Banned user's "Voter Guide" listed in election template
Election coordinators, administrators and commissioners: Please see discussions that have started here and here. I don't think that what the user writes on his talk page is within your "election jurisdiction", but the fact that his "Voter Guide" is listed in the template is. And, although I know that issues are supposed to be dealt with first by the "coordinators" (of which none are currently listed), I think this issue is controversial enough (as indicated by the discussions, especially the one at ANI) that it should go straight to the Commissioners. Neutron (talk) 01:16, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect the commissioners already know this, but this situation seems to have been "handled", at least for the time being. Someone has removed this editor's access to his talk page, and someone else has de-linked that talk page from the voter guide template. Now all we need are more candidates to run in the election. Neutron (talk) 23:08, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Eligibility criteria contradiction
I have just discovered that there is a contradiction between the eligibility criteria for candidates listed on the main election page (WP:ACE2013) and those listed on the candidates page (WP:ACE2013/C). Specifically, clause (ii) at WP:ACE2013 states that a candidate must be:
"(ii) is in good standing and not subject to active blocks or site-bans,"
This clause does not appear in the eligibility criteria listed at WP:ACE2013/C.
That currently blocked or banned editor may not run is pretty clearly the case, with the minor caveat that a candidate blocked after they nominate themselves is not automatically disqualified, except possibly in the case of sock-puppetry, as discussed in the 2013 RFC. It is possible that a blocked editor could therefor be elected, especially if blocked after the voting, but lets worry about that in the unlikely event it ever occurs. Monty84506:00, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Who is serving on the election committee?
It seems to be remarkably difficult to learn this. In previous years there's been a link to a page that shows who has signed up. Could we know, please? Tony(talk) 14:16, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Snowman, thanks. The "what links here" shows that no standard election page links to the list. To get here I followed the "contact the coordinators" link. I was expecting to find coordinators. Could there be a link at the top of the election page for the sake of transparency? Tony(talk) 14:57, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think the reason there isn't a page notice is to try and keep discussion centralised i.e. to stop posting at the talk pages of individual committee members. If editors post their requests/concerns etc. here then one of us will pop along (as I have done) to help. GiantSnowman16:51, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was half expecting a separate page purely on the electoral commission. Possibly a redirect for those expecting a separate page, pointing to the current listing? Though that may change each year. Carcharoth (talk) 02:01, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawing
Can a coordinator withdraw me from the elections? I knew I needed two significant eye surgeries in 2014, but thought I would be gone for, at most, a fortnight each time. One of the standard questions got me researching more and calling my doctor this morning, and it turns out I could likely be unable to devote any significant computer time for more than a quarter to a half of the next term. This isn't fair to anyone, so I'm going to drop out. Sorry for the trouble, and thanks to whoever does the paperwork. Courcelles16:50, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest also blanking or otherwise clearly marking the questions page, so that community members won't waste time posting more questions, or analyzing the responses already given, or checking for additional responses. The same also goes of course if any more candidates withdraw. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see Kevin Gorman has also withdrawn. But he has done so in a different way (striking out his candidate statement and appending a note). Might be best if all withdrawals are handled in a uniform manner to avoid confusion - the key bit being to (a) avoid confusing those reading the election pages; and (b) to make sure the list of names entered into SecurePoll is correct. Carcharoth (talk) 01:57, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm interested in what went wrong and so why the poll had to be reset but I can't seem to find this information anywhere. Have I missed it somewhere? For the sake of transparency I'd suggest a link to a description of the problem should be included in the election notice where it is stated people will need to vote again. Dpmuk (talk) 12:33, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The site notice for the current election reads: "Voting is now open to elect new members of the Arbitration Committee." This contains the apparent unintended subliminal message that the election is purposed to replace the current members with new members. I think this bolsters the resonating theme which precedes the election about replacing sitting arbitrators with "new blood" and disadvantages candidates who are sitting members, seeking another term. Subliminal messaging is powerful, and this is the wrong message to promote. Please redact "new", making it more neutral in form: "Voting is now open to elect members of the Arbitration Committee." Thank you for considering this request.—John Cline (talk) 18:00, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Argh; looks like I misspelt your name as "Mathionius" in the SecurePoll config, sorry! I have created that account to prevent what would be a very serious private info leak if someone random created it. I can transfer the password of that account to you if you want to contact me via email (I'll ask you to make an edit with some text I'll give you to confirm your identity), so you can use that to access the election. Or we can ask the WMF to edit the configuration to fix the typo, but that might take a while. Up to you. Happy‑melon21:44, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I took over the account "Mathionius" from Happy-melon, which also solved the problem, but this is probably better. I've now locked that account. Thanks! Mathonius (talk) 05:14, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
