User blog comment:Triakula/Proposal of softening citation policy on GWiki/@comment-35470197-20200115122614/@comment-35470197-20200117083752

> there must also be some basic immutable guidelines that are the product of common sense.

Right. I am not saying that we should decide everything by voting. It is better to make several helpful rules to keep the main space sound.

> that basic misconceptions are a problem in this community, even if UNOCF itself is no longer a good example of this

Exactly. The point is that my proposal is just about the voting for whether we create a new article on a given notion or not, but not for the content. If there are uncertain descriptions in articles, we should correct them. This is the same as the current situation.

> If you're already creating multiple account, there's nothing to stop you from creating a dozen accounts for vandalism/direct trolling and another dozen accounts to break the voting system.

Hmm...? I might not understand the point. Accounts only for vandalism/direct trolling have nothing to do with this system. Other accounts for the voting system should satisfy the four conditions. I think that it is not so easy to satisfy all of the four conditions using multiple accounts, but you do not think so, right?

> Quantity is not quality. Raw activity does not equal contribution.

Of course, I know.

> We have plenty of editors here who meet all your criteria, and who contributed absolutely nothing useful to our community.

Really? I assumed that there are few such users. If you are correct at this point, I completely agree with your point. Anyway, I am not against your proposal to have a panel, because as I said that I expected admins play such a role. I do not disagree if we need more experts for the panel. You know this community much better than me.

> The problem is simply that one person could render the enitre voting system meaningless.

Ok. If you think so, then I might be too optimistic, although I am not certain whether we already have so many editors with the right. (Yes, and I am certain that there can be much more, if we decide to apply this voting system, as you point out.)

> And how are the admins supposed to decide what's inappropriate?

If you doubt it, then how other members in the panel can decide what is inappropriate?

> Blirx

Well, I personally accept such a number, because it is nothing wrong. For many googologists, naming a number (including salads) is a significant portion of googology, I guess. The article might look joking for a googologist, but it is nothing halmful.