I looked. I failed. I think I'm looking for the mythical document that hasn't yet been completed.

aurelia, I went on the same quest, and couldn't find it, yesterday. We're tilting at cheesebutts.

Would it at all help if I simplified it to "Require some proof (standard to be determined during discussion) that a show discussion has legs beyond its first season before allowing it to be granted a thread of its own."

I see you've withdrawn, but so you don't lie awake nights, wondering...it wouldn't have helped me accept or support it, Sean. It's still adding on yet some more process--which is the source of my objection. I understand that's the point--to slow us down, but maybe we have slowed, anyhow. A lot of shows got some support in Lyra's pre-proposal poll last year. The one that's the focus of the current discussion in Lightbulb was tied for second or third with a handful of them. It's the only one that's come up, since. It's the only one for which I've noticed the interest, viewership, and devotion grow, and read the kind of comments I do read about it.

We're asking about what happens when two proposal are being proposed at once? I don't think it's being referenced in Nutty's page.

As far as I could tell (looking back on dates of votes from "Press"), no proposal-and-vote was entangled with another. There were a few with quite close dates (May 5 2003 to May 13, and right afterwards May 16 to May 22).

As far as I could tell from skimming the bureaucracy thread at the time (um, there's a lot of it - the first 25% of the second Bureaucracy thread. There's too much for me to link), when there were a few proposals on the virtual table, we took them in order, each waiting until the end of the voting for the former one (at least) before raising them again or re-opening Lightbulb for them.

So this is what I suggest, as well. Finish with this current proposal (discussion started Thursday, so voting should start Monday, right? and end until the coming Thursday?), and then if Sean still wants to make his proposal, take it from there.

Nilly, that link for Nutty's page is strange. The url shows as www.buffistas.org when I point at it, but when I click on it, it takes me to a blank page, with "about:blank" in the address bar. I don't know if it is an HTML issue, or if something is wrong on my end, though.

Cindy, I rewrote the link.

If it doesn't work, it's www.buffistas.org/faq/Cheesebutt.html

And here's a summary of the voting procedure: [link] It starts with "no other proposal on the table," but I didn't look to see how/when that was established.

I suggest that Sean re-proposes after the VM thread vote is done.

Thank you, Nilly. I even did a google search for Buffista cheesebutt, but it was fruitless (or cheeseless).

Insent to you and Jon B. at your profile addresses.

I expect to be without Internet access during voting, so I'd like to submit an absentee ballot for the VM thread, and my preference is indicated in the email. As I note in the email, if people feel this goes against our principles for voting, then please disregard it. My one vote on this issue is not worth a prolonged discussion.

So the cheesebutt page is not actually linked from the FAQ, right? I looked again and didn't find it. (I now have it bookmarked, but that's not the point).

Looks like we're going to need a name for Natter 38 pretty soon.

Natter .38 Special?

Given that there's an execution going on, I'm game for the .38 special.