Wikipedia talk:Wikiethics/Archived polls, March 29, 06

message: The approval poll is started without consensus, and by a single individual. This poll is for asking the community if we really need the approval poll at this stage? Including main proposer of this policy, there is a concensus on not having a poll at this stage. Simply because the contributing editors even do not think that it looks like a policy at this stage. In that sense if the result of this poll is NO, it invalidates the approval poll's result. If it is YES, together with the approval poll, it will serve as a guide to improve the policy. This poll is vandalized for days and it was not active. Please note that even some users in the approval pool below says that: 'It is early to put this policy to a vote'. If this policy was not vandalized, they would vote here on this poll. Resid Gulerdem 05:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this poll for? 

message: # The policy needs more work before voted. The approval poll is designed to kill the process. The editors proposing it do not believe that it is ready and in the final form. The proposal is not even completely written yet. It is not fair to vote a half-written proposal down. Resid Gulerdem 20:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NO

message: If you chose to say NO, please give us some hints why you think the policy is not ready for vote. Let us know also about which section(s) you think need improvement together with your suggestions in this section.
* It is not ready for vote simple because it is not stable yet. It reflects 3-4 editors opinion. I announced this proposal in many places. Feedbacks from the community will improve it. Can anybody see a reason for such a rush?!... As a person who initiated and continuously contributing to this proposal, I feel that we need much more input from the community. Resid Gulerdem 07:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: If you say NO

message: # Yes. The poll below is valid. It was started first and is underway. Vote struck due to excessive re-editing of poll rules, title and introduction ॐ Metta Bubble puff 05:47, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, virtually all those people who voted "NO" on this poll did not vote in the other poll (which makes sense, since they don't think it's valid).  However, virtually everyone who did vote in the other poll either did not vote in this poll (the vast majority of them), or also voted "YES" here.  But regardless of whether or not they voted in this poll, I believe the other poll should be allowed to continue, for the reasons I stated above.  --  noosphere 03:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: YES

message: # Pegasus1138Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 00:22, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oppose 

message: * Based on the numerous comments on the talk page I am actively assuming that this is a proposed guideline and not a proposed policy. Pegasus1138Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 00:28, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree, it is as stable as it is ever going to be and it has built up more than enough to be mature enough for people to determine whether or not it should be approved or not.  It's not like the version is locked in as soon as the poll starts either, during and/or after (assuming it gets a consensus to have it be a guideline) people can still add on and edit it. Pegasus1138Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 01:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

text: * Over the course of 3 days your obsessive POV editing (consensus opinion) completely turned around my hope of anyone else ever getting their opinion heard on this article. I made many comments on polls and my last one was "I am looking forward to this poll". For you to dig up quotes of mine that supported your POV you had to skim over my most recent comments and go back to earlier ones. I cannot begin fathom how blinded you must be to do this. And then you have the nerve to call me a liar for it? What are you trying to achieve? Are you trying to show how much of an unethical person you really are? ॐ Metta Bubble puff 06:03, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * I just would like to teach you the meaning of twisting on a clear example. It would be good if you can see whether you are an appropriate person to discuss ethical issues at all. Resid Gulerdem 06:10, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * Okay, I see you're struggling with the language. Let's just leave this here. Peace. Let the vote work it out. ॐ Metta Bubble puff 06:22, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * Actually I am having hard time when I see dishonesty and insincerity. That is the only problem; language is OK. Resid Gulerdem 06:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

text: This APPROVAL POLL IS the first poll. Look at the dates! Your attempts at undermining this poll are failing miserably. The results of this approval poll will determine the fate of this project. ॐ Metta Bubble puff 05:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * The problem is if we should vote for it. It is not ready for the vote yet. It needs to be improved first. Everybody is accepting that. Resid Gulerdem 05:57, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I'm not. I want to see it lying on the floor dead. Hawkestone 05:30, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments