UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Voting Eligibility (2)

Problem

Unlike sysop promotion, where the overall opinion is only taken into account before the bureaucrats choose to promote a user or not, bureaucrat promotions, policy discussions and deletions can be manipulated by users to force their will by asking friends (so called meat puppets) who never used the wiki to vote in their favor.

Policy

Right to vote

For a user to have a right to vote on any administration voting processes (like policy discussions, bureaucrat promotions and deletions) he must have done one (1) single edit to any page before the beginning of the election. For policy voting, this means the day the policy was created.

Any user can strike invalid votes from users who didn't have the right to vote before the election begun.

Appeal

Any user whose vote got struck can ask its vote to be validated by pointing to a page where he made an edit before the beginning of the election. This action should take place on the discussion page of that election process, and the user must wait for a sysop to confirm the veracity of the edit and to validate the vote.

The user must request his vote to be validated before the end of the voting process. If a vote is struck in the 48h before the end of the voting, the voter has 48h to request its validation.

Pages Affected

List of pages affected by this policy

1. policies
2. bureaucrat elections
3. deletions
4. deletion scheduling
5. speedy deletion

Any voting process (where the amount of votes determines the outcome of the administration actions) that occur in any other administration page (those under the UDWiki:Administration namespace) will also be affected by this policy.

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, signed, and timestamped. They can take one of two forms: # comments ~~~~ or # ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above will be struck by a sysop.

The only valid voting sections are For and Against. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

For

1. Keep - Author vote. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{talk mod} 11:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
2. For - I see no harm done if this policy passes. Most wiki policies, sysop positions, deletion votes etc only affect the wiki, and not the game. Linkthewindow  Talk  11:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
3. For - Same as Linkthewindow above. -- Ωmega360 ^T 13:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
4. For - I hate Iscariot. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 19:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
5. For - This will keep meat puppeting down at least a little bit, and it'll help the Wiki going strong and updated by motivating people to go and make edits. --Darth Elsij 23:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Against

1. Against - This policy is detrimental to the integrity of the wiki and is based on the very irrational fear of people we don't yet know conspiring against us.--Karek^maps?! 11:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
2. Against - For two reasons. First, this should have been pretty much confined to 'crat elections. People who have never edited the wiki should still be able to vote on the actual content (deletions and speedy deletions) and things that directly affect the content (policies and scheduled deletions). Second, requiring one single edit, ever, is just not enough to make any kind of sensible distinction. This policy is both too much and too little. --Midianian ^{Big Brother Diary Room: [512,02]} 12:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

   It might not be enough to make the distinction, but still helps avoiding meat puppetry... even if by little --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{talk mod} 13:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

3. Against - As Karek (and myself on the discussion page.) And Midianian here. One edit is pathetic and won't stop anything. Any requirements for voting discourage participation.--– Nubis ^NWO 13:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
4. Against - I don't think this policy's going to prevent meat puppetry. A user could tell his/her friends: "listen, we have this policy, make one edit so you'll be cool for wiki's next discussions". Nope. --Janus ^talk 15:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
5. Against - We have no real problems with meat puppetry, and we already have enough tools to deal with it in the most unlikely event that it ever becomes a problem. This solves nothing and only results in lowering legitimate participation. A poor solution for what isn't a problem.-- Vista  T  16:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
6. Against - --Thadeous Oakley 16:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
7. Against - Good thing I can still vote on things like this. I still lurk, and meander through the wiki. If something strikes me (though little has as of late), then I'll comment. --Ryiis 19:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
8. Against - What Vista said. --Pestolence^(talk) 21:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
9. Against - Even if it were a problem, this is a very poor solution. --Pyrranha 22:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
10. Against - Tries too hard and goes too far. If it was just 'crat elections and polices then yes. Deletions are too far. -- Cheese 22:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
11. Karek makes a strong point. Amazingly, but yes. I'm with Kerek on this one. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 00:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)