User:Filll/AGF Challenge Rules-Other


 * 1) I would take certain steps to limit this promotion. Specifically, I would move for deletion or userfying of any of these policy forks that are in Wikipedia space, I would make sure any that are in user space are marked as essays and properly described as opinion that is unlikely to catch on (e.g. tagged as "Rejected").  I would also move for any template being used in welcoming to be deleted if it is being used for what is fundamentally canvassing.  However, the user is welcome to his opinion, and is welcome to argue for it.  I would help explain to the user how they can request broader feedback properly, e.g. by posting at WP:VPP.  Mango juice talk 04:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 2) Per MangoJuice. Perfect response. -- Levine2112 discuss  19:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 3) MangoJuice has the right idea, I think. Sχeptomaniacχαιρετε 19:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 4) RFC. Neıl ☎  16:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Been there, seen this. Publicly expose the fancy-footwork.  Unilateral changes to worded policy in order to convenience oneself while arguing (or anticipating) a specific content dispute is the kind of game the "community process" handles well enough, it just requires attentiveness.  It's a pain in the you know what, but unless policy pages are protected in some fashion from fly-by edits, that's the price we agree to pay as a community.  It's like punishing someone for "voting wrong" to do otherwise.  Professor marginalia (talk) 02:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) to just say my interpretation trumps his would be hypocritical. I would try and make the case that my view is the right one. I would do this by seeking an authority that we both can agree to such as precedents, other editors, or some sort of mutually recognized expert. Rds865 (talk) 01:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 7) We've had this already, and it ended up with an ArbCom case. Stifle (talk) 09:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 8) Further to Mangojuice's comments, it's not up to me to decide that his proposed changes are all rubbish and stop him. Some of them may be entirely meritorious and be taken on by the community. I'd suggest to him that two sets of rules won't (can't) work in one community, and to engage in debate in the talk places of the policies. --Dweller (talk) 12:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 9) If everyone could understand my sense of humor, I'd have said "Make him a steward." Oops! -- Fullstop (talk) 03:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 10) Throw the discussion open to the floor. If there is consensus, accept the new rules. Chenzw (talk · contribs) 11:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 11) How major are the changes to policy? Bwrs (talk) 04:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)