On 12/10/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
A lot of the poisonous feelings on AFD seems to come from sheep voting and people voting without providing rationales. Perhaps we should improve the debate-percentage and require people to provide rationales.
I suggest a two step process:
- The first 24 or 48 hours people submit rationales for or against deletion.
- After that people can vote on which of these they support.
Similar to a finding of the facts.
Sort of. But you don't need a reason to keep an article. We keep an article unless there is a consensus to delete it. Of course it would be silly not to submit rationales for keeping if one has to compete with rationales to delete, but really it's a bit like criminal law. If the prosecution fails to present a case, the defence can spend all day on Blackpool Beach with a bucket and spade and a knotted hanky on its head, and the defendant is still acquitted.