Really, there shouldn't be any "selection". All of the community questions should be put over, and the candidates then may choose to answer any or all of them. If a candidate does not answer a question, people can then take from that what they will.
This is a community selection process. There is no valid reason for any question a member of the community has to be excluded. Todd On Sun, Jul 4, 2021 at 9:55 AM Nosebagbear <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > I write to highlight concerns shared by a number of editors about how the > questions selected by the Elections Committee < > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Candidates/CandidateQ%26A> > from the broader Community-created list < > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Apply_to_be_a_Candidate#Community_Questions_for_Candidates> > has not been well-chosen, on several grounds. > > First and foremost, is that of the questions that received significant > Community endorsement, only one was selected. That the Community felt so > strongly those questions should be answered by any candidate should be > grounds for presumptive inclusion. > > The question list is also short - not even a fifth of those presented. As > a role that needs significant time, and in a process that lasts weeks, it > seems dubious to indicate that 11 questions is the most that can be > answered in an election for the most "senior" community-selected positions > in the movement. This is especially in comparison to, say, en-wiki RfA > candidates who answer well over 20, on average. > > A number of editors have also raised concerns that some of the questions > on the list are "soft" or "gimme" questions vs much more difficult ones > left off. As engagement with individual editors is a must for Trustees, it > is also unclear why the page is claiming grounds to prohibit editors from > individually seeking answers from candidates. > > Finally, there has been a distinct communications failure, though I am > unsure how much is purely ElectCom, WMF, etc. Questions were asked on the > original Q&A talk page, and not answered. Then there was no reasoning given > for specific questions excluded or included in the refined list. > > There are a number of facets in this post - thank you for reading, and I > look forward to answers handling all of these concerns, not merely a > section. > > Cheers, > > Nosebagbear > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/OQUL2MSPXBDUNHH7JI4IZFUHIBJ5ZNZS/ > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/4FBIML4KJV24NQRXVRY7MA7Z7JFWXXKS/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
