'Dirty Girls'
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: Jon B, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych, msbelle, shrift, Dana, Laura
Stompy Emerita: ita, DXMachina
Not to mention, Una, it takes practice to be witty. And experience to be wise.
Lurkers who want to break the ice might want to offer birthday or anniversary wishes, or ~ma or hugs. It's painless, and it's the thought that counts.
Not that I took that advice. It literally took 9/11 to get me to leave lurkerdom.
Others of us just jumped in blindly and flailed around until we figured out what was going on. Not that I recommend that strategy. Luckily people were kind.
Luckily people were kind.
Because you handed out money right off the bat!
Damn, so it was all bribery?
Yeah, it's easy to make friends when you give it away, Kristin....
Catching up...
These two things are indirect contradiction with each other, unless you presume that some significant portion of respondants don't think creating a greater threshold for thread creation is the same as revisiting the voting rules.
I understand what you mean, but in my head in my head "revisiting the voting rules" meant eliminating no preference, changing the # for a quorum, shortening the time period, or otherwise altering the who/what/why/how of all votes.
I'm not sure that I'd consider it revisiting the rules if you made that kind of change for one particular type of proposal. Like, if you said for new thread proposals only , the quorum is 60 instead of 42.
And beyond that, you could make it harder for new threads to be created in other ways. It might mean saying, "Only 1 new thead can be created in any 3 month period," or "In order to propose opening a new thread, you must also ask for another thread to be closed" or "if the measure passes, everyone who voted yes has to send ita a dollar." That sort of thing doesn't change the voting process.
I am not sure who all you people are, but ...
everyone reads my posts
everybody likes me
I like everyone (being the nicest and all)*
I am the core
I not a part of anything bitch or bitch related, but should be in a cabal should one exist
You know, in a case of complete esprit d'escalier, I'm going to try this again.
Although there is one type of person who meets ita's definition of NOT-a-lurker, but not victor's -- the person who has donated money to the board but never posts.
Lurkers with Privileges.
I feel better now ....
I am not sure who all you people are, but ...
Yeah, but I've been here the longest. In case anyone's forgotten.
I don't know. It looks like five people have got you beat.