Hattrick:Consensus

From Hattrick
Policy This page is an official policy on Hattrick Wiki. It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. Feel free to edit the page as needed, but please make sure that changes you make to this policy reflect consensus before you make them.
Policies and guidelines
Hattrick Wiki Project
General policies and guidelines
Vandalism
Related to articles
Others

Building a consensus within Wiki requires a few clear steps. Consensus debates may be used in any issue within the Hattrick Wiki that has two sides. The issue should also have support from both sides by members within the wiki. Consensus development should not be seen as a requirement in any move made within the wiki for that reason, since many issues are more obviously one-sided.

Discussion[edit]

To establish a consensus, all sides of a disputed issue must be discussed, and input from multiple editors should be sought. Debate should take place in an appropriate form and over a reasonable amount of time to allow for discussion.

Evaluation[edit]

Once discussion has occurred, the issue should be assessed and all viable options should be distinguished. If necessary, discussion of options may occur. Once the issue has been evaluated, a list of all viable options to resolve the issue should be listed.

Further Discussion[edit]

With a list of viable options established, further discussion should occur. Debate should be centered around which options are reasonable and for what reason. If a clear consensus on which option to choose exists at this point, step 4 should be foregone. If no clear consensus exists, step 4 must be used.

Vote[edit]

If at this time no clear consensus exists, the issue should be put to a vote. All viable options that have not already been eliminated unanimously through debate should be options in this vote. In order to vote, one must be a registered user. A vote may take place in a number of ways:

Limited Vote[edit]

Only registered and established users (i.e. more than 10 edits) may participate in the vote. Votes must be signed. Open debate from established users may occur during the vote.

Closed Vote[edit]

Only users within a certain group (such as a policy-making committee) may vote. Votes must be signed. Open debate from eligible voters may occur during this vote.

Note: This type of vote should only occur on matters of policy pertaining to that group, not on general wiki matters. Even then it should only be used with caution.

Straw Poll[edit]

In this type of vote only two options may exist, generally in favor or against a certain action or change. Only established users may vote. Users vote in designated sections of the page, under the subheading for their vote, in a numbered list. Debate may not occur in the main body of the vote, but only in the discussion section. Straw polls are generally used to establish a quick consensus on an issue of importance. Straw polls are not considered a viable form of consensus in policy and guideline establishment.

Further Action[edit]

Once a vote has run for a reasonable amount of time (or, in the case of a straw poll, for the set length of time), a final tally of the vote results should be listed and the vote and debate should be archived.

After a vote/consensus-establishing debate has occurred, the action following depends on the result of the debate.

If the debate establishes a consensus in favor of change[edit]

If the clear consensus is in favor of change, debate of 'how' the change happens should occur. An exception to this step is if the method of the change has already been clearly established, such as if an article is to be deleted or moved. Once the method of the change has been decided, the change should occur and all discussion should be archived.

If the debate establishes a consensus against change[edit]

If the clear consensus is to keep things the same, the next step should be to do just that: keep things the same. The debate should be archived, though the discussion should be clearly accessible so as to prevent unnecessary discussion of the same topic in the future, unless new arguments occur.

If the vote concludes with a decision of "no consensus"[edit]

If a vote is held and the vote ends without a clear consensus, two things may occur: If the topic has been debated to its exhaustion and it seems that there is no possible way to reach a consensus, the action should be in favor of the status quo, meaning that the proposed change should be rejected. If the debate is over policy, the policy should be labeled as a guideline. Or, if the topic requires further discussion, the debate should be referred to a higher body and/or given more exposure to increase input. Methods of accomplishing this include bringing the topic before a committee, requesting comment from other users, or simply allowing the discussion to continue as it has been.