283:
2009, below the line). The blue points were successful candidates; the red points unsuccessful. Each point, then, shows two features of the votes for a candidate: (a) the ranking percentage, from left to right, which determined whether they were elected; and (b) the percentage of
Neutral votes (equivalent to abstains) from bottom to top for each candidate as a proportion of the total number of voters (996 in 2009; 984 in 2008). Thus, candidates who fell towards the bottom-right received high ranking-percentages with low proportions of Neutral votes / abstains; and candidates towards the top-left gained low ranking percentages and received more Neutral votes / abstains (that is, fewer Supports or Opposes). The mild trend from top-left to bottom-right in 2008 suggests a tendency by voters not to cast a vote for candidates other than those they preferred. No such trend was evident in 2009, suggesting that more voters deliberately opposed or consciously left the radio button on default for the candidates they did not prefer.
499:
117:
107:
90:
33:
127:
87:
137:
97:
329:
The second shift occurred in the level of Oppose votes. Figure 2 shows the ranking percentage (again horizontal) against the level of Oppose votes (vertical) for both years, now reversed, with 2009 above 2008. The average percentage of Oppose votes dramatically increased, from an average of 11.8% in
303:
it happened". Among the possibilities, he said, are that automated secret balloting lets people vote their conscience without fear or favour, that the simple radio-button format makes it easier for people to vote for/against, and that more candidates stood in 2008, so people didn't have time to look
264:
that the minimum number of votes that would be needed to alter the outcome was 13, "so there is no concern that this irregularity could prejudice the outcome of the election. To protect the privacy of the three votes, we have no intention of publishing a revised tally.... Had this irregularity been
239:
system, and overall the election ran smoothly. There were only three minor glitches. First, due to confusion about the use of "00:00 UTC" in the software, the election was programmed to end midnight at the start rather than the end of 14 December. The problem was picked up during the weekend before
282:
Three significant shifts in voting patterns occurred in 2009. First, the proportion of
Neutral/abstain votes was dramatically reduced, from an average of 75.3% in 2008 down to 44.7% in 2009. In Figure 1, each of the 50 points represents one of the candidates (28 in 2008, above the line; and 22 in
220:
is expected soon. Just as for the previous round of appointments a year ago, a system of tranches will be used to minimise the variation of vacancies from year to year. The candidates with the five strongest votesâKirill
Lokshin, Fritzpoll, Coren, Mailer diablo and Steve Smithâwill serve two-year
475:
Without the one-year tranche this time, baseline oscillations would be 5 in 2010, 13 in 2011, 5 in 2012, and 13 in 2013. The one-year seats will balance the early departures since the last election, of
Deskana, FT2, Sam Blacketer and John Vandenberg, who were all due to retire at the end of
274:
554:
279:
This year, there were 993 unique voters, slightly more than last year's 984. About 40% of voters in 2009 also voted in 2008. In 2009, there were 22 candidates at the end of voting (one withdrew during the polling), compared with 28 candidates in 2008.
110:
265:
identified before the publication of the results, it could have been trivially rectified.... we also note the pressure that was placed on the scrutineers by members of the enwiki community to publish the results as rapidly as possible."
250:. The second issue was that the scrutineering process took four days, more than the single day the election coordinators had advertised. During this time, the mostly good-humoured frustration of candidates and onlookers was clear on
171:
624:
I agree. By the time arbitration is reached in dispute resolution, there is no good faith left - everybody is at fault. ArbCom really doesn't matter to editors "in the field," but it's nice to see the democratic process in action.
183:
203:
187:
330:
2008 up to 27.4% in 2009. Both elections saw pronounced tendencies to oppose the less popular candidates, a significantly greater trend in 2009. The same reasons as given above, in converse, could be proposed for this trend.
199:
191:
175:
333:
The third shiftâa correlate of the other two factorsâwas towards a lower average ranking-percentage in 2009 (from 51.1% to 44.7%), with a narrowing of the range. This is shown in the horizontal dimension of both figures.
516:
195:
221:
terms expiring 31 December 2011; the remaining four successful candidatesâSirFozzie, Hersfold, KnightLago and Shell Kinneyâwill serve one-year terms expiring 31 December 2010. The new ArbCom arrangement is illustrated
179:
130:
308:
has raised the effects of voter fatigue from visiting so many pages, and the inevitable edit conflicts that arise from scroll-and-type voting, as possible reasons for the decrease in neutral/abstain voting.
