HAHAHAHAHA!

42

Dude.

That's too perfect.

And, basically, what Brenda said. But man, 42.

---

I find the harmonic beauty of "42" breathtaking.

Mmmmmmm.

---

I think you can do that without being mindcontrolled too, you know.

Yeah. I am feeling the stupid right now. I'm sorry, Allyson?

---

The summary:

ITEM 1: FORMAL DISCUSSION THREAD
Do we want a separate thread for actual voting discussions?
Yes

ITEM 2: CLOSE DISCUSSION
Do we want to close the talking about a subject when the voting starts?
Yes

ITEM 3: VOTER TURNOUT
How many Buffistas does it take to make a vote count?
42
Do votes of "no preference" count toward this?
Yes

ITEM 4: SECONDS
a) Should more than one Buffista be needed in order to move something to formal discussion and vote?
Yes

b) Please choose a minimum number of people who have to agree with the original proposer before a proposal moves to formal discussion, if the above item passes.
4

ITEM 1: FORMAL DISCUSSION THREAD

Yes

53 61.6%   No 33 38.4%   No Preference 8     Total Votes with preference 86     ITEM 2: CLOSE DISCUSSION Yes 50 57.5%   No 37 42.5%   No Preference 7     Total Votes with preference 87     ITEM 3: VOTER TURNOUT How many Buffistas does it take to make a vote count? Mean 42 3961/94 Median 42 The middle number Mode 50 Favored by 24 voters Do votes of "no preference" count toward this? Yes 72 78.3%   No 20 21.7%   No Preference 2     Total Votes with preference 92     ITEM 4: SECONDS Should more than one Buffista be needed in order to move something to formal discussion and vote? Yes 78 86.7%   No 12 13.3%   No Preference 4     Total Votes with preference 90     Minimum number of people who have to agree with the original proposer before a proposal moves to formal discussion, if the above item passes.   Mean 4 369/94 Median 4 The middle choice Mode 5 Favored by 27 voters

Raw numbers for minimum number of Buffistas:

2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 8, 10, 10, 10, 10, 15, 15, 15, 18, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 25, 25, 25, 25, 25, 25, 25, 25, 30, 30, 30, 30, 30, 30, 35, 35, 40, 40, 40, 40, 40, 40, 40, 42, 45, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 50, 51, 51, 60, 60, 60, 65, 65, 65, 65, 67, 67, 75, 77, 80, 80, 90, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100
Raw numbers for numbers of seconds:

1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 7, 7, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10

---

That's not so. He would've been allowed the option to stay.

Well, maybe. In all honesty, I'd say he took the decision away from us by stepping away. On the one hand, he did us all a favor by not having to sort it out any further. On the other, we're left with very little precedent to work from should it happen again. But such is life.

As the guy who eventually flipped the switch on Anathema, I did so because A.) He had a two month suspension that had never been served, and B.) From his e-mails with the Admins as a group and with myself individually, he felt it was best to walk away completely. Those were the only two factors that made me feel justified in closing his account.

That being said, while we were discussing the best way to handle it, I don't feel we could have taken any serious action without bringing it to the board's attention. I do think that we made the right decision approaching him directly, and seeking his input as to what we should do, but I'm not sure we would have been able to do anything major--such as permanent banning or wiping away the suspension entirely--without discussion here. Anathema gave us an out to deal with it beforehand, and for that I'm grateful, but in the big picture, I'm not quite sure how to deal with it next time.

I don't really have any interest in dealing with the personality of Anathema's situation. I have a great deal of interest in discussing the procedure, because while I can say without a doubt that we handled the situation as best we could, I'd like to not have to be left in the same gray zone again.

---

Thank you very much, Laura.

And now I actually go to bed.

lizardfoot>>>>>><<<<<<<lizardmouth

---

I find the harmonic beauty of "42" breathtaking.

Ain't it just a kick in the pants?

---

Heh, I had to post that 3 times to get the last 10 in. Now to fix Press!

---

Yeah. I am feeling the stupid right now. I'm sorry, Allyson?

Quite alright.

---

Thank you for the beautiful tally, Laura!

I agree with Wolfram upthread about the difficulty those of us who read on a different schedule feeling like we can't post because people have asked that it stop, or that it is upsetting them. Also the power of those who are upset to divert conversations can drive me batshit due to my own issues.

But, I'm learning the hard way that when people say, "Stop talking about this" chances are they aren't particularly open to hearing my side of it and perhaps it's best if I do stop talking. Not that I heed this that often. As shown here.

• ************************

With regard to what has happened here tonight:

(1) John, it's obvious you still feel a lot of pain and anger and frustation over what happened and I'm sorry that all of the events have hit you so hard emotionally. While lots of us care about you, feeling an affinity to m/A is not a repudiation of our feelings about you. Some people will continue to think of him as a friend and I think that's normal and just and whatever. You may not understand why, but it's not up to you to decide.

(2) People were upset with you in January not because they were picking mieske over you. I didn't comment at the time, but I think I felt upset because it felt like you crossed the boundary of what is socially okay. Just as Allyson doesn't get to thrash me whenever she feels like it, if she does and I thrash back or if I cross a socially acceptable barrier back due to her behavior, then I should expect to be shot down. I think we have higher standards for our friends and it hurts more when they do something strange or offputting. Also, I think when our friends slap our knuckles, the sting of the disapproval is worse.

(3) Rebecca, I'm not sure what the confluence of events that caused you to post about mieske's suspension were. Maybe it was just a weird cosmic convergence, but it came across like you were spoiling for whatever you knew to be made public knowledge so that *this* could happen (I'm not really sure what *this* is). That sort of behavior is really disquieting to me.

• *******************

42... henh. Well. That's interesting. And Burrell was right. Whatever comes up for a vote gets approved. I wonder if that will continue to hold true?

---