You know, I've saved lives. Dozens. Maybe hundreds. I reattached a girl's leg. Her whole leg. She named her hamster after me. I got a hamster. He drops a box of money, he gets a town.

Simon ,'Jaynestown'


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


bitterchick - Mar 20, 2003 8:02:59 pm PST #8448 of 10001

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.


Betsy HP - Mar 20, 2003 8:04:23 pm PST #8449 of 10001
If I only had a brain...

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.


Wolfram - Mar 20, 2003 8:05:39 pm PST #8450 of 10001
Visilurking

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.


P.M. Marc - Mar 20, 2003 8:05:40 pm PST #8451 of 10001
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear

What. Betsy. Said.


bitterchick - Mar 20, 2003 8:06:14 pm PST #8452 of 10001

We cannot be all things to all people.

Yes, Deena. This. It seems like we're trying to cover too much ground in one community.

There's also the technical ramifications of opening new threads. I'm not going to pretend I understand the architecture of this board but I do know that when we went dark, posting volume was an issue. And it seems the more threads we have, the more posts we make.


P.M. Marc - Mar 20, 2003 8:06:25 pm PST #8453 of 10001
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear

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.

And sometimes, you have to follow them, even if you don't like the result.


Deena - Mar 20, 2003 8:06:46 pm PST #8454 of 10001
How are you me? You need to stop that. Only I can be me. ~Kara

Wolfram, I was summing up what I perceive as the consensus of the previous discussion, not trying to lobby for or against at this time.

and why, oh why can't I spell consensus??


John H - Mar 20, 2003 8:06:57 pm PST #8455 of 10001

would be equally annoyed if we reopened the Music thread (which I opposed).

Good point. If we can go back and reconsider our decisions not to do something, logically we might end up reconsidering our decisions to do something.


Michele T. - Mar 20, 2003 8:09:24 pm PST #8456 of 10001
with a gleam in my eye, and an almost airtight alibi

And, coming in late -- yes, COMM went to the sidebar because it's an archive.


John H - Mar 20, 2003 8:09:48 pm PST #8457 of 10001

My apologies. I'll delete.
< EDIT > Changed my mind. I'm not going to delete it

Good decision, Gandalfe -- I think it's much better for people to leave their posts up, even if they generated some heat, than it is to delete.