With the idea of a) keeping discussion from going on eternally and b) keeping a "concensus" from being determined by whatever big mouth is around (neither of which seem like enormous problems IMHO), yeah.

Wow, then, I guess, I really can leave this thread alone.

Don't tell the Australian taxpayer about the eight or so hours I put into it yesterday when I was supposed to be working, they'll be very upset.

Let me know if there's an actual vote or if anyone's specifically saying "let's get John H's input on this one"... or if something else is being discussed, I guess.

[edit for context]

Really? I don't think you want me to.

I'd like to think that anything serious enough to require a vote would be something that people are able to bring up in this thread. If it's something too sensitive to even mention, then perhaps we don't want to devote 4 days of discussion to it, ever.

Well, the how we vote is a semi-serious question, as is if a bunch of people decide they want the Buffistas to be moderated. We might also vote on policys regarding trolls, or users, or whether we want to go private. Pretty much anything anyone could come up with.

In practice, I imagine it is mostly about new threads. And whiffle.

If it's something too sensitive to even mention, then perhaps we don't want to devote 4 days of discussion to it, ever.

See Kat's posts before, with which I heartily agreed. There are things too sensitive to mention? For who? That way lies the Tyranny of the Easily Upset.

I think John has a very good point. What are we talking about here, exactly? I mean, sock colors are a fine example, but point to nothing specific. Is this all about thread proliferation, or are there other things being discussed?

See Kat's posts before, with which I heartily agreed. There are things too sensitive to mention? For who? That way lies the Tyranny of the Easily Upset.

See Party Comma Cocktail.

Frankly, I'd rather have the Tyranny of the Easily Upset than the Tyranny of the Obnoxious Blowhards, push coming to shove, and it would.

And, speaking as an Obnoxious Blowhard, that's saying something.

Uh I hope you understand that keep it simple is not just a matter of "let's all agree with what the cool kids" want. We don't have to discuss preferential voting to death - but it seems to me that at least enouigh people favor to make it worth voting on the question. And it is not that complicated. All it does is, in the rare cases where there more than two choices required, give people a chance to say what their second choice is in case their first choice does not win. No one has to give a second choice. Then peoples list of favortes, second favorites and so on, help us determine who would win a run-off if no option is first choice of a majority. Not complicated. The arguments against it are complicated.

And I will say there has been at least as much endless blabbing from the keep it simple crowd as from everyone else. It seems that some of this is what ita proposed as a thread title - "everybody shut up and agree with me".

Uh I hope you understand that keep it simple is not just a matter of "let's all agree with what the cool kids" want.

I swear to god, the next time someone uses a phrase like "cool kids", "higher status", or "I'm not a true Buffista", I'm going to start a campaign to bring Riley back. I mean it.

Uh I hope you understand that keep it simple is not just a matter of "let's all agree with what the cool kids" want.

Oh, good. This argument again.

Walking away now.

I would very much like to hear what people think are the serious issues that demand voting. The reason I was never in favor of voting in the first place was because it seemed to me that things run well here already. The only regular decisions are thread naming, or thread creation, and I haven't seen a lot tsuris over those issues. Although I can also understand wanting to have a system in place to decide those things, it seems as if the cure is worse than the disease at this point.

What other decisions are there that make this voting thing so important?

methinks this anathema guy still doesn't understand the definition of "lurk"