ESB:Proposals/Forbidding promotion nominations/voting

	Proposal Archive The following proposal has been discussed and is now marked as resolved. The page has been protected and now serves as an archive. Do not edit this page. Date Resolved: June 17, 2016 Result: Passed at 70%.

Instructions

This page is the voting stage of this discussion: "Forbidding promotion nominations."

With all concerns from the concern stage of this discussion having been resolved and taken into account, the proposal located in the "Proposal" section above has been created and moved to voting. To join the voting, you simply use buttons located in the "Voting" section of this page and fill the resulting page.

Have a happy voting!

Proposal

The issue regarding other people nominating others for promotional positions was discussed during the concerns stage.

Some agreed that there were pros and cons to both, but then Alex.sapre offered a compromise for certain ranked users to be allowed to nominate others, which would satisfy concerns such as a user being too modest to apply for a position.

Therefore, I am proposing the following changes to the promotion policy. Addition is in bold.

• 3. Application process

...

• e. Nominating another user for any position requiring a request form is prohibited unless the nominating user is an administrator or bureaucrat. All other nominations will be closed as invalid.

This discussion will end on Thursday, June 15, 2016 at 5:50 p.m., eastern time. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 21:45, June 5, 2016 (UTC)

Voting

Choose your input: Support • Neutral • Oppose • Comment

• Support - as proposer. It's a good compromise. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 21:48, June 5, 2016 (UTC)

• Support - ~JCM 21:48, June 5, 2016 (UTC)

• Support -  Nicko756 ^{(M•C•E) Sign!}  21:49, June 5, 2016 (UTC) 

• Support - although, "that user" should be changed to "the nominating user" to avoid confusion. ѕqυι∂∂ℓєωαя∂ ^{❮мεssαgε ωαℓℓ ● cσηтяιвυтισηs ● ε∂ιтcσυηт❯}

• Neutral leaning toward Support - I guess it may work if only administrators or bureaucrats are allowed to nominate.  Navus ^{[Wall|Contribs]}  21:55, June 5, 2016 (UTC)

• That is the case in this proposal. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 04:43, June 7, 2016 (UTC)

• Support - ZeoSpark  Talk  Contribs  Edits  22:09,6/5/2016 

• Oppose - Per previous reason. AustinD-3 (Message Me Here!)

• Support - Per above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChocolateBrownieBoy (wall • contribs). Remember to sign your posts with ~~~~

• Neutral - Auron ⚡ Yeah, that's right baby! Welcome to my locker! ⚡  

• Oppose - Per reason stated by Austin.-SσпıcTнεEρıc (talk) 00:15, June 7, 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose -

• Support - as person with idea Your obedient friend, and angel (talk) 20:07, June 16, 2016 (UTC)