Board Thread:Policies/@comment-10473115-20170415164119/@comment-112155-20170417190934

ADour wrote: As for improving the decission-making process, as a bumpy as it was, I believe the Mister/Mr. discussion was ultimately a good start. A matter was brought up to the attention of the community, it was discussed, it was voted with a concise result, and it was implemented as a policy. Everbody acted accordingly for the most part. I don't believe time was wasted when in the end we could move from a norm being decided unilaterally and without and actual guideline to having a written policy established by a consensus. I'm sorry, but it was a clear case of consensus by editing, until you realized you disagreed with it and went on to blame me of trying to impose "my personal preference", when I was merely trying to make the mess of articles have some sort of consistent naming, independently of the editor who created them...

Also, I started trying to fix that long before I had rights for renaming articles, so I wonder how I managed to lure the admins that performed the moves before that into following "my personal preferences".

The fact that it had to spam more than one vote to finally satisfy everyone having the same result over and over again, something that was critizised by more than one person, demonstrates that it was an awful examples of decisión-making.

Hopefully, it will serve in the future to change the multiple flaws that discussion had, and to never repeat them again in the future.