I hate the idea of a Supreme Court thread because it seems like thread duplication to me.

I like it for these reasons: puts a simple check on topics before moving them to vote; it has a clear and defined period of discussion - when it's closed it's closed; it lets Bureaucracy go back to dealing with issues which are more administrative.

If quorum is passed the next step is to figure a reasonable number. We would need statistics to determine that number. I'm one step at a time girl, so I await the results of the vote in progress before debating the next potential step.

I hate the idea of a Supreme Court thread because it seems like thread duplication to me.

I disagree. If there's to be focused debate on some issue of importance for (say) four days, and another issue of bureaucratic importance arises during that time, I don't want that issue to get lost in the swamp of the debate.

t edit and what Hec said....

I like it for these reasons: puts a simple check on topics before moving them to vote; it has a clear and defined period of discussion - when it's closed it's closed; it lets Bureaucracy go back to dealing with issues which are more administrative.

So, what you're describing would be this:

In Bureaucracy, suggestions are brought up. If enough people are interested (a fixed number or not), they are brought to this "Supreme Court" thread for formal discussion (for whatever period of time we decide) before voting (or not, based on the results of this current vote).

So then, Bureaucracy is left to thread naming, and...what else?

I see no reason for it (the Supreme Court thread, that is), but given the love of new threads, I fully expect it to pass.

Thanks for your help DXM - I have successfully voted. Do I get a sticker?

So then, Bureaucracy is left to thread naming, and...what else?

Off the top of my head? FAQ additions, calls for Stompys to deal with some problem in a thread (open tag, spoiler, etc.)...

Not everything bureaucratic requires debating and voting.

FAQ additions, calls for Stompys to deal with some problem in a thread (open tag, spoiler, etc.)...

Good ones. I wasn't trying to be contentious, I just couldn't think of anything else right then.

So then, Bureaucracy is left to thread naming, and...what else?

Raising issues to bring into the Supreme Court :-).

Personally, I like the time-limited discussion and formal voting things. I'm not certain we couldn't do that and keep things in bureaucracy, but it will make it easier to get up to speed on a specific issue if discussion of it isn't mixed up with posts about 20 other things.

given the love of new threads, I fully expect it to pass.

We in no way have a "love" of new threads. Seriously, on most forums the idea of needing permission to set up a specific area to talk about something would be viewed as, like, unconstitutional censorship. I understand that's not the Buffista view, but the fact is we have very controlled thread proliferation given what a large community we are. Our database problems are due to number of posts, not number of threads.

I wasn't trying to be contentious

I know Jesse. No worries.

given the love of new threads, I fully expect it to pass.

I'm generally not in favor of new threads, but I think that if we go forward with the new debate-n-vote process, a separate Supreme Court thread will be a good one to have.