Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:41, 25 February 2008

Misplaced Pages:Delegable proxy

This "proposal" is an unbelievably bad idea. Proxy voting works fine when you have a body with a finite, well-defined membership - e.g. the board of a corporation or a state legislature. In such a case, all or substantially all of the membership votes on every proposal. But on Misplaced Pages, a quorum is whoever happens to show up and having proxy voting would simply lead to !vote stacking. This proposal is being pushed by a ring of sockpuppets who want to move it forward even though nobody has actually agreed with it. There's no good reason to leave it here, even in its rejected state, as it is merely an invitation to vote stack under the guise of an "experiment". B (talk) 18:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete AFD debates are NOT A VOTE. There is no possible benefit from having larger numbers of people who support your position. This entire idea is a fundementally BAD idea. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete - terrible idea, and given the circumstances under which this was created, nothing short of disruptive. Risker (talk) 19:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete - Completely mutually exclusive with Misplaced Pages policy.--WaltCip (talk) 19:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete - per lots and lots of reasons I've given at Misplaced Pages talk:Delegable proxy, this is a very bad idea and completely against WP:NOT, and represents an experiment, in my opinion, carried out by the proponents of this type of system without the best interests of Misplaced Pages in mind. I would be okay with an Esperanza-like solution where the rejected page is kept around, but I prefer deletion because leaving this up implies that the idea had some level of support while this basically has none. Whether the page is rejected or deleted in the end, we should certainly delete Misplaced Pages:Delegable proxy/Table and Misplaced Pages:Delegable proxy/Table/Actual table as the existence of that page is pretty much akin to the end goal of the proposal. Mangojuice 20:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete I'm normally against MFD for proposals, but IMO this is a terrible idea for Misplaced Pages and the proponents of it (who are apparently mostly the same person as part of some massive WP:POINT experiment) seem to be dead set on pushing through as a proposal, brainstorming, or an experiment without any regard to the opposition, even to the point of calling good faith criticism disruptive as a way to ignore it. Mr.Z-man 20:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
• Guess this covers all of this? --81.104.39.63 (talk) 21:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep and mark as Essay. At the risk of being accused of trotting out the "Other stuff exists" argument... the precident for rejected proposals is to change them to Essay status, not to delete them whole cloth. I agree that the proposal was a spectacularly bad idea, but if slightly rewritten so as to be an essay reflecting the thoughts of its creator, I see nothing wrong with keeping it. That said, the associated table pages should go... or at least be merged into the essay. Blueboar (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Addendum - I would probably add Misplaced Pages:Experiment/Current experiments to the list of associated pages to be deleted. Blueboar (talk) 21:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

An essay is supposed to be helpful or neutral, even without having the enforceability of a policy or guideline. This is directly contrary to multiple policies and established consensuses and as some have said would actually be harmful to Misplaced Pages. Mr.Z-man 22:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy delete as trolling and disruption per the last several contributions of User:Absidy before being blocked indefinitely for disruptive sockpuppetry and trolling. I would be glad to do the deletions myself but would want to get the views of some more admins before doing it. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:16, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
• I would happily endorse a speedy delete per Newyorkbrad. Daniel (talk) 00:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete This would never have a WP:SNOW chance of ever being adopted in any remotely similar form. MBisanz 02:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete!; A proposal to take the worst thing about Misplaced Pages (blind voting in discussions), formalize it, enshrine it and increase its influence? Surely thou jestest! — Coren  04:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete This is a terrible proposal. I don't think the creators--who dismissed or even sneered at every attempt by a number of editors to tell them this--are going to get it unless this gets deleted. Consider deleting this proposal a sensible, prudent measure. Darkspots (talk) 05:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per reasons given by Newyorkbrad and Mangojuice. Midorihana 06:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy delete I agree with the comments made by Newyorkbrad--VS 10:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy delete An absurd idea, totally unworkable and unnecessary. Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 12:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep and mark as extremely rejected. We generally don't delete policy proposals unless keeping them would be entirely meritless, but keeping this one has merit - it would document the community's (basically complete) rejection of the principles expressed here. If the objection to this is that the {{rejected}} tag isn't strong enough to convey this, then just cook up a stronger rejection tag. — Gavia immer (talk) 14:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. While I would normally suggest simply tagging a failed policy proposal as {rejected}, there are additional factors here that weigh against retaining any of this material on Misplaced Pages. One of this process' strongest proponents (Absidy et al.) was pushing it using a ring of sockpuppets, and there's no reason to leave a memorial to his trolling. The other key proponent (Abd) has been pushing this concept because of his own interest in the topic as his own personal experiment in democracy. He has spent a significant amount of time on- and off-wiki Misplaced Pages promoting this idea, and has identified himself as coining the term 'delegable proxy'. (His earlier attempts to create an article on this topic under the alternate name 'liquid democracy' were rebuffed.) Again, Misplaced Pages isn't the place to push his novel voting schemes. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)