OK - deleted after x-post with Cindy. I see your point; I just think that in practice they are related. Even if we don't have a Supreme Court thread - we could use seconds to limit discussion in Kafka.

If we are voting on whether to limit discussion (and we are) and voting on whether to have quorum (and we are) then I think seconds should be included. Because - even though they are not redundant in strict logic - in practice they do very similar things.

There are people who support the idea of seconds; they were posting earlier, but not now. I'm wondering if anyone who opposes having seconds on this ballot supports it in general?

But seconding is not stopping Buffista discusison in general. It avoids starting a particular formal process that requires labor on the part of buffistas when there is no chance of something passing.

I actually do think I support it in general. I don't support it on this ballot.

If we don't discuss it on this ballot, what damage have we done?

I'm wondering if anyone who opposes having seconds on this ballot supports it in general?

I'm not sure yet whether I support it in general. Don't support it on the ballot.

Mostly, I just want to start the time-limited discussions.

I'm wondering if anyone who opposes having seconds on this ballot supports it in general?

Me. I think seconds are a good idea. I also think that this ballot is deciding things related to how we decide things, and that seconds belong in a discussion on how we propose things.

All right. The "it should be on this ballot" is pretty much a minority of one. I'm not sorry I tried, but I won't take any more of your time on the issue.

And I'm not sorry you brought it up. That's what these discussions are for!

I'm just moved to say that I've read two hundred posts and didn't understand any one of them, 'cause I'm still sick, but I trust and will adhere to whatever ends up getting done.

God, I never thought I'd hear myself say that.