A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
Guys, for the record and because DXM isn't here, it was very clear in the original post that Ed was talking about stats for the
whole thread,
from the very first way before voting became a discussion topic, to end [at the time], of Bureaucracy. (And for that matter, as a point of interest, not a point of gripe and/or accusation.) His original stats and John H's stats aren't the same stats, not least because DXM has been away for probably 70% of this most recent discussion as John H quantified it.
Also, as I think was pointed out by yours truly about 100 posts ago, "Gang of 14" (and for that matter, "bullshit consensus") is impolitic and rude and we might all agree to stop using it and arguing over it? Especially if it's going to turn into a series of backhanded barbs?
The phrase "Gang of Fourteen", which doesn't bug me in the least, applied to people doing something which an overwhelming majority of Buffistas voted for: setting up a voting system. And doing it in public. And doing it slowly. And doing it in great and very careful detail. And listening to each other.
Err, as the coiner, no it didn't. It applied to the fact that Kafka, even pre-vote vote, was mainly frequented by a smallish number of people, and specifically, that saying "Hey! Consensus!" among that small number, with regards to the way we were thinking about doing something, was just as false a consensus as the supposedly false consensus that lead up to this whole mess.
And is someone making new natter?
Plei, I started but just got slammed at work. Can you please pick it up?
V. It's not letting me... don't know why, exactly.
You have the thing open? Could it be two people trying to create a thread at once?
It applied to the fact that Kafka, even pre-vote vote, was mainly frequented by a smallish number of people
I apologise.
I have got two different things mixed up, it seems.
Anyway.
saying "Hey! Consensus!" among that small number, with regards to the way we were thinking about doing something, was just as false a consensus
but what we consensed on doing was
asking everyone what they thought.
How could that possibly be considered the same kind of, let's say, "fake consensus" as the other kind?
Nope. Won't work for me either. It submits, but doesn't show up in the list.
Thread-build needed? What's up?
