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"

I'd rather have the Tyranny of the Easily Upset than the Tyranny of the Obnoxious Blowhards

Am I an OB, Plei? I thought I was more of an obnoxious blow-soft.

This is just becoming to cutesy for words, but what if the Easily Upset are too easily upset to deal with the question of throwing out the Obnoxious Blowhards? That way we get the worst of both worlds.

Is this all about thread proliferation, or are there other things being discussed?

Off the top of my head? Thing that have actually come up? Troll policies, spoiler policies, user feedback (wuffie thing).

I really really feel like if we can get to a place where we have a procedure for decision-making, there really aren't that many decisions to be made. At this point. It's just that the "procedure" we had was making people unhappy.

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".

Yeah. Because we've finally snapped. No, seriously. At least for me.

FOURTEEN PEOPLE. FOURTEEN.

And, FWIW, I was #15. I asked. But I hear there was a large gap between 14 and 15 in terms of numbers.

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.

Then maybe you need to clarify what you meant by "I don't think you want me to." Because I read it as "the examples I have are too controversial to even bring up."

Also, I can't come up with a definition of "cool kids" or whatever that only includes a group of people who all agree with each other. I mean, really.

"let's all agree with what the cool kids"

Wow. I find that incredibly insulting. And now I'm walking away.

Yeah. Because we've finally snapped. No, seriously. At least for me.

FOURTEEN PEOPLE. FOURTEEN.

Fourteen people what? In this thread, or on the board, or...?

I just need some context, sorry.

"Cool kids" was a poor choice of words (sorry, Gar), but I agree with his sentiment. I believe that the original proposal made a zillion posts ago to have four more questions that would settle the issues of Votor Turnout, number of seconds, etc., and to use preferential balloting just this once before we debated it to death (too late!), was simple. It's the endless meta-debate on the subject that's made it seem complicated.