I like that the war talk is diluted a bit with the natter. I think it helps keep tempers in check. Instead of seeing, oh say, Hec, as a warmongering right wing facist (not saying he is of course), I can see that he's still the sweet funny porny Hec he always is.

My point is that I'm afraid that if there's a thread where political beliefs are separated from the everyday people who have them, we run the risk of reducing people to those ideas and getting very upset with each other.

Apparently I stepped on a nerve by agreeing with wolfram's post. So that leads me to ask -- is there any way to keep a log of what was decided regarding subjects like this? Ever since the dicussions started about how to vote about how to vote, I haven't really been following this thread, and I'm afraid there's other things I may have missed that I don't want to drudge up for anyone else at a later date.

I looked up the links that bitterchick provided and I'm not seeing a consensus anywhere on this issue, I'm just seeing a bunch of opinion posts and then the conversation moved in another direction. Is that what a consensus is?

I also am not looking forward to previous board decisions being up for debate, but I don't see a decision and circumstances have dramatically changed since that discussion. We need three more "seconds" and we can officially discuss the merits.

The question "can a decision of the old consensus system be challenged by a vote?" is a fundamental one.

I think we should hold off on the seconding/going to a vote thing for a while and discuss that.

Oh, and, if the war goes "well" -- and there are not enough inverted commas in the world -- but if it goes as hoped by some, it will be over before we can complete a vote.

Look, I would request that discussion on the merits of a war thread be reserved for the discussion thread, if this proposal gets the requisite seconds.

Discussion about whether the proposal is allowable is fair. But I don't think we need to hold off on the seconding for it. And nobody has provided a link to a decision.

I'm just seeing a bunch of opinion posts and then the conversation moved in another direction. Is that what a consensus is?

Yup. We had a discussion. It ended. Nobody felt like challenging the results of the discussion.

And here's where things get REALLY messy.

Hi, lurker here.

I'll second that war discussion Wolf. May I call you Wolf?

Natter just doesn't seem the place to discuss war, unless it is to discuss Sadam's choice of boxers or briefs. And please don't take offense at that Natter seems like a pretty cool place to hang out.

Okay, because I'm really pissed off at a client right now and don't feel like working for them, I actually read that freaking War Thread Discussion. My interpretation of the results was that 26 people were against, 6 people were for and 2 were undecided. Which to me, is pretty much a consensus.

[Edited to reflect updated numbers.]