On 5/3/06, Ben McIlwain cydeweys@gmail.com wrote:
Way way way to subjective. RFC and arbcom would probably be a better option.
That would take weeks, and by then the vote-stackers have long gotten away with it. And I don't think vote-stacking is too subjective. If you see someone recruiting votes, deal with them. It's pretty simple.
Vote stacking is bad. But telling other people about things they might be interested in participating in is not -- in fact it is often a good way to combat vote stacking (people post things to this list, for example, when it is clear that a small but organized POV minority is trying to change things for the worst). The line between the two? Blurry, quite subjective.
If you can come up with a policy which could be used to make a clear distinction between the two practices, feel free to propose it. But simply saying that vote stacking should be against the rules doesn't quite get us there. There cannot be a rule which would prohibit people talking to other editors about decisions taking place on other pages, in fact our mediation process recommends people do just that.
FF