If we discover that we're voting all the time and it's a hassle, my opinion could change, but until that happens I think sticking to a procedure is the better, more hassle-free way to go.

I totally agree with this when it comes to things like changing procedures or adding new threads.

I haven't seen any indication that any of the other stompies are confused, either.

I'm not one, but I agree with Plei on this. Codifying those duties sounds to me like people want to add/change them. Fair enough, but let's hold off on this issue, because it's sounding like there will be a lot of discussion needed.

Somewhere on WX, from pre-move, I think it's spelled out.

It should, along with stompy contacts, be added to the FAQ. Don't think it should be changed, mind you, but it should be added.

I agree with David, and also Plei re stompies, although I think that should be put aside until we deal with how we make decisions. And then we can make a decision about that. ;)

I agree with Jesse.

(d) what constitutes a quorum and what that number should be (I think it should a percentage of registered users since any hard number may not be relevant if community size fluctuates over time;

Here's my problem with this. Say we established a floor of 10 percent of registered users. Right now, that means about 75-80 votes are needed.

Joss comes by, and suddenly we need 100 votes. We get news about major ME developments, and it's up to 120. Etc.

My understanding is that there's no simple way of determining what you might call "active" users - say, unique posters within the last month? That might be a better number to base things on, but more complicated than it's worth, I suspect.

I've gotta say, I think 50 votes is enough. It's not a large percentage of registered user, but it's a decent percentage of regular posters, and accounts for the fact that a lot of people won't feel strongly enough one way or the other to bother voting.

The trouble, Plei, is not so much that you don't know, but that I (for example) don't know.

I don't know either, really. I have a vague understanding, but I'd like to see them enumerated. But I agree it can wait until we've established how we make decisions.

I think I am being dumb.

What is a quorum and how does it replace the majority stuff?

We could set an absolute minimum, i.e. no swinging majority if only 15 people voted, and then take it from there. I'd be more comfortable the larger the voting body, and the clearer the majority, but we can't tie ourselves in knots and/or require people to vote.

Concur on those who want to set aside the Stompy Formal Job Description till afterward. Just keep it in the backs of our brains, for next week.

Mwah to Jesse, who appreciates the use fo a good $0.50 word.