W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > June 2014

Disclosure and information proposal

From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 19:13:34 -0400
Message-ID: <CADC=+jcBQi6yHZw5i=1gWtgWYMUkJEOOKqeox0dYYLud0xX9uA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Ok, spawning a new thread.  I am a pragmatist.  I think the best deal is
the one you can actually reach and I see no reason to belabor an argument
which, at best, has to be put to ACs anyway.

It seems that we've set something of a precedent in getting very basic
figures cited.  I'd like to propose (if I may) that AB resolve to ask
whether data (or maybe Jeff can just decide and it is so) can be provided
with each election going forward.  It is enlightening to some and spawned
some interesting new conversations and efforts to find ways to increase
involvement - all good things IMO.  I would also charge that basic
information like this for the last 5 years is helpful information.  I know
some people were kind of taken aback by Jeff's seeming "I'm pleased" about
that - but I think that such information puts it into context.  My own read
of this is that participation before Jeff came was something ~ 1/3 to 1/2
of that at best.  While it still seems dismal, this is indeed something to
celebrate IMO - we're going in the right direction.

It seems that at least without significant more efforts we're not going to
get anything like the details that we see in examples cited (even in
countries where cultures are very different, I think).  I think that the
unfortunate bit about this has little to do with trust concerns and more
about the fact that that information is a valuable cog in any democratic
process that allows a number of things that have been discussed in various
other threads.  So, let's assume we can't get that for now - is there any
other way to get 'mostly there' or 'enough there' in terms of the valuable
data.

For a candidate, it seems like they should have access to the AB list for
the duration of the campaign.  It seems several people agreed to that.
 Does anyone specifically oppose that idea?  Can we AB support or rejection
of that?

It also seems that their own numbers should be available them privately
upon request, several people voiced support for that.  Can we AB support or
rejection of that?

Note: I think that personally it would be nice if basic data (including
this) could be available to them throughout the election as well... It
might make things more competitive and stimulate participation.

Can we send out a questionare and maybe even actively ask people a few
questions about their participation?   I can create a google form and this
could be completely anonymous data we could use to provide many of the
answers we'd be scanning the data for or speculating on. Note that this can
literally be done unofficially without the support of the AB by any
'reporter' - but it seems like something AB should support:  Do you vote
never, sometimes, always?  If you don't vote - why? Here's some possible
answers and a space for you to provide your own.  Even a few questions
submitted by a statistically significant number of members would be
valuable information that could be used to help AB and the W3C improve.



-- 
Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: hitchjs.com
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2014 23:14:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:10 UTC