Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2007-09/Assume good faith

Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2007-09/Assume good faith. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2007-09/Assume good faith, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2007-09/Assume good faith in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2007-09/Assume good faith you have here. The definition of the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2007-09/Assume good faith will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofWiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2007-09/Assume good faith, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.

Do we have to vote on everything?

This is becoming bureaucracy for bureaucracy's sake, in my opinion. "Assume good faith" does not need to be branded some "official" policy. What does that even change? The essay represents not a law, but a principle we value, and advice for following its philosophy. If it is just confirmation that the current version has agreement that you are seeking, well, that can be done with the normal consensus editing. Dmcdevit·t 06:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

No we don't have to vote on everything. If there are no objections why don't you go ahead and replace the banner that says DRAFT PROPOSAL with {{policy}}? Maybe I'm just not bold enough, but I'm not sure how you could check if there were any objections without running a vote. DAVilla 12:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
Er, that's not what I said at all. Dmcdevit·t 19:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply