Do we need another? Second, in case.

Also, i is confusing and rediculous, but we need to have some freeddom to revisit old decisions within reason. for example, on Salon we decided not to have a natter thread. When we got to WX, we did. So when we went back to Salon, we changed out minds and created natter. If we stood by that decision made three years ago, we wouldn't have natter now.

That's why there's a time limit on revisiting. After the limit's up, we can discuss it again.

Good God please excuse my typing.

Who shall second me?

Allyson? I've got your back, girl.

I sympathise with Wolfram's wish - based only on having read these recent posts on the subject - because I do feel pretty strongly about the war and having one location in which to discuss it is appealing. But, that said, I can see (from reading the recent posts) that it would likely be a red flag to trolls and could disociate individuals from their political stance and generally make this little world considerably less pleasant. Regardless, though - if it was discussed before and ruled out, I'm happy to go with that. If I have a powerful urge to discuss politics, I'll hit GuardianUnlimited.

I second that, too, and feel we should throw out 3 months as an option but add on the clause that if there is a signficant change in circumstances, we can move to reopen. I think the example I used last time is: if an Alias thread gets shot down, we close discussion for 6 months. But if two months later, Joss takes over Alias and Willow joins the CIA, someone can move to reopen the conversation due to the change in circumstance.

You've just murdered your own grandfather.

And he was already dead. I'm SO confused.

Also, it might be a good idea--for sanity's sake--to make a list of all decisions made during the last six months.

Ahhh, the ever-wise Anne to the rescue.

I think that any decisions made by consensus in the last six months be grandfathered over as "closed" for at least six months.

there's an overwhelming sentiment in favor and none of the opposers are bitter about it

How do you know no one was bitter? Frankly, I shut up about it because I'm a fairly new poster and didn't know how things were done/decided on the board. Also because I didn't feel like becoming known as the squeaky wheel.

I wasn't bitter, but the war thread shut down was definitely one of the faux-consensus decisions I had in the back of my mind when we were discussing voting at all. I didn't change my mind, I gave up.

I understand that we don't want to go re-visit every decision we've ever made. I do think things like the war thread, a tv thread and whatnot were what folks had in mind when they voted to vote. And I think they're what they had in mind when voting passed.

I stopped talking about the war thread because I didn't want to piss anyone off, and because (I haven't reviewed the conversation) it seemed to me that at least some of the people saying "no" were saying "no" because there was no war at the time of the discussion.

On the other hand, now? I don't think I care enough to have a war thread to second Wolfram's motion (sorry Wolfram). However, that's not how I felt at the "decision" point of that conversation.

Anne rocks. Also,

I think that any decisions made by consensus in the last six months be grandfathered over as "closed" for at least six months.

Yes.

I fourth Sophia's closed-discussion time limit proposal.

Let's move it over to Lightbulbs then?