The bulk update request #1354 is active.

create alias brain_drain (0) -> intelligence_loss (1781)
create implication himbofication (198) -> intelligence_loss (1781)
create implication bimbofication (2183) -> intelligence_loss (1781)

Reason: brain drain is being used interchangeably with intelligence loss

EDIT: The bulk update request #1354 (forum #317113) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

Bimbofication doesn't always include a mental aspect as seen in both how the wiki is describing it and in posts such as this

Even if the process includes mind_control how would you know it's intelligence_loss from TWYS?

The bulk update request #1430 is active.

remove implication himbofication (198) -> intelligence_loss (1781)
remove implication bimbofication (2183) -> intelligence_loss (1781)

Reason:

EDIT: The bulk update request #1430 (forum #318336) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #1430 (forum #318336) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

What exactly did just happen here? First one implication is approved despite having two votes and no comments and then the reverse is done as soon as suggested, again without any discussion?

supina said:
What exactly did just happen here? First one implication is approved despite having two votes and no comments and then the reverse is done as soon as suggested, again without any discussion?

Votes and discussion are more of guidelines to help an admin decide what course of action to take. The implication could have twenty thumbs-ups, twenty thumbs-down, or none at all yet still be declined or accepted if the admin thinks it's best. Having a discussion is a good idea, but if nobody's going to discuss it and give the admin insight on its feasibility or not, there isn't much an admin can do but use their own judgment. An admin isn't locked into going with votes or discussion, although they'll take them into consideration if there's any offered.

clawstripe said:
Votes and discussion are more of guidelines to help an admin decide what course of action to take. The implication could have twenty thumbs-ups, twenty thumbs-down, or none at all yet still be declined or accepted if the admin thinks it's best. Having a discussion is a good idea, but if nobody's going to discuss it and give the admin insight on its feasibility or not, there isn't much an admin can do but use their own judgment. An admin isn't locked into going with votes or discussion, although they'll take them into consideration if there's any offered.

Meanwhile the difficulty of undoing the results of a bad alias/implication is also being used as an argument against making the votes matter. I feel there is a hole in the logic here somewhere.

supina said:
Meanwhile the difficulty of undoing the results of a bad alias/implication is also being used as an argument against making the votes matter. I feel there is a hole in the logic here somewhere.

Against making it automatic based on votes, not on having any influence at all. The admins ultimately run the site, but that doesn't mean they don't take into consideration how users feel on certain things. An alias/implication request that the admins don't have a strong opinion on can be swayed either way by the votes and reasonings, while a request that the admins definitely want or don't want will have the votes ignored, and any number of steps in between.