I couldn't believe it the first twenty times you told us, but it's starting to sink in now.

Riley ,'Lessons'


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


Jesse - Mar 21, 2003 2:46:13 pm PST #8685 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.

See, I'm just not so sure about this (and I'm number 14, FWIW). A big part of the impetus for voting at all was to be able to implement the stop-discussion time limit on things that kept coming up, like a politics thread. So my understanding was that we'd throw it up for a vote, it would (most likely) get voted down, and then we'd have an instituted policy that allowed us to prevent it's being brought up again. But I think we're skipping over a step here.

I basically agree with this. I don't think I personally had a clear feeling about how the new procedure would or should affect past decisions.

And honestly, if we think bandwidth is becoming a problem, I reserve my right to move to start eliminating threads.


Katie M - Mar 21, 2003 2:48:18 pm PST #8686 of 10001
I was charmed (albeit somewhat perplexed) by the fannish sensibility of many of the music choices -- it's like the director was trying to vid Canada. --loligo on the Olympic Opening Ceremonies

See, I'm just not so sure about this (and I'm number 14, FWIW). A big part of the impetus for voting at all was to be able to implement the stop-discussion time limit on things that kept coming up, like a politics thread. So my understanding was that we'd throw it up for a vote, it would (most likely) get voted down, and then we'd have an instituted policy that allowed us to prevent it's being brought up again. But I think we're skipping over a step here.

Me, uh, four at this point (unless I'm cross-posting). I don't feel strongly about it, mind you.


Sophia Brooks - Mar 21, 2003 2:52:11 pm PST #8687 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here

See, I'm just not so sure about this (and I'm number 14, FWIW). A big part of the impetus for voting at all was to be able to implement the stop-discussion time limit on things that kept coming up, like a politics thread. So my understanding was that we'd throw it up for a vote, it would (most likely) get voted down, and then we'd have an instituted policy that allowed us to prevent it's being brought up again. But I think we're skipping over a step here.

Me too, actually. I am not sure we discussed it. I think that I thought people wouldn't bring up old issues unless they needed to.


Cindy - Mar 21, 2003 2:57:11 pm PST #8688 of 10001
Nobody

I do know, one of the examples people used when they mentioned eventually taking a vote to end discussions for a period of time was "the war thread". So that may be where our particular feeling of "no - this one is settled" comes from. In fact, Sophia might have used the war thread as an example of something that was closed in some of her early list or ballot posts or issue explanations.


DavidS - Mar 21, 2003 2:59:10 pm PST #8689 of 10001
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."

So...are we going with the procedural vote about re-opening consensus decisions or not? Is that next in the que?


Lyra Jane - Mar 21, 2003 2:59:29 pm PST #8690 of 10001
Up with the sun

Sophia might have used the war thread as an example of something that was closed in some of her early list or ballot posts or issue explanations.

I'm pretty sure she did, because I remember thinking, "Huh, I didn't know that was finalized."


brenda m - Mar 21, 2003 3:01:18 pm PST #8691 of 10001
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there

I looked at that post, but IIRC she used it as a theoretical example of what happens after we vote something down. But let me go look and make sure.

#6174

2. HOW we decide things, because I think that will eliminate any of this talking and talking and talking about something until finally we don't decide. Or make a decision because people objecting have left the thread Suggestions

Closed Decisions (ex: War Thread has been voted against, no more requests for 6 months) (This still needs to be dealt with)


Nutty - Mar 21, 2003 3:06:08 pm PST #8692 of 10001
"Mister Spock is on his fanny, sir. Reports heavy damage."

Yea, "ex. war thread" was the example Sophia used.

My sense is, the grandfather clause proposal made it to the lightning round next, so we do that next. We might then want to decide to make an exception for a potential war thread, but then we might not.


Sophia Brooks - Mar 21, 2003 3:07:32 pm PST #8693 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here

My sense is, the grandfather clause proposal made it to the lightning round next, so we do that next. We might then want to decide to make an exception for a potential war thread, but then we might not.

yes, this.

I don't even know how I meant the example, it was so long ago that that original list was made.


jengod - Mar 21, 2003 3:07:56 pm PST #8694 of 10001

Has there been any consensus (YdefinitionofconsensusMV) on rearranging the threads and/or trimming the slugs? I haven't seen any dissent, but then again, it's a small topic drowning in a sea of much bigger and more controversial topics.