I don't see a problem with starting up a new discussion, if warranted, immediately after the (4 days?) elapse on a current discussion.

Well, if the other 799 people on the board don't care enough about the proposal to vote "no" then the one person should get what they want.

Well, yes. BUT, won't that lead to discssion and voting threads for everything someone brings up in bureacracy?

P.S. Australians have to vote?!

In Federal and State elections, yes. There are exemptions for religious reasons, for instance, and it's not compulsory for people resident outside the country at the time. If you don't vote without cause then you pay a fine (about $50, last I checked, but that was a while ago).

Of course, if you really don't like any of the candidates, you can turn up and enter an invalid ballot (my favourite was a guy who drew a big Anarchy symbol on his paper).

Also, I can volunteer to tally votes as well, so that we can spread it around.

Also, at the end of this discussion are we going to vote on one long proposal or on each part of it?

What's the tie-breaker solution?

That's where the Whip comes in. We just pick some people who are on the fence and I beat them into submission.

Democracy is fun!

On a less S&M slant, I think the 4 + 3 is more than adequate. I also think that to start the process, you need more than one person saying they want something. You need at least one person to suggest it and maybe two others going, "Hey, that's a nifty idea." Otherwise, we'll all be stuck in debate hell for the rest of our lives.

Also, I can volunteer to tally votes as well, so that we can spread it around.

I can do this too.

Dammit, I had this whole long post listing everything we needed to vote on from this discussion, and the computer ate it.

I think the list was:

• Opening a debate/Supreme Court thread dedicated to the discussion of one policy issue at a time.
• Voting via email on all policy/maintenance decisions. (This seems to be pretty much a given, but it is a change, so I left it on the list.)
• Keeping decisions open for four days of discussion then three days of voting, OR three and three, OR one week for each.
• Requiring a certain number of posters (2, 3, OR 10) support an idea before officially opening a discussion
• Requiring a certain number of votes (20 OR 10% of registered users)to make a decision official
• Requiring 60% of voters agree to make a decision final, OR requiring a simple majority, OR requiring a majority for thread creation but 66% for major policy changes.
• Closing decisions for six months OR one year once they're made.

What's the most streamlined way to vote on all of this?

I would agree that proposer words the final proposal for voting.

I still want a minimum number of proposer to get it to the ballot. I don't think ten is so high. And remember, no time limit on getting your ten. It just avoids endless voting.

What if there is more than one choice. For example, it looks like consensus is not popular. but suppose it was. Suppose we had substantial support for majority, super-majority, consensus - so you wanted all three on the ballot? This will happen on an issue eventually. Why not allow choice voting (0nly if a question cannot be subject to yes/no?) If you'll give me rights to a table in the database and a directory on the server, I'll volunteer to create the ballot when any choice voting is needed, and write to queries to tabulate as well. To tabulate we can use the Austrialian system, Borda Count, or (my favorite) instant Cordecet Round Robin. In any case the voting is the same. You rank choices. (And no change is always a choice.)

I still want a minimum number of proposer to get it to the ballot. I don't think ten is so high. And remember, no time limit on getting your ten. It just avoids endless voting.

I tend to agree with Gar. If less than ten are willing to endorse it even being discussed, then I don't see the discussion being overly profitable.

If you'll give me rights to a table in the database and a directory on the server, I'll volunteer to create the ballot when any choice voting is needed, and write to queries to tabulate as well.

A) Polling software is already half working
B) Let's not increase server load if we have a solution that doesn't do it.

I still want a minimum number of proposer to get it to the ballot

Why? [edit: by to the ballot do you mean to the discussion thread? That just puts in a longer wait -- I say let it go straight to discussion with just one person, and it will all get hashed out. or not. but to no detriment of the community]