User talk:TheNuttyOne/Archive 3: Difference between revisions
From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
TheNuttyOne (talk | contribs) |
Serpent King (talk | contribs) m (→About the move) |
||
| Line 177: | Line 177: | ||
Looking at this from the perspective of someone who wasn't involved, I see a highly fragmented move discussion that went nowhere and was agreed to be going nowhere, so it was closed and the status quo was upheld. Do you really think that opening it back up immediately would do anything but repeat the exact same results, therefore wasting everyone's time? Calling it a "new discussion" isn't magically going to change people's opinion on the issue. No one's going to like the results of every single discussion we have; don't be the one guy that can't accept defeat and move on. [[User:Toomai|Toomai]] [[User talk:Toomai|Glittershine]] [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Sphere 16:14, 27 January 2016 (EST) | Looking at this from the perspective of someone who wasn't involved, I see a highly fragmented move discussion that went nowhere and was agreed to be going nowhere, so it was closed and the status quo was upheld. Do you really think that opening it back up immediately would do anything but repeat the exact same results, therefore wasting everyone's time? Calling it a "new discussion" isn't magically going to change people's opinion on the issue. No one's going to like the results of every single discussion we have; don't be the one guy that can't accept defeat and move on. [[User:Toomai|Toomai]] [[User talk:Toomai|Glittershine]] [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Sphere 16:14, 27 January 2016 (EST) | ||
:I have a hard time believing that effectively favoring one side is fair at all, much less the fairest way to handle a discussion that is not reaching consensus. What's the difference between just going through with the move when there's no consensus vs. not moving it at all besides less effort? <small>---Preceding unsigned comment added by [[Special:MyPage|you]]. Or maybe [[User:DatNuttyKid|DatNuttyKid]].</small> 16:21, 27 January 2016 (EST) | :I have a hard time believing that effectively favoring one side is fair at all, much less the fairest way to handle a discussion that is not reaching consensus. What's the difference between just going through with the move when there's no consensus vs. not moving it at all besides less effort? <small>---Preceding unsigned comment added by [[Special:MyPage|you]]. Or maybe [[User:DatNuttyKid|DatNuttyKid]].</small> 16:21, 27 January 2016 (EST) | ||
::To keep a discussion going that long after it has had split consensus since it began makes no sense. It was very clear that we were not going reach an actual consensus (by the way, no, being in support by 1 vote is not considered a consensus, and a democratic approach in this situation when the discussion did not open as such would be inappropriate; not to mention, if you recall, we were 7-6 with neutral-supports. If we counted the neutral-supports separate, we'd be evenly tied at 6-6). Rather than let the discussion go nowhere even more, the decision was made by all 3 active admins to end it, and in that decision, it makes a lot more sense to keep the page as is than to go through with the move. I also have difficulty accepting your claims that we are acting on bias, given that directly after the decision to close discussion, you proceeded to open a new discussion, ergo dissatisfaction with the result of the previous discussion, AKA bias. <span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:12pt">[[User:Serpent King|<span style="color:#083">'''Serpent'''</span>]] [[File:SKSig.png|16px|link=]] [[User talk:Serpent King|<span style="color:#ed0;">'''King'''</span></span>]] 19:34, 27 January 2016 (EST) | |||
