As an alternative, I would like to propose that the first round is on Vortex.

As an alternative, I would like to propose that the first round is on Vortex.

I can get behind that. That means that I get to drink with Buffistas! WOOT.

Is that cool?

Totally cool, and I got your explanation and the correct vote, no worries.

For the record, there are already more than 42 votes for either "Yes" or "No" (even without the "No Preference" votes). So no worries regarding that.

Thank goodness. I don't think we can take another hiccup in this process.

Midnight, the 21st East Coast time

So that would be 9 PM board tme, right?

One could easily make a case for 0001 GMT, which, I believe would be 5 PM CDT board time. That's the international release time (But since the UK are on summer time, it seems the UKians are getting it 11 PM BST).

Aren't time zones wonderful?

finding out that Hogwarts gets nuked from space.

Damn you!!! You've ruined the surprise!

t runs away

Once we settle on when, we should probably post in press that such is our intention. To give people who are still subscribed to the closed thread a chance to unsubscribe if they so choose.

I'm astounded anybody thought even for a second that early spoilers were going to fly.

why does this site have to house a thread for every discussion 10 people will vote yes for?

I know this was msbelle hyperbole, but this is why I like Kat's "No More No Preference" idea. Let each proposal stand or fall on the nuber of yes/no votes only.

Okay, I'll put this stirring stick down and slowly back away now...

I'm astounded anybody thought even for a second that early spoilers were going to fly.

Honestly, I'd count us lucky we haven't been spoiler-spammed yet. (There's a group of people on LJ - or possibly just one jackass with multiple logins - who's been spamming people's journals with highly detailed "X happens on page Y" type spoilers for a few days now. I don't know if it's just on LJ or if other forums have been hit as well.)

Not that we'd come up in a Google search for HP discussion, but still...

I know this was msbelle hyperbole, but this is why I like Kat's "No More No Preference" idea. Let each proposal stand or fall on the nuber of yes/no votes only.

When this issue first came up a few years ago, when we were first developing our voting procedures, typoboy made a really good argument for NP votes. I'd completely forgotten this particular argument until a few days ago when I was researching the rules. Anyway, here it is:

And I think that "no preference" if actually expressed in a ballot should count. Because we have a minimum voter turnout. It just seems silly to me, that if the voter turnout is exactly at the minimum, and the proposal passes, that a no voter will have reason to reflect that if she had voted "no preference" instead of no, the proposal would have failed, that her "no" vote caused the proposal to pass.

I think not voting should count as not voting. But actually taking the trouble to cast a ballot, even if the choice is no preference, should count towards the minimum voter turnout.

Speaking of typoboy, someone a while back asked for a definition of "binary walk". Gar provided one here.

And the vote at the time of whether NP votes should count towards the MVT was 72 Yes, 20 No. Not that people's opinions can't change in four years...