Club Penguin Wiki:Vote Page

The Wiki's Vote Page is made to hold all kinds of votes.

When a vote is held, you will be allowed to sign your username, using four tildes ~

Each vote will be published in this way:

 (0)

 * Suggested by and confirmed by

Comments
Nominee Notice: After being nominated, you can enter reasons on why you should be nominated next to the "nomination sentence". A vote closes when 14 days is up. The vote difference is calculated by the number of votes "for" subtracted by the number "against". The user option with the most vote differences wins.

Voter Notice: You must vote in either "For" or "Against". If you vote in for, you have to sign underneath the "For" heading. To do this you have to type this in:

#~

After you have signed it, you must change the number in the brackets up by 1. (e.g. if it was at 3, it means 3 people have already signed it. Change it to 4 when you sign it.) This is also the same with the number by their name. If you vote for, you must also increase the number beside his or her name by 1.

Please remember to use "#" instead of the usual "*", because it numbers the votes making it easier to count them.

You can also remove your vote. If in any case you change your mind, do not remove your vote completely, just strike it out and move it to the back of the list.

Please discuss with an administrator before creating a new vote!

- Please create votes under this line:

Impose an emote limit (-1)
Suggested by CustardTheWikiBird and confirmed by Dps04.

Hi there! So today I'd like to suggest imposing an emote limit into the chat policy, now hear me out! Essentially, on the 3rd of July, 2016, an admin said there is no official emote limit, and people can decide how many they'd like to use, which does sound a lot more free, yes, but this resulted in the chat getting EXTREMELY flooded by non-stop emotes throughout most of the night (GMT). My suggestion is to add a limit to the chat policy, not a small limit like 6, as that's a little too small, but perhaps something like 9 or 10 emotes as the limit? So as to stop this excessive flood which breaks up conversations. Thanks for reading!

For (5)

 * 1) Surprised Emoticon.png You know it is CustardTheWikiBird Clothing Icons 5429.png 13:26, July 4, 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) RafaelMoutaCP 14:28, July 4, 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) Ghhhooossst (talk) 13:38, July 4, 2016 (UTC)
 * 4) Techman129 (talk) 19:18, July 4, 2016 (UTC)
 * 5) –Watatsuki sutra scroll Watatsuki sig.png 02:25, July 5, 2016 (UTC)

Against (6)

 * 1) Ifellfromgel   TalkBlogContributionsEditcount
 * 2) The island is mine! MINE!  09:58, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) Llove Kuwait (talk) 15:35, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * 4) Jenna Darabond x (talk) 15:41, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Llove Kuwait (talk) 15:35, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) Jenna Darabond x (talk) 15:41, July 5, 2016 (UTC)

Comments

 * The current rule has worked well.. if it ain't broke, why fix it?
 * No problems at all. –Watatsuki sutra scroll Watatsuki sig.png 21:07, July 4, 2016 (UTC)
 * That's obviously spam and the people doing it know this. They just twisted my words.
 * Of course it is, Apj, but since your words can be freely interpreted, they can get away with it, which is why an emote limit would work better. Surprised Emoticon.png You know it is CustardTheWikiBird Clothing Icons 5429.png 14:33, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * Common sense.
 * "I want to spam, but mods say people shouldnt be posting excessive emotes. This sucks, why cant I spam? I should try and increase the limit. Wait, there is no actual defined limit? Sweet, this can be abused. I have back-up, since an admin told me I could, but I will loophole the heck out of the words I was told, so I can spam all I want. Nothing can stop me.

When you have no defined system, people are going to bend it to their whim. Trust systems really do not work for things like this. If you say "you can post as many emotes as you consider to not be spam", people are going to abuse this. What the heck would you expect? This simply does not work. I see no problem with the accepted six, which people followed. Fair amount, in my opinion. Suddenly someone goes against this and the next day we have people getting off scot-free with posting 70 emotes in the span of three lines. Whats next? Are we going to be letting people say whatever they want, as long as they dont consider it inappropriate? Sure, just let everyone swear, its fine, because they say they dont consider it to be bad. When you let any individual define the general limits, they abuse it, which is exactly what has transpired.

