I fed off a flowerperson, and I spent the next six hours watchin' my hand move.

Spike ,'Same Time, Same Place'


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


Java cat - Mar 27, 2003 10:57:59 am PST #8881 of 10001
Not javachik

I'll come back and threadsuck and read any replies later, 'cause I have to work now, but I am still bothered by the issue of a vote of 3, 4, or 6, in the span of 15 or 16 hours, turning into a vote on the "one true number of 6," and the numbers 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 - which not one person wanted - being thrown into a survey.

Am I the only one who's bothered by this?


Wolfram - Mar 27, 2003 11:24:18 am PST #8882 of 10001
Visilurking

No. It bothered me too.

But I felt the group Doblerization was way more important, and whether it was her timing or her persuasive style, Cindy pulled it off. So kudos to her.

And in truth, her proposal as a whole, written against her interests of 3 as the OTN, was pretty much fair. So even though I get your point, I'd advise not focusing on it too much. The greater good was served.


Dana - Mar 27, 2003 11:24:56 am PST #8883 of 10001
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.

Honestly, everyone's bothered by something at this point.


Nutty - Mar 27, 2003 11:25:20 am PST #8884 of 10001
"Mister Spock is on his fanny, sir. Reports heavy damage."

Well, Sophia proposed it, so she wrote the ballot. There were a couple of ideas floating around Light Bulb before the vote, several of them viable, but we finally decided that consensing was not the way to go and that the proposer should write a ballot and Sophia chose one.

The concept we're voting on is the same; it's just phrased differently from how it was originally intended. And to a certain extent, I suspect that phraasing is a reflection, in the people reading Light Bulb, of the fact that 6 months seemed to be a front-runner.

I can sort of see how such a system could be abused, by writing ballots that are unintelligible or severely biased. But if that ever really turned into a problem, we all could give the ballot a vote of no confidence, by refusing to vote and not making the minimum turnout.


Jesse - Mar 27, 2003 11:25:31 am PST #8885 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.

And I think the possibility of revisting 6 (should it win) in three months is the key factor.


scrappy - Mar 27, 2003 11:28:13 am PST #8886 of 10001
Nobody

Also the vast numbers of non-Kafka-posting Buffistas might want some of those different numbers, and now you'll know which.


Lyra Jane - Mar 27, 2003 11:33:39 am PST #8887 of 10001
Up with the sun

It's an imperfect solution (but the best available) to a problem that was tying us in knots. I think six is long, but I'm happy we're at a point where we can pass something.


§ ita § - Mar 27, 2003 11:35:51 am PST #8888 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

I'm really very pro the proposer writing the ballot. S/he can listen and listen and persuade and be persuaded, but in the end, one person should write it. As long as the voting mechanism allows for a "no confidence/utter bollocks" option, it's all good.

And if the proposal is badly done and doesn't get the MVT -- whoops! Moratorium anyway. So it behooves the proposer to do a good job.


Jesse - Mar 27, 2003 11:39:46 am PST #8889 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.

What ita said.


Laura - Mar 27, 2003 11:41:22 am PST #8890 of 10001
Our wings are not tired.

I'm really very pro the proposer writing the ballot.

Makes sense.

eta: Sweet!