MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
I support the idea of forcing people to actually argue
their view, but
I see a lot of problems with the current idea.
1) The decision of the closing admin is always going to be questioned.
Since you've used the word "always", clearly you're aware that this is
not a problem specifically of my proposal and therefore not an argument
against my proposal.
2) Having only arguments doesn't show how many
people actually endorse
these views.
But that's the whole point. It shouldn't be *necessary* to show "how
many" people "endorse" anything -- "endorse" is just another
euphemism
for "vote for", as is apparent in the words "how many". Instead, it
should only be necessary to explain reasoning. If the only reasoning
that makes perfect sense is one that favours deletion or keepage, then
this should be all that's necessary, regardless of any counts or any
"how many people".
Timwi