Oh, there's no voting in my suggestion, believe me.
Spike: Taking up smoking, are you? Harmony: I am a villain, Spike. Hello!
Spike/Harm ,'Help'
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
§ ita § - Jan 27, 2006 7:19:27 am PST #6286 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
msbelle - Jan 27, 2006 7:19:49 am PST #6287 of 10001
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
Here's the thing. I am pretty damn sure that if people have problems, they are gonna have problems with things being removed and/or tone - not facts.
§ ita § - Jan 27, 2006 7:21:20 am PST #6288 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I am pretty damn sure that if people have problems, they are gonna have problems with things being removed and/or tone - not facts
Less work for you, then.
Topic!Cindy - Jan 27, 2006 7:25:31 am PST #6289 of 10001
What is even happening?
Oh, there's no voting in my suggestion, believe me.
Sorry. That was actually clear. I just over affirmed.
Wolfram - Jan 27, 2006 7:33:28 am PST #6290 of 10001
Visilurking
I vote for no vote. We don't vote on FAQ edits in general, so why would we vote on a whole bunch of FAQ edits? I just don't see anything constructive coming out of it.
bon bon - Jan 27, 2006 7:34:11 am PST #6291 of 10001
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.
I don't care whether there's a vote or not. I am concerned that everyone will have a comment on something, and then a comment on everyone's comment, and it'll be a zoo for the people who have to edit. Arguing about what is a proper factual representation is what I do for a living, so I'm not sure this is a good limitation. But I don't know how open for argument this FAQ will be.
Allyson - Jan 27, 2006 7:37:47 am PST #6292 of 10001
Wait, is this real-world child support, where the money goes to buy food for the kids, or MRA fantasyland child support where the women just buy Ferraris and cocaine? -Jessica
I propose that since msbelle is doing the work, she gets final say on which edits to accept/reject, because she's all smart and stuff.
If someone gets mental about it, msbelle will make the requested change for $25 a word.
And I get 15% as the agent of this suggestion.
Nutty - Jan 27, 2006 7:38:04 am PST #6293 of 10001
"Mister Spock is on his fanny, sir. Reports heavy damage."
What msbelle said. People won't say, "Oh, you don't know what NATLBSB means!!" People will say, Why did you delete X, Y and Z?"
I imagine it's worthwhile to repost or Nilly the original rationale that got us revising, to provide context, but even so -- we made editorial decisions, and people are gonna disagree with those decisions each in his/her own way. Even if we do an up/down vote on FAQ 2.0, what if it's voted down? Do we start all over again with the revision?
(N.b. I don't think anybody really wants the FAQ to stay as it is now; it's needed an update/streamline for a long time.)
Jesse - Jan 27, 2006 7:41:04 am PST #6294 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
I am concerned that everyone will have a comment on something, and then a comment on everyone's comment, and it'll be a zoo for the people who have to edit.
Yeah, this is my concern. For every change, there will be five suggestions of how it really should have been changed.
DebetEsse - Jan 27, 2006 7:41:06 am PST #6295 of 10001
Woe to the fucking wicked.
For the FAQ, I'd prefer to go with a consensus, rather than a vote, just for precedent's sake.