Forum:Ignore All Rules

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Ignore All Rules
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 8 April 2010 by Calebchiam.

RuneScape:Ignore all rules was meant to be a means for users who wish to improve the Wiki to avoid a rigid interpretation of certain Wiki policies, when it would be more beneficial to perform an action does not strictly obey the policy. However, of recent it (along with RuneScape:Be bold) has turned into a tool for users to avoid policies at will. Thus, I am proposing that the name of the policy be changed to RuneScape:Use common sense, or RS:UCS.

Examples of where RS:UCS should be applied to circumvent Wiki policy:

  • User A is a troll, and has vandalized excessively. While waiting for an administrator to show up and handle the situation, User B may apply this policy and revert User A's edits, as long as they are vandalism. A rigid interpretation of the rules will run into trouble, especially if User A repeatedly vandalizes the same page, as continued rollbacks would be a violation of RS:3RR. However, UCS would allow User B to remove the vandalism. This is common sense.

Examples of where RS:UCS should not be applied to circumvent Wiki policy:

  • User C has just made a proposal that was rejected in the Yew Grove. User C should not UCS and override RS:CONSENSUS, and perform that action anyways. This is also common sense.

Anyone that can come up with more examples is welcome to add them. User:Whiplash was playing around with this idea. His post is found here.

--LiquidTalk 21:31, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

Support - As nominator. --LiquidTalk 21:31, March 30, 2010 (UTC) Support - Ignoring all rules has more of a negative connotation associated with it, whereas common sense...is obvious Wink HaloTalk 21:40, March 30, 2010 (UTC) Support - It's common sense. Xmas07 presents.gifStelercusSanta hat detail.png 22:13, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all support. - TehKittyCatTalk Wikian-Book 22:29, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I enjoy the idea of this rule and it's execution. I enjoy it a lot. Godspeed to this. Zaros symbol.pngChaos Monk Talk SignCoins 250.png 22:44, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Support - the application of Bold to IAR can produce some strange arguments. Dark avorian 22:59, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Strong support Per Liquid, Haloolah, Dark avorian.  Ranged-icon.png Zap0i TalkRune scimitar.png  23:00, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - are you proposing we change the policy, or just the name? Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 23:54, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Just the name. Well, we will have to modify the policy slightly, so that it uses the phrase Use common sense instead of Ignore all rules. But, the content will be the same. The name Ignore all rules was encouraging users to use it as a free pass to ignore any wiki policy they wanted to. --LiquidTalk 23:56, March 30, 2010 (UTC)
IMO changing the name to Use Commons Sense, while not changing teh wording of the policy, does change peoples understanding of the spirit of the policy. Dark avorian 23:57, March 30, 2010 (UTC)
It will help, but it's also about not being the "get out of jail free card" whenever someone starts doing something without community consensus. HaloTalk 23:59, March 30, 2010 (UTC)
The main problem with the policy, as it stands, is that people use it to override any policy they wish to, because the name gives the impression that they can ignore ALL rules. Changing the name will remove a large portion of the problem. --LiquidTalk 00:00, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
There will be a separate discussion as to the perception/wording of RS:Bold & RS:IAR, I can assure you.-- 00:03, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - as it wont change the policy, i somewhat support it, however ignore all rules sounds very good to me, as we should be ignoring all rules anyways, unless the rules protect some1/something and arnt just there to take up space, as many rules are. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 00:24, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

The problem with ignore all rules/be bold is that people are using them as an excuse for anything they need, without getting community consensus. This would hopefully help this somewhat. HaloTalk 00:27, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. Huzzah! Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 01:47, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Support - Hurrah! Some original thinking! The policy could use a little bit of a rewrite as well, because as it is there is no clear guidelines on when it is appropriate to use it. Trust me, I have n00b'd on this one before ;) Ajraddatz Talk 02:02, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. I thought I already did. --Iiii I I I 02:06, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per All. Should be good.BerserkHackr 02:09, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I noticed Whiplash's comments on that talk page, and also something on a subpage of Azaz. Implementing this would be common sense. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 02:18, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Makes sense to me. Per all. --Aburnett(Talk) 02:31, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Because I said it first! No, but in all honesty folks, I believe this will be the first important step to finally bringing the RS:Bold and RS:IAR, policies/essays into line with their original intent and to prevent further manipulation/misunderstanding amongst the community.--

