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]

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

Why?

To avoid endless numbers of [formal discussions and] votes on trivia.

[]=edit.

I think requiring ten will just lead to a lot of headache-inducing campaigning. Three is fine by me, since it would seem to circumvent the "We have to vote on everything anyone posts!" possibility.

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

I like the minimum being 2 or 3, just so we don't REALLY have to vote and discuss the "Connor is HOTT" thread. Especially if we can only tackle one issue at a time (so one issue per week). It is going to take forever to get the list I made from WX voted on.

Or what LJ said!

(also, thanks for posting the issues again).

How about five (which was actually someones proposal) as a compromise.