Kaylee ,'Out Of Gas'
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
Cindy. I can't. I have a good memory for black words on white. I can see the post, but I don't know how to nilly without the search function.
If you want, I can go back through bureacracy and find it... which should delay things until sometime next week. *g*.
I think it was even Victor who said it first, if that's any help to anyone who can find it.
You can threadsuck and then control-F to search, FYI.
oh, duh, okay, I'll find it.
I think it was over on WX. I can go try and look.
But the proposal on whether the time limit applies to previous decisions got seconded first, and it logically should be decided first.
Look the second proposal was moved in response to my proposal. And moots the first proposal. (x-post with DavidS) So if the consensus is to let it move ahead I'm not going to fight it. But I do want to point out there are meritorious arguments why the first proposal should be before the second proposal. I'm just not going to make them in an effort to decrease the fighting. (Feel free to email me if you're really dying to hear them.)
you do that Sophia, I'll do this... I think it was here, too.
I can't even remember what the first and second proposals were at this point, it would help to use specifics.
I have to come off of lunch and don't have any more time to look at WX-- But I can't find it.
Deena - you don't have to do it. I just thought maybe you knew where it was. Sadly, your memory sounds like mine.
And the old system wasn't subject to the moratorium
The old system wasn't subject to an official moratorium. There usually was a sense that we ought to let sleeping dogs lie, at least for a bit. Usually, if someone closed a poll or discussion and said "Denzel" won, we didn't come back the next morning to find 100 more votes for "monkey", and when we did? We let monkey go in, because we didn't want to argue. We valued our community enough to let someone else win, even if it's just because someone else was louder, not righter.
Things were looser, so "a while" wasn't defined. And one of the things that itched people about the old system was that sometimes something would get talked down, and then brought up again and again 'til everyone gave in. That's why we're defining "a while" now. But if you'll notice, the "a while" was honored after that last post (I think by brenda) - until you brought this subject up last night. It was honored because we value each other more than we value the idea of adding a thread.
We've always felt constant rehash was bad for the community. It's something we tried to discourage and were talking about quasi-officially discouraging, prior to ever even approving the voting process, because it breeds dissent. The voting process was developed to ease the feelings of dissent, not to be used to create more.