CZ Talk:Election July-August 2013/Referenda/6: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>John R. Brews
mNo edit summary
imported>John Stephenson
(→‎Unnecessary: You could have a referendum on that if it rewrote the Charter)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Unnecessary==
==Unnecessary==
'Approved' articles are hard to modify, and many presently 'approved' articles are sadly deficient. So far as I can see, the notion of an 'approved' article does nothing to enhance CZ, but does result in a poorer quality of article being touted as prime examples of what CZ stands for. This entire conception should be abandoned, not made easier to institute. [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 13:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
'Approved' articles are hard to modify, and many presently 'approved' articles are sadly deficient. So far as I can see, the notion of an 'approved' article does nothing to enhance CZ, but does result in a poorer quality of article being touted as prime examples of what CZ stands for. This entire conception should be abandoned, not made easier to institute. [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 13:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
:You could propose your own referendum on that. :) It would have to be a Charter-modifying one, rewriting Articles 15 and 22. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 13:48, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:48, 23 July 2013

Unnecessary

'Approved' articles are hard to modify, and many presently 'approved' articles are sadly deficient. So far as I can see, the notion of an 'approved' article does nothing to enhance CZ, but does result in a poorer quality of article being touted as prime examples of what CZ stands for. This entire conception should be abandoned, not made easier to institute. John R. Brews 13:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

You could propose your own referendum on that. :) It would have to be a Charter-modifying one, rewriting Articles 15 and 22. John Stephenson 13:48, 23 July 2013 (UTC)