I like COMM on the side bar. But I'd like to see it higher up, as well. My typical buffista & coffee morning goes like this:

coffee, beep me, coffee, press, no coffee to spare my monitor, COMM, then, if I'm feeling particularly brave, bureaucrazy. Followed by more coffee and then I hit the threads.

work is always optional.

The point is, people were unhappy with the way decisions were being made. Which means that, although most of the decisions were OK, some people felt left out, and think a few of the decisions made the old way were wrong. Being able to vote on the issues was supposed to be a better way to make decisions. By saying the old decisions are untouchable means we're repudiating the new voting system which we voted for, and validating the old system which we voted against.

And honestly, how many decisions are going to get overturned? Nobody is seriously going to propose deleting the Movie or Firefly threads, and poor Wolfram can't even get four seconds on his war thread.

I like COMM where it is, John.

Look, everyone! Rebecca and I disagree about something! See?

No seriously, I guess it says "Site tools and archives" so I guess it comes under archive? I didn't mean to say let's chuck it out, it was really just puzzlement as to its placing in the first, er, place.

Deena brought up a good point that when this was discussed originally, it was said we would NOT revisit old votes.

Where was it said that this war issue would be closed and not revisited? Can you point me to a place? It's not like every post isn't recorded here (unless deleted) so let's see some links/cites.

...and poor Wolfram can't even get four seconds on his war thread.

Not even a pity second.

I like sidebar too.

I wanted to mention some things I just recalled about the war thread idea.

1. We didn't want to be inundated with trolls who might never integrate with the rest of the community, or, might try, and really suck at it.

2. We didn't want to make a thread that might be divisive. If it's a thread that's very important to Poster A and Poster Z, and they argue and it gets tense, then the ripples are felt everywhere, whether said posters post everywhere or only in the War thread, because many are going to read those posts and the tensions do mutate beyond a single thread.

3. This I think is most important: We cannot be all things to all people. This is primarily a board dedicated to the entertainment industry, sub-genre sci-fi/fantasy/horror, all Whedon, all the time. If we change this, adding general interest (politics, war, crafts - they all seem general interest to me, even war as it is being discussed here) isn't part of the hmm.. manifesto.. of this board.

I'm feeling some trepidation at posting this. I don't want a fight. I don't want a huge conflict. I don't want to get emotional. I'm trying to post my feelings as clearly, concisely and non-judgementally as I possibly can. I have a great deal of respect for everyone on this board*

*Channelling Jesse: Even those of you who are WRONG and do not understand the value of 50!

By saying the old decisions are untouchable means we're repudiating the new voting system which we voted for, and validating the old system which we voted against.

If anyone feels that the decision made was a poor one, they can propose to revisit it once the expiration period is up. We haven't decided what the period is yet but, once we do, that's how we can handle it.

There are three issues at stake here:

1. Was this a valid Buffista decision? That is, was it properly made?

2. If the decision was valid, is it appropriate to reconsider old-process valid decisions before the (insert-month) quiet period?

3. Was it the right decision?

I don't think it's appropriate to address (3) before you address (1) and (2).

(1) In my opinion, the process that led to the decision was valid. It was the old Buffista process. A question was raised. It was discussed. It became clear that an overwhelming majority (23-6, I believe) of the people discussing the issue were against it. The issue was dropped.

That is the way that we always handled negative decisions before voting was put in place. Whoever showed up in Bureaucracy and argued had a vote; whoever didn't show up, didn't. It became clear to me, the proposer, that the consensus was against me, and I shut up.

(2) I don't think we should reconsider *any* decision made under the old rules. I don't want to reconsider this particular decision, but I would be equally annoyed if we reopened the Music thread (which I opposed). We have enough on our plates without reopening the stuff we decided on.

(3) Sure, the war affects all of us. Sex also affects all of us. That doesn't mean we should have a dedicated Buffista sex thread. (And, no, that's not what Bitches is.) But the question of whether we should have a War thread is IRRELEVANT, in my opinion, because we already made that decision.

Deena - your post is good but premature. It belongs in a discussion of the merits of a war thread.

Bitterchick - 3 or 6 mos on this issue is tantamount to a non-issue. Rules are good, but fairness needs to play a role too. Sometimes the rules need to be flexible.

What. Betsy. Said.