[WikiEN-l] Interpreting merge votes (was Wikipedia's provable anti-expertise bias)
Ray Saintonge
saintonge at telus.net
Mon Nov 21 23:03:17 UTC 2005
Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>On 11/20/05, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Sam Korn wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On 11/20/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>They should be voting "merge and delete", then. If they just vote
>>>>"merge" then calling that a delete vote is itself putting words into
>>>>mouths, whereas keeping is the default.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Merge and delete is not a possible vote. People should not have to
>>>vote in such a specific way to prevent vote-hijacking.
>>>
>>>
>>People can vote any way they want. If people vote that way then it's
>>possible. I don't know anything about the "vote-hijacking" jargon that
>>you are trying to introduce.
>>
>>
>The suggestion to merge is a vestige from a time when VfD was about
>reaching consensus about what to do rather than about voting and
>counting votes.
>
A whiff of nostalgia!
>If you want to count votes, then I guess you could
>take two positions. The first, which I'll call the Al Gore position,
>is to try to figure out whether the voter intended the merge vote to
>mean delete or not delete. The second, which I'll call the George W.
>Bush position, is to throw out the vote as invalid.
>
Just choose the one which best achieves your goals. ;-)
Ec
More information about the WikiEN-l
mailing list