I propose that the membership nominates and elects a “council of watchers”

There's not enough "HELL, NO" in the world for how I feel about this, really.

I honestly think that if this board is going to be around for any long term period of time, there needs to be a system that’s representative as well as practical. And so far, over two weeks and thousands of posts have gone by and a voting system for voting has yet to be finalized. The irony is starting to get ridiculous.

IT HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME.

Already.

There's not enough "HELL, NO" in the world for how I feel about this, really.

Can I get a HELL, WHY?

I know most of you have flinched when you hear the ideas of officers or directors being elected here, but I’m not sure what the knee-jerk reaction is for.

Because I come here to laugh and talk to my friends. Because I think that a group of 800 people, most of whom lurk, does not need elected officers or directors. Because I have participated in Vermont Town Meetings managing a group of much, much more than 800 people *with real budgets*, and the only officer necessary was a moderator and a parliamentarian, often the same person.

Because, in short, this is precisely the kind of bureaucratic overkill that makes me want to scream and tear my hair.

Elected officers mean elections, with all the pain and favoritism that implies. It means an official system of "some are more equal than others". The more-efficient decisionmaking process you promise is in no way as important to me as the drawbacks I perceive.

I know most of you have flinched when you hear the ideas of officers or directors being elected here, but I’m not sure what the knee-jerk reaction is for.

Because one of the one things we have consistently resisted is the idea of having "special" community members. We balk at the terms "high-status", or "true Buffista". Even the Stompies will insist that just because they have the power to white-out posts and close tags and do other nifty stuff, they're not any more important than anyone else. When we start electing representatives, we've firmly moved out of Cocktail Party Land. And I like it there.

I appreciate the thought that you're putting into this, Wolfram, but you're swimming upstream here.

Edited to add a "g".

IT HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME.

Not at the current membership level.

Not at the current membership level.

We have no way of measuring how many lurkers there were at TT. Maybe we did at WX, but I don't remember any firm figures from there.

The culture has been around since, what, 1998 or so? Sure, the board has gotten larger. But there's an evolved culture that has violently resisted the idea of official officers for a long time. Even the concept of Stompy Foots made us uneasy.

What Plei And Betsy And Dana Said.

We do not need a government. We do not want a government. The Stompies were chosen primarily based on their coding skills and timezone availability (for starting new threads). They are not, have never been, and will never be moderators of any kind.

Not at the current membership level.

Most of whom are not endorsing the idea of voting. Less than 20% of the "population" here participated.