Board Thread:Administrator's Noticeboard/@comment-7697305-20150120234008/@comment-7697305-20150211220922

652Graystripe wrote: Up above, you indicated it would be possible to have the guide to rights on the unified nomination page. That seems to have changed with the addition of what you said in the expandable. Am I understanding right? Are you talking about this statement?: Oscuritaforze wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like Silver wanted to have the improvements he mentioned implemented into the system, and believed that these improvements could only be implemented in the current system. As such, I interpreted this part of his reply to my most recent post: SilverHexxitFights wrote: If we end up incorporating the "new" system, I would like the improvements (descriptions of each right placed on its page) to be incorporated into that system. ...to mean that he would be more or less fine with the new system in light of the fact that the changes he proposed would be able to be incorporated into it. Again, correct me if I'm wrong. If so, then I was actually talking about the compromise of transcluding rights summaries on the nominations page. However, on reading through the rest of the thread, I think I might have misinterpreted Silver's statements after I proposed said compromise.

Specifically, when he said this: SilverHexxitFights wrote: I am advocating for the current system, as well as the improvements. If we end up incorporating the "new" system, I would like the improvements (descriptions of each right placed on its page) to be incorporated into that system. ...I interpreted that to mean he would be fine with the compromise. In retrospect, it's pretty obvious that he was not saying that. I don't really know how I came to the conclusion I did, and I am sorry for any confusion that came about as a result.

Long story short, I never held the opinion that it would be viable to have the full rights descriptions on the nominations page.