Board Thread:Wiki Management/@comment-7530765-20150502162439/@comment-25897292-20150502222216

1Zulu wrote:

TheHandsomePlant wrote:

How many reasons you have on supporting and how many on opposing? Most supports here mean "I agree", "we should do it", "this is good option", so it's quite obvious it doesn't need a reason. Oppose, on the other hand, can have multiple or even dozens of reasons like "I don't care", "Because lies r cool", "Because x, x and x" etc.

But why do you agree?

I can play this game too. Why can't the opposes mean "I disagree," "we should not do it," "this is a bad option"? Why do I only need to explain my reasoning if I disagree? Well take a promotion thread for example. I find that an oppose would reveal what the person in question could do better to become whatever rank they're aiming for, whereas a support basically says "Yes, you deserve this right. You meet all the requirements". I think of opposes as saying that there is something that could be better, which could be countless things. I think of supports as saying that whatever you're voting on is nearly perfect, and if there should be a small change, then that idea could be taken into account, and it's optional whether it should be brought up or not.

In other words, yes says yes, no says no, but we need to know why no says no to make the thing we're voting on better. If the vote says yes, then that's yes. We really don't need to know why it says yes. We can see from a support that the voter thinks it's a good idea, and should happen on the wiki.

(Granted I've only been here for so long, so perhaps my definition is flawed)

, by the way.