ita, there won't ever be a next time.

Thanks Wolfram. I really do hope most people got what they wanted.

Without sounding self-serving (since I was pretty adamant about what I wanted) I think the will of the buffistas was accurately reflected.

makes room in the post-proposer support group for le nubian

le nubian - you've got nothing to apologize for, far as I see it. It was clear to me that you tried to accomodate/synthesize everyone's suggestions, and goodness knows you were patient. So. Good for you, I say.

le nubian, let me add my voice to the assurers, since I launched this round of discussion. You did a great job with a difficult project, and accommodated everyone as well as could be done. In the end, the result was approved by the process and was promptly implemented. In every way I can see, yours was a successful proposal and implementation. My apologies for what was definitely just my confusion, adding to the volume. We appreciate the service you did for the community, specifically for people with interests beyond just your own. So, my apologies, and my thanks.

If people got what they wanted, that's good for me. Onward! :-)

Thanks all.

Jon, at least add new pictures. I know there are newer Buffistas who aren't on there, and people who aren't around anymore who are.

I was thinking about redesign possibilities, but wasn't really in love with anything I'd come up with.

So, whatever you're comfortable with.

le nubian, I am sorry. I want to add my voice to the You-Did-A-Great-Job chorus. I know that was a pain-in-the-ass ballot, and I know all you really wanted in the first place was to get the white font out of Spoilers 3, and in trying to help the lighter spoiler-seekers in the process, you ended up with a really complex ballot issue riding on your coattails.

Now I've managed to offend you, when I was trying to get people who skipped, to back off of your ballot--a ballot which worked despite my worries before the fact, and their worries after the fact.

Again, I am sorry.

well if you had issues with it, I would have liked to hear it. Hearing about it after that fact doesn't do much good.

All right, what I am going to say now, isn't the point of this post. I am addressing this point of yours, so that you don't think I was biting my tongue in order to later snark about your hard efforts (and I know you worked hard on this), I did present them to you: Topic!Cindy "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Nov 2, 2004 11:17:03 am PST;
Topic!Cindy "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Nov 3, 2004 4:37:48 am PST.
Deena made a similar point here: Deena "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Nov 2, 2004 9:06:06 pm PST.

You made it clear you were aware of these concerns, and said if the results were problematic, we'd deal with it another week. I would have preferred to deal with it all at once, but couldn't think of a valid reason why you shouldn't do it your way. I wasn't going to argue you down. I told you my concerns, and let it go. As we've worked the process since it was implemented, we've found that airing concerns, and then allowing the proposer to do it her own way, is what works best. I mentioned the concerns here in response to DX, only because this became a discussion about process, not as some sour grapes thing.

(I only had a personal interest in the hardcore thread, anyhow.)

I hope there are no hard feelings.

It seems clear that the majority got what they wanted, and that's the only post mortem criterion worth considering.

The lightbulb process worked well with a complex issue I say. Buffista democratic process rocks.

Buffista democratic process rocks.

Seconding Laura.