bar currently being so low.
(I support public voting, by the way--in the context of the project's culture, it's more suitable and healthy.)
Five thousand mainspace edits? I have 2137 mainspace edits according to Kate's Tool
or 3626 total and 653 recent according to this analysis by Franamax
Are you seriously suggesting that I be disqualified from running from ArbCom? Since I sometimes write entire articles in one edit that's rather a high bar. Or an encouragement to fire up AWB to do some needless and trivial edit or another to a wide swath of articles to pad the count. Surely that's not a good thing. I suggest that one article from scratch is worth a hundred AWB edits or more.
Look, I agree that some mainspace editing experience is important, even vital. I won't support candidates who have little or none. But I'd say with 1 FA, 3 GAs and closing on 40 DYKs (each of which represents a brand new article I wrote myself), I have plenty. So your metric is lacking something.
QUOTE(Hemlock Martinis @ Wed 26th November 2008, 4:02am)
I prefer public voting in this instance. I know that last election I was able to sway a few voters by hearing their reasons for opposing me and then discussing it with the voter on his or her talkpage. I think it helps to have that dialogue with voters and makes for a better process overall.
Yes. and I think this election's trend toward pre-voting places to discuss views Template:ACE_2008_guides
is likely to turn out even better. We're up to 10 and counting.