Forum:CT:Other misc. voting requirements cleanup

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:Other misc. voting requirements cleanup
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 both proposals. —spookywillowwtalk 16:23, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Firstly, I want to clarify that the reason I'm bringing this to CT first is because it falls under an area that seems mostly pass/fail. If it does fail, I'm sure it can circle back to the ever-crowded Senate Hall, but this goes along the same lines as a current discussion so figured to just throw it directly on here and see what people think, even though straight-to-CT is generally unusual. Nothing like a surprise mid-week CT!

With that said the following pages read:

  • Wookieepedia:Social Media Team membership nominations—"Support votes must have a 2/3rds supermajority for the request to be accepted. (Only users who have been registered for over a month and have at least 50 edits—from the day the nomination is put forth—are counted.)"
  • Wookieepedia:Requests for removal of Social Media Team membership—"Participating registered users' votes must have a 2/3 supermajority for the relevant position to be removed. (Only users who have been registered for over a month and have at least 50 edits—from the day the nomination is put forth—are counted.)"
  • Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights (section: RFA)—"At least ten eligible Wookieepedians must contribute a vote, three of which must be administrators."
  • Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights (section: RFB)
    • "Registered users' votes must have a 3/4ths supermajority for bureaucratship to be accepted (Only users who have been registered for over a month—from the day the nomination is put forth—are counted)."
    • "At least ten eligible Wookieepedians must contribute a vote, five of which must be administrators."

Of which, I'm proposing to alter all of the above clauses in this two-part CT, primarily to remove the latter halves of most of them.—spookywillowwtalk 16:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

SMT pages

From Wookieepedia:Social Media Team membership nominations and Wookieepedia:Requests for removal of Social Media Team membership, proposing the removal of:

"(Only users who have been registered for over a month and have at least 50 edits—from the day the nomination is put forth—are counted."

Reasoning: We're currently on a bureaucracy stripping spree. Obviously, both of the aforementioned pages require a user to follow the voting eligibilty policy and still will if this passes. Arbitrarily requiring a user to have been registered for an entire month and meet the editcount requirement to be counted is somewhat of a relic of an old era. I mean, what if someone joins and really kicks it off, getting near a thousand edits? It's happened before and may again; and even if someone doesn't join and become a prolific editor, if they're able to vote on everything else (CTs, etc.) then the extra "month" is pretty much just saying that someone doesn't matter for the first month even if they are doing a great job.—spookywillowwtalk 16:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Support removal

  1. —spookywillowwtalk 16:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. Ayrehead02 (talk) 16:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  3. Tommy-Macaroni (he/they) 16:38, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  4. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 16:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  5. OOM 224 (he/him) 17:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  6. Master FredceriqueCommerce Guild(talk) (he/him) 17:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  7. Rakhsh (talk) 18:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  8. Asithol (talk) 22:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  9. Zed42 (talk) 23:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  10. Fan26 (Talk) 00:15, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  11. Rsand 30 (talk) 00:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  12. Away with the silly nonsense. —SnowedLightning (they/them) 00:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  13. ThrawnChiss7 Mitth symbol Assembly Cupola 01:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  14. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 04:04, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  15. Bonzane10 Sabine Starbird (holonet) 04:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  16. Imperators II(Talk) 09:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  17. NBDani TeamFireballLogo-Collider(they/them)Yeager's Repairs 13:38, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  18. Lewisr (talk) 19:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose removal

Rights request pages

On Wookieepedia:Requests for user rights, proposing the removal of the following clauses (full clauses detailed at CT start):

    • RFA section:
      • "three of which must be administrators."
    • RFB section:
      • "(Only users who have been registered for over a month and have at least 50 edits—from the day the nomination is put forth—are counted.)"
      • "five of which must be administrators."

Reasoning: Mostly, same as above reasoning for the part about being here for a month—if someone has CT voting rights, then it makes little sense to restrict their other accesses for an arbitrary length of time. But for the other parts, I'd reccomend those who weren't here for this CT last year to read up on that. It's in the same vein—admins are not, nor should ever be able to veto the will of the community. Admins have powers to use for the good of the wiki, but we shouldn't in any capacity be able to block a community vote from occurring. So, if 2/3s of the community (for admins) and 3/4 of the community (for bureaucrats) votes yes for a nomination, doesn't seem like we need to specify an amount of administrators to have participated. This is in the same vein as the CT linked before: we're all one Wookieepedia, and it's up to the community to make the choice with everyone's vote being entirely equal. For logging's sakes naturally, the three/five parts that are chopping off the end of sentence just means we'd add punctuation at the end.—spookywillowwtalk 16:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Support removal

  1. —spookywillowwtalk 16:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  2. Ayrehead02 (talk) 16:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  3. Tommy-Macaroni (he/they) 16:38, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  4. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 16:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  5. OOM 224 (he/him) 17:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  6. I honestly hate having the ability to overrule the community. It feels slimy. Get rid of it. Master FredceriqueCommerce Guild(talk) (he/him) 17:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  7. Rakhsh (talk) 18:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  8. Asithol (talk) 22:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  9. Zed42 (talk) 23:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
  10. Fan26 (Talk) 00:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  11. Rsand 30 (talk) 00:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  12. Per Fred, that's always been something that doesn't sit with me. Getting rid of it only seems fair and gives more power to the community as a whole. —SnowedLightning (they/them) 00:22, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  13. ThrawnChiss7 Mitth symbol Assembly Cupola 01:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  14. TanDivoInsignia-SenateMurders Anıl Şerifoğlu (talk) 04:04, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  15. Bonzane10 Sabine Starbird (holonet) 04:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  16. Imperators II(Talk) 09:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  17. NBDani TeamFireballLogo-Collider(they/them)Yeager's Repairs 13:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
  18. Lewisr (talk) 19:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose removal

Discuss