User talk:ElectionJune2014/Referenda/5: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Russell D. Jones (Where's the discussion of this?) |
imported>Peter Jackson |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Not thought through== | ==Not thought through== | ||
I'd like to see the discussion of this proposal because this proposal cuts to the core of what makes CZ different. If this proposal has been hashed out among the citizenry, I'd like to read it so that I understand the rationale behind it. But I can't support this on the face of it -- it overturns a fundamental premise of CZ. [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 00:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC) | I'd like to see the discussion of this proposal because this proposal cuts to the core of what makes CZ different. If this proposal has been hashed out among the citizenry, I'd like to read it so that I understand the rationale behind it. But I can't support this on the face of it -- it overturns a fundamental premise of CZ. [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 00:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC) | ||
:I agree completely. A number of changes recently have been weakening Editor authority, which is basically our USP (I don't think real names sufficient for that.) [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 09:49, 9 June 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:49, 9 June 2014
Not thought through
I'd like to see the discussion of this proposal because this proposal cuts to the core of what makes CZ different. If this proposal has been hashed out among the citizenry, I'd like to read it so that I understand the rationale behind it. But I can't support this on the face of it -- it overturns a fundamental premise of CZ. Russell D. Jones 00:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
- I agree completely. A number of changes recently have been weakening Editor authority, which is basically our USP (I don't think real names sufficient for that.) Peter Jackson 09:49, 9 June 2014 (UTC)