User:Dank/RFCs

I've worked as a closer on some of the messier Requests for Comment, including proposals concerning enabling hovercards by default, RFA reform (December 2015), non-admin closures of deletion discussions, Pending Changes Level 2 (2014), Conflict of interest limit (and related RfCs on COI), and Requests for Adminship (2013).

My statement in the Media Viewer RfC Arbcom case

My recommendations for contentious, multi-year RfCs:

• Encourage everyone to say more than they would say in a typical RfC. People tend to talk in terms of solutions ... but if you prompt them for more, they'll tell you something about what they see as the problems, and that's the information people need to negotiate something that has a chance of working for everyone.
• Instead of letting a few people determine what everyone is going to vote on, allow votes on whatever questions gain traction, either through a pre-RfC to decide the questions, or at the end of an RfC, to set up the next RfC.
• Allow lots of time. Tough issues often take multiple RfCs, because initially people will be focused on different aspects of the problem, and it's hard to find any consensus when people insist on viewing the problem in different ways. Try to get consensus on one question at a time; after people see that they've definitely won (or lost) on the question that concerns them most, some of them will be willing to shift their attention to whatever question comes next.
• If several rounds of discussion haven't produced anything, try tackling problems in smaller groups first, such as wikiprojects.