[WikiEN-l] Admin, RFA, RFB and whatnot...

Majorly axel9891 at googlemail.com
Fri Feb 29 16:28:34 UTC 2008

On 29/02/2008, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's "rough consensus", which basically means supermajority with a
> slight weighting of votes based on reasons given. It's not a pure vote
> (at least, it's not meant to be), but it's certainly not consensus. We
> rarely get a true consensus on any Rf(A|B) - it would essentially
> require 100% support (there is a difference between consensus and
> unanimity but with a format like RfA [which discourages discussion],
> that difference is minimal).

Yeah, consensus is supposed to be a general agreement of everyone. With
people passing despite serious concerns, it's hardly communal agreement.

The requirements for crats should certainly be higher than for admins
> (since crats need to be admins too). That can be done either by people
> being harsher in their votes, by the required percentage being higher,
> or a combination of the two. Since people are a lot harsher in their
> votes, the percentage doesn't need to be much (if at all) higher - 90%
> is probably a little excessive.

I'm not entirely sure here, but only the RfBs that have passed have garnered
over 75% of the vote (there may be an exception or two). The point is,
people will be tougher on RfBs, especially knowing the % will be the same.
Making it 90% (where did that number come from?) is rather unnecessarily
high. I don't agree requirements should be higher for 'crats - as I've
stated, their job is easier than being an admin, despite what most people
would have you believe.

Alex (Majorly)


More information about the WikiEN-l mailing list