  Social media sites are often guided by a core group of committed users
engaged in various forms of governance. A crucial aspect of this type of
governance is deliberation, in which such a group reaches decisions on issues
of importance to the site. Despite its crucial --- though subtle --- role in
how a number of prominent social media sites function, there has been
relatively little investigation of the deliberative aspects of social media
governance. Here we explore this issue, investigating a particular deliberative
process that is extensive, public, and recorded: the promotion of Wikipedia
admins, which is determined by elections that engage committed members of the
Wikipedia community. We find that the group decision-making at the heart of
this process exhibits several fundamental forms of relative assessment. First
we observe that the chance that a voter will support a candidate is strongly
dependent on the relationship between characteristics of the voter and the
candidate. Second we investigate how both individual voter decisions and
overall election outcomes can be based on models that take into account the
sequential, public nature of the voting.
