Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Iasson/Proposed decision

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Iasson (talk | contribs) at 10:00, 21 March 2005 (/* POLL: What version [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Iasson/Proposed_decision&action=history] of arbitration_proposed_decision's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Iasson/Propose). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

POLL: What version [1] of arbitration_proposed_decision's [2] voting rules do you prefer?

  1. POLL OPTION:With accurate voting rules Define what exactly majority means and who is the electorate[3] , also define how long a passed or rejected decision should be valid.
  1. VOTE:Iasson 08:42, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  1. POLL OPTION: With inaccurate voting rules. Neither majority nor the electorate should be defined accurately, and especially we should not define the rule which determines how long the passed or rejected decision should be valid. We should not also define what happens to the votes of the electors that are currently inactives or baned, but the decision the have voted for is still a valid decision.
  2. POLL OPTION: Other
  3. POLL OPTION: I dislike this poll