the process for this vote did a lot of discourage it

As far as I understand it, the process for this vote was the same as for any other.

the process for this vote did a lot of discourage it, not facilitate it.

But Java, the process has been in place for seven years now. So if you check in less than every four days, you've always known you risk missing notification and discussion of a vote. This isn't new, and you must have missed many more before now. I can see you being disappointed, but there's no room for outrage.

If you object, put the wheels in motion to change the process. There was no nefarious plot going on to get this out of the way where people couldn't see what was happening. It was perfectly normal Buffista voting process, which majority has long agreed upon.

The process of this vote did not do a lot to discourage it. The process of this vote simply was.

So posting the poll with such a short time frame didn't have anything to do with actually needing an answer right away, it had more to do with the people who were around wanting to get it over with.

No, not at all. It was conducted according to our process that we've used for SEVEN YEARS.

So posting the poll with such a short time frame didn't have anything to do with actually needing an answer right away, it had more to do with the people who were around wanting to get it over with. Which is fine, I guess that's the voted-on procedure, but if the desire was to get participation, the process for this vote did a lot of discourage it, not facilitate it.

If you feel that way, I think the issue would stand for every vote. I don't think that someone made a choice to try and exclude people, they were just following our rules (which are admittedly not posted, but I think we are working on that). In that case, we could definitely have a proposal to discuss a change.

we seem to have a BS consensus on this.

we seem to have a BS consensus on this.

A BS consensus and a seven year-old vote. It's like the Buffista way, squared.

So if you check in less than every four days, you've always known you risk missing notification and discussion of a vote.

Discussion. But part of the rationale for the seven days was that even if you do check in only on one day a week, you will not miss anything entirely. You may have to just read through discussion, but you'll have your opportunity to vote.

I am hugely sorry to have been a part of raising this brouhaha. I personally had a hugely shitty week and didn't have the headspace, but it had nothing to do with the timeframe being inadequate or misunderstood.

I am hugely sorry to have been a part of raising this brouhaha. I personally had a hugely shitty week and didn't have the headspace, but it had nothing to do with the timeframe being inadequate or misunderstood.

Buh? You mean, because you were one of the people who didn't vote? Don't beat yourself up!

Don't beat yourself up!

This.

Seriously, of all the votes not to have a quorum on, this is the perfect one, because if people want to enact the proposal, nothing is preventing them from going to F2F and getting the ball rolling.

Seriously. All you have to do is act like it passed, and voila! It's not like you're forced to disobey the verbiage, or anything.