Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-05/Starting votes

Starting votes
Voting on: Adding these rules in Voting policy:


 * Starting the vote
 * 1) At least 7 days should elapse between the vote creation and the actual start, except for votes for granting user rights or a bot flag, which can start immediately after the user accepts.
 * 2) The start of a vote can be postponed as much as discussion requires.

Rationale:
 * These are unwritten rules that seem to be already in effect. But, it's better to have written rules than unwritten ones, so we can learn by actually reading the policies rather than observing previous behavior and finding patterns. This should hopefully be helpful to new editors.

Schedule:
 * Vote starts: 00:00, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Vote ends: 23:59, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Vote created: --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:36, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Discussion:
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] Beer parlour/2017/April
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] User talk:Dan Polansky
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2017-05/Starting votes

Support

 * 1)  --Daniel Carrero (talk) 23:42, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 2)  — Andrew Sheedy (talk) 06:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 3) . Does this technically need to be voted on? -Xbony2 (talk) 00:30, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * WT:VP is "think tank", so maybe we could have just added the rules without a vote, but they would be "unvoted" rules and thus second-class rules.
 * Having this vote is a good idea, I believe. If the vote passes, this demonstrates that we have consensus for these rules. Plus, this vote makes the rules "official" and serves to check that the wording is good. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:40, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I doubt it's really necessary, but I guess it does not hurt. -Xbony2 (talk) 11:13, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 1)  —  Salt  marsh . 04:50, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 2)  2WR1 (talk) 16:57, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 3)  I originally hesitated whether we need this voted on. On the upside, having this voted on  reinforces the distinction between the parts of Voting policy that are verifiably based on consensus and the parts that are not. The substance of the proposal looks good, and the wording is succinct. --Dan Polansky (talk) 06:37, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree it's a good idea to reinforce that distinction. At the moment, some parts of Voting policy are voted and others unvoted. I'd like it to be 100% voted when possible. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 09:18, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  - While I generally agree that votes shouldn't start immediately in most cases, there are some votes which don't need to wait. Perhaps if this were limited to policy votes or something? -  [The] DaveRoss  17:08, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * While I think the wording is fine as is, maybe it would be improved if we added "usually" at the beginning? The final result would be: "Usually, at least 7 days should elapse between the vote creation and the actual start, (...)" That's just an idea. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:11, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 1)  Why do we need to codify this? --WikiTiki89 18:48, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * There's a rationale in the vote description. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:02, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That was a rhetorical question. To translate to a declarative sentence: I don't think we need to codify this. --WikiTiki89 19:15, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Wikitiki: I do not see this so much as a codification. I see this as finding out whether and to what degree we have a consensus and where the opposition is, if any. Above, we see a substantive oppose, which we would not so easily see without a vote. Curiously enough, even your oppose "we don't need to codify this" counts as evidence toward consensus or at least lack of substantive objections for the proposed principles, even though your oppose detracts from policy draft page modification. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:37, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Abstain

 * .. But there should probably be something about new users, or at least old ones with new accounts, not being allowed to start a vote. Or to cast a vote, or to even abstain, or to even mention something on a vote page. --unsigned comment by Wonderfool
 * Striking abstain vote by permablocked user. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 23:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Decision
Passed: 6-2-0 (75%). Edited WT:VP accordingly. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:18, 11 June 2017 (UTC)