It is granted, unilateral decisions have to made by a BMORG technocrat whenever he or she is 'knee-deep' in developing a particular 'progress'. There's simply not enough availability or expediency to gather a consensus at every fork of a decision making processes when trying to fulfill a particular module of effort.
However, there does exist in the weeks or days or even minutes following such a unilateral decision, the opportunity to examine if whether or not that decision is congruent with the group consensus. Congruent? No bother. But on the instances where the technocracy makes a unilateral decision that is not congruent with the consensus, then it may be an indication of a poor decision, even if the consensus can never be accurately 'polled': In the name of progress, such a decision can be reversed and a change of path can be afforded.
Here is the particular matter of concern-
In ePlaya Feedback -> Bug Reports -> Timed Edit Mod Feedback:
spanky wrote:To clarify: ... The policy discussion forum is not editable. ... (05Apr17)
The consensus that has been brought up in the last few weeks is that we want an Edit button, reassured by agreement that an Edit button would be re-instated, albeit an Edit button with a time-limit, and made doubly self-evident by the fact that we are now testing an Edit button module. To make the Policy Discussion forum ineligible for the Edit button, but all the while making the Edit button available to the Drunk thread, doesn't make a whole lot of sense! And it certainly is not congruent with consensus. The unilateral proclamation that the Policy Discussion forum simply will not host an Edit button is, at face value, an act of laziness against fulfilling the mandate of the consensus.
The 'Timed Edit Mod Feedback' thread seems more of a place to write test-posts. The 'Edit Discussion' thread is the established thread for discussion of the Edit button. We should discuss this here- What is the rationale behind no-Edit button within Policy Discussion? Why should our ability to restore dropped words and fix typos be denied, especially in an area where writing requires a lot more nuance in carrying across complex ideas when examining board policy? Let's discuss this.