I like this. And you can go back and edit your position as needed (and in response to other positions).
Ugh. So you'd have to reread the entire thread every day? Can't say I like that idea.
Buffy ,'Get It Done'
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
I like this. And you can go back and edit your position as needed (and in response to other positions).
Ugh. So you'd have to reread the entire thread every day? Can't say I like that idea.
I would say no need to edit and cause rereading of the thread. If you change your mind, then you could delete your previous post and post a new one.
If you change your mind, then you could delete your previous post and post a new one.
Which makes it more redundant with the regular discussion thread. I dunno. I think one thread for discussions and positioning is enough.
I can say that I would never post in a thread that only allowed me to have one position at a time.
Which makes it more redundant with the regular discussion thread. I dunno. I think one thread for discussions and positioning is enough.
I agree.
I think one thread for discussions and positioning is enough.
Agreed. The idea of bureaucracy + Supreme Court + State Your Position + Polling + So Mote it Be at the end kind of makes my head spin.
I think that is too much.
However, I do agree it can be confusing, which is why I was periodically posting a summary of the discussion as I understood it at WX.
I can't always do this, like today I am at work. I do think it is a good formula.
Okay, why can't we require people to vote? Where are the Australians? If you don't vote, you can't post! Or your membership is made inactive!
The Aussie system doesn't involve getting booted off the island. Anyone who didn't vote would have to put a dollar in the pot, which would certainly help with site funding. However, it would also leave voting optional for anyone claiming a religious exemption, of anyone not resident in Australia, so really it'd just be Angus and John and such that'd be out of pocket.
I can say that I would never post in a thread that only allowed me to have one position at a time.
And this is why we have so much confusion. Get 3 Buffistas in a room and you invariably get 5 opinions. No offense Jesse, but one position at a time would make things clearer.
Edited to add: Doh! Now that you were COMMed I realize you were kidding. But the point is still valid.
And this is why we have so much confusion. Get 3 Buffistas in a room and you invariably get 5 opinions. No offense Jesse, but one position at a time would make things clearer.
For me, the point of discussion is much more for the people discussing to have a chance to see other points of view and thus refine their own than it is for us to all present our opinions to be evaluated by a larger public. Are you envisioning something more like the latter?