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
We will have an updated FAQ for review by the community next week.
Indeed. I was asking the question as part of updating FAQ-y materials.
We have "we seen it in the US but noplace else, please discuss with whitefont," situations, and their converse, "we seen it everywhere else but the US, please discuss with whitefont."
The latter occurrs regularly in Natter, which is not NAFDA. It occurred (without anybody objecting) in Boxed Set in the autumn. Previous to that, it occurred sporadically and with much confusion and wrangling in the various Firefly threads, as 3 episodes were broadcast in Britain that the US had to wait for. It was the Firefly situation that first alerted me to the idea that geographic whitefonting could happen inside-out, because I am a big ole US-centric slob that way.
In sum, Boxed Set seems to function OK with geographic whitefonting for shows on a schedule different from the US. I don't think anybody has raised a stink about it recently, so I don't know of a reason to change Boxed Set over to a NAFDA designation. I was just feeling clueless, and had to ask.
We will have an updated FAQ for review by the community next week.
Do you FAQ ladies have an idea on how the community will go about reviewing it? Is it too early to discuss how to keep the new FAQ from getting mired in a community-wide editorial process?
We will smite all objections with our amazingly accurate and mellifluous prose?
Actually we were thinking of pulling off a military coup, but msbelle insisted that the assault weapons be painted pink.
ita, whenever you have time/feel like it, would you be willing to run the posting stats, at least for Natter and Bitches? I'm curious about a couple things, including how the new job has changed (or not changed) my posting.
Which specific Natter and Bitches thread? I can warn you--the chances of me amalgamating the results from various threads into one are more than slim.
LazEEE.
Do you FAQ ladies have an idea on how the community will go about reviewing it? Is it too early to discuss how to keep the new FAQ from getting mired in a community-wide editorial process?
Very good questions. We have discussed how to present it, but I'd like to hear from others. Basically we have the new FAQ, and then we have the old FAQ with all the edits tracked. I am happy to share both documents with the community, but I am not really excited about the process of a community-wide edit party. Those of us who work on this did so because it was discussed as something some people saw as needing to happen and we did not select each other, we worked with all who expressed a willingness to be involved.
That is not to say that therfore our decisions wrt the FAQ MUST be accepted by the community, but perhaps just a up/down vote on accepting it or keeping the old one? I'd be willing to make that proposal next week. Open up Lightbulbs and take the alotted time to hear suggestions - changes could be made just like to any proposal - and then the community could vote.
msbelle, how about opening it up for
factual
corrections only? Then you take those notes, perform any rewriting necessary and go with it. No style edits, no nothing, and once the first round of feedback is in you and the team have final say.
I think I understand msbelle to be saying we treat the FAQ like a proposal, talk about it for four days and let the proposers make the changes they wish, and then an up-or-down vote? This makes sense to me, though the FAQ ladies may wish to decide amongst themselves whether they want to take on the task of editing it in accordance with hundreds of posts of suggestions.
msbelle, how about opening it up for factual corrections only? Then you take those notes, perform any rewriting necessary and go with it. No style edits, no nothing, and once the first round of feedback is in you and the team have final say.
This sounds sensible. Do we even need to vote it? Can't we just put it up, and if there are errors, note them for correction?
