At this point, no. We're just sending regular old emails. And I don't know if jen's around, or how much she cares about how we format these emails.

Liese, I'm sorry about the week thing and your travel schedule. But you're likely to be around for most things, right? I mean, when we talk about seven days, they can start on any day of the week. So, that's something?

Right, I just feel that a week is a fairly reasonable amount of time that someone would be out of the conversation. (Me, me, me) But yes, if it works out that way, I'll participate when possible. Like now.

I'm about to post and run, but I was just reading the old TT bureaucracy to get a feel for how we used to do things, before there were any moderators of our own. It seemed okay.

My humorous observation was, we were concerned about two things 1) would we be able to afford our own board? and 2) we were afraid we wouldn't have any new people once we were out in the wide web, and no longer getting promotion from being beside Joyce's articles.

Heh.

Classic. We even got new people all hidden away at WX!

But I don't think you can understate the difference between being under the umbrella of TT, and having to follow their rules, and making up all the rules ourselves. It's like we're in our first apartment, you know?

Liese - Jon also mentioned business trips and there was positive response to a an absentee ballot idea.

My own problem with the consensus method was just that I don't think we always reached it, it just appeared as if we did, because whomever spoke last seemed to gain the most momentum. This may not get any more formal than voting on things. It may not even get that far if people vote against voting - which is an option.

My two cents about the ballot is that it should be very simple -- something with just the item number and the yes or no, so like...

Item 1: no

Item 2: no

Item 3: no

Item 4: no.

When the motion is posted in press, it should contain a sample of what kind of email to send. Since jengod is counting this time, jengod, do you have a preference for how people send you their votes?

Honestly, Cindy, I should just shup up and let you post for me all the time.

I dunno, Jesse. I'm sitting here reading Liese's post and reminding myself that when I first found the Buffistas (at WXing no less) that I vowed I'd just stay in the topic threads. Liese, that's not a slap at you, either. It's a I-hate-politics-so-what-am-I-doing kick in my own pants. I want to wave a magic wand and give each Buffista his or her own private version of their favorite things about the Buffistas.

Well, I for one am glad you are helping us all think through all this stuff. Because I can think of few things more important than governance. I mean, once we know what the rules are, and how we're going to do things, it should cut down on so much handwringing and bad feeling. (Not to get all real-life, but it's like the 2000 presidential election -- Democrats aren't pissed off because their guy lost, but because they don't think it was done fairly.)

Democrats aren't pissed off because their guy lost, but because they don't think it was done fairly.)

Except for me. I'm also pissed that my guy lost (sorry for any inadvertant earwormage).

I'm glad we are having this discussion because I think figuring out how we decide things is a necessary component of deciding who we want to be.

I'm also pissed that my guy lost

Well, yeah, but you know what I'm saying -- poorly designed and implemented processes lead to a lot more bad feelings than just losing, I think.