Helm of neitiznot (charged).png Azaz129 Crystal shield.png Talk Edits Contribs

02:39, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - per all. Andrew talk 03:30, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Much better wording. --Quarenon  Talk 03:49, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Better wording as stated by others, too easy as is to take advantage for a policy named "Ignore All Rules" really. Korasi's sword.png Archmage Elune  TalkHS Void knight deflector.png fetus is my son and I love him. 05:52, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Support - Let's fill all loopholes. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 07:20, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support- per all. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 10:35, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Pretty straightforward. C.ChiamTalk 10:36, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support Ignore all the rules sounds like anarchy to me ‎20px‎AtlandyBeer.png 15:02, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support Per all   Swizz Talk   Events!   17:34, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 19:18, March 31, 2010 (UTC) 

Request for closure - This is going to pass, no doubt about it. Xmas07 presents.gifStelercusSanta hat detail.png 19:51, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

I proposed this about 21 hours ago. It's generally a good idea to leave things open for at least 3-4 days. --LiquidTalk 19:52, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
When I came to this page, coolnesse had not posted. When I pushed edit he had. lol. According to the policy I just referenced, if it is clear what the consensus will be and there is a close-to-zero likelihood of anyone coming out with a decent opposite view, there is no reason to continue the process. 21 hours was all that was needed to get us there. Xmas07 presents.gifStelercusSanta hat detail.png 19:56, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
Agreed- it's going to happen unless there is some sort of devine intervention OMG!. I've gone ahead implemented it (sorry for stealing your thunder Liquid, I thought you were offline Blush.) --Aburnett(Talk) 19:58, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I kind of promised Degen he could close it <.< So, if you want a Degen mad at you, go ahead. Just don't blame me for not warning you. --LiquidTalk 19:59, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
Too soon - per my reasons in countless other threads which were closed too soon, and a line (which I edited) in RS:CONSENSUS which says: The topic has unanimous or near unanimous support or opposes and discussion has ran for at least a week or two.   az talk   22:04, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
Way too soon - Not all users/admins/crats check the wiki every day. And this has ran under a day. Maybe there is a reason it hasn't been implemented yet. It can be good to be bold sometimes, but this was way too soon. Is this that urgent that it needed to happen in less than a day? (rhetorical Lol) Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 02:18, April 1, 2010 (UTC)
Support Closing - It doesn't matter, we won't get everyone's opinion on this no matter how long it is left up. Like Steler said, per RS:SNOW, this should be closed. To address the people who don't see it, we can simply put it in the Site Notice, and problem solved. HaloTalk 13:54, April 2, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. --Coolnesse 19:52, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Seems like a good idea to me; makes a lot of sense. Suppa chuppa Talk 21:28, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Having some fun editing ain't too bad. Quest point cape.png Axiot Slayer.png 02:38, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - In my opinion, it takes a certain level of immaturity to not see the irony in citing RS:IAR as justification for a certain action (since obviously the same policy could be used to summarily reverse that action). So I don't really see the problem in just logically countering someone who uses IAR as a justification for something. I'm leaning towards oppose since it waters down the affect of the policy (these policies are contradictory and strong in language for a reason). The beauty of "ignore all rules" is that it gives us the mandate to throw out the rulebook/processes/bureaucracy when it is hindering the good of the wiki. "Use common sense" does not instill that same mandate. But I don't really care either way. If it has actually been a problem in practice, then fair enough. Obviously this has garnered a lot of support and I don't want to stand in the way of obvious consensus. Endasil (Talk) @  04:36, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

UCS does not directly install that mandate, but if the common sense is to throw out the bureaucracy, then that's what the new policy allows. Simple as that. --LiquidTalk 20:55, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Clarity and flexibility are always good things. Quest.png Morian Smith Saradomin crozier.png 04:04, April 2, 2010 (UTC)

Request for closure - This has been open for about a week now, and discussion has died down. I think that we can implement this and close the thread now. --LiquidTalk 15:52, April 5, 2010 (UTC)

Do it. --Aburnett(Talk) 00:43, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

Additional proposal

I've modified the wording of IAR slightly to conform to the new title, if the above proposal passes. My version can be found in my sandbox. I propose that the new text replace the original IAR text. It's not that much different. You may edit my text as you like, as long as you put an appropriate reason in the edit summary.

Support - As nominator. --LiquidTalk 20:10, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I'm pretty sure Azaz was working on this and already had something ready O_o Chicken7 >talk 02:18, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

Really? OMG! No one told me. --LiquidTalk 02:22, April 1, 2010 (UTC)
I think he did just a bit above there ;) Ajraddatz Talk 03:45, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - There is consensus for this policy change. The changes have been implemented (see RuneScape:Use common sense). C.ChiamTalk 09:06, April 8, 2010 (UTC)