User talk:Kim Bruning/rfatest

See also: User:Kim Bruning/Refactoring RFA

Note that requests for discussion still count as if they are opposes! No set time limit. You must convince all discussion participants to move to pass (aka support).

I tend to feel this would be insanely political with a strong insentive to give non answers to hard questions.Geni 00:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I suspected some people might base on politics, or other hidden criteria. This way we bring all that into the open, right?

Discussion with habj on irc
kim_ habj_, majority? :-P kim_ Oh! kim_ right kim_ it's the same mechanism as currently support/oppose kim_ 85% of total entries under pass and discuss must be under pass habj_ so in reality a qualified majority is needed kim_ I'll add on the talk page kim_ habj_, well yes, except there's no time limit kim_ so it's not a majority vote in the traditional sense kim_ more like a really tough test ;-) habj_ you said 85% kim_ BUT! You can revise your answers habj_ this test looks pretty tough, yes kim_ so if you revise your answer kim_ you might then later pass kim_ the interesting part is that people are forced to reveal their criteria this way (for one) kim_ those were hidden before habj_ so to pass a RfA, you study old exams to learn what kind of questions you get, and you learn good answers kim_ habj_, that can work! habj_ well, that is a good thing. actually kim_ yes kim_ we get a body of work which describes how wikipedia really works kim_ or how people would like to see that it works kim_ so it kind of meets the requirements habj_ yes... kim_ may I post this log? kim_ (where just you and I are talking?) habj_ and you see what the people who vote on RfA think... but if we don't assume they are typical we are flawed anyway Gracenotes I'm so not special habj_ kim_: well, if you want to go ahead kim_ Ok thanks
 * habj_ wonders how "the majority of the requests to discuss" will be determined. does it mean, numbers of questions from users?
 * Sethant has quit (Connection timed out)
 * TehKewl1 has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
 * kim_ looks