[Wikipedia-l] New request for Cantonese Wikipedia: vote at 29-6

[Jimmy Wales]

I wrote:
>> This is why I'm opposed to rampant voting on everything.  The only
>> valid purpose for a vote in Wikipedia is actually as a *poll*
>> which seeks to build community consensus.  Deliberately excluding
>> some interested parties is a great way to "win" a vote, but it is
>> not a great way to get buy-in from the entire community.

Phroziac wrote:
> Actually, Jimmy, aren't they to determine consensus, not build it?

Super duper excellent question which allows me a nice spot to explain
how I see this.

I think that all polls should be attempts to *build* consensus.
Consensus means something loosely like "general agreement by nearly
everyone except the lunatics and trolls".  "nearly everyone" because
otherwise we have paralysis, and "except the lunatics and trolls"
because consensus is not a suicide pact.

What do I mean, in this context, by "build consensus"?

Suppose there is a poll about whether to include Photo A or Photo B at
the top of an article.  Imagine for the moment that everyone agrees that
there isn't room for both, and further that going with neither is not a
helpful option.  In a case like this, a poll can be used to *build
consensus* on the theory that most people aren't so pigheaded as to
continue edit warring after the vote.

My position on many such issues would be: "Well, I like A better than B.
 But I looked at the poll and I see that 80% of the users liked B better
than A.  So, ok, I'll defer to the majority.  I won't edit war about it."

In such a case, we now have a consensus on A.  Yes, I still think B
would have been better, but the poll has helped me to accept that A will
be fine to leave in the article.

Polls are non-binding.  Some people have taken to saying that voting is
banned in Wikipedia, and I don't disagree with them on the substance of
what they are saying.  I would phrase it differently, though: there is
no rule in Wikipedia which says that polls *are* binding, it is a social
matter, and there can be many different possible times in which a person
ought to ignore a poll.  (At their own social peril, of course.)

Why is this important?

A poll which is thought to be binding can easily be designed in a way
which is divisive despite getting a majority on one side.  If you
approach a poll as being a great way to get people to agree on
something, then you take an entirely different approach to considering
what options should be voted on.

--Jimbo