Certifiable but currently unneeded primitives

Certifiable but currently unneeded primitives
Recently I've noticed that Chris has begun to hold certifiable but currently unneeded primitives (for example this one). To me, this seems like a bad idea.

According to our reference, we define a held part as:
Reference Page Wrote:Hold (No) - It's getting there, but not yet.
There are errors to be corrected before the part can be released. The author has to take care of the errors.

These parts clearly do no fall under this category. Now, I understand the sentiment of wanting to sort these parts so you don't have to look over them again and again, only to realize you don't need to deal with them/certify them now. However, by putting them on hold, your only shifting this nuisance to part authors/fixers. Imagine the part author who checks his submitted parts list to see he has a held part, but when he goes to see what's wrong and fix it, finds there is, in fact, nothing wrong with it. Furthermore, imagine someone who likes to fix up parts perusing the held parts list looking for a part to fix up, constantly clicking on parts that don't need to be fixed. It'll be both annoying and off-putting to them as well.

Therefore, I'd like to suggest creating a new category for parts like this (beyond our current "certified", "needs admin review", "needs more votes", "has uncertified subfiles", and "held" categories). You could call them "Certified but unneeded" (or something along those lines) and give it a seperate color (may I suggest blue?). This way, the parts are seperated out so both you and others can skip over them instead of having them always being in the way, and they won't be a nuisance for anybody any more.
I'm theJude! So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, his Judeness, or uh, Juder, or el Juderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »

Messages In This Thread
Certifiable but currently unneeded primitives - by Jude Parrill - 2013-12-29, 5:07

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)