100:
140:
651:
656:
Congratulations to the successful candidates. I'm very pleased to see that not one of the people I opposed got a seat and the majority who did are ones I placed a 'support' vote for. --
665:
619:
343:
73:
569:
251:
543:
161:
629:
605:
538:
366:
The scrutineers were election officials selected to insure the integrity of the election by verifying the votes and monitoring for potential manipulation. They were
286:
It is striking that a line can cleanly divide the candidates of two ArbCom elections in this respect. Several possible reasons for the shift have been put forward.
120:
643:
485:
528:
533:
314:
291:
260:
254:. The third glitch was that due to an oversight, three duplicated ballots were not picked up, so 996 ballots were counted from the 993 unique voters.
510:
52:
41:
346:
on the 2009 election, including discussion of ways to improve the 2010 ArbCom election. The topics thus far include "election personnel", "the
170:, the final dispute resolution body of the English Knowledge. The nine new arbitrators, who will take up their seats on 1 January 2010, are
735:
574:
466:
The ranking percentages were calculated as the number of "supports" per candidate divided by the sum of their "supports" and "opposes".
268:
222:
581:
21:
710:
558:
705:
700:
67:
447:
212:
congratulates the arbitrators-elect, and offers its thanks to the other 13 candidates for participating in the election.
610:
Who cares about ArbCom again? Please folks, ground yourself and try to make
Knowledge accessible to the beginner user.--
695:
287:
591:
Congratulations everybody! I trust you'll do your best as arbitrators in the coming year. But for now, sit back and
350:
system", "improving instructions to voters", "voting rules", "supplementary voting", and "questions to candidates".
433:
642:
Jimbo Wales", please. We can't stop all the attempted rewriting of history, but we can rebuff it in many ways. --
213:
679:
228:
419:
405:
690:
498:
46:
32:
17:
602:
391:
377:
647:
244:
441:
235:
326:
is notable and (IMO) desirable: the number of actual opinions expressed has almost doubled."
716:
427:
337:
305:
8:
661:
437:
565:
413:
399:
615:
353:
255:
217:
247:
626:
423:
385:
371:
657:
154:
729:
451:
409:
395:
166:
611:
638:
381:
367:
310:
150:
241:
160:
On
Thursday 18 December, the six scrutineers certified and announced
273:
598:
595:
592:
454:
not primarily active in the
English Knowledge community.
675:
Get the latest headlines on your user page â just add
579:If your comment has not appeared here, you can try
727:
164:of the two-week community-run election for the
148:
258:, one of the three election administrators,
216:of the appointments by Knowledge co-founder
469:
233:The 2009 election was the first to use the
360:
462:
460:
272:
582:
322:is an interesting question, the effect
14:
728:
457:
240:the end of the election and fixed by
51:
736:Knowledge Signpost archives 2009-12
27:
497:
269:Comparisons with the 2008 election
53:
31:
28:
747:
564:These comments are automatically
342:All users are invited to provide
135:
125:
115:
105:
95:
85:
68:ArbCom election result announced
575:add the page to your watchlist
13:
1:
652:23:04, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
630:01:32, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
620:18:24, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
606:15:19, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
288:Short Brigade Harvester Boris
666:16:13, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
550:
18:Knowledge:Knowledge Signpost
7:
299:happened, but we can't say
10:
752:
229:Running of the election
572:. To follow comments,
502:
277:
252:the election talk page
36:
680:Signpost-subscription
501:
276:
214:A formal announcement
167:Arbitration Committee
35:
568:from this article's
544:Features and admins
641:
559:Discuss this story
503:
304:into all of them.
