Well, in all fairness, it had been thoroughly debated in recent memory. I can't recall when we last had a good throwdown over cilantro.
Spike ,'Sleeper'
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
Well, in all fairness, it had been thoroughly debated in recent memory.
And cilantro hasn't? Didn't we just do a poll?
Tempest in a teacup compared to the original brouhaha.
What is the point of the x-posting? I think we've pretty much BS consensed on updating thread headers a few times a year to indicate current shows under discussion. That will probably require an occasional reminder in thread (or really, just in B-craxy) to talk about what to add/delete. I'm not sure what else we need to do here.
Cilantro lovers rule and cilantro haters drool!!!!
What is the point of the x-posting?
Well, less a x-posting than an announcement in each thread to get the new headers going, especially for the people that don't read Bureaucracy.
Off to post...
That makes sense. I just don't see why to change the existing headers except to add [Currently dissected in this thread: x, xx, xy and more!] at the tail end.
ETA: the rewording for Procedurals deletes "shows where the primary idea is to figure out the case. " which a) is kind of key and b) was hashed out at some point. (I mean, it's obvious for this thread, others possibly not so much.) Adding currently active shows to the end of the description is no big deal, but changing the description of the thread purpose is something we didn't discuss.
FTR, Jesse's link was deeply wrong.
I may be scarred for life.
the rewording for Procedurals deletes "shows where the primary idea is to figure out the case. " which a) is kind of key and b) was hashed out at some point. (I mean, it's obvious for this thread, others possibly not so much.) Adding currently active shows to the end of the description is no big deal, but changing the description of the thread purpose is something we didn't discuss.
It is still there. It's in the header, not the slug.
I don't follow the thread, but I actually thought that was an awesome description.