I'm really out of the loop on this one, because this doesn't feel like Big Dramatic Change to me at all. I don't see it as damaging to the community, and I don't foresee the board ending because of this. I understand the impetus to restrict change, but I think it's rather unfounded in this discussion, other than as a measure to promote careful consideration of what best serves the need of talking television for this community.

My gut SA is that this we're looking a significant change in assumptions but that the actual changes might be relatively small.

If we decide that we need to limit the smaller interest threads (not eliminate! Limit!) to maintain or garden the community then it's a fairly simple adjustment. We just look at thread creation in a different way.

It's not a matter of, "Will this please the most people?"

But the first question you ask when a thread request comes up is, "Will this have a negative effect on the whole?"

I think that's a big change in culture, but a small change in structure. It's more of a long term investment in how we garden around here.

What poll response is going to say "I don't want anything to change"? None.

ftr, this is what I would vote. - which is why I thought one of the poll questions should be on board satisfaction.

I think that's a big change in culture, but a small change in structure. It's more of a long term investment in how we garden around here.

Could I get this in bronze? A nice, attractive plaque for the wall, over there?

It's not a matter of, "Will this please the most people?"

The (One) problem is, that's not what we're doing now. What we're doing now is "Will this please enough people?" I'll admit it: I've voted yes on ballots I didn't really care about.

Yes, we have passed every television thread we have gone to vote on in the last few months

To me it's obvious that we have measures in place to keep thirty new random threads opening.

I would disagree with the latter in part due to the former.

It seems obvious to me that the supermajority of people want a poll. This is not 12 Angry Men here. We should just get on with it. I want to save what capital I have left for when we fight over the results.

The (One) problem is, that's not what we're doing now. What we're doing now is "Will this please enough people?" I'll admit it: I've voted yes on ballots I didn't really care about.

Well, I think this is one of the problems. We shouldn't do that!

Right now, we're not broken, right? The board is okay today. Nobody is trying to fix something that is wrong, just improve something that could be better. And that improvement might break the board, because that's how change is, things you think will be fine sometimes aren't.

For me, this is relatively simple: we have been talking about television since day one. We have created separate threads for television that caught our fancy in a particular way, but never made a provision for talking about television generally, which was fine.

The one difference in the way I see that statement is that we were created to talk really about one fandom since day one, and often we digressed. Once those shows that fueled that fandom died down, the whole board has been a whole series of digressions. And the question of being a general TV board, seems, to me, like a huge shift in focus.

Specifically -- alter the six-month moratorium so that it kicks in regardless of whether or not the 42 person quorum is met.

I don't like this. It seems like it would make it way to easy to shut down discussion for six months with a narrow focus proposal that has minor support.

Interesting point. Do you have an alternate suggestion? I'm really starting to think we need to eliminate No Preference voting, but if the elimination causes another problem, it's not a great solution.

Maybe a secondary quorum, then? Where a majority (or perhaps even a supermajority -- 60 or 70%) of a given vote needs to be from interested parties in order for a thread to be succesfully created (or destroyed)?

Because I really think a big chunk of the current angst could be solved if we have more confidence that a particular thread proposal passes (or fails) because of genuine, sustainable interest.

My gut SA

Without commas, it first read like you named your digestive system after me. I am honored.

I think that's a big change in culture, but a small change in structure. It's more of a long term investment in how we garden around here.

I'd agree with that.

I would disagree with the latter in part due to the former.

Well, I was using the context of your example to define my argument. The television threads we did pass bear little relation, in my opinion, to your example of threads that might be passed. Having a nonfic thread is not the same thing, to me, at all, from having a "survivor dvds" thread, and I think the comparison is unworkable.

But I would rather move on and get to polling. For curiosity's sake if nothing else, though I think there is value to be had in the polltaking.