Forum:CT:Bylaws revamp

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:Bylaws revamp
This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was support proposals. OOM 224 (he/him) 16:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

This CT proposes to change the Bylwas of the various boards with the text located on my workbench here, respectively for the EC, AC, and INQ. The differences with the current bylwas can be seen here.

List of what was changed:

  1. Removed the "Discord consensus" possibility to strike objections and remove nominations.
  2. Removed example of policies under "Invalid objection rational."
  3. Made the "AC/Removing successful nominations" section consistent with the other Bylaws.
  4. Removed the difference between AC and INQ votes for GANs.
  5. Removed the possibility to reomve a GAN after one week if the nominator has not edited in over a month.
  6. One week -> 10 days swap to consider an objection invalid for GANs consistently with the other GAN waiting periods.
  7. Made the Inq section consistent with the others.
  8. Revamp of the "Current strikes" section: introducing the Wookieepedia:Requests for removal of review board membership system and reducing the expiration time of strikes from two years to one year.

Explanation of the changes:

  1. For transparency toward the community. The feature was hardly used.
  2. Redundant and useless: all policies should be respected.
  3. Consistency.
  4. All the INQs (aside from Preem) are ACs, and there is no reason to limit the number of INQ votes a GAN can get.
  5. It isn't needed: we can wait three more days and avoid having another quibble.
  6. Consistency.
  7. Consistency.
  8. The expiration time has been reduced because two years were way too long to make a strike expire. Moreover, the mandatory WP:RFRRB has been added to avoid the offending review board member taking the removal vote personally: if it's dictated by policy, it's nobody's fault. LucaRoR Sigil of House Serenno (Talk) 09:42, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Support

  1. LucaRoR Sigil of House Serenno (Talk) 09:42, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  2. Samonic Signatureicon (Talk) 10:09, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  3. Imperators II(Talk) 10:29, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  4. UberSoldat93 ClanMudhornSignet-Redemption (talk) 10:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  5. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 10:57, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  6. 01miki10 Open comlink 11:22, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  7. NBDani TeamFireballLogo-Collider(they/them)Yeager's Repairs 12:47, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  8. Rakhsh (talk) 14:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  9. BloodOfIrizi Seventh Fleet (Syndicure) 15:23, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  10. ThrawnChiss7 Mitth symbol Assembly Cupola 15:29, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  11. Fabulous work, Luca! I had been looking forward to this. OOM 224 (he/him) 15:46, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  12. Rsand 30 (talk) 17:52, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  13. —spookywillowwtalk 21:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  14. Lewisr (talk) 21:25, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  15. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 13:04, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  16. Great work on this! Supreme Emperor Holocomm 05:56, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
  17. We make Luca a review board member and he immediately fixes everything. Makes my job easier. :P Master FredceriqueCommerce Guild(talk) (he/him) 02:12, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
  18. Ayrehead02 (talk) 10:17, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss