Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-4984687-20150326211251/@comment-1251315-20150327115138

The Rim of the Sky wrote: Voting varies per topic. For a consensus of a change or addition, people must give their ideas or improvements rather than just saying that they agree with what OP says. I know. But my point is that voting only allows people to give weak or no reasoning for why they support something. By focusing more on the reasoning, rather than the vote, a better consensus can be reached. Sometimes a vote should happen, but the vote shouldn't be the main factor in deciding consensus: the discussion with users should absolutely be more important imo. There's also the fact that voting has, in the past, created camps of users who hate on each other during the process and also only gives two viewpoints: there is no ability for compromises without starting a whole new discussion.

Consensus for demoting a user is different. Unlike changing something, a consensus against demoting a user will just result in the same thing - demotion or they keep their rights. When you suggest changing something, there are multiple ways it can be done unlike a consensus against a user. The same thing happens with staff or MOTM nominations, in the end it will only end to ways. Voting should only occur where there are only two options. Like I said above, voting only gives two outcomes. In many cases, discussion can create better possibilities, everyone can give their opinion and a better consensus can be reached. Discussion also prevents user camps being generated from votes as well.

Speaking of MOTM, it should stay the same. The end result is the person either becoming or not becoming MOTM. No issue with keeping MOTM the same here.