|
|
| (62 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | {{DISPLAYTITLE:Welcome to my Sandbox#1}} | + | {{DISPLAYTITLE:Reglas para que Eduardo, Xavier o cualquier persona pueda compartir material de TF2}} |
| − | <small>Here you can see more or less, the current project I'm working on. Shhh it's a secret to everyone!</small>
| |
| | | | |
| − | __TOC__
| + | Eduardo y Xavier tienen que jugar con Yossef, para que puedan compartir algún material de Team Fortress 2 (TF2) o cualquier propiedad intelectual de Valve, si no cumplen con el requisito, Eduardo y Xavier no podrán compartir materiales de TF2 o Valve. Esto aplica en Facebook, X (anteriormente conocido como Twitter), cualquier red social, cualquier página de internet o en la vida real. |
| − | <!--
| |
| − | == "Best of 5" method ==
| |
| − | As the name implies, we would need 5 eligible voters, making the outcome always be either '''Yes''' or '''No'''. Pretty much self-explanatory, majority decides the outcome of the nomination.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Pass Example:'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | Below you can this that Mr. John Doe '''passed''' the nomination process because majority of the staff members voted favorably.
| |
| − | | |
| − | <small>'''Notes:'''<br>Number of available voters: '''5'''</small>
| |
| − | {|class="wikitable grid sortable" cellpadding=2 style="text-align:center; font-size:90%"
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Nominee
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Yes
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | No
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Staffs' notes
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | John Doe
| |
| − | | 3
| |
| − | | 2
| |
| − | | N/A
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | '''Not pass Examples:'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | There could be various reasons why the nominee would not pass the nomination process, below you can this that Mr. John Doe '''didn't pass''' the nomination process because majority of the staff members voted against granting the Cap.
| |
| − | | |
| − | <small>'''Notes:'''<br>Number of available voters: '''5'''</small>
| |
| − | {|class="wikitable grid sortable" cellpadding=2 style="text-align:center; font-size:90%"
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Nominee
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Yes
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | No
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Staffs' notes
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | John Doe
| |
| − | | 2
| |
| − | | 3
| |
| − | | N/A
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Below you can see that Mr. John Doe's nomination was not approved by the staff members, therefore the nomination process is cancelled and closed altogether. This could be either; he was obviously nominated by a friend, his contributions are not worthy/significant in order to be nominated, or because John is not community friendly and a troublemaker among other editors.
| |
| − | * The reason for why the nomination process was closed, should be kept privately in the user's logs.
| |
| − | | |
| − | <small>'''Notes:'''<br>Number of available voters: '''5'''</small>
| |
| − | {|class="wikitable grid sortable" cellpadding=2 style="text-align:center; font-size:90%"
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Nominee
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Yes
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | No
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Staffs' notes
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | John Doe
| |
| − | | 0
| |
| − | | 0
| |
| − | | Not Approved<br>Nomination closed per staff discussion.<br>Please refer to the logs.
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | '''Changes from the current system:'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Removal of the 'Abstain' column.
| |
| − | * Reduced the amount of required voters to a '''MAX''' of 5.
| |
| − | * Replaced being dependent on having 5 staff members on voting for the same outcome with being dependent on having 3 staff members on voting for the same outcome.
| |
| − | | |
| − | This method was suggested as a way to improve the speed of the nomination process, with only the need of 5 staff members, the outcome would be relatively quicker than the current one.
| |
| − | | |
| − | === What if an EVEN number of staff members are available to vote? ===
| |
| − | In that case, by default a '''No''' vote would be count, this way it will '''always''' be required to have the majority of staff members agreeing on granting the Cap.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Example:'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | <small>'''Notes:'''<br>Number of available voters: '''4'''<br>An additional '''No''' was added to the vote. </small>
| |
| − | {|class="wikitable grid sortable" cellpadding=2 style="text-align:center; font-size:90%"
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Nominee
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Yes
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | No
| |
| − | !class="header" style="background-color:#F3A957;" | Staffs' notes
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | John Doe
| |
| − | | 2
| |
| − | | 3
| |
| − | | N/A
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − | | |
| − | As you can see by the example, all 4 staff members voted and are evenly divided on whether if John should get the Wiki Cap. Sadly for John, he didn't get the '''majority''' to vote in his favor, which means that he didn't pass the process.
| |
| − | | |
| − | === Nomination Time-limit ===
| |
| − | [[User:Mikado282|Mikado]] brought a point that originally didn't think of,[https://steamcommunity.com/groups/OTFWiki/discussions/0/3319736698851342849/#c3362523988649653560 '''Time-limit''']. As we all know, in the past few nominations, it took around 4-6 months to complete the whole voting process. Base on this model, since the required amount of votes are lower, I expected that nominations would no take longer than 4 months. Though we need to prepare for instances of what would happen '''IF''' the nomination process exceeds the time-limit, and how to deal with the possible scenarios.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''What would we do if the nomination process exceeds the time-limit?'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | Before stating the possible scenarios and how to deal with them, I suggest on making some general rules first on ''expired'' nominations (nominations that exceed the time-limit). I try to make it fair for both parties, staff '''AND''' contributors.
| |
| − | * The nomination countdown starts on the moment a staff member approves the nominations and the nominee's name is written in the [[Team Fortress Wiki:Wiki Cap/Nominations#Nominee Vote Queue|queue table]].
| |
| − | * If a nomination expired '''for the first time''', then the whole nomination is then aborted with the option for the nominee to be self-nominated {{tooltip|three|it could the day after? two days?}} days prior the cancellation.
| |
| − | * If the '''same nominee''' decides to be renominated and the nomination process expires for the '''second time''', then whatever result left from the staff in the queue table will be '''FINAL'''.
| |
| − | ** The Cap will granted if the nominee has the majority of votes:
| |
| − | *** This means, if the nomination expires and the results were 1/0, then the nominee will be '''granted''' the cap.
| |
| − | *** Consequently, if the nomination expires and the results were either 0/0 or 0/1, then the cap '''will not''' be granted.
| |
| − | -->
| |
