[WikiEN-l] Improve AFD - require rationales (2-step process)

Mon Dec 12 23:07:17 UTC 2005

On 12/12/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
>
> Tony Sidaway got RFCed for not doing a strict numerical count. I said
> the RFC was completely fuckheaded (which it was), and then Ed deleted
> VFD. So there's some historical precedent for your view ;-)
>
>
The RFC *was* fuckheaded, but there might have been a point somewhere in the
nonsense.  That admins can execute as much discretionary power when it comes
to what "consensus" means in an AFD is worrisome; it implies that the
closing admin can alter the result of the vote substantially according to
whatever arbitrary view he or she might have on deletion.  Tony doesn't
think this is a problem, because (I get the impression-- please correct me
if I'm wrong here) that he's happy that he can close AFDs with an inflated
standard for consensus, because he wants more articles to be kept.

Whatever you think about the question of whether more articles need to be
kept, it would be prudent to consider whether we want admins to make this
kind of decision at all, in either direction. It seems contrary to the idea
of what consensus means; it means that the closing administrator is really
the one with the power, and the idea that the "normals" in the discussion
have power is just an illusion.  Now, this is why I think the RFC was
fuckheaded: the RFC was really about a systematic problem with AFD, not Tony
Sidaway's behavior. Tony's closing habits are, if anything, a symptom of the
problem inherent in AFD, because it makes this kind of dispute even
possible.

Since what I'm providing here is yet another reason to think of AFD as
borked and needing replacement, I don't expect much debate on these points.
But I see a lot more discussion about how bad AFD is and a lot less
discussion about what we should replace it with, and why whatever system we
choose to replace it will be any better. Defense of AFD seems to be getting
quieter and quieter but I still don't see us making much progress toward
enacting some actual improvements.

Ryan