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'm imagining the files they had in the movie version of M*A*S*H where they could see where the opponents in the football game had previously broken bones.
See, this just reminds me of an old joke:
Q: What's the difference between a normal actuary and a mafia actuary?
A: The normal actuary can tell you how many people are going to die next year. The Mafia actuary can give names.
PS: I note since I was last here that we have a shiny new Voting thread. It's good, except I'm pretty sure I'll constantly be reading the title as
"We're Screwing In Light Bulbs, And It's F**king Cramped!"
Michelle T., these are my proposed short (and therefore not floridly witty) slugs. Were they so short as to be blinvisible and therefore non-impactful?
Bureaucracy 1:
Administrative discussions
Better Board:
Tech support and site development
Debate Club
If it's proposed in Bureaucracy, it gets discussed here
okay, I hate the third one, but the first two I think don't suck.
I changed the first two. I go to bed now.
Aha! I've got it!
Debate Club:
Legislative discussion
(And then jus 'splain the rules in the thread intro, etc.)
May I interrupt these debates with a question?
It's occurred to me that it would be cool to do Buffista charity-gifty things in honor of CC's sprog and the finale of BtVS, and I have some ideas for both. I would be happy to use my logistical skills toward coordinating them.
Is this something we should discuss in Bureaucracy, or should it go somewhere else?
Probably elsewhere, so that it doesn't get interrupted by a fight over font size. But I'm darned if I know where. Maybe in each shows' respective thread?
I'd think that would go in Natter or the show threads, with announcements in Press. It seems like that's where those things have usually been.
Sophia did a good thing by putting a FayJay "Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!" Mar 20, 2003 6:46:02 pm EST link in her proposal. It lets you skip to the start of the discussion and reminds less-involved voters of the thread's existence.
even if a war thread gets a fourth second (and it's been less then five hours I must add), it won't be discussed for two weeks at the earliest, and won't be voted on until three weeks from now.
Since we voted for discussion to close when the vote goes up, can't we start a new discussion in four days and vote on it after the other vote closes? That would bring the third issue to vote in 12 days, on the first of April. The only problem is we'd have the voting discussion thread still open while the first vote was up, so people might try to discuss it.
If no more than four people will second a formal proposal, then no more than four would vote for it, and it would lose anyway, right?
Nah, it's different. See Sophia's
I have to preface this with the fact that I am in favor of opening the war discussion thread if a fourth is forthcoming. What harm will it do.
and I have the opposite position, where I was champing at the bit to get Wolfram's proposal seconded, but would have voted against it.
