Re: Disclosure and information proposal

There was considerable interest in this and other emails for more 
information about the recent AB election.  There have also been concerns 
about releasing certain information as some have claimed that it would 
discourage people to run.

We have already released the number of Members that voted, and the 
distribution of how many candidates they voted for.

There have been requests for additional information about the actual 
vote scores.

The Team, with the approval of the Advisory Board is pleased to provide 
the following additional (partial) information for this particular election.

1. The five candidates who were selected received 49, 43, 42, 38, and 36 
2. The seven candidates who were not selected received 28, 28, 24, 20, 
19, 15, and 13 votes.
3. Any candidate who would like to know their vote total will be told.


On 6/4/2014 7:13 PM, Brian Kardell wrote:
> 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 :: <>

Received on Friday, 20 June 2014 12:53:35 UTC