No edit summary |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{Policies}} |
{{Policies}} |
||
| + | == Life cycle of a proposal == |
||
| − | == Discussion System == |
||
| − | #A proposal is made, in which the proposer provides background information and clearly states what is being proposed. In a discussion made to find out which course of action should be taken, a clearly stated proposal is not required. |
||
| − | #The community "votes" for what they feel is the the best choice - yes, no, undecided. However, what is different with this is that it isn't the '''Oppose''' that counts, but it is the reason that follows after it. |
||
| − | #After discussion has died down, an admin '''''who was not involved in the discussion''''' takes a look over it, examines all of the arguments presented, and determines consensus from it. Consensus does not mean whether or not the proposal has passed per the number of supports, but what arguments were made on both sides. |
||
| + | This is the basic structure of how proposals are processed in the community: |
||
| − | So let's try this out here. There will be no vote on this forum, but rather one large comment section. Please begin any post with one of the following (they are pretty self-explanatory, but feel free to invent your own as needed): |
||
| + | |||
| − | *'''Support''' - Detailed reason for supporting; why it will work. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> |
||
| + | # A user creates a proposal. The scope of the proposal can be on any scale — from a simple MoS addendum to a desysopping request. |
||
| − | *'''Neutral''' - Detailed explanation weighing the pro and cons of the proposal and outlining how they more or less balance each other out. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> |
||
| + | # The community starts discussing the proposal. Depending on the nature of the proposal, conflict may arise, which is resolved by calm debate. |
||
| − | *'''Oppose''' - Detailed reason for opposing; why it won't work. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> |
||
| + | # After the discussion has died down, an administrator not involved with the discussion closes it, clearly identifying the consensus. |
||
| − | *'''Question''' - excuse me im confus <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> |
||
| + | |||
| − | *'''Answer''' - bla bla bla <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> |
||
| + | Of course, this exact process is rarely followed. Sometimes a discussion can be closed with no consensus, sometimes an involved administrator can close the discussion, and sometimes the discussion is resolved with a simple straw poll. The exact procedure strongly depends on the situation; remember to [[BP:UCS|use common sense]] and bend this structure as much as is needed. |
||
| − | *'''Comment''' - I think that... <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> |
||
| − | *'''Request for closure''' - Discussion has died down, it is pretty clear which way this has gone. <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> |
||
| − | *'''Closed''' - Clear consensus to... <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> |
||
== Voting System == |
== Voting System == |
||
Revision as of 01:13, 25 August 2011
 |
This article is still under construction. More content may be added in the near future. |
Life cycle of a proposal
This is the basic structure of how proposals are processed in the community:
- A user creates a proposal. The scope of the proposal can be on any scale — from a simple MoS addendum to a desysopping request.
- The community starts discussing the proposal. Depending on the nature of the proposal, conflict may arise, which is resolved by calm debate.
- After the discussion has died down, an administrator not involved with the discussion closes it, clearly identifying the consensus.
Of course, this exact process is rarely followed. Sometimes a discussion can be closed with no consensus, sometimes an involved administrator can close the discussion, and sometimes the discussion is resolved with a simple straw poll. The exact procedure strongly depends on the situation; remember to use common sense and bend this structure as much as is needed.
Voting System
This is just a straight vote: The team with the most number of supportees gets their proposal through.
Examples
Discussion System
This is my proposal. ~~~~
- Support - Here's why. ~~~~
- You're wrong, and here's why. ~~~~
- Your argument is incorrect. Why? Because... ~~~~
- You're wrong, and here's why. ~~~~
- Oppose - I don't think this is a good idea. ~~~~
- Please explain. ~~~~
- Here's why. ~~~~
- Please explain. ~~~~
- Suggestion - Instead of this, why don't we do that? ~~~~
- Hear, hear! I think we should do this. Here's why. ~~~~
- Comment - I want to point this out. ~~~~
Neutral - While this part is good, that part is bad. ~~~~- Actually, that part is good. ~~~~
- Oh yeah, you're right... ~~~~
- Actually, that part is good. ~~~~
- Strong support - Here's why. ~~~~
- Question - I don't get this. ~~~~
- Answer - Here's what it means. ~~~~
- Answer - Here's another meaning. ~~~~
- Oppose - I like cake. ~~~~
- What?!? ~~~~
- Weak oppose - While this part is very good, this part is pretty bad. ~~~~
- No it isn't. ~~~~
- Yes it is. ~~~~
- No it isn't. ~~~~
- Yes it is. ~~~~
- No it isn't. ~~~~
- Yes it is. ~~~~
- No it isn't. ~~~~
- Yes it is. ~~~~
- No it isn't. ~~~~
- Yes it is. ~~~~
- No it isn't. ~~~~
- WTH? - Now that totally redefines "ridiculous." ~~~~
- Actually, it's a good idea, and here's why. ~~~~
- Request for closure - In general, discussion is heading in this direction. ~~~~
- Closed - The result is this. ~~~~
Voting System
I think, because, of this, we should use this.
Support
- Yes, that is a great idea. ~~~~
- That would make doing this much easier. ~~~~
Oppose
- No, because of this. ~~~~
- Per above, having that would be bad. ~~~~
- I agree also. We don't want this to happen. ~~~~
Comments
- I'm staying neutral, because of this and this. ~~~~
Where we use the Systems
| Name | System |
|---|---|
| Brickipedian of the Month | Straight Vote |
| Userbox and Infobox Colour proposals | Straight Vote |
| Improvement Drive nominations | Straight Vote |
| General Forums (eg. Forum:New method of community discussion/voting) | New Disscusion System |