MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/13: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 608: | Line 608: | ||
I don't know if there would be problems with copyright and stuff, but apart from that it sounds like a great idea that could be useful for the wiki. I'm actually already working on a script of ''[[Mario is Missing!]]''. {{User|Time Q}} | I don't know if there would be problems with copyright and stuff, but apart from that it sounds like a great idea that could be useful for the wiki. I'm actually already working on a script of ''[[Mario is Missing!]]''. {{User|Time Q}} | ||
}} | |||
===Make an Official Stance On Ties=== | |||
<span style="color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS;font-size:150%">MAKE AN OFFICIAL STANCE ON TIES 5-0</span> | |||
I think that we need an official stance on ties '''completely'''. We already have a rule about ties, but it only applies to proposals with 10+ votes. So that is why this proposal is here. If passed, it would create a new rule about all ties in general. <s>Voting is set up a bit oddly, but I have it detailed to make it easier to vote.</s> | |||
{{scroll box|content= | |||
'''Proposer:''' {{User|Super Mario Bros.}}<br> | |||
'''Deadline:''' 28 April, 2009, 17:00 | |||
====Let Ties Pass Proposals==== | |||
====Let Ties Fail Proposals==== | |||
====Let Deadline Be Extended==== | |||
#{{User|Super Mario Bros.}} I think that extending a proposal would be the best thing to do because it receives half support, and could possibly draw in more attention. | |||
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per Super Mario Bros. Seeing as there's already a policy concerning 10+ vote ties (in the Clear Majority rule), the only logical thing to do would be to extend that same extension policy to ''all'' ties. | |||
#{{User|Zafum}} - I think that it should be all ties, because what if the proposal seems less important and less people vote in it? There would probably be about the same percentage of votes, but one side may still win by 1 vote. | |||
#{{User|Tucayo}} - Per SMB | |||
#{{User|Stooben Rooben}} -- Something like this would be a great rule to have in place. I agree with everything SMB said. | |||
====Against Creating New Rule==== | |||
====Comments==== | |||
But, {{User|Tucayo}}, on the other hand, if a lot of people vote ''against'' a proposal and that means it is a bad proposal; a lot of people vote ''for'' a proposal, it must have a good idea/rule to implement. So that is where I say that there is no definition of a "good" or "bad" proposal is, as whether it is good or bad is a matter of opinion. {{User|Super Mario Bros.}} | |||
:I believe the past past rule said that any proposal with 3 opposes lost, that was because some users think itll be a bad idea, maybe talking with them would be better to decide {{User|Tucayo}} | |||
::What do you mean by "The past past rule"? And talking with them and trying to make a compromise would be better if the deadline was extended (at least, in '''my''' opinion). {{User|Super Mario Bros.}} | |||
:::You see? Like now, you convinced me {{User|Tucayo}} | |||
::::Cool... Thanks! {{User|Super Mario Bros.}} | |||
:: To expand on the 'part part rule', when proposals were first introduced, three No votes with exceptionally good reasons would auto-reject a proposal. I wasn't very active at the time, so I don't know the exact reasoning for the change. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Chris]][[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 19:18, 25 April 2009 (EDT) | |||
}} | }} | ||
