New rule for Content Revision Threads

[Damage3245]

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.

 

[KLOL506]

Didn't we already accept a grace period of at least 48 hours for all CRTs prior to this thread being made?

 

[Damage3245]

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.

 

[Planck69]

Honestly, I agree. A 24 hour wait seems sufficient to ensure everyone has a chance to weigh in.

 

[KLOL506]

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.

 

[Damage3245]

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.

 

[Maitreya12]

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?

 

[Aachintya31]

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).

Happened many times even if its uncontroversial.

 

[AKM sama]

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.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I think KLOL already said that we already have a rule, only that we need a bigger reminder of it passing.

 

[Antvasima]

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?

 

[Antvasima]

Also, do we need to make our current rule regarding this issue easier to understand?

 

[Damage3245]

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.

 

[Antvasima]

That seems good to me.

 

[AKM sama]

Yes. Seems fine.

 

[Damage3245]

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.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that seems acceptable, yes.

 

[Damage3245]

Done. Closing.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you to everybody who helped out here.

 

[KLOL506]

Uhhhhh... thread's over, can someone close this now?