Proposal:05 - Proposition on the usage of a Discord bot

Proposal Details

Proposer: Ampera

Initial proposal date: Feb 5th, 2023

Last update: Feb 5th, 2023

Date of Proposal: 13:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Date of Conclusion: 16:07, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Status: Passed (Option C)

Preamble

This proposal is intended to be a small vote regarding the implementation of a Discord bot for use on the OpenWiki Project Discord server.

In the future, if any of these options shall become unsatisfactory, a subsequent proposal can always be created to change the decision.

S1. Options

A. Implement Carl bot

B. Implement Dyno bot

C. Implement no bot, instead opting to allow a custom made bot, whenever it may or may not happen

S2. New Proposal Type

1. This proposal introduces a novel proposal type, a multi-choice proposal. Successful approval of any of the options shall count as an approval for adoption of this new proposal type.
2. Multi-choice proposals must present lettered options, and reflect those options in the voting section
3. Multi-choice proposals must specify if multiple choices may pass
4. If multiple choices may not pass, then the first choice which gains a majority shall pass. In the event of a tie, then the proposal shall not pass until individuals rescind their votes to bring a single option into majority
5. When a proposal passes, the status should be updated to reflect which options have passed.

Voting

This proposal requires a simple majority for a single option in order to pass.

Votes in favor of option A

1. As the one that I'm more used to. (WiKirby) PinkYoshiFan (talk) 19:40, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
2. As the one that I'm more used to. (MiiWiki) PinkYoshiFan (talk) 19:40, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Votes in favor of option B

1. "oh, then dyno, because i'm most familiar with that one, but i'm also content with no bot or a custom bot" Cheepy (talk) 16:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC) Relayed by Ampera (talk) 16:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Votes in favor of option C

1. A third party bot may present both social/political disagreement, as well as potential security risks to the server. I do not believe the utility presented by these bots are essential, and would rather implement whatever functionality personally through an in-house option. Ampera (talk) 12:59, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
2. No point. PikaSamus (talk) 17:54, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
3. A custom bot is preferable, though I am not necessarily opposed to a third-party bot as a stopgap prior to the creation of a custom one. Thecornerman (talk) 20:53, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
4. No need at this time. Soveia (talk) 01:28, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
5. Since the option of a custom bot is here, I will just vote in favor of this. I would not be completely opposed to having a third-party one at first until we have a custom one ready, however. Gigi (talk) 14:37, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
6. Would prefer a custom Discord bot. Bro3256 (talk • contributions) 14:52, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
7. I'm in favor of a custom bot. Sure. -- PanchamBro (talk • contributions) 15:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
8. "oh, then dyno, because i'm most familiar with that one, but i'm also content with no bot or a custom bot" Cheepy (talk) 16:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC) Relayed by Ampera (talk) 16:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)