User:Gil/policy

acadec scores policy:

motivation: irish catholic guilt. i personally don't like to do things without some sort of blessing out of fear that i'll piss someone off. this is also based in a large part off of debian's documents describing how they solve the same problems we have. also there were genuine problems that existed that all of the constitution drafts failed to address.

This document exists to address two problems:

• There was no way to get a consensus (example: top 10 scorers having the same person twice)
• There was no way to show leadership/hold people accountable for projects.

Summary: This document introduces a standard way to get a consensus through discussion and creates a user role tasked with making sure policy is implemented.

What are the new roles?

Project Manager

The PM maintains the ADSIC:Todo list and assigns these tasks to editors, notifies the editors when there is a vote and maintains the list of editors (a sort of master list for who gets to vote).

Editors

People who decide they want a say in how things are done. Anyone can ask the PM to be an editor but editors are expected to understand how the site works. All editors are called to vote and are willing to help execute a project if asked. In order to raise a vote you must be an editor (you can't ask people to work if you're not willing to work yourself. n.b. that I fully expect that most people calling votes will be doing what they request). All these duties are volunteer and added on top of the primary mission of the site (collect acadec scores).

How will consensus be done?

1. An editor that wants to change how we do things comes up with a change and on the page puts a Template:Disc template. See below for the guidelines on what is up for discussion.

2. The users and editors who read the site discuss the issue to come up with a specific set of questions to be asked in the vote.

3. Once the person who raised the question is satisfied with the options offered the person asks the PM to add the Template:Vote template and the PM then contacts all the editors using off-wiki means to tell them to vote on that page.

5. Once a quorum is reached the person who called the Template:Disc will then execute the decision or the PM will ask someone to execute it.

6. A table will be maintained of all completed Template:Votes at ADSIC:Todo and will show who is assigned to carry out something and appropriate status things

7. The PM will maintain the table and is tasked with making sure everything gets done.

Voting topic guidelines

What does not need to be discussed

adding scores

security updates

temporary bans and reversions for vandalism

What can be discussed

features added to the software that don't change other features (i.e. routine mw updates)

a new project manager

What always has to be discussed

changes to the way we will display scores

changes to non-score pages in the main namespace (categories, the pages you browse through to get to scores)

changing user roles

changes in the MediaWiki: namespace and changes to the css/php that will change existing functionality

Things that need to be done

a comprehensive page of how mainspace pages will be formatted (aka ADSIC:Todo but anal)

a list of all editors

Template:Vote and Template:Disc templates

a todo in this new format

a getting started/faq page explaining how to implement the style guide

i think this system will replace AfD so get rid of that too