Talk:Archive:Elections and Referenda (Forum)/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
imported>Peter Jackson (→Editor authority: new section) |
imported>John Stephenson (→Editor authority: What counts as content? Could just make ME a voting member) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Any thoughts? [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] ([[User talk:Peter Jackson|talk]]) 08:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC) | Any thoughts? [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] ([[User talk:Peter Jackson|talk]]) 08:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
:Possible problem could be what counts as a content issue. We had this before, with the two separate Councils, when they couldn't necessarily agree on which one was responsible for something. We could simply give the ME a vote, meaning that there would always be at least 25% Editor representation under the current structure. The ME already has the powers of the old Ombudsman role as well, which includes some authority over content. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] ([[User talk:John Stephenson|talk]]) 14:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:39, 26 May 2015
| Help system | All recent posts | Back to top | Contact Administrators | Archives |
|
Elections and Referenda Announcements and discussions of forthcoming elections and referenda | ||||
Regarding the Election Committee for the upcoming election, June 2015
Inasmuch as no member of the Council has responded to my call on appointing an Election Committee, I will render a Managing Editor decision and appoint John Stephenson as Committee Chair. I ask John to choose a second member to assist him if he wishes. Anthony.Sebastian (talk) 02:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Editor authority
is supposed to be a fundamental principle here. Control, however, is vested in the Council, which by decision of a referendum at the last elections no longer has to include a majority of Editors, or indeed any at all. I'm not going to try to reverse that decision now it's been taken, but I'd like to propose a referendum to restore Editor control in some other way. The maximal one would be to transfer all content decisions to the ME. The minimal one would be to give the ME a veto if the Council makes a decision without an Editor voting in favour. There are various possibilities in between, such as simply giving the ME a veto on all content decisions.
Any thoughts? Peter Jackson (talk) 08:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
- Possible problem could be what counts as a content issue. We had this before, with the two separate Councils, when they couldn't necessarily agree on which one was responsible for something. We could simply give the ME a vote, meaning that there would always be at least 25% Editor representation under the current structure. The ME already has the powers of the old Ombudsman role as well, which includes some authority over content. John Stephenson (talk) 14:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC)