Return to Answer

5 users decided to throw away the attempt at policy making Oak tried to make and the resulting question because an unimplementable answer attracted large consensus. In some of these users' opinion, the only way to truly exclude this poll is to start over.

I have to be honest, this vote was not conducted with enough preparation and for-planning and the result has been disastrous. I'm going to have to ask, at this time, that we abandon this vote and reconvene when we have a better understanding of what it is that we want to accomplish, and a better method for doing so. – tzenes yesterday

Frankly, I disagree for a number of simple reasons:

• There was a time and a place to prepare and that time and place are now well over.
• Users can vote on multiple answers, so you do not necessarily discount users by discounting an answer.
• The whole point of this poll is that the current situation is unacceptable. Voting to keep the situation basically as-is, thus, is unacceptable.

5 users decided to throw away the attempt at policy making Oak tried to make and the resulting question because an unimplementable answer attracted large consensus. In some of these users' opinion, the only way to truly exclude this poll is to start over.

I have to be honest, this vote was not conducted with enough preparation and for-planning and the result has been disastrous. I'm going to have to ask, at this time, that we abandon this vote and reconvene when we have a better understanding of what it is that we want to accomplish, and a better method for doing so. – tzenes yesterday

Frankly, I disagree for a number of simple reasons:

• There was a time and a place to prepare and that time and place are now well over.
• Users can vote on multiple answers, so you do not necessarily discount users by discounting an answer.
• The whole point of this poll is that the current situation is unacceptable. Voting to keep the situation basically as-is, thus, is unacceptable.