I agree with Kristen.

No need for a new thread or for excess publicity as far as I'm concerned.

But isn't that what is being discussed in lightbulbs? How Buffistas.org is going to show support? I understand doing something in-house such as a logo or goodie bags doesn't garner extra visitors, but affiliating with another, such as fans4writers.com, will inadvertently draw excess attention. If you do want to discuss it without highlighting any particular members, then perhaps there should be a separate thread. Unless the vote is to not advertise support outside of this site, and then I agree, members can find their own way to the discussion.

I thought the vote was to put a link on this site to fans4writers. I don't know anything about affiliating or advertising.

affiliating with another, such as fans4writers.com, will inadvertently draw excess attention.

Attention to Buffistas.org as a whole, yes. But not to any specific Buffistas who are WGA members. It's not like we have a roster somewhere listing vital stats of Buffistas. (Teppy: 36, editor, blonde, v. cute.) So if anyone came to us through fans4writers, why would they need to know who -- if ANY -- Buffistas were WGA members? They don't. We're just a community who, as a whole community (probably) wants to support ALL of the people who are responsible for writing the many shows we love.

If you do want to discuss it without highlighting any particular members

I don't understand why discussion of the strike -- in Minearverse or any thread -- *should* mention any particular Buffista.

There was a suggestion to link to Minearverse for strike talk earlier, but the exact details of the proposal on the table are still in flux from what I can see. Mostly just the link and the image.

Yeah, the reasons above are perfectly valid, so ignore my idea. Although if the site starts to get advertised at the WGA strikes directly (I think that was tabled) having all the strike discussion in Minearverse may be an issue in itself. It's not an issue I have an opinion on, because I'm not a writer.

There was a suggestion to link to Minearverse for strike talk earlier, but the exact details of the proposal on the table are still in flux from what I can see. Mostly just the link and the image.

yes. I wasn't bringing up anything new.

Attention to Buffistas.org as a whole, yes. But not to any specific Buffistas who are WGA members. It's not like we have a roster somewhere listing vital stats of Buffistas. (Teppy: 36, editor, blonde, v. cute.) So if anyone came to us through fans4writers, why would they need to know who -- if ANY -- Buffistas were WGA members? They don't. We're just a community who, as a whole community (probably) wants to support ALL of the people who are responsible for writing the many shows we love.

I'm really sorry. I wasn't clear. I didn't mean to suggest anything of the sort. When I said directions to Minearverse, I was told we shouldn't draw attention because of certain members. So I was thinking another thread would hide those members involvement in the WGA therefore eliminate the worry that was expressed a few posts ago. But as I try to back out of one guac bowl, I'm landing in another and frankly just want to avoid the topic now. I also misunderstood the proposal and thank P-C for validating it is still in flux and therefore wasn't just me being thick. I misunderstood that others from fans4writers would know of our affiliation, not just that there would be a fans4writers logo on this site.

I'm really sorry. I wasn't clear. I didn't mean to suggest anything of the sort. When I said directions to Minearverse, I was told we shouldn't draw attention because of certain members. So I was thinking another thread would hide those members involvement in the WGA therefore eliminate the worry that was expressed a few posts ago. But as I try to back out of one guac bowl, I'm landing in another and frankly just want to avoid the topic now.

I definitely wasn't trying to kick you into any guac; I just misunderstood your post as wanting to draw attention to any Buffistas who are WGA members, regardless of where we might discuss the strike.

Thanks for clarifying, Austin.

Heh. Yes, I'm definitely pro privacy. Yay privacy, go privacy!

I thought the vote was to put a link on this site to fans4writers. I don't know anything about affiliating or advertising.

This is what Allyson needs to clarify in the wording of her ballot.

I personally read her initial post as being more along the lines of -- can we go to fans4writers and say "Buffistas support the strike"? (The banners were intended to work both ways. A consolidated display at fans4writers.com as well as links at the individual sites.)

Saying this is an actual concern if we haven't actually asked b.org as a whole if they'd like to do that.

If someone sends pretzels and says "The Fans of The Office support the WGA", who knows how true that is? It's basically hyperbole, because sure thing no one polled every fan. But, there's also no backlash to be had if someone disagrees with the support stance. Individual fans can stand up and say, hey, I watch The Office and I don't support jack, but there's nowhere for them to really direct their ire.

If someone buys pizza and says "The members of Whedonesque.com support the WGA", well, they're a private board. So long as they are a site owner or their representative, they can say anything they want. If there's backlash, that's their risk to weigh up. Current members who feel misrepresented can un-member themselves.

If someone here makes a banner which says "Buffistas support the WGA" they are actually speaking for the community. If that banner draws negative attention, then there is a place that might be targeted in that response. And that's something that the members of b.org need to have resolved as a community.

Do I actually think that there would be negative backlash? I do not. But man, there are some trolls and flat minded people apostin' out there on the interknits. Who knows how craxy they'll be come the dead of winter when they've been on a steady diet of reality television for a couple months?

But also speaking for myself, I can display my support in a number of ways, none of which needs to involve b.org if that's what the majority of members want.