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
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.
I fourth Sophia's closed-discussion time limit proposal.
Let's move it over to Lightbulbs then?
Thanks for the ego-feeding, all. I'll start pulling the list together, as there is
no way
I will be watching any TV tonight unless C.S.I. is a) not a repeat and b) not pre-empted.
PROPOSAL:
When we first started this whole voting thing, our ultimate goal was to be able to close discussions and not have them over and over and over and over....
After a proposal, discussion and vote, further discussion on this matter should be closed for:
3 months 6 months 1 year
In discussion, I would like to narrow this to 2 choices so we need not get into trying to decide how to vote.
Proposer Sophia Brooks
Seconds Anne, Sean K, brenda M. ,Deena , Jessica
Discussion: 3/21/03 12 am EST - 3/24/03 11:59 pm EST
Voting: 3/25/03 12 am EST - 3/28/03 12:00 am EST
This should be posted in Press when we open the threa
Um. I know we just opened this snazzy new thread but who else seconded Wolfram's motion? I only saw two.
There were 3. Gandalfe, Noni, & me.
Second Sophia's proposal.
I thought it was 4 days of discussion and 3 days of voting.
