I'm at my wits' end over how to handle [[Wikipedia:Preliminary Deletion]]. Half the oppose votes oppose the policy for no reason other than that they prefer a different course of action - how am I to address that when it's clear that a majority of the community prefers this proposal to the alternative this substantial opposition proposes (namely, the expansion of speedy deletion criteria)? Others called it instruction creep, which I've tried to address, though how this proposal can be viewed as complex is beyond me, A minority suggested housing it on the same page as VFD (when a central reason behind this is that VFD is overcrowded).

Now, I've added a section to the proposal answering these objectors, and tweaked it here and there to see if I can make it palatable. The problem? Nobody is coming to discuss. I've advertised this on the community portal and the pump as well as this mailing list, and a grand total of one user came to discuss why he voted no - he soon changed his mind on the proposal after we discussed his reasons for opposition. How is one to gather consensus for a divisive and controversial policy when it's impossible to gather discussion at all? Anthony argued that polling stifles discussion. Well, at least it created one user who came back and discussed the policy with me. Before, very few users were discussing the policy.

Am I appealing in this email for those who voted against preliminary deletion to discuss? Hell, yes. But this is also an appeal to stimulate discussion about how to avoid post-voting apathy - visit once to vote and never come back to discuss. The problem is that "hot discussions" don't appeal much to anyone. It's so much easier to cast a vote and forget about the issue. But how are we ever going to reform VFD (or any of our other more enduring institutions) at this rate? We're bogged down in vast non-consensus because a substantial minority want to have their cake and eat it too, and the fact that most of them won't discuss the issue only adds to the burden.

John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]])