• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

New rule for Content Revision Threads

Status
Not open for further replies.

Damage3245

He/Him
VS Battles
Administrator
Calculation Group
29,290
23,957
I was reminded that we don't have a minimum time period rule for Content Revision Threads after this CRT for One-Punch Man was created, evaluated, accepted, applied and closed in the span of around three hours (all while I was asleep mind you). Now, I may not have anything specific to say for this particular thread this time... but what if I did? Or other users who don't share the same timezones as users who did participate in the thread?

I think that from now on, no matter how minor or major the changes are from a CRT, there needs to be a minimum of 24 hours passing from the creation of the thread to when the results of the thread can be applied. If only to give a chance for people to see the thread, regardless of their timezones.
 
Didn't we already accept a grace period of at least 48 hours for all CRTs prior to this thread being made?
Took another look, and there is this rule, yeah:

  • For all content revision suggestions, a grace period of 48 hours should be allowed for the reviewing staff members to evaluate and approve them. This grace period applies to both minor and self-evident revisions, as well as larger revisions that may require more input from other staff members. This is to ensure that all staff members have the opportunity to review the suggested revisions and provide their input, even if the initial explanation post in a content revision thread is quite large and complicated.

This only mentions that time should be allowed for staff members to review it though, and the CRT I linked in the OP was reviewed by staff members. The issue is that it was applied too quickly.
 
Took another look, and there is this rule, yeah:

  • For all content revision suggestions, a grace period of 48 hours should be allowed for the reviewing staff members to evaluate and approve them. This grace period applies to both minor and self-evident revisions, as well as larger revisions that may require more input from other staff members. This is to ensure that all staff members have the opportunity to review the suggested revisions and provide their input, even if the initial explanation post in a content revision thread is quite large and complicated.

This only mentions that time should be allowed for staff members to review it though, and the CRT I linked in the OP was reviewed by staff members. The issue is that it was applied too quickly.
Pretty sure this was explicitly in reference to even after other staff had approved of this that there should be a 48-hour grace period even after overwhelming acceptance was found, so that any remaining staff members could give their two cents on something like this.
 
Yeah, I think so. I'd add to the wording to be a bit more explicit then, and say:

  • For all content revision suggestions, a grace period of 48 hours should be allowed for the reviewing staff members to evaluate and approve them. This grace period applies to both minor and self-evident revisions, as well as larger revisions that may require more input from other staff members. This is to ensure that all staff members have the opportunity to review the suggested revisions and provide their input, even if the initial explanation post in a content revision thread is quite large and complicated. Until this grace period has elapsed since the time of the thread's creation, the revision should not be applied to the profiles.
 
Question though cause I’ve seen this happen a couple of times but is there any period of time you have to wait after a CRT has been accepted before you can make another CRT to reverse the changes?

Like if a CRT was just debated and accepted but you don’t agree with the outcome of that CRT, you can just make another CRT as soon as the other one was closed to attempt to reverse the changes, or is there a grace period like there is here?
 
Pretty sure this was explicitly in reference to even after other staff had approved of this that there should be a 48-hour grace period even after overwhelming acceptance was found, so that any remaining staff members could give their two cents on something like this.
This is true.
 
Yes, but I cannot keep spamming popup messages to our members.

Should I highlight an announcement thread one week from now, as I can probably remove the double-highlight from our staff promotion thread at that point?
 
Also, do we need to make our current rule regarding this issue easier to understand?
 
Also, do we need to make our current rule regarding this issue easier to understand?
I posted a suggested addition to the end of it here:

  • For all content revision suggestions, a grace period of 48 hours should be allowed for the reviewing staff members to evaluate and approve them. This grace period applies to both minor and self-evident revisions, as well as larger revisions that may require more input from other staff members. This is to ensure that all staff members have the opportunity to review the suggested revisions and provide their input, even if the initial explanation post in a content revision thread is quite large and complicated. Until this grace period has elapsed since the time of the thread's creation, the revision should not be applied to the profiles.
 
Okay, it's a pretty tiny addition to an already existing rule, so I can add it in now and close this if that's fine.
 
Thank you to everybody who helped out here.

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top