River ,'Objects In Space'
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
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.
I think the seconds conversation falls most naturally within the discussion of whether to open the discussion thread at all. So not yet.
At any rate, I'm having a hard time imagining a serious discussion request that wouldn't get at least a few nods of approval, so I'm not sure it's that big a deal anyway. If nothing else, there'll be people chiming in saying "I'm not interested, but if so-and-so wants to discuss it, we should."
My one problem with the quorum question is that without specifying a number it's hard to judge what the effect will be. A quorum of 15 is a very different thing than a quorum of 50.