How about between 1 and 15?

To start a discussion? That really seems like a lot, esp. given the now-infamous Gang of 14.

I've been thinking about this, and feel like a retroactive announcement is fine.

I understand your point, but I think we should stick to the 4/3 plan. Discuss today through Saturday, vote Sunday through Tuesday? That also splits up the weekend nicely.

I understand your point, but I think we should stick to the 4/3 plan. Discuss today through Saturday, vote Sunday through Tuesday? That also splits up the weekend nicely.

Definitely the 4/3 plan. But I'm disinclined to say this conversation is only just starting now.

A new version:

ITEM 1: FORMAL DISCUSSION THREAD

Do we want a separate thread for actual voting discussions?

A yes vote on this Item means you would like a new thread, that will be solely dedicated to formal discussion of future items put forward for voting. This thread will only be open during the designated days of formal discussion.

A no vote means you do not want a new thread. (Presumably in this case, all discussion will take place in Bureaucracy.)

----------------

ITEM 2: CLOSE DISCUSSION

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

A yes vote on this item means that you would like to end all discussion on a given item when voting starts.

A no vote means you would like to continue discussion through the voting period.

----------------

ITEM 3: VOTER TURNOUT

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

For the first question, put a number between 2 and 100 into this box, please: [  ] An AVERAGE (rounded to the nearest 5) of these numbers will be used to determine the voter turnout

For the second part, it's a simple yes or no.

If you vote yes, you would allow people to register their vote as an abstention -- that is, with no preference for either choice -- and that vote would count toward the minimum number

If you vote no, you want only votes that prefer one option to count toward the minimum.

----------------

ITEM 4: SECONDS

a) Should more than one Buffista be needed in order to move something to formal discussion and vote?
b) Please choose a minimum number of people who have to agree with the original proposer before a proposal moves to formal discussion Put a number between 1 and 10 into this box, please: [ ]
You may answer this question even if you choose to vote no to proposal (a)
An AVERAGE (rounded to the nearest 5) of these numbers will be used to determine the number of people needed to second. [  ]

Also, con someone else post in press. I am getting a bad reputation ; )

Sweet number Jesse.

I certainly think that the discussion started some time ago, but I was thinking that the "formal" 4 day discussion is the time to campaign for your side in the vote. Go Favorite Number! Go Yes! whatever

Also, the annoucement in Press that discussion has begun signals those who wait until that time to come in here.

Hokay then. So can I just say DISCUSSION STARTS NOW and link to Sophia's post in Press? Because I'm willing to do that.

Sophia (who is doing such a wonderful job here, her reputation should only improve) - I'll post in Press, if you like. [Edit: x-post with Jesse, who has been more involved in this than me, and therefore has more right to do the posting]

Sophia - will you accept an amendemnt - between 1 - 15?

Since we have written and seconded however many times a formal proposal now, I think the discussion of several days will be (a) skippable for those who care to skip and (b) generally academic, and not direclty affecting the proposal, unless we find another verbal ambiguity as was just corrected into post #7228.

So I can live with 3 more days of discussion; I'm just going to skip it all. Laura, you want to post to Press? Anyone?

[Edited to add: thanks Jesse.

[And to add: Gar, I'm in agreeance with Jesse on 15 being too high a number, and ironic, given the whole "gang of 14" discussion we just had. So, let's just leave the proposal as is. OK?]