Category talk:Votes

Creating the category
(The following was copied from "Talk:Main Page")
 * Since we have takes to vote a lot more on controversial issues, actually *finding* the pages with votes on has become more important. Since votes are sometimes very hidden on categories talk pages or user pages, someone not checking all recent changes might miss them, despite having an interest in the issue. Why not make a category votes. Whenever a vote is called somewhere, the person calling the vote adds that category to the page. That way you can easily check what is currently being voted on. When the vote is closed, the category is removed. --Xeeron 11:33, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I like the idea - there have been one or two issues where I didn't even know a vote had been asked of the community. It's part of the reason I wanted to extend this one until Wednesday instead of something nearer - to give people a chance to actually find it to know a vote had been requested. I'll add the tag here now. We can remove it or change it later if people decide for that - although I was really tempted to create a vote on creating the page ;-) --Barek 12:30, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thinking about it again, we might not simply remove old votes from the category votes, instead we could move them to Category:Old votes to help us keeping track of issues already voted on and help new people get info about community decisions. --Xeeron 12:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Instead of a category for the old votes, I think just a tally page Completed votes or something similar. Copy the voting results and add a line stating the results and what that means:
 * Yea:User1, User2, User4, User6
 * No:User3, User5
 * With this vote it was resolved that the site "guildwiki.org" would be used for a Wiki about the game "Guild Wars". Decided on 5/16/05.
 * Seperate each vote with a level 2 headline ( ==Vote X== ) so that when it starts getting filled up the page will be easily navigated with a table of contents. --Rainith 12:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I think completed votes should go into the Style & Formatting section or some kind of editing guidelines section. This way new users can actually see them and be informed about them. Overall, we need someone to step up and maintain our style and formatting section and keep it up to date with our decisions. I nominate PanSola. --Karlos 15:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmmm you are right Rainith, over time, the articles might be clogged by lots of old votes, better to remove the category fully. All I really want is one place where all old votes go. --Xeeron 19:17, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Discuss the page
The page seemed a good idea to me. Feel free to rename or remove if others feel strongly about this. --Barek 12:38, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * If we choose to keep this category, then I suspect that we should probably link it to the "How to Help" page so that people know that it exists. Opinions on this? --Barek 12:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me, I was getting freakin' lost with all of PanSola's votes out there. More confusing than a butterfly ballot to a Florida retiree.  :P  --Rainith 15:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I like the idea, very much! -- 17:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

"Unless somebody objects ..."
A few time I've handled a potentially controversial edit by putting it on hold for a few days to give people time to object. I put on the talk page "Unless somebody objects by, I'll make the edit." That is not strictly a vote, but I wonder if I should categorize such pages as vote to make people aware of it. Thoughts? -- 17:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. --Xeeron 18:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It's almost useless. The reason for the vote "category" (I'd prefer all votes be stored within a single article but we'll see how this version works, first) is because there's so much activity nowadays it's nigh-impossible to keep track of things. I'd say don't bother with a weak "If anyone notices.." bit; just do the edit. If they have a problem/question, they can bring it up on the Talk: page. --Nunix 21:37, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I think people are generally resistent to change. i.e. if you are adding information, you don't really need anyone's permission or opinion. If you are doing minor edits/fixes, no big deal either. But, if you are removing information or if you are changing the layout (of the infromation, not the page)... i.e. how everything is tied together, whether these creatures are type A or type B. You probably wanna propose your edit in the talk page first. Give it a few days. If people don't fuss, go ahead and do it. If people fuss, then put the matters to a vote. I think that's a sound plan. --Karlos 23:58, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Have there been too many frivolous votes recently?
Yes
 * 1) Stabber
 * 2) JoDiamonds
 * 3) (your vote here)

No
 * 1) JoDiamonds
 * 2) (your vote here)

"Voting is evil"
 * 1) Rezyk
 * 2) JoDiamonds
 * 3) Xeeron
 * 4) Razyk
 * 5) Rizyk
 * 6) Rozyk
 * 7) Ruzyk
 * 8) (your vote here)

Vote on quantify "too many" and "frivolous" first!
 * 1) Karlos
 * 2) JoDiamonds
 * 3) (your vote here)

Vote on whether to vote on quantifying "too many" and "frivolous" first
 * 1) PanSola
 * 2) JoDiamonds
 * 3) (your vote here)

"When will people learn? Democracy DOESN'T WORK!" - Homer Simpson (quoted from the episode "Much Apu About Nothing")
 * 1) 161.88.255.140 (aka 161.88.x.x)
 * 2) JoDiamonds
 * 3) (your vote here)

Simple majority wins. Vote ends a week from today, i.e., March 22, 2006. 04:43, 16 March 2006 (CST)
 * 1) JoDiamonds


 * 1) JoDiamonds

Discussion
Does this one count? --Rainith 04:56, 16 March 2006 (CST)
 * 1) JoDiamonds
 * Should we put it to a vote to decide if this one counts? --161.88.255.140 05:00, 16 March 2006 (CST)
 * JoDiamonds
 * In case that there is at least a serious undertone in this: I believe that votes are a bit of hassle, but they save the much bigger hassle of endless discussions (which also tend to get personal on a regular basis). --Xeeron 05:52, 16 March 2006 (CST)
 * JoDiamonds


 * 1) JoDiamonds, putting in as many personal frivolous votes as possible.

Something tells me you people are not taking this vote seriously. 23:59, 17 March 2006 (CST)
 * 1) 161.88.255.140
 * 2) JoDiamonds
 * 3) (your vote here)
 * What makes you say that? --Rozyk 02:27, 18 March 2006 (CST)