FANDOM


The CouncilEdit

Here all users, Admins and Bureaucrats will meet to discuss major topics and make administrative decisions.

Any user may bring a proposition before the council and every active member will have 10 days to place his/her vote before they are counted. One vote is allowed per person and must go into either "Accept","Neutral" or "Decline". Reasons for your decision should be stated and a "Comments" Category may be added also.

All democratic community discussions, proposals, and votes took place here before this was created.

Rules:Edit

1. All discussions MUST be on topic and relevant to the current discussion.

2. Each post MUST be signed and a line (----) between to make it clear where each post begins and ends.

3. "Bad language" is allowed but flaming, and out of control posts will not be tolerated. Please try to be friendly.

Discussion Edit

Propositions Edit

I propose that we allow multi-licensing, if it isn't available already, and/or move the default license to the Creative Commons. DJ 1337 Man 02:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

  • I believe that the GFDL does not suffice for the protecting of peoples' intellectual property, especially with the nature of this wiki (that being, user-created fantasy worlds). I'm not sure if there's anything else I should say, but if you have questions, I would be more than glad to explain. DJ 1337 Man 02:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Accept

  1. User: Flamefang - I see no way that this proposition can damage the wiki, and it will allow our users more control over the way their work is used, thus i vote "Yes".
  1. DJ 1337 Man - I forgot to accept this, and I'm the proposer! (^.^')
  1. Pmkava - we should do anything we can do to help users have more control over their works.
  1. User:Lars Præstmark - I think that it is a good idea for new contributions, though, in order to follow the licenses, old contributions should remain avaible under the terms of GFDL, only the copyright holders of text (i.e. its authors can make their works avaiable

under more licenses, so old contributions can only be made avaiable under more licenses by these. So, if we should follow the licenses, we could only do two things:

    1. Making new contributions to be licensed differently and
    2. each user could double license their own older contributions.

Please note that several Creative Commons licenses exist and, if you have more doubts about licensing contents of the wiki it might be better to ask questions about it to wikia staff, they probably know more about why the default license is the GFDL.

  1. User:Debate dude - We should definitely work to give users as much control over their work as possible.

Neutral

Decline

Comments

PASSED!


Vulgar and Offensive LanguageEdit

May I propose that we do not allow profane or vulgar language in our wiki? I think that we should. These words are not needed. What do you think?

Posted by User: Mattkenn3

Accept

  1. I find profanity and vulgarity to be quite disturbing and distracting from a wiki's goal and main purpose. These words only insight violence and disputes. I find these words to be inappropriate and are not needed. I don't understand why we would use something that only causes trouble? I don't mean to ban the profanity overall. I know it slips out sometimes. What I mean to do is not allow these words to be used offencively or used to critisize other users. Mattkenn3 Talk 03:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. DJ 1337 Man - Personally, I don't like profane and/or vulgar language, but from what I've seen, it doesn't change the fact that it can't be stopped. For example, in the 1950s and 60s, the television companies tried to keep almost everything seen as vulgar or profane off the air waves, but that still didn't keep the kids from picking up their parents' and grandparents' vulgar and profane language. My point is, this is a way of life; I don't agree with the way of life, but I also can't stop it - nor can we on this wiki.

Decline

  1. User: Flamefang - "Profane" language isn't necessarily "Bad" its just another way of expressing one's self. While i think it should be allowed, it must not be overused, and preferably not in articles, only talk pages. Words like F*ck should most likely be kept under strict control though words like "Hell" and "As*" are pretty common in everyday language now.
  1. Leon - I agree with Flamefang.
  1. Esyrias - Swearing can be offensive, but there are loads of creative ways to attack people without any cursing at all. The cursing is a side effect of the intent, not the cause. (For example: Mattkenn, you have a very nice vocabulary but no idea how to spell half of it.) I have nothing against it. Moreover, any attempt to ban swearing really annoys me. Dunno why, just feels intrusive and unnecessary.
  1. Pmkava - I for one am against censorship, but we should do what we can to keep offensive language to a minimum and preferably in talk pages only.