If I saw people using something like this responsibly, I would imagine it could be good. But from what have I seen in the mere day this "define your own spam limit" has been in place, it has not worked at all.

By the way, I like how two of the people who excessively spammed today are voting against. Nice. I thought "common sense" would be not spamming in this case? –Watatsuki 02:25, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * It seemed to work before people twisted my words
 * But it isn't now, evidently. Surprised Emoticon.png You know it is CustardTheWikiBird Clothing Icons 5429.png 15:44, July 5, 2016 (UTC)

Penguin-Pal  (talk)  17:25, July 5, 2016 (UTC) P.S. with a rule like that, how could we possible summon the whole gang? http://images.wikia.com/central/images/7/70/Dolantongue.gif http://images.wikia.com/tehuncledolanshow/images/thumb/8/8c/Dafty.png/19px-Dafty.png    http://images.wikia.com/theuncledolanshow/images/thumb/c/cb/Gooby.png/19px-Gooby.png http://images.wikia.com/tehuncledolanshow/images/thumb/7/7f/PRUTO.jpg/19px-PRUTO.jpg Also, not to mention, whenever Watutsuku posts a message without any emoticons, there's always a hinted lenny hiding behind the wall Penguin-Pal  (talk)  17:36, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if we are technically allowing floods and people would still use them while writing messages so I don't think that will be necessary. The island is mine! MINE! 09:58, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * How is it allowing floods if floods are still against the rules? If people use floods to try and get around the limit, that's still breaking the rules as they're flooding, so they'd still get in trouble. Surprised Emoticon.png You know it is CustardTheWikiBird Clothing Icons 5429.png 15:39, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the emoticons without the proposed policy and since flooding is against the rules, I don't think that is needed. The island is mine! MINE! 15:56, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * The limit is just going to cause people to go one under the limit and that is going to be annoying and when we tell them to stop they'll just say it's not against the rules.
 * But they'd be right in that statement, if they go one under the limit they're not breaking the rules. OVER the limit would be the problem. And would you rather that or people keep lagging out the chat with spam in such excess as there was yesterday? Surprised Emoticon.png You know it is CustardTheWikiBird Clothing Icons 5429.png 15:36, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * Let Jeserator decide he is king of this kingdom Jenna Darabond x (talk) 15:37, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * People will abuse the limit.
 * As much as people abuse the lack of one? And if they do abuse it, so? We just tell them off, it's just an additional rule to enforce. Surprised Emoticon.png You know it is CustardTheWikiBird Clothing Icons 5429.png 15:44, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * If a chatmod needs special assistance determining if 100 emoticons of cats are spam, maybe he shouldn't have been elected from the first place (orite admin from 2012 when people were still promoted for "being worthy" [[File:MediaWiki Emoticons - Dolan.png]]). Frankly, we might have been so addicted to cellphones (from which we can also minimod) that we forgot how to ask users to calm down with the emoticon usage when it's getting somewhat too much.
 * But the point is, when chat mods or admins try to punish users who spam them, they just say that Apj said it's okay and argue with us about it, kicking up a massive fuss. Also, does it not make more sense to have a rule against emote spam in our chat policy so new users can see it? Otherwise, new users could spam emotes, we'd kick them, and they'd say "But it's not in the policy!". Surprised Emoticon.png You know it is CustardTheWikiBird Clothing Icons 5429.png 17:28, July 5, 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, the human brain works a lot based on ratios. What we consider "a lot" and "too few" depends on the context: suppose you post 10 emoticons in a row, is this spam? Probably is, but what if you were to post the same amount of emoticons in a 1000-character message? Suddenly life seems short m8 :P jk, but just trying to say that although posting a lot of emoticons can sometimes be a form of flooding, a fixed number isn't exactly a realistic solution here.