Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-05-06/Special report

Duration
Wow, the elections were held in just eight days. I never saw any banner or message of it, just about Wiki Loves Earth. --NaBUru38 (talk) 17:17, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Frankly I think this is a big problem with these elections, blink and they're gone. Res Mar 02:39, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , I agree that the length of time was quite short. Unfortunately, the Election Committee (to which I was only an advisor, due to my experience coordinating the 2013 elections) was appointed only in the first week of April, and tasked to run two separate elections with their completion by the end of the first week in June. The timeline was definitely suboptimal, and I think they did the best they could do on such short notice.  The Board elections have to run for two full weeks, and there had to be a break between the two elections so that the votes for the first one could be verified, counted, and the results approved by the Board of Trustees before the second one started. As it was, there were 1100 votes for the FDC elections, a very respectable tally given there were just over 1800 for the combined elections that ran for two weeks the last time around, and the Board of Trustees election has already received even more votes less than halfway through.  I do encourage you to vote in the Board elections.  If you'd like further information or would like to add your comment to the election discussion page on Meta, or the election post mortem page on Meta once the Board of Trustees election has ended, those linked pages are the places where the election committee is most likely to see them.  I will suggest to the Election Committee that the post mortem page be unlocked now so that community members can post their comments or observations while they are still fresh in the mind, but as they are still busy monitoring the Board election, please don't expect them to be responding to comments at this point.  Risker (talk) 03:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC)