Turns out all I'm sure about is that people are pissed.

Yeah, I usually don't post much in here of late (see comment below), but this afternoon has just seemed like everybody is just upset. What people are upset about is uncertain.

Does that make sense? At all? Please?

I thought it made sense, and may have been the best phrasing of it I've seen yet.

Lately, as conversations have become heated or voluminous in here, the phrase that keeps running through my head belongs to Treebeard:

"Side? I am on nobody's side, for no one is on my side."

Just adding my voice to the "Doblerize" faction. Let's all chill, let's all try to keep from making it about sides, and let's try to remember that none of this is worth getting angry at each other over.

If anybody needs to tell me to shut the hell up and keep out of it, fire away. I humbly submit to any abuse that needs to be heaped my way.

In fact, if it will help soothe feelings, I'll take the abuse for everybody. Just heap it on me. I can take it, and won't bite back.

I am your subserviant whipping post.

Posted in Press

this afternoon has just seemed like everybody is just upset. What people are upset about is uncertain.

As was just stated in Natter, I think emotions are running high what with the whole war and everything. I know that today, I was much more touchy about things than I normally am.

PROPOSAL:

That we rearrange the sidebar threads thusly:

MUST-READS

• Apocalypse Beep
• Sunnydale Press
• COMM

GUBMENT

• Bureau
• BBBB
• Lightbulbs

FEATURES

• Mejiaville
• Nillytown
• Tape Xchange
• Archives

Why? Because I don't want to have to scroll to read COMM. ;)

But seriously, I think it's a more rational arrangement.

COMM's not a "must-read" in the way that either Bureaucracy or BaBB is, I don't think. I think maybe the slug on the voting thread's a little long -- maybe with an edit, we can bring COMM back up above the fold.

Wouldn't that be more a BaBB decision?

t voting avoidance

Hah, I was thinking the same thing. I hate that COMM is getting pushed further down the page.

edit: And then Michele comes in with the sensible suggestion...

I never understood why COMM was in that area at all. To me it's just a normal thread that should be subscribable like all the others. And, ahem, not showing off, but I came up with COMM, or at least resurrected the idea in memory of the similar thread at TT.

And I am not pissed. Excet for the part where I have had, like 3 glasses of wine.

So you're like British pissed, not American pissed, Sophia?

In response to Allyson's posts, I'm only going to assume that her thoughtless rudeness was because she's feeling like the newbies are taking over the zoo. So I want to apologize to her and other "old-timers" who feel like this is the case. It's not. We fully respect all of you for building and maintaining this wonderful community. But unless some here are more equal than others we all have a right to post, to discuss issues, and to be treated with respect as well.

I don't want every decided issue revisited. Nobody does. It's stupid and pointless and offensive to those that came to those decisions in the first place.

I want this issue revisited. Whether we agree or not that a decision or consensus had been reached in the past, it doesn't change the fact that there has been a significant change in circumstances. (See bitterchick's previous suggestion for opening closed discussions.)

I submit the ongoing war warrants a longer and more open discussion on the idea of a war thread that's announced in press and open to the Buffista community at large instead of the 34 people who weighed in on the issue initially. I'd like to ask those who are against the war thread to give it a fair chance and forum, without making a rule or setting any precedent that all old issues are up for rediscussion. Please.

This war affects all of us, and we need to come to a serious and fair decision on how to approach the topic on this board through careful deliberation and discussion with the entire active membership, old and new alike, without grandfathering it closed.

Obviously we still need a fourth second on the issue, then we can discuss it. And if the majority is still against it, then it won't happen. Let's see if we've spent the last few weeks of endless discussions in Bureaucracy building a system that really works. Or were we all just blowing smoke.