5,988
pages
ALL POSTSProhibiting Inactive users from voting on RfRs
<p>Recently I was reading over community policy, and I noticed that we do not have any rules regarding the people who can and can not vote on RFRs besides the "active for one month" rule. I think it's time for this to change.
</p><p>I think the people voting on RFRs, especially CM, admin, and bureaucrat RFRs, should not only be active, but also active in the community has a whole. This means users who have the inactive tag, but also users who edit but never participate in chat, can not vote on these RFRs. I feel it's too easy to exploit the current system. In fact, I was even guilty of doing this myself. I came out of retirement for the sole purpose of voting oppose on a RFR. That is hardly fair. I also think if a user is not active on chat or in the community, they're hardly a good judge of the person they're voting for, which is also unfair.
</p><p>So, should we restrict the people allowed to vote on these different RFRs to people both active on the site and active in the community as a whole?
</p><p>Bureaucrat
</p><p>A) Yes 15 Votes
</p><p>B) No 13 Votes
</p><p>Admin
</p><p>A) Yes 15 Votes
</p><p>B) No 13 Votes
</p><p>CM
</p><p>A) Yes 16 Votes
</p><p>B) No 12 Vote
</p><p>DM
</p><p>A) Yes 15 Votes
</p><p>B) No 13 Votes
</p>
<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Consensus">Consensus</span></h2>
<p>Yes for all
</p>
(Edited by administrators)
<div class="quote">
<p>Brick425 wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">Harold89 wrote:
B, B, B, and B. This vote is too unclear in what determines activity and inactivity. Moreover, I do not like the idea of having no physcial/written rules on who is and is not eligible to vote. Instead, if this vote passes, we would simply be allowing the admins to determine activity as they please, with no grounded rule to restrict their decisions.</div> <p>The "common sense" thing is, believe it or not, used a ton in real life. I don't see why it's such a bad idea. I think most of us can agree who is active and who isn't, since our definitions of "active" are more or less the same. </p> </div> <p><font face="Courier New">agreed</font> </p>
B, B, B, and B. This vote is too unclear in what determines activity and inactivity. Moreover, I do not like the idea of having no physcial/written rules on who is and is not eligible to vote. Instead, if this vote passes, we would simply be allowing the admins to determine activity as they please, with no grounded rule to restrict their decisions.</div> <p>The "common sense" thing is, believe it or not, used a ton in real life. I don't see why it's such a bad idea. I think most of us can agree who is active and who isn't, since our definitions of "active" are more or less the same. </p> </div> <p><font face="Courier New">agreed</font> </p>
(Edited by LordWeirdo)
<p>Like, what happened in the two months between now and this? 
</p><noscript>
</noscript>http://legomessageboards.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:263544
</p><noscript></noscript>http://legomessageboards.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:263544
(Edited by Michaelyoda)
0
<div class="quote">Michaelyoda wrote:
Like, what happened in the two months between now and this?http://legomessageboards.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:263544</div>
<p>Per this. I knew I remembered this issue from somewhere...
</p>
Like, what happened in the two months between now and this?
http://legomessageboards.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:263544</div>
<p>Per this. I knew I remembered this issue from somewhere...
</p>
(Edited by Brick425)
0
<p>B to all, and per Harry. It's too hard to determine who is "actually active", and if a user is active enough in the community to be around, hear about the vote, and have feelings one way or another about it, that seems active enough for me.
</p>
(Edited by Loney 97)
1
<p>Like with the last vote, there are no concrete confines for who is and isn't "inactive." I'm not a fan of determining rules without there being actual rules, nor am I fan of restricting voting access with such a dependency on subjectivity. Like Yoda pointed out, it's weird how quickly sentiment has changed from the previous vote on this matter to what we have now.
</p><p>B to all.
</p>
(Edited by Riolu777)
B to all.
(Edited by EvilMidnightNG)
<p>Per loney and rio, the only level headed people here.
</p>
(Edited by Packachoo)
<p>B to all.
</p><p>THIS IS AN UNACCEPTABLE BREACH OF DEMOCRACY!!! YOU'RE TRYING TO TURN US INTO BLOODY COMMUNISTS!!! I WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS!!!
</p><p>Jk, most of my reasons have already been stated, so...per above. :P
</p>
(Edited by GandalftheWizard)
B to all.
(Edited by TheShadowAssassin)
0
B to all.
(Edited by Peudguin)