That moment you just came back on the wiki and you saw two proposals that failed that I missed giving my own input on.
#1: Votes shouldn't require a reason accompanying them, and I think it's a nice little QoL touch that would save hassle of requiring to type a rather meaningless two letter phrase to reinforce why you're agreeing with the side you're agreeing with. Blank votes are pretty much a stealth per all, and they hold the same power as a 1000 word essay. Having users "bandwagon" on a side isn't an obvious thing to detect in the first place, and it hasn't ever been a problem: if one side has a succinct reason, people will more likely to vote for that side (and as if "per all" isn't already used as a loophole of the reason to "bandwagon" votes into one side if a group of people really want to do it; you can't read minds of other people. I agree that typing "per all" is easy, so if people want to bandwagon, they will type the magical two letter phrase to do so...and admittedly, that's something I actually did in the past, just typed "Per all" because one side was extremely popular and I didn't take the time to read all points being made). Again, we're assuming bad faith in users, and that's something we shouldn't do in the wiki.
#2: The main reason signatures were banned in voting was because some signatures broke the # parameter and flubbed up counting votes, not because they took up too much space. I still think it does look cleaner if we used the {{user|Derpmachine}} template for voting though.
#1: Votes shouldn't require a reason accompanying them, and I think it's a nice little QoL touch that would save hassle of requiring to type a rather meaningless two letter phrase to reinforce why you're agreeing with the side you're agreeing with. Blank votes are pretty much a stealth per all, and they hold the same power as a 1000 word essay. Having users "bandwagon" on a side isn't an obvious thing to detect in the first place, and it hasn't ever been a problem: if one side has a succinct reason, people will more likely to vote for that side (and as if "per all" isn't already used as a loophole of the reason to "bandwagon" votes into one side if a group of people really want to do it; you can't read minds of other people. I agree that typing "per all" is easy, so if people want to bandwagon, they will type the magical two letter phrase to do so...and admittedly, that's something I actually did in the past, just typed "Per all" because one side was extremely popular and I didn't take the time to read all points being made). Again, we're assuming bad faith in users, and that's something we shouldn't do in the wiki.
#2: The main reason signatures were banned in voting was because some signatures broke the # parameter and flubbed up counting votes, not because they took up too much space. I still think it does look cleaner if we used the {{user|Derpmachine}} template for voting though.
