I’m really not privy to much in the way of back channel and I don’t know if I’ve made any enemies over this. I doubt I’ve made any friends

I think you've conducted yourself courteously throughout. Not that I've been Little Miss Actively Involved, like, but I've been following the debate, albeit erratically. There have been differences of opinion and misunderstandings all round, and nerves have been frayed. But I never doubted your sincerity, nor have you seemed, to me, to be intentionally inflammatory. (Although my first reading of the 2nd 'banning' remark was initially that it had that intention - but I think you explained & contextualised it thoroughly.)

(fwiw, I'm not big with the backchannel either)

I knew I should've e-mailed you! I'll just say front-channel that I'm not reading you shaking my fist at the screen. More like wanting to send hugs and featherbed armor, because arguing is strainful even when you stay courteous and respectful.

Wolfram, I feel the same way Nou does. And fwiw - there was no back channel here. I understood your devotion to the principle, I just also understood the other devotion to the other principle. There were no shaky fists here. Thank you for what you just did. Very much.

Coffee and donuts are on me, Buffistas.

1) Cindy, why on earth are you awake so early?

2) Do you deliver aforementioned coffee and donuts?

They were only metaphorical coffee and donuts, Nutty - so yes, I suppose they were delivered already, right in that post. Am I correct in thinking you need the more anvil-y type of coffee and donuts? (me, too)

I was awake because I died on my couch last night at about 10:15. I'd had a big glass of water. I've had 3 kids. A 36 year old bladder is sensitive, like a finely tuned violin or summat.

Also, when I wake up that early - it's sooooo quiet here, that it's hard to resist.

eta - that's all natter - sorry folks. Didn't remember where I was.

For your consideration, an idea which may reduce the number of votes, over time.

Is it possible to put up a policy that one (1) new thread may instituted, to live for one month? Call it a 'trial' thread. No other trial thread could be created until the current trial thread is retired. OK, now for the weird bit. When a trial thread expires and a new trial is instituted, it is just a change of title and use for a single thread.

I'm thinking that the desire to isolate conversations on a particular topic away from the existing fora is something that arises surrounding some transient topic (war, events of an actor/writer's life, new-series speculation, and so on). It should be evident from the content of the trial thread what the new title should be. These transients seem to have a brief life.

Just a notion. Thanks for your attention.

Is it possible to put up a policy that one (1) new thread may instituted, to live for one month?

Seems to me that's what Natter does, though in not so formal a fashion. But I'm generally anti-proliferation.

Hmm. I think I'm missing something. The voting thing is primarily about starting new threads, yes? It would seem to me that the trial thread notion would be anti-proliferation. It sort of isolates the "I want a new thread" activity to one place.

Further, it seems that Natter is one of the places where the subject separation is most wanted/needed. I know I'm green, here. It does seem, though, that there is something to consider in the idea.

Thanks, Wolfram. I've appreciated your posts, and the difficult position you put yourself in.

I wonder if it's time for another go-round of What Are We Here For, Anyway? at least as it applies to the creation of new threads. My position is that we are a Jossverse-oriented place. We have some side interests, true, mostly around fanfiction and some other favorite TV shows. Anything else (and even those, I could argue) is off-message. We don't want to be a general-purpose discussion website, and we don't have the capacity, really. This is why I would argue that all the miscellaneous topics, even the really important ones, belong in Natter. I know Natter is hard to keep up with, but threadsuck (which is SO AWESOME) really does let a person scan over what's been discussed. There's no problem with conversations streching out over days, with long breaks, if that's what people are worried about.

I'm sure I could say more about this, but won't for the moment.

Once we get the search function back things will ease a bit as well.

I would really rather not have that discussion right now, Jesse. Honestly, I think that'll be a discussion well suited to the downtime after the end of the season and the F2F, and I'm not sure I can handle a big meta meaning-of-life conversation right now. Even relatively minor things are getting bogged down right now, and my hunch is that the world situation is bleeding into a lot of other areas for many people. I don't think major subjects should be decided on at a time when we're so on edge.

Oh yeah, I'm sure you're right, brenda. Now is probably Not The Time. I just couldn't help myself.