Perhaps an announcement was forgotten, but if you read the post Jon linked to regarding the vote, it wasn't part of the vote on the discussion and voting.
I know Pix put a lot of energy into herding the cats last year. I appreciate her actions and those of others who make the F2F happen. I'd rather not have a kerfuffle over her attempts this year to streamline the process. As Perkins says, I'd rather see this energy go towards actually planning the F2F.
Thank you. And yes, this please. Seriously, my purpose was to put a system in place to ensure that we get a F2F vote early enough to ensure more people have time to save/plan to come. I see no reason why we can't do it unofficially this year. As I said, I will re-propose in six months for future gatherings. Also, I didn't realize that it was my job to post in Press (I thought that was part of the Stompy process), so that's my bad. No harm, no foul. Truly. No reason we can't move forward as far as I'm concerned.
The proposal, as well-meaning as it was, was toothless. There is absolutely nothing we'd be doing differently had it gotten enough votes, other than pointing to it and saying "hey, we ought to get moving on choosing a location and dates!" So let's do that.
(I hope Pix doesn't take this as a criticism. I was for the proposal; sometimes cats need a little shove to get herded)
I'm not offended, but I don't see it as toothless. I believe that putting an official timeline and system in place will have a measurable impact on the viability and attendance of future F2Fs. That's why I proposed it.
We had a vote, it failed -- and it was a vote that doesn't matter in the slightest* because it was a vote for something that couldn't happen this year.
Actually, I had stipulated that we use November this month, so it would have made that official instead of hand-wavey. But again, not worth keruffling about, especially since I'm the one who was supposed to post in Press and failed to do so.