Forum:Policy Vote Updating Voting Requirements

	This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes.

Howdy folks how's tricks?

This forum is to vote on the idea of officially allowing a discussions post to count as an edit for the purposes of voting. To be clear, if this vote passes then the current voting requirements will be updated to the effect of allowing a discussions post to count as the minimum of 1 edit or post required prior to the start of a given vote. The amended language will read as follows:

Discussion of this topic can be found here.

Richie9999 (talk) 21:59, July 27, 2020 (UTC)

Vote

Poll finished on 9:59 pm August 3, 2020 (UTC). A consensus must be reached by voting before any action is taken. You can vote by placing one of the following lines in the appropriate section: Use # {{yes}} ~~~~ if you support the proposal. Use # {{no}} ~~~~ if you are against the proposal. Use # {{neutral}} ~~~~ if you wish to abstain. Please do not edit other user's votes.

Yes - Update voting requirements

1. Richie9999 (talk) 21:59, July 27, 2020 (UTC)
2. JCB2077 (talk) 22:01, July 27, 2020 (UTC)
3. User:Savior D.J --The Greatest Savior (talk) 22:01, July 27, 2020 (UTC)
4. Jgrsoto 22:01, July 27, 2020 (UTC)
5. Kdarrow (talk) 22:16, July 27, 2020 (UTC)
6. --DankalorYT 22:17, July 27, 2020 (UTC)
7. L84tea ^{Would you like a cup of tea?} 22:27, July 27, 2020 (UTC)
8. Given the purpose of this rule is to prevent users creating sock accounts after the vote starts, I don't see that it matters if it's a wiki edit or discussions post. Aya42 (talk) 22:48, July 27, 2020 (UTC)
9. Discussions users are people too! Laat the Survivor (talk) 01:32, July 28, 2020 (UTC)
10. I agree they should count, though I didn't think the current wording was all that ambiguous either... - Sigmund Fraud ^{Talk Contributions} 01:50, July 28, 2020 (UTC)
11. Sharing sentiments with Siggy. AllYourFavorites! (talk) 02:42, July 28, 2020 (UTC)
12. - FDekker ^(talk)
13. Goes towards addressing the existing community disparity, though much like Sig I did not believe there was any ambiguity in the existing rule. Saxhleel12 (talk) 12:54, July 28, 2020 (UTC)
14. Gave my two cents on the forum. The Dyre Wolf (talk) 06:34, July 30, 2020 (UTC)
15. Gavin Sumedha (talk)
16. After having read the discussion -Findabair (talk) 08:12, August 1, 2020 (UTC)

No - Discussion posts should not count for voting requirements

Neutral

1. I think the sides of the community should be separate in that only people with an edit count can vote towards editing positions and only people with a discussion count can vote towards discussion positions, with both required for roles that deal with both LovinglyGaslight (talk) 09:28, July 28, 2020 (UTC)

Comments

This is an exceptional idea, especially for increasing engagement across the two "sides" of the site. Kdarrow (talk) 22:17, July 27, 2020 (UTC)

To address the comments regarding the ambiguity or lack thereof, there were two problems with how things were written. First and foremost, there was never any formal vote or even discussion to update the voting requirements, or at least none that could be found. Secondly, one could try to argue about the ambiguity as written regardless of the intention when it was posted, in an attempt to disenfranchise someone, which could then lead to them also pointing out the lack of changing the policy through proper channels. That lack of discussion or vote to change a policy is what spurred this more than anything else. Changing a wiki policy should not be a unilateral decision, rather it needs to go through the proper channels. Richie9999 (talk) 22:19, July 28, 2020 (UTC)

Result

Well look at that, it passes. Richie9999 (talk) 03:15, August 4, 2020 (UTC)