Comments

DECLINED!


Sidebar fixesEdit

I got the idea of trying to view Pegasus with more elements on the mediaWiki:monaco-sidebar. What about putting elements in some order (e.g. alphabettically) I have currently tested it as User:Lars Præstmark/Monaco-sidebar.

Accept

  1. Flamefang- I definitely agree with this, the better the wiki is organized and presented, the easier it is to navigate and use.
  1. Pmkava- I agree, anything that can be done to better organize the wiki should.

Neutral

Decline

PASSED!


Control of mediaWiki:edittoolsEdit

What about making it possible to chose what to see in mediaWiki:Edittools? It currently depends on CSS settings whch each user can override individually by creating pages like Special:Mypage/monaco.css. What about making it to use some kind of controls as those used on wikipedia (where users have to select which alphabet they want to see shown.

Accept

  1. Lars (Poet) (speak page) 16:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC), although I have not found out yet how it works, and wikipedia uses so much javascript that finding the right code to do speciffically this and making it to work in the monaco skin is so difficult that I would have to ask others how to do it.
  2. Flamefang If it can be done, i see no way it could have a negative affect on the wiki whatsoever.

Neutral

  1. DJ 1337 Man I have absolutely no opinion on this, because I simply don't understand what this is about (and believe me when I say this: I'm a very technical-minded person!). If this were to be passed, declined, or even tabled, I still wouldn't really care. 'Nuff said.

Decline

Comments It seems that the only way that this can be done is using Dynamic navigation. Lars (Poet) (speak page) 20:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I have added it now but I have not found out how to use it yet. Lars (Poet) (speak page) 20:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


The SidebarEdit

I would like to bring a proposal before the council on the topic of the sidebar currently in use. My proposal is to change the "Realms" Category and re-name it the "Worlds" category. This is primarily since the world "Realm" actually refers to the dominion of a person, usually a King, Queen, Emperor or Empress and many of the articles listed there are in fact worlds. I await the opinion of the members of our Wiki.

Pass

  1. Flamefang
  2. User:Glaenia
  3. DJ 1337 Man
  4. Mattkenn3 Talk

Neutral

Decline


Comments

Since this vote appears to be unanimous and there is a low chance of getting future voters, the necessary changes will be made immediately.

PASSED



New Policy Edit

Today, on May 6th 2010, at 1:00 AM. I, Flamefang, current Sysop and Bureaucrat of the Pegsus/Constructed Mythology wiki put forth the following proposal:


Ever since Mighty Erick left this wiki has had a severe decline in active users, and thus edits. We decided to tear off the shackles of a wiki completely "Ruled" by the Bureaucrat. We wanted a wiki where the decisions were made by the editors. Thus Erick, the Bureaucrat, left and we had our democratic system in place. As many will see above it functioned well while we had many users and it was a generally unspoken rule that any proposal would require more than 2 positive votes to pass. Now that we lack users the entire system, which wiki improvement and progress rely on, has ground to a halt. Thus, with much regret, i put forth the proposal to allow the Bureaucrat the undeniable ability to pass proposals without more than one vote, his or her own. Hopefully this will allow the system to function until a true democracy may begin again. I trust that this will not be used for ill intent, for in fact this entire system cannot stop a malevolent Bureaucrat from destroying it. But instead what i write here and what was written before in months and years past, in the golden days of this site, shall serve as testimony to what came before, to what those who come after should seek to achieve. I am not going anywhere any time soon but one day i will be forced to leave this place and then it will be up to another to caretake it in my stead. Perhaps i'm being overly ceremonious, concerned and stupid due to lack of sleep... but, as of now, i cast forth my vote in favor of this proposal, and hope that some may follow so that progress may begin anew.


Pass:

Flamefang 04:59, May 6, 2010 (UTC)Flamefang - I should probably vote for my own proposal...


Neutral:



Decline:



Comments:


I realize what this could do but, I trust it will be used well... Flamefang 04:59, May 6, 2010 (UTC)Flamefang

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.