hello... I'm also somewhat overwhelmed. After about the first 100 posts of this discussion, I thought I had something to add. Then, I was called away from the computer and found another 200 posts when I got back, and my thoughts were lost in the tidal wave. I'm glad others are keeping better track.
I remembered a little bit of it. One person said that only voting in e-mail was appropriate, since we have no way set up to poll on this board. Actually, at WX, one suggestion was made for voting in Bureacracy with one person taking on the task of tallying the votes (though I don't think that had much support) and one suggestion was made for designating a voter who could access Mr. Poll if someone knew the vote would be happening at a time they could not access it. I don't think that one would work very well, since the last poll (monkeys!) I noticed two different people volunteering and/or voting for one person who couldn't access the poll.
I don't really think these are important. The e-mail vote seems more reasonable to me, but, I did want to mention that they were suggested as possible.
I do, finally, have a question, though. Could we, if we have strong opinions about one part of this vote, but not about the others, vote YES or NO for one thing, and ABSTAIN for the others? For example, I'm not sure I'm convinced one way or another regarding simple majority or quorum.
Cindy, either way is good by me.
Uh, not to be annoying, but I just thought of another question.
If someone knows they won't be able to vote during the three day period, but otherwise thinks voting is a good idea, would they vote NO for voting if they didn't know there might be consideration for pre/absentee voting after this decision is made?
t /being annoying
Run that by me again, Deena?
If someone knows they won't be able to vote during the three day period, but otherwise thinks voting is a good idea, would they vote NO for voting if they didn't know there might be consideration for pre/absentee voting after this decision is made?
Personally, I think someone who liked voting but would vote no to the proposal because they knew they individually couldn't vote in one specific instance would be shooting themself in the foot. But that's me.
I think we have decided against extending the deadline for votes because someone's out of town, because that would never end. I have no problem with voting in advance for people who are around for the discussion but not the vote, assuming the tallyer is okay with it. Either way, it's outside the scope of this vote, but could be decided later.
I am having a concern that some people heavily involved in the discussion at WX haven't made it back yet (Jim e-t, Angus?)
I sure as shit am sick of talking about it, but maybe we haven't waited long enough. i think I just need reassurance.
Sophia, I was a little concerned about that too, also feeling overwhelmed.
Lyra, I was picking nits, I think. Shutting up now.
i think I just need reassurance.
I did make a brief mention in UnAmericans to be aware this was coming up.
If I knew I was going to be unable to visit the board for a week or so I would ask another user to please email me about any important decisions being made during that time.
If I was going to be without email for a week or so I would very much trust that the will of the Buffistas would not be totally out of line with my desires.
Although all this discussion seems rather head explody at the moment I am convinced that we will all benefit from a routine way to handle decisions in the future.
if we have strong opinions about one part of this vote, but not about the others, vote YES or NO for one thing, and ABSTAIN for the others?
I see no reason why you couldn't place a vote for some questions but not vote on others.
Lyra, I was picking nits, I think. Shutting up now.
I didn't mean to sound impatient or whatever -- I think the question of how we handle it if someone cares deeply about an issue and wants to vote but will be offline for the time of the vote is an important one. But the reasoning in your scenario semeed odd to me.
