Volunteers are invited to vote for statements to use in the Election Compass in the 2022 Board of Trustees election. You can vote for the statements you would like to see included in the Election Compass on Meta-wiki.
An Election Compass is a tool to help voters select the candidates that best align with their beliefs and views. The community members will propose statements for the candidates to answer using a Lickert scale (agree/neutral/disagree). The candidates’ answers to the statements will be loaded into the Election Compass tool. Voters will use the tool by entering in their answer to the statements (agree/disagree/neutral). The results will show the candidates that best align with the voter’s beliefs and views.
Vote now through August 3.
I was asked to list the statements here so the translations could be seen. The numbers on the statements here are the same as the numbers on the wikipage where you can vote for the statements.
- The Wikimedia Foundation should conduct all of its activities with absolute transparency (excluding where this would cause legal/privacy/security issues)
- Well over 50 percent of Wikimedia Foundation expenses is spent on salaries in the US; that percentage is too great
- The Wikimedia Foundation does not spend enough money in countries of the “developing world”
- WMF fundraising is deceptive: it creates a false appearance that the WMF is short of money while it is in fact richer than ever
- I am uncomfortable with the way the WMF organization has continuously grown its staff headcount and budget and taken on more and more tasks that are not directly related to the Wikimedia projects and the volunteer communities working on them
- I am uncomfortable with the way the WMF increasingly assigns itself unilateral authority to make decisions about the Wikimedia projects which then affect the community
- I am uncomfortable with the way the Wikimedia Foundation serves the interests of Big Tech (Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft)
- The software development should be focused on constant development and core features instead of short projects and new features.
- The departures of numerous senior staff members in 2021 indicate a problem at the Wikimedia Foundation
- Future community seats of the Board of Trustees should be filled purely by a contributor (editor, volunteer developer, and so on) vote on all nominees
- The Election Committee must be made actively accountable to and selected or elected by the community
- Wikimedia Foundation spending by country must be prominently reported
- The primary activity of the Wikimedia Foundation should be funding the Wikimedia community’s efforts.
- Grantmaking to Wikimedia editors and community affiliates in the Global South should be increased to 5% of gross Wikimedia Foundation annual budget
- Staff of the Wikimedia Foundation should be totally excluded from organizing the Board of Trustee elections
- Wikimedia Foundation projects should compete for Movement funds with projects of other Wikimedia organizations (except for keeping the sites up)
- Regional quotas for grants/funding and participation (e.g. to Wikimania) should be removed
- The represented diversity is more important than individual qualifications of members of the Board of Trustees
- The Wikimedia Foundation should allocate a higher percentage of their resources into tasks related to contributing to the projects
- The WMF should initiate a participatory budgeting process, in which the editor community participates in the allocation of funds
- The “Global Council”, recommended in the Movement Strategy recommendations, will not fulfill the goal of equitable representation in global decision-making
- Regional and Thematic Hubs create more unnecessary hierarchies and complex structures in the Wikimedia Movement
- The Wikimedia Foundation should provide more technical support to meet the demand of the community
- Had I been a member of the Board of Trustees at that time, I would have voted in favor of the Wikimedia Enterprise project
- The Wikimedia Foundation should allocate additional resources to research, documentation, and advocacy of real-world policy issues that affect Wikimedia users and Wikimedia projects (for example, issues of access and free expression)
- The Universal Code of Conduct is a net positive addition to the Wikimedia movement
- Simplify the Board of Trustees Election Process to keep Community Members interested and engaged
- The details of the evaluation of each candidate done by the Analysis Committee should be shared with the community
- The WMF should generally opt for community-vetted ideas, rather than internal ideas, as the basis for its organizational roadmap
- The community may recall a selected candidate for any reason
- The WMF should continually seek to reduce, rather than expand, its scope of responsibilities, leaving as much as possible to the community’s self-organized capacity
- The WMF should voluntarily recognize a staff union with proof of support from a majority of eligible unit members
- The WMF should get consensus from respective communities before running fundraising banners on their wiki
- Nowadays, it is practically impossible for Wikimedia user groups to be recognized as a Wikimedia chapter
- Had I been a member of the Board of Trustees in May 2020, I would have voted in favor of the Brand Project Support resolution
Friendly reminder that voting for the Election Compass Statements is open until August 3. Voting finishes at 23:59 UTC!
To upvote a statement, click on the “Upvote this Statement” button below the statement you would like to see included in the Election Compass. There is no limit on the number of upvotes a contributor can use.