Board Thread:Administrator's Forum/@comment-143604-20130419212451/@comment-26074921-20130617183929

Alright I forgot aboutn this. My two cents:


 * Option 1- . I do consider the experts opinion to be part of the battle itself and is optional. I do not feel that we should just add them to other's battles, in the same way we don't let people correct other authors misspellings, grammar, or the stuff Hawk does. I do however see the merit to Drayco's argument, Expert opinions do improve the quality of the wiki as a versus debate wiki, which is why I prefer option 2


 * Options 2-. Because I agree that expert opinions are better to have than without, but still part of the battle I support this plan. It allows the addition of an expert's opinion while still maintaining the auhtor's creative right over their own battle.
 * In the Case of an author who is absent from the wiki
 * I personally feel that in the case of an absent author or those who are banned, the experts opinions of their battles could be added if they are lacking solely if the editor in question leaves a message on their talk page stating the battle(s) that had experts opinions added. In fact, creating a template (and adding it to the wiki's editing menu for source) would go along way to make that easier


 * Option 3- I both agree with Las and Leo here, but I'll leave it neutral unless this whole deal comes to a tie (pffft)

Changing an existing experts opinion without permission Changing an experts opinion for unfair battles (This deals more with the unfair battle policy but I'm going to make a proposal for a change soon) Kittens
 * Other thoughts that I will not budge in