We have seen lists of recent or active posters before, although maybe it was just in particular threads?
Book: I believe I just... I think I'm on the wrong ship. Inara: Maybe. Or maybe you're exactly where you ought to be.
'Serenity'
Bureaucracy 4: Like Job. No, really, just like Job
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
Jesse - May 11, 2008 7:58:28 am PDT #2829 of 6786
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Kevin - May 11, 2008 8:02:14 am PDT #2830 of 6786
Never fall in love with somebody you actually love.
I'm willing to bet money that a vast majority of the people who vote are active members, and that low count votes are when people don't really care about the issues enough to vote, or they're unsure which way to vote. Let's face it - if you don't care about Gaming, I doubt many people would have waded through the several hundreds of posts in Lightbulbs about it.
Jesse - May 11, 2008 8:18:43 am PDT #2831 of 6786
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Actually, the Games Thread vote had 93 votes, at the top of the range.
Kevin - May 11, 2008 8:21:52 am PDT #2832 of 6786
Never fall in love with somebody you actually love.
If I was a gambling man I'd totally be broke. Doh!
Wolfram - May 11, 2008 8:46:50 am PDT #2833 of 6786
Visilurking
They are the sorts of subjective questions that already get asked and discussed in Lightbulbs. So I'm not sure how adopting these conditions will change anything.
I think it would crystallize discussion, and prevent totally inappropriate threads from getting proposed. I think this would result in less rancor in light bulbs, and take away some of the antipro' concerns - the creation of inappropriate or unnecessary threads. Other than that, it's not going to make a big difference.
Just to reiterate, I don't think any discussion on any topic or from any perspective should be shut down, relocated, censored, stifled, dissuaded, discouraged, or disallowed at all. Tone should be moderated as appropriate.
NoiseDesign - May 11, 2008 9:22:11 am PDT #2834 of 6786
Our wings are not tired
Have we had any totally inappropriate thread proposals?
Laura - May 11, 2008 9:26:53 am PDT #2835 of 6786
Our wings are not tired.
Have we had any totally inappropriate thread proposals?
We could try! We have had ideas that never went to light bulbs. The notion of general tv and politics have been rejected. If a thread proposal didn't have wide support here it didn't make it to LightBulbs. I'm sure there are other examples, but too busy to look for them.
Sports thread! (kidding)
Laga - May 11, 2008 9:28:41 am PDT #2836 of 6786
You should know I'm a big deal in the Resistance.
childrearing thread
Has the question of whether or not thread proliferation taxes our resources been answered?
Wolfram - May 11, 2008 9:29:44 am PDT #2837 of 6786
Visilurking
Have we had any totally inappropriate thread proposals?
Arguably yes, but I'm not going to single any out. (I may have even proposed one or two myself). The point is, one of the concerns of the antipro' camp is not to open the precedent floodgates to any kind of threads being opened (i.e. cooking thread). This would take some of that pressure off.
Wolfram - May 11, 2008 9:30:59 am PDT #2838 of 6786
Visilurking
Has the question of whether or not thread proliferation taxes our resources been answered?
Numerous times, and it's always an unequivocal yes.