This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums
Forums - Bring it Back
This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page.

Comment: Bring it Back

About one year almost exactly we had a rule that said: "To vote on an RfA or an RfB you must have at least 100 mainspace edits." The reason we had that rule is to not easily convince new users to vote on your thing so you can win. Bringing this rule back would help for the following reasons:

  1. It minimizes canvassing. These newer users are still forming opinions about users but don't realize that they are being told to break rules. If this rule was brought back this problem would be done and these newer users would not be in trouble.
  2. Currently there are more new users then established users. The newer users just go with the crowd (yes I have seen this on recent RfA's) or because there friend voted so they are going to vote with their friend with no care of what they are actually voting for. This would make a better judgment because a bunch of these users vote make five more edits and are never heard from again.

klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 15:19, July 9, 2012 (UTC)


  • I agree. I've seen it too. Things should be decided by users who know what to vote for. Darth henry The Dojo Turtles! 15:24, July 9, 2012 (UTC)
  • Per Darth. Ninja Head StealthNinja Contact 6,767 Edits
  • Definitely. Sometimes, notorious users ask new users to vote for them on some rights requests, and the new users don't know anything about how the user acts, so they vote for him/her. One con, it is annoying to check out all the users who vote to make sure they meet the requirements. SuperSpyX Knowledge isPower
  • Actually I don't care as much on RfCM but the rule really needs to be brought back for RfA's and RfB's. klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 18:55, July 9, 2012 (UTC)
  • Per Darth Charge talk Devoted editor of Brickipedia. 23:18, July 9, 2012 (UTC)
  • Per Darth -βᵒᵇ βʳᶦᶜᵏˢ Ʈᵃᶫᵏ · βᶫᵒᵍ
  • I've seen it a few times as well. Some new users can have very poor opinions or comments on RfA or RfB sometimes. - Power Jim Talk Blogz02:33, 7/11/2012 02:33, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose Still biting new users? Not allowing a new user vote is still rude. They are still part of the community, and edits don't always matter. They might just spam 100 edits, and they'll all be reverted. I just don't see the point in restricting them to vote because of their edit count. --Czech 09:12, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
When did I bite new uers before? Anyways, these users still haven't fully grasped Bricki yet and just vote with the crowd making an uneven consensus. As I said above these users vote along with their buddies and don't care what they are actually doing. klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 20:13, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
  • Maybe something lower like 25 or 50? Drewlzoo
  • Support If we did only 25-50 edits, then we'd have newbies making trash edits so that they could vote. 100 edits can take quite a lot longer to achieve, so I think we should do that. Perhaps a minimum of 100 edits before voting on(or submitting) chat mod nominations could be implemented as well. Why? Mainly because most newbies get on chat first, then after a week or two, they nominate themselves for mod rights. Dataman-logo-bluetalk 20:59, July 11, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I spaced my vote off so everyone will read this. New users are meant to edit and learn the ropes, not for voting/forums. People with no experience can't say who would be fit to be a good administrator, just like none of us would go to, say Avatar Wiki, and vote for a user's administrative rights without knowing a thing about the site or its status. The requirement should be 200 mainspace, enough for around 300-400 edits total. New users need to prove themselves before they vote in a change of our system. -NBP 14:16, July 13, 2012 (UTC)

  • I'm mostly neutral, even though I am leaning towards support. Usually, new users are pretty oblivious as to what is going on, but every now and then they are reasonable. Rather than say that they can't vote, I'd rather slash all supports or opposes with bad reasons (i.e. "As brother/friend" or "hes kool") on sight and then say why in those little parentheses like (this). --Berrybrick (Talk) 14:26, July 13, 2012 (UTC)
    • Per Berrybrick. - nxt
  • Per KoN, and some of Berrybrick. And if you don't put any effort into the wiki, why should they be able to influence decisions (some of the quite important) on the wiki? NightblazeSaber 23:37, July 15, 2012 (UTC)
  • Per NHL. -Cligra Join the redlink war!
  • Support bringing it back. @CM: this isn't 'biting' new users. Are you allowed to vote in the Australia elections? (I'm assuming here that you're under 18.) But are you being 'bitten'? Jag 03:14, July 17, 2012 (UTC)
  • I thought we already brought this back with my last proposal O_o ajr 03:59, July 17, 2012 (UTC)
    • Remember Ajr it takes two times for anything to get done around here.  :P klagoerRollinglaughingsmileyname that user 23:02, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

Bumping this forum, any resolution? -NBP 22:09, July 26, 2012 (UTC)

  • Overwhelming consensus for, closed. NightblazeSaber 23:54, July 26, 2012 (UTC)