Forum:When is consensus achieved?

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > When is consensus achieved?
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 1 September 2009 by Soldier 1033.

As stated in RS:CONSENSUS consensus is achieved when, well, when it's achieved. But what if everyone Supports or Opposes something? How long does it have to go on, people adding '''Support/Oppose''' - Per all ~~~~, before it can be closed? The policy never clearly states this, so I propose that if there are no differing opinions on a topic after 15 different people post or after 2 weeks of thread being active that it is automatically closed with what the community decides. RS:IAR should cover exceptions.


Support - As nom. — Enigma 07:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Support - Per Enigma. bad_fetustalk 10:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Support - If it was 2 weeks. The 15 signers would be an added plus, where it would be of concern if there was a lack of participation. What I would not want to see (and I've seen this happen on Wikimedia projects) where a "stealth" proposal with a small clique of users make a "proposal", support it with a discussion page, and then proclaim it as policy. I saw that happen once with a administrator deadmin policy that had surprisingly come to the exact opposite conclusion a year earlier. If it is open and there is widespread support for the change, 2 weeks seems to be sufficient. --Robert Horning 14:08, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Support and Comment - Does this apply to RfAs too? I think it should. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  14:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

It applies to discussions in general, which yes, includes RFAs. — Enigma 23:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Support The two weeks if all agree with no differing opinions.Time is more important than 15 supporters, as Robert says above. @Telos, I would be very leery of allowing an RFA to be closed in less than 10 days unless support or opposes were unanimous. An extra few days on getting sysopped should hardly make a difference.--Degenret01 14:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Conditional Support - People can always come to a compromise. But when a discussion reaches a stage of several users commenting back and forth repeating what has already been said, it should be closed. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 15:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Support two weeks, oppose 15 people - The two weeks sound good to me as that will allow even editors that only come on once a week to get their say in. The 15 supports/oppose sounds bad to me due to the rush posting like Robert said earlier. The point about an argument going on with the same comments as earlier on, I'm going to support that. A compromise should be made up before the closing, and have active parties support/oppose it. Having it closed and then a compromise worked up by the admin that is archiving it doesn't make it fair to the people arguing. ~MuzTalk 15:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

RS:IAR should cover that...? — Enigma 23:51, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - We should refer to RS:CONSENSUS when archiving discussions but there is no reason to have any criteria set in stone. If there are 14 supporters after 2 weeks or if there are almost 15 supporters after a week and the discussions has died then there is no reason to keep it open. It's usually pretty straightforward (RS:SNOW basically covers it) and admins are pretty good about making sure there is nothing else that can be added to the discussion. Also, after 2 weeks if there aren't 15 supporters it will usually cause the discussion to be forgotten and sink to the bottom of the list. Andrew talk 23:54, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Request for closure - I didn't realise RS:SNOW already covers this. Sorry govnahs D= — Enigma 00:16, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

-Applies padlock of doom- Andrew talk 00:19, 1 September 2009 (UTC)