rfc:rfc.third-party-editing

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
rfc:rfc.third-party-editing [2016/05/12 17:31] – pollitarfc:rfc.third-party-editing [2016/05/13 01:41] – Make recommendation for how to summarize arguments. pollita
Line 11: Line 11:
 ===== Proposal ===== ===== Proposal =====
 This proposal suggests the introduction of a new section to the standard RFC template for "Third Party Arguments", with subsections for "In Favor" and "Opposed".  The understanding being that any content under "Third Party Arguments" may be edited by anyone with wiki karma to add a summary of their argument in their own words. This proposal suggests the introduction of a new section to the standard RFC template for "Third Party Arguments", with subsections for "In Favor" and "Opposed".  The understanding being that any content under "Third Party Arguments" may be edited by anyone with wiki karma to add a summary of their argument in their own words.
 +
 +It is the RECOMMENDATION of this RFC that summaries placed in the "Third-Party Arguments" section be constrained to concise summaries, possibly as bullet points.
  
 If taken advantage of (and it would be optional to all parties), then not only does this provide a unified and consistent place to find established arguments during the voting phase, it ensures a historical record of the discussion in a more accessible format than searching mail archives. If taken advantage of (and it would be optional to all parties), then not only does this provide a unified and consistent place to find established arguments during the voting phase, it ensures a historical record of the discussion in a more accessible format than searching mail archives.
Line 21: Line 23:
      
   ==== In Favor ====   ==== In Favor ====
-  Arguments by individuals as to why this proposal is a good idea.+    * Concise list of arguments 
 +    * Summarized for easy review
   ==== Against ====   ==== Against ====
-  Arguments by individuals as to why this proposal is a bad idea.+    * Longer paragraphs are permitted, but brevity should be considered where possible.
  
 ===== Proposed Voting Choices ===== ===== Proposed Voting Choices =====
 Adopt these new headings and codify scope-limited editing of other's RFCs during discussion phase.  Requires 50% + 1 Adopt these new headings and codify scope-limited editing of other's RFCs during discussion phase.  Requires 50% + 1
  
rfc/rfc.third-party-editing.txt · Last modified: 2017/09/22 13:28 by 127.0.0.1

Page Tools