>From what I can tell from the now-closed election page all struck votes have a standard not qualified template following them, I was figuring on having it look for that. Your implementation sounds workable as well though and it really doesnt matter, they would both seem to address the issue and provide a simple 'somethings not right, fix it' red flag for a user that would (presumably) be interested in making sure they get things right. -Brock
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 8:18 PM, John Vandenberg <jay...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:54 PM, brock.wel...@gmail.com > <brock.wel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Indeed, you've hit the nail on the head. In the talkpage exchange I > already > > accepted this election is tallied. This is more about fixing the election > > process now. Something as simple as using a bot to template all > > non-qualified votes pointing to an easy to follow list of whats needed to > > achieve technical compliance during a, say, 3-day vote freeze following > an > > election, or even 3 days before it closes would easily be sufficient I > > think. > > It might be a bit tricky for a bot to automatically find all the > struck votes afterwards. > > Another solution, which might be easier to implement, is for a bot to > check every contributor to the voting pages for compliance, and notify > any contributor who doesn't have a cross-linked account. > > -- > John Vandenberg > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