278:
42:â Back to Contents
37:
637:
583:purging the cache
539:Discussion report
490:"Election report"
47:View Latest Issue
743:
719:
684:
678:
644:Seth Finkelstein
586:
584:
578:
557:
521:
513:
511:21 December 2009
506:
489:
477:
473:
467:
464:
455:
364:
317:
294:
263:
157:
139:
138:
129:
128:
119:
118:
109:
108:
99:
98:
89:
88:
59:
57:
55:
54:21 December 2009
751:
750:
746:
745:
744:
742:
741:
740:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
715:
713:
708:
703:
698:
693:
686:
682:
676:
672:
671:
588:
580:
573:
562:
561:
555:+ Add a comment
553:
549:
548:
547:
524:Election report
514:
509:
507:
504:
493:
492:
487:
481:
480:
474:
470:
465:
458:
438:Effeietsandersâ
365:
361:
356:
340:
313:
306:John Vandenberg
290:
271:
259:
231:
158:
147:
146:
145:
136:
126:
116:
106:
96:
86:
80:
77:
66:
65:Election report
62:
60:
50:
49:
44:
38:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
749:
739:
738:
714:
709:
704:
699:
694:
689:
688:
687:
674:
673:
670:
669:
668:
654:
634:
633:
632:
608:
563:
560:
552:
551:
546:
541:
536:
531:
529:News and notes
526:
520:
508:
496:
495:
494:
484:
483:
482:
479:
478:
468:
456:
358:
357:
355:
352:
339:
336:
295:that "we know
270:
267:
230:
227:
202:(60.1%), and
172:Kirill Lokshin
144:
143:
133:
123:
113:
103:
93:
82:
81:
78:
72:
71:
70:
69:
64:
63:
61:
58:
45:
40:
39:
30:
29:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
748:
737:
734:
733:
731:
718:
712:
707:
702:
697:
692:
681:
667:
663:
659:
655:
653:
649:
645:
640:
635:
631:
628:
623:
622:
621:
617:
613:
609:
607:
604:
600:
597:
594:
590:
589:
585:
576:
571:
567:
556:
545:
542:
540:
537:
535:
532:
530:
527:
525:
522:
518:
512:
505:In this issue
500:
491:
472:
463:
461:
453:
449:
446:
443:
439:
435:
432:
429:
425:
421:
418:
415:
411:
407:
404:
401:
397:
393:
390:
387:
383:
379:
376:
373:
369:
363:
359:
351:
349:
345:
338:Feedback page
335:
331:
327:
325:
321:
316:
312:
307:
302:
298:
293:
289:
284:
275:
266:
262:
257:
253:
249:
246:
243:
238:
237:
226:
224:
223:in this graph
219:
215:
211:
207:
205:
201:
197:
193:
189:
185:
184:Mailer diablo
181:
177:
173:
169:
168:
163:
156:
152:
142:
134:
132:
124:
122:
114:
112:
104:
102:
94:
92:
84:
83:
75:
56:
48:
43:
34:
23:
19:
523:
517:all comments
471:
444:
430:
416:
402:
388:
374:
362:
347:
341:
332:
328:
323:
319:
318:that "while
300:
296:
285:
281:
248:Roan Kattouw
234:
232:
210:The Signpost
209:
208:
204:Shell Kinney
165:
159:
717:Suggestions
636:"Knowledge
566:transcluded
534:In the news
292:pointed out
256:Happy-melon
218:Jimbo Wales
188:Steve Smith
162:the results
639:CO-founder
627:HereToHelp
424:Mardetanha
348:SecurePoll
236:SecurePoll
200:KnightLago
79:Share this
74:Contribute
22:2009-12-21
711:Subscribe
658:bodnotbod
593:celebrate
570:talk page
354:Footnotes
315:responded
245:developer
242:MediaWiki
206:(59.9%).
198:(64.6%),
194:(64.9%),
192:SirFozzie
190:(65.6%),
186:(68.4%),
182:(70.1%),
178:(71.1%),
176:Fritzpoll
174:(72.9%),
155:Skomorokh
730:Category
706:Newsroom
701:Archives
599:holidays
488:Previous
452:stewards
448:contribs
434:contribs
420:contribs
406:contribs
392:contribs
378:contribs
344:feedback
196:Hersfold
121:LinkedIn
101:Facebook
20: |
450:), all
436:), and
410:Millosh
396:Laaknor
111:Twitter
612:Kozuch
324:itself
261:stated
131:Reddit
91:E-mail
696:About
476:2010.
382:Thogo
368:Erwin
311:Coren
225:.
180:Coren
151:Tony1
16:<
691:Home
662:talk
648:talk
616:talk
442:talk
428:talk
414:talk
400:talk
386:talk
372:talk
297:what
153:and
141:Digg
603:ALI
601:.
596:the
422:),
408:),
394:),
380:),
320:why
301:why
149:By
76:â
732::
683:}}
677:{{
664:)
650:)
618:)
486:â
459:^
685:.
660:(
646:(
614:(
587:.
577:.
519:)
515:(
445:¡
440:(
431:¡
426:(
417:¡
412:(
403:¡
398:(
389:¡
384:(
375:¡
370:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
