AVID:Requests for Comment/Revise criteria for SNOW closure: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 11:23, 13 February 2023

The following discussion is closed.
Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

wait, this is my own proposal? Is this allowed? Anyway...Closing as

passed Compooper (talk) 11:23, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Revise criteria for SNOW closure

I've noticed lately that many proposals are being shot down rather quickly due to the snowball clause. I feel like more and more proposals are being closed with under 10 votes and within a single day. So, I'm proposing the following criteria: Increase the vote count to trigger a SNOW closure to 10 or more unopposed votes, and have the grace period before that happens be two to three days.

What do you think? Compooper (talk) 13:00, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Support

Support in the condition that the minimum be lowered to at least 10 or something. I've got a feeling that not many people vote as much at times. The grace period is just as fine though. Two days is enough. Either way, I'm in. Doctorine Dark (talk) 13:06, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Support under these conditions

(Lets chat!) 13:08, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Support Could do, I guess. Gilby1385 (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Support Sounds like a good idea! (Talk to Me!) 19:28, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Support Luke2505 (talk) 20:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Support · Talk · Edits 21:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Abstain

Oppose

Oppose If we had a bad idea, How would we quickly erase it from existence? Sonicfan19198282 (talk) 13:06, 6 February 2023

What do you mean? Doctorine Dark (talk) 13:09, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Maybe, someone has a stupid idea. Then, they unknowingly make an RfC for it. It gets a ton of opposes. Then, how will they close it? Sonicfan19198282 (talk) 13:13, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Easy. Someone requests a speedy closure/SNOW if needed, and if the above conditions are met, have an admin or bureaucrat close the RfC. Doctorine Dark (talk) 13:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

But it happened within the course of one day. And they're so embarrassed, they try to take it down instantly. Sonicfan19198282 (talk) 16:40, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

It's 2 days. They can wait.

(Lets chat!) 23:57, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

And it also gets them reported for being underage. True story btw. Sonicfan19198282 (talk) 07:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Comments

Comment:If you don't mind, Compooper, I'd like to make an addition to your proposal.
If a proposal recieves over 20 votes without opposition in the first day, then I believe it should also qualify for SNOW closure. If there is any opposition to said consensus, the standard grace period still applies. If anyone wishes to build upon this, feel free to. (Lets chat!) 11:54, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

This might be a better idea!

(Talk to Me!) 19:27, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh hey, looks like its about time for closure on this one

(Lets chat!) 10:47, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{Archive top|wait, this is my own proposal? Is this allowed? Anyway...Closing as {{Approved|passed}} [[User:Compooper|Compooper]] ([[User talk:Compooper|talk]]) 11:23, 13 February 2023 (UTC)}}
 ==Revise criteria for SNOW closure==
-I've noticed lately that many proposals are being shot down rather quickly due to the [[AVID:SNOW|snowball clause]]. I feel like more and more proposals are being closed with under 10 votes and within a single day. So, I'm proposing the following criteria: '''Increase the vote count to trigger a SNOW closure to 15 or more unopposed votes, and have the grace period before that happens be two to three days.'''
+I've noticed lately that many proposals are being shot down rather quickly due to the [[AVID:SNOW|snowball clause]]. I feel like more and more proposals are being closed with under 10 votes and within a single day. So, I'm proposing the following criteria: '''Increase the vote count to trigger a SNOW closure to 10 or more unopposed votes, and have the grace period before that happens be two to three days.'''
 What do you think? [[User:Compooper|Compooper]] ([[User talk:Compooper|talk]]) 13:00, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 ===Support===
+{{Support}} <s>in the condition that the minimum be lowered to at least 10 or something. I've got a feeling that not many people vote as much at times. The grace period is just as fine though. Two days is enough. Either way,</s> I'm in. <span style="font-family: 'Verdana';">[[User:Doctorine Dark|Doctorine Dark]] <small>([[User talk:Doctorine Dark|talk]])</small></span> 13:06, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
+:{{Support}} under these conditions [[File:Eternity Media Group Wordmark.png|100px|link=User:EternityMediaGroup]] ([[User Talk:EternityMediaGroup|Lets chat!]]) 13:08, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
+{{Support}} Could do, I guess. [[User:Gilby1385|Gilby1385]] ([[User talk:Gilby1385|talk]]) 16:33, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
+{{Support}} Sounds like a good idea! [[File:Sickminecraft45 Signature Icon.jpg|link=User:Sickminecraft45]] [[User_talk:Sickminecraft45|  ('''''Talk to Me!''''')]] 19:28, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
+{{Support}} [[User:Luke2505|Luke2505]] ([[User talk:Luke2505|talk]]) 20:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
+{{Support}} [[File:T807sig.png|50px|link=User:Trevor807]] '''·''' '''[[User talk:Trevor807|Talk]]''' '''·''' '''[[Special:Contributions/Trevor807|Edits]]''' 21:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 ===Abstain===
 ===Oppose===
+{{Oppose}} If we had a bad idea, How would we quickly erase it from existence? [[User:Sonicfan19198282|Sonicfan19198282]] ([[User talk:Sonicfan19198282|talk]]) 13:06, 6 February 2023
+:What do you mean? <span style="font-family: 'Verdana';">[[User:Doctorine Dark|Doctorine Dark]] <small>([[User talk:Doctorine Dark|talk]])</small></span> 13:09, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
+:Maybe, someone has a stupid idea. Then, they unknowingly make an RfC for it. It gets a ton of opposes. Then, how will they close it? [[User:Sonicfan19198282|Sonicfan19198282]] ([[User talk:Sonicfan19198282|talk]]) 13:13, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
+:Easy. Someone requests a speedy closure/SNOW if needed, and if the above conditions are met, have an admin or bureaucrat close the RfC. <span style="font-family: 'Verdana';">[[User:Doctorine Dark|Doctorine Dark]] <small>([[User talk:Doctorine Dark|talk]])</small></span> 13:16, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
+::But it happened within the course of one day. And they're so embarrassed, they try to take it down instantly. [[User:Sonicfan19198282|Sonicfan19198282]] ([[User talk:Sonicfan19198282|talk]]) 16:40, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
+:::It's 2 days. They can wait. [[File:Eternity Media Group Wordmark.png|100px|link=User:EternityMediaGroup]] ([[User Talk:EternityMediaGroup|Lets chat!]]) 23:57, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
+::::And it also gets them reported for being underage. True story btw. [[User:Sonicfan19198282|Sonicfan19198282]] ([[User talk:Sonicfan19198282|talk]]) 07:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 ===Comments===
+{{Comment}}If you don't mind, Compooper, I'd like to make an addition to your proposal.<br>
+If a proposal recieves over 20 votes without opposition in the first day, then I believe it should also qualify for SNOW closure. If there is any opposition to said consensus, the standard grace period still applies. If anyone wishes to build upon this, feel free to. [[File:Eternity Media Group Wordmark.png|100px|link=User:EternityMediaGroup]] ([[User Talk:EternityMediaGroup|Lets chat!]]) 11:54, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 [[Category:Requests for Comment]]
 __NOTOC__
+:This might be a better idea! [[File:Sickminecraft45 Signature Icon.jpg|link=User:Sickminecraft45]] [[User_talk:Sickminecraft45|  ('''''Talk to Me!''''')]] 19:27, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
+:Oh hey, looks like its about time for closure on this one [[File:Eternity Media Group Wordmark.png|100px|link=User:EternityMediaGroup]] ([[User Talk:EternityMediaGroup|Lets chat!]]) 10:47, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
+{{Archive bottom}}