I think only ita and/or Jon B can do that.
you may want to post the request in BBB
Saffron: You just had a better hand of cards this time. Mal: It ain't a hand of cards. It's called a life.
'Trash'
Bureaucracy 1: Like Kafka, Only Funnier
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
Sophia Brooks - Mar 20, 2003 4:49:48 pm PST #8308 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
Wolfram - Mar 20, 2003 4:49:57 pm PST #8309 of 10001
Visilurking
I have to go. I'm not dropping my stance and I'm not withdrawing my motion. I can appreciate the reluctance to revisit old topics but if the Firefly thread hadn't opened, and a several weeks later the Firefly posts in other threads had just gotten rampant would you agree that the Firefly discussion had been closed for a signficant period of time, or would the issue have been revisited? I don't believe there was a "closing of issues" under the old system. I repeat, you can't close out an issue that wasn't really decided in the first place, and if people had known this was an all or nothing decision I daresay more people would have weighed in at the time. We're not talking about a Clem thread. This is a serious issue, and I feel it warrants serious discussion, not to just be shut down because people are afraid of re-opening old topics. We'll move it into a discussion thread and stop cluttering Bureaucracy with it if it gets a fourth. Then it can be fairly decided. Do you really want to dismiss this motion summarily without hearing from the bulk of the Buffistas on it?
I know this was something of a ramble but I'm getting the feeling that a small percentage of posters is getting the power to cut off a discussion because they are active posters.
Katie M - Mar 20, 2003 4:51:51 pm PST #8310 of 10001
I was charmed (albeit somewhat perplexed) by the fannish sensibility of many of the music choices -- it's like the director was trying to vid Canada. --loligo on the Olympic Opening Ceremonies
Yay, Plei! Thank you.
Wolfram - Mar 20, 2003 4:52:17 pm PST #8311 of 10001
Visilurking
Why are we moving the discussion whether to have a discussion into the discussion thread? I thought the discussion thread was supposed to be open only when a motion had four seconds and was being discussed prior to a vote?
Katie M - Mar 20, 2003 4:53:29 pm PST #8312 of 10001
I was charmed (albeit somewhat perplexed) by the fannish sensibility of many of the music choices -- it's like the director was trying to vid Canada. --loligo on the Olympic Opening Ceremonies
We aren't, Wolfram. At least not as far as I know. We're opening the thread because the vote went through to create it, and now we're prepped for any future discussions that do get there.
bitterchick - Mar 20, 2003 4:53:52 pm PST #8313 of 10001
Um. I know we just opened this snazzy new thread but who else seconded Wolfram's motion? I only saw two.
Sophia Brooks - Mar 20, 2003 4:54:20 pm PST #8314 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
We aren't moving the discussion, are we? I think we are just opening the thread.
Regardless of anything else, there is no forth for the proposal.
Gandalfe - Mar 20, 2003 4:54:40 pm PST #8315 of 10001
The generation that could change the world is still looking for its car keys.
But you're making the decision to not revisit old "consensus decisions" by consensus, which is the old way.
biclops and Wolfram are my new heroes.
Betsy HP - Mar 20, 2003 4:54:56 pm PST #8316 of 10001
If I only had a brain...
Oh. Confused now.
Wolfram - Mar 20, 2003 4:55:44 pm PST #8317 of 10001
Visilurking
Okay, I'll be away from thread for a bit. Again, (ominous voice), this isn't over.