Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2014/Electoral Commission

Notifications
I have placed notifications for the RfC on the administrator's noticeboard and the arbitration committee's talk page. Please feel free to make additional notifications as necessary. Mike V •  Talk  04:11, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Will there be an election for eligibility to vote in the RfCs? Tony   (talk)  09:57, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't believe so. I think we can just use the same criteria as last year's RfC, any community member in good standing. Ideally, it should be a discussion, not a vote, so comments can be weighed on their merits. Mike V  •  Talk  21:38, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, and the evaluation period starts before the nominations finish ... is that a mistake? Also, the banner at the top says the RfC has concluded. Who is doing the choosing ("will be chosen")? Tony   (talk)  10:10, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was a mistake. I've corrected it on the page. If the consensus of support for the 3 candidates becomes obvious, it can just be closed by any experienced user. If it's not, then I'll ask the bureaucrats to help close the RfC. Mike V  •  Talk  21:38, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering whether you'll get any takers. In my day ordinary users came forward (not many of them) and just did the job. Thankless and exposed to instant community criticism/complaint. This will smell too much like a hanging in the village square (i.e. RFA). Why not just open a page for interested parties to sign up, the way it used to be done, and from them one or two will emerge to do the hard work? It helps an awful lot if someone from previous years can do it again, since there are quite a few procedural and technical issues that are much streamlined with previous experience. I did it in 2010 and 2011 (but regrettably it's not something I want to do again). But wait, I'm sorry, I've lost contact with the process: is this electoral commission the group who do the grunt organisation, or the higher-level decision-making where necessary, including liaison with external stewards for auditing? Perhaps this could be spelled out on the main page. You could also add a little about what skill-base is required, and what the responsibilities are. Tony   (talk)  03:10, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * This nomination period is for the "higher-level decision-making where necessary, including liaison with external stewards for auditing" position. This RfC is set up somewhat similar to last year, with the exception that Jimbo won't be involved with the selection and there's a longer timetable, as last year timetable was accelerated due to being held so close to the ArbCom nomination timeframe. As for the "grunt work", any willing editor is more than welcome to help and there's no appointment process for that. They may help as much as desired. As for any takers, I'm hoping to see additional nominees later this week, assuming other as busy during the weekend. I've just listed the RfC at the Centralized Discussion template to increase exposure. If it appears there won't be a significant amount of nominees, I'm willing to throw in my hat in the last minute. Of course I'll have to have some unbiased support during the evaluation period, as I don't want anyone to view this as some sort of self-appointment. Mike V  •  Talk  18:53, 12 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't think anyone ever notified the bureaucrat team that our involvement is desired if consensus is not clear. – xeno talk 00:32, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Mike, User:Happy-Melon, one of the election admins as they were called in those days, wrote a very useful document outlining their responsibilities. Do you have it at hand? If so, it could be linked, if still up to date. Tony   (talk)  02:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I found Happy-Melon's instructions for steward scrutineers, but haven't yet found anything for the election administrators. I'll keep searching and please let me know if you find it. Mike V  •  Talk  23:16, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * My apologies, Xeno. I had intended to do so, but it slipped my mind due to being busy outside of Wikipedia. I'll drop a note at the bureaucrat noticeboard. Mike V  •  Talk  23:16, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't recall one for the lower-level grunt work. It would be nice, since there's a lot of procedure, protocol, housecleaning involved. Tony   (talk)  00:14, 14 October 2014 (UTC)