If we allow the war decision to be overturned because it doesn't fit the new rules, then does that mean that every other previous decision can be revoted?

Why don't we take it on a decision by decision basis. I don't think we need to make a sweeping policy on this right now.

ETA: And there was no war "decision". ;)

I'm with Betsy. I absolutely do not have the strength to revisit every old issue because we now have new voting rules in place.

Okay, folks, where's the list of Stompies? Is it in the FAQ?

Oooh, so we can get rid of the Movies thread now? (kidding)

Seriously, just because you don't like the decision doesn't mean it wasn't decided.

I only think we do becuase it is fuzzy whether this is a NEW proposal because the circumstances changed, or a revisiting of an old proposal. Also, we haven't voted in a time period for closed discussion, so it is unclear that way to.

What I do think is we need to decide this time period before we decide anything else, so we need to wait a while to do that anyway.

Seriously, just because you don't like the decision doesn't mean it wasn't decided.

And just because you agree with the alleged decision doesn't make it a decision.

And there was no war "decision". ;)

Wolfram, there was a war decision in PRECISELY the way there was a Firefly thread decision. It just happens that one decision was positive and the other negative.

What's the thread name and slug?

I might be around.

whether this is a NEW proposal because the circumstances changed,

The circumstances have not changed. I asked for a war thread *should there be a war*. We had the discussion well aware that there was likely to be a war very soon.

It isn't as if we said "Should we have a Spinoff thread if there ever is a spinoff?"; we said, rather, "There's a war coming up, should we have a thread?"

Things were decided.

They were decided against.

Betsy is correct.

This should NOT be revisited.