Removing the 96 Hours Requirement from RfRs

This post is locked.

AmazingPythor·1/6/2017 in Community Voting

So recently multiple users have complained to me that the 96 hours requirement for Requests for Rights, which prohibits RfRs from being closed until they have been up for four days, is more of a nuisance than an equitable policy. Because the other RfR requirements seem to be effective in making position advancement difficult on their own, and the 96 hours wait seems to serve as nothing besides a redundant roadblock, I suppose it would make sense to remove it.

Should we remove the 96 Hours Requirement from Requests for Rights?

A: Yes: 9 votes.

B: No: 8 votes.

Consensus

Yes, remove the 96-hours requirement from RfR.

(Edited by administrators)

BusyCityGirl·1/7/2017

Mm, I considered A. But in the end, definitely going with B. So, B.

</noscript> But yeah seems like the policy could use some editing as LCF pointed out.

(Edited by BusyCityGirl)

Tadonyx·1/7/2017

I'm a bit on the neutral side, but I'm going B.

(Edited by Tadonyx)

TheShadowAssassin·1/7/2017

Riolu777 wrote:

Jerry Seinfeld wrote:

Riolu777 wrote: I'm in favor of scrapping this vote and having an entire overhaul of the closure rules. I've had to ask people on chat and get different answers in the past when wanting to find out when to close RfRs.

Is that actually allowed? If so, then ditto.

AP could just close this and then we figure out a new system for RfR closures and put forth a vote on it.

#ImWithThis

(Edited by TheShadowAssassin)