User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-188432-20130514042227/@comment-188432-20130515194305: Difference between revisions
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="quote"> | <div class="quote"> | ||
Badwolff wrote: | Badwolff wrote: | ||
| Line 13: | Line 12: | ||
It just depends. | It just depends. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20130514042227-188432/20130515194305-188432]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 13:44, 27 April 2023
Badwolff wrote: Just wondering whether it is worth it to weigh in on this and other topics.
Yes, it's always worth it to weigh in on this and other topics. All views are thoroughly read and considered when policy is eventually written. The process is explained in greater detail at T:WRITE POLICY.
While Tangerineduel or myself — as the site's two active bureaucrats — usually are the primary authors of policy, we have often written policy from opinions contrary to our own. I wrote T:ITAL, for instance, but it is very much the "will of others".
Of course, sometimes it takes a while for policy to get written. Some discussions have lasted for over a year, with months where the discussion is sorta dormant. So, in a sense, when you suggest that there's a "last man standing" element to policy writing, you're sort of correct. Often, someone has to come by a dead conversation and either stoke it back to flame or write up the results as they then exist.
On the other hand, some policies go through in about a week.
It just depends.
