Has anyone ever studied how Natter actually gets named?
Anya ,'Showtime'
Bureaucracy 3: Oh, so now you want to be part of the SOLUTION?
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
Other than the Brookings Institute? No.
Has anyone ever studied how Natter actually gets named?
Not that I know of, but academics would have a field day with us.
That wasn't an attack. It was an honest question. The answer might be "Bullshit Consensus" or "Frack it, I'm picking one, because it is urgent."
I think I'm asking what "Bullshit Consensus" means. The notion seems important.
Gus, first, apologies for being smart-alecky. No attack presumed.
I think bullshit consensus just kind of spontaneously happens in a "you know it when you see it" kind of way. I'm not sure you can quantify it because, if you have a poll, the consensus is formal and no longer bullshit.
I'm not sure you can quantify it because, if you have a poll, the consensus is formal and no longer bullshit.
Schrodinger's Bullshit!
What Fred said, but in some cases, I'm pretty sure at times the stompies have gone with whatever they interpreted as bullshit consensus, and not necessarily the "true" bullshit consensus.
I think that there was discussion about that at one point, and how if the new name caused an uproar because it wasn't the real choice, it could be changed easily enough.
Anyway, have at it - to paraphrase Cindy, this bullshit isn't going to consense itself.
I urge Harry G. Frankfurt's excellent (and short) book On Bullshit as essential reading for all of you. In fact, it should be mandatory reading for anyone dealing with decision-making. My blog entry: [link]
and not necessarily the "true" bullshit consensus.
Faux bullshit?
Natter 35: Schrodinger's faux-bullshit consensus.