Board Thread:Internal management/@comment-1764483-20160131204339/@comment-4009269-20160202195534

Legofan9o5 wrote: Starfruity wrote: ...it's better to prevent n00bs from influencing the vote too much... Then just raise the requirements to filter out "n00bs".

And may I say that it would be quite insuting as a fairly regular user to be forced into a group considered "n00bs" simply because I lack a position. What? You mean that I may not fall under this "n00b" rule and I'm extrapolating too far? Well the voting weight would say otherwise.

Should every single new user be able to vote with the current standards? Certainly not, some are too ignorant to the consequences and some are possibly malicious and want terrible changes.

'''Does crippling other users by grouping them with a "low standard" and limit their voting influence regarded as moral or fair? No.'''

'''Would limiting these new users by increasing voting standards prevent the problem causing "n00bs"? Yes.'''

I'm looking at you too TULO, you're argument may include the "per" problem (which I agree, that is becoming a dominant problem in its own right), but the bulk of the problem would still be remedied by increased standards. I don't want to cripple anyone who doesn't want to or can't have rights, but sadly no matter the requirements for being able to vote there are going to be inexperienced people. That's partially why I mentioned the new staff position thing, though it was mostly a joke. I definitely don't want to overlook the thoughts of people who are newer to the community, but the truth is, in general, experienced users are going to go for staff positions, and therefore staff votes are going to be more reliable.

And to be fair, this rule kinda IS increasing voting standards. Though if you have a better idea to filter out "n00bs" I'd be glad to hear it.