I think it's terribly sad that Steph's never heard "Officer Krupke", or presumably, seen "West Side Story

FWIW, I 've seen West Side Story at least twice all the way through, and bits and pieces other times. I grok that it was an important musical, but I still don't have the tune in my head.

I would like the short ettiquette to be the default link, because I agree the filk is fairly intimidating, especially to newbies. But I admit I'm biased.

Woo-hoo to the voting. I can't believe those majorities... and Sophia, thanks for reposting the list. I guess the next decisions are size of the quorum and Supreme Court thread?

I'd also like to ask that we include agreeing to for discussing Angel in Buffy and vice versa after a the 1-week grace period in the next ballot, even if it is otherwise about procedural issues. It's just such a time-sensitive issue.

Was a final vote tabulation posted and I missed it?

I like to propose that the next vote be on the size for the minimum vote. And I'd like to propose we vote for the following options

a - 20-----b - 40------c - 60------d - 68 (which is 50% + 0.5)

If we end up having more than 4 choices for which we may vote, then I would also propose a runoff between the two highest vote getters (assuming no choice gets 51%). Reason being, with too many choices you may end up having a minority of 21%, or less, making the decision.

Just a proposal. I don't feel strongly enough to argue the point.

The voting totals were posted in Press last night.

The final vote: jengod "Sunnydale Press" Mar 3, 2003 12:00:27 am EST

jengod and Sophia and all of you - I hope somebody says it better in a few posts so that I can just 'wrod' them, but in the meantime, just my humble thanks for all your work, and my hopes that I'll be more available in the future to help. You very much rock.

[Edit: Everything could be mathier. But in a fun way.]

A quick stab at the next round of decisions (after which most of this stuff will be over)

1. Do we want a separate thread for actual voting discussions?

2. Do we want to close the talking about a subject when the voting starts?

3. How many Buffistas does it take to make a vote count? Do abstentions count toward this?

4. Do we have some way of deciding what we vote on? Do we need "seconds"? Obviously not everything needs to be voted on!

edited to reflect ita's and Jon's suggestion.

2. Do we want to close the talking about a subject after the voting starts?

I recommend this language be changed to "Do we want to close the talking about a subject when the voting starts?"

Sophia's Four Points look good to me.

Thanks so much for receiving the votes and tabulating and everything, jengod!

I'm all excited because of how many people voted. I just think it's great. I'm also glad that there were so few weekend voters, because I did wonder about peoples' access. I guess weekend-access people are also evening-access people, generally.

I'll edit, ita.

Nice summary, Sophia. There was also the issue of whether abstentions count towards #3.

And to avoid a runoff ballot, I would like to suggest again that we use a preferential ballot to determine the number of Buffistas needed to make a vote count (a.k.a. "the quorum"). Yes, it's mathy. But it's also the system used by the government of Australia as well as Cambridge, MA. If it's good enough for them, it should be good enough for us. It will save us time. And if the vote counters are intimidated by it, I volunteer to add the votes and post detailed results.