A mock-up of a proposal for the Yew Grove, about proposals for the Yew Grove. This is not final, and may differ from what appears on the Yew Grove when I propose it. Please direct any suggestions or comments to the bottom.
This is a proposal that will most likely spark large debate. As I, and some other users, see it, an essential one. Most of us are aware that the Yew Grove is absolutely packed with Active threads, the exact number being Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character ",". (auto-updated). This number has built up over months, or even years of proposals, and is obviously FAR too many. How is the community meant to discuss, contribute and reach closure for 94 proposals at one time?! I understand that most of those proposals discuss important ideas that could greatly benefit the wiki. But we're getting nowhere at this rate, as we can't discuss all of them. Something needs to be done...
I am proposing that we impose a limit on the number of Yew Grove threads at a time. Yes, that's right, a limit. This limit would ensure that the community is not overwhelmed with proposals and threads, leading to them falling into a deep state of inactivity and no consensus. With a small number of threads, it'd be so much easier for the community to discuss important threads, and ensure that they do reach some sort of closure, consensus or no consensus. When the community has less threads to consider, it means discussion is boosted and the current threads can be closed. Therefore, more can be opened/proposed, and the process continues, making the system much more flowing, easier and beneficial. Those 90 threads sitting there in idle mode are doing nothing to help the wiki currently.
I understand there are some down-sides to this. But something seriously needs to be done about this problem, that is being detrimental to the decision-making process of our wiki. I think it'd be a good idea to have a queue, instead of first-in, best-dressed, as some people may not check up on the Yew Grove daily and may keep missing opportunities to propose threads. I'm not totally sure about a number either, but to start us off, let's say that we'll limit the Yew Grove to 15 threads at a time. Discuss. Chicken7 >talk 06:21, March 23, 2010 (UTC)
Proposal: To impose a 15 thread limit on the Yew Grove, and create a queue for when the Yew Grove is full.
The below won't be carried into the Yew Grove when I propose it, but feel free to make suggestions or voice your opinion.
- Oppose - Cuz ur ruels mean nothing. PUWEYrwojy 12:36 am, 24 March 2010, last Wednesday (5 days ago) (UTC−5)
- Comment - I would agree that something needs to be done. I'm not quite sure what I think the answer is at this point though. HaloTalk 05:27, March 24, 2010 (UTC)
- Support - Walrus. Yep, that about covers it :D Ajraddatz Talk 03:04, March 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose - WAY too many problems about this... scooties 03:05, March 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose - Casuse it will disrupt teh grove of willows Twig Talk 04:45, March 30, 2010 (UTC)
- Support idea, Oppose 15 - Because I think 15 is not enough, but I do support the idea of having some sort of limit. And I think it should be possible to make a thread about something that has suddenly become urgent, even if the limit is already fulfilled. Oil4 Talk 07:38, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
- Support Idea, Oppose 15 - We just need to crack down on threads nobody is paying a bit of attention to and close them. If nobody is interested, no point in keeping it open. I get the idea your goal is to remove the now useless threads and increase activity in those we still have being used at all, which can be achieved by other means. Stelercus 13:31, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose - This will create "competitions", per se, for spots on the Yew Grove. Users with threads in the queue will be trying to rush through the active discussions so that theirs can be discussed. Plus, I think we can handle that many discussions. A lot of the active threads have a consensus, but it's the sysops who neglect to properly close and implement them. --LiquidTalk 13:34, March 31, 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose - While I cringe whenever I see the long list of active threads in the Yew Grove, I do not believe that limiting the number of threads is the answer. Some of the main causes of threads going inactive are that the users who open it neglect it (Forum:Proposal for RuneScape:Profanity) or if the thread proposal involves walls of text that are too complicated for users to read/understand (Forum:A GP Measurement, Forum:Style of writing on this wikia) and so they do not bother to comment on it. What we need to do is have administrators actively clear away these old proposals that are going nowhere by either closing them/requesting for comment/contacting the proposers to implement changes (assuming there is a consensus for it), and hopefully, if we continually do this for some time, we should be able to clear the backlog of inactive threads, and have a much smaller number of active threads to deal with, which leads to a much more productive Wiki environment. C.ChiamTalk 14:01, April 2, 2010 (UTC)