I think the poll will be very misleading to the extent that people will seek their short term preferences without considering the larger collective goal.

I think we need to articulate the larger collective goal. I think polls will help us do that.

I'm not so interested in what people want. We can always add or subtract stuff later. That process is in place.

I would rather the polls addressed why people post here. What show thread environment is interesting to them. How they see the board. How they think it works best. Not just for them but for everybody.

I need a better sense of where the commons is before I think we can invest energy into it.

Where is the middle of our Venn diagram. We can't accomodate all outliers, but we can say, this stuff is us, this is the stuff we maintain. We stretch this far but no farther because that wrecks the middle

That's what I'm trying to get a sense of.

For me, I don't believe that there isn't a place to discuss it. I've always been fine with talking about a show in Natter until such time as it feels that a show can support a thread of its own.

I get that. I was addressing my point more to the people that have already expressed that Natter doesn't work for them as far as tv talk goes, but still have issues with having to wait to go into a bucket thread.

I'm kind of confused now. I see people stating that what the majority of people may or may not want isn't necessarily what's best for the board. But who gets to decide what's best for the board if not the majority?

I mean, regardless of what's polled and discussed , unless Connie withdraws her proposal, isn't whether or not we have a new Network Drama thread going to be decided by a vote on August 11th-13th? Isn't the only thing this discussion can change perhaps the way people decide to vote on the issue? Or am I missing a step here?

so:

what threads do you post in (text box) what things you do you like and/or not like about those threads currently (text box)

what threads are essential to b.org for you (text box) would more or less activity in those threads have an affect on your enjoyment (text box)

what if anything do you feel is missing from the threads or the board(text box)

omg - that is so more huggy touchy feely than I can continue to develop. someone else must take it and run.

But who gets to decide what's best for the board if not the majority?

The discussion itself may change people's minds about what each thread vote means. The polling could clarify what we value most and how it works best.

I mean, regardless of what's polled and discussed , unless Connie withdraws her proposal, isn't whether or not we have a new Network Drama thread going to be decided by a vote on August 11th-13th?

That vote will go ahead. But we're trying to engage a larger discussion about how to handle the recurring board tension between a tight focus and a broad focus. I do think it is time for us to get a better sense of what we expect from this community and how to maintain it.

Isn't the only thing this discussion can change perhaps the way people decide to vote on the issue? Or am I missing a step here?

We've made some fairly profound changes in the past based on discussions here. It is my sense that we are looking at one of those moments where we look beyond voting our interest and creating some functional core direction that will help us make future decisions on growth. At least I hope we get a better sense of ourselves so that we don't ignore frictions and divisions which have been arising regularly over the last couple years. Some tension and disappointment is inevitable and that's okay. But it would be foolish to ignore bigger schisms if they started to emerge.

The board is whatever we decide it is. I'm arguing that now is an appropriate time to look beyond this particular vote and get some framework on how we will handle these issues going forward.

omg - that is so more huggy touchy feely than I can continue to develop. someone else must take it and run.

Maybe less squishy to start with.

Let's just try to clarify two things:

1. Board useage.
2. TV thread preferences.

One at a time.

Let's do that then, on Mr Poll or something that can remain anon.

Let's just try to clarify two things:

1. Board useage.

2. TV thread preferences.

So where are we doing this? I think this could be really valuable, but it's ultimately going to depend on how many people answer the questions.

The only thing, Sean, is that even with us paying more now, there is always an upper limit to our resources. What has been proven is that if we thread it, we will talk. Increasing the number of threads has never resulted in fewer overall posts. So it's not an infinite number of threads we can support, technically or practically.

We've made some fairly profound changes in the past based on discussions here.

I'm arguing that now is an appropriate time to look beyond this particular vote and get some framework on how we will handle these issues going forward.

Thanks for your explanation, David. The above two comments make it much easier to explain what I'm confused about. To the best of my knowledge, please correct me if I'm wrong, these changes that were made by discussions here are what prompted the voting procedure to begin with, no? Because people were upset by a bullshit consensus? I guess what my question is, is that whatever information this poll and discussion gives us about how thing should be handled going forward, wouldn't that decision have to be put to a vote as well?