MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
I support the idea of forcing people to actually argue their view, but I see a lot of problems with the current idea.
- The decision of the closing admin is always going to be questioned.
Since you've used the word "always", clearly you're aware that this is not a problem specifically of my proposal and therefore not an argument against my proposal.
- Having only arguments doesn't show how many people actually endorse
these views.
But that's the whole point. It shouldn't be *necessary* to show "how many" people "endorse" anything -- "endorse" is just another euphemism for "vote for", as is apparent in the words "how many". Instead, it should only be necessary to explain reasoning. If the only reasoning that makes perfect sense is one that favours deletion or keepage, then this should be all that's necessary, regardless of any counts or any "how many people".
Timwi