Discussion Rules lil Revision

[Lloydblitzed]

Permission granted by @Antvasima

This is very simple. So I think a little precision should be added to the discussion rules concerning the number of staff approval required to make a CRT pass. I've seen many people think they need 3 staff approval to make CRT pass when the rule only applies to popular verses

In cases where the series verse has a significant following or a large amount of material has been published based on its content, it may be necessary to seek approval from a minimum of three staff members to ensure that all relevant parties are aware of and agree with the proposed revisions.

As minor/less popular verses only 2

In order to ensure that all revisions are thoroughly reviewed and approved, it is necessary for a minimum of two staff members to sign off on any proposed changes. The concluding evaluations must be handled by Thread Moderators, Administrators, and Bureaucrats, who should make an effort to base their evaluations on valid arguments, not personal opinions.

So I think some precision should be added to the 3 staff rule, by giving examples of popular verses who would need their CRTs to get 3 staff approval at minimum. Like this

In cases where the series verse has a significant following or a large amount of material has been published based on its content, it may be necessary to seek approval from a minimum of three staff members to ensure that all relevant parties are aware of and agree with the proposed revisions.
(Example: Marvel Cinematic Universe, Ben 10, Sonic (Main Continuity), Kirby, Mario Bros)

Agree:
Disagree:
Neutral/L idea: @DontTalkDT

 

[DontTalkDT]

I'm neutral I guess.

I can't imagine the examples help, as, if any part of this is ambiguous, it's what the lower boundary of significant following/lots of materials is. All the mentioned examples are so big that they don't really aid in clarifying that.

 

[KingTempest]

We can barely get 1 staff member for popular verses why the hell would we push it to 3?

 

[Lloydblitzed]

I'm neutral I guess.

I can't imagine the examples help, as, if any part of this is ambiguous, it's what the lower boundary of significant following/lots of materials is. All the mentioned examples are so big that they don't really aid in clarifying that.

Do you think we should add "smaller" big verse example then? And would a verse like Ben 10 count?

 

[Lloydblitzed]

We can barely get 1 staff member for popular verses why the hell would we push it to 3?

That's a good question tbh, maybe lowering it to 2 would be good?

 

[Vzearr]

"Popular verse" is pretty subjective. We should probably clarify that a bit more, so I agree. However, I still don't think naming a few verses is enough clarification.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

"Popular verse" is pretty subjective. We should probably clarify that a bit more, so I agree. However, I still don't think naming a few verses is enough clarification.

So you think maybe doing a list of qualifying "popular verses" as well as adding more clarification to the page?