Buffybot ,'Dirty Girls'
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
It seems that few people online at the moment are in favor of that, and that's totally cool. Majority rules. I agree. But I did want to make sure that no one here thinks I am even remotely suggesting that discussion be abridged or restricted.
No, I get what you're saying now. But I still think it's redundant and likely to become frustrating.
Hopefully, the fact that there's a consequent voting process will mean that there won't be a lot of duplicative posts. There doesn't need to be "wrod"s or "I agree" or needless arguing with one person because we're not looking for consensus; it should really just be about persuasion and amplification.
it should really just be about persuasion and amplification.
If this is the case, then is a full week necessary? Or, put differently, what time limit should there be on discussion?
I agree the full week is too much. I understand it's for people who might miss those days, but that only works if that person or more would change the outcome of the vote. It's not like among us we don't usually cover all the bases, so...
THREE DAYS! THREE DAYS! THREE DAYS!
(That's a cheer, not yelling at you nice people.)
And I wouldn't say three business days, either -- three calendar days should do it, if at least one of those days is a week day and one of those days is a weekend day.
Actually, do we really need a hard-and-fast time rule for arguing at the outset? We're not using the thread, as I understand it, to get everyone's consensus, just to present all the positions on the topic and refine it. We might be able to tell when that phase is over.
Well, we'd need to know when to close it? Or, Shawn, are you thinking, whoever proposes it says, "I'm proposing this. I'd like to talk about it for X number of days and then vote" with X being no less than 2 or 3?
Speaker of the house! I'll assign the amount of time spent. I'll be Speaker.
Giddy at the inherent lesson in Civics this could be!
I wanna be the Whip! Whip!
I was thinking more along the lines of a loose guideline of three business days. If the discussion isn't over by then, someone can move in-thread to extend it for a day. Second and thirded motion should do it.
I like the time limit because it means we have to act at some point. Otherwise, we might have one discussion drag on for weeks and weeks and weeks.