A minor addition about discussion rules

[marosuke]

Hello.

General Revision Rules say "Avoid writing upgrade threads mainly based on assumptions from a limited amount of information, with no additional context or evidence to support them."

I don't understand why only upgrade threads is mentioned. Is there any specific reason that I don't know? Anyway here is my proposal.

Option 1
Change to:
Avoid writing upgrade threads and downgrade threads mainly based on assumptions from a limited amount of information, with no additional context or evidence to support them.

Option 2
The rule is perfect. No need to change.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I agree generally speaking; though sometimes downgrades and/or proposals to change stats to "Unknown" are made based on there being vagueness of the current justification I believe is the reason why it only says "Upgrades."

 

[Deagonx]

Technically this would be a staff discussion, but I don't think it's a major issue.

I don't necessarily mind the change, it's mostly a guideline and it's not the sort of thing we'd ever cite as a rule violation. However, the reason it applies more to upgrades than downgrades is that downgrades are rarely based on "assumptions from a limited amount of information without context." The only time that such a scenario would lead to a downgrade proposal is when there's a vague "could-be" anti-feat, but downgrades based on anti-feats are just not that common in general. The main point is to dissuade people from pursuing erroneously founded upgrades which is commonplace.

TL;DR: We could change it, I think it doesn't matter much, but there's a reason it only says upgrades.

 

[Tdjwo]

I agree