I don't think posters here are as irritated with the lurkers as other posters here think they are.

I think I connected the last few comments with the poll and that was my mistake. It was a separate conversation of lurkers voting. I made the leap where there wasn't a connection. Sorry.

I don't feel hostile. Umbraged, sure. As was pointed out above, one post calling us cretins is not indicative of the feelings of most humans here, or they'd have moved on long ago.

One post questioning the idea that we should care about lurkers' opinions about how we organize our discourse isn't indicative of how most people feel, either. If it was, lurkers wouldn't have been invited.

It's not like the voting system came down the mount with Moses. We could trash all of that tomorrow and go back to Gang of Sixteen. Or try something completely new.

We're not locked into any sort of rules here, actually. The people creating all the discourse that entertains the lurkers could suddenly all become miserable enough to let the collective fizzle out and die.

I'm thinking that we'd not let something like that happen. If enough people who actually post the entertainment felt the board was starting to blow, we'd make whatever changes were necessary to keep us together and afloat, and it wouldn't matter if 1000 lurkers suddenly voted that the little monkeys in the box should dance faster (I don't mean that with any sense of hostility, I'm just bringing in monkeys for monkey sake). The people talking, to me, weigh more than the people who don't. A lot more.

Lurkers opinions don't matter to me, not a jot. Those opinions did matter to lots of other people. It's Bureau, where we torture each other with opinions.

I'm shocked at the idea that lurkers are voting, it's something I don't remember considering when we hammered out voting, but I think if the day ever came that a vote counter saw that 60 votes came in from people who don't post, and 2 votes came in from people who do, they'd sound the alarm that something strange was afoot at the circle k.

I mean, seriously, would we create an entire thread for lurkers to stare at white space? I just don't think it'd happen.

If anything like that was occuring, we'd surely toss the votes and figure something else out.

Right? RIGHT?

ION, I'll never be a good ambassador.

we'd surely toss the votes and figure something else out.

Hmmph.

Don't make me propose a thread discussing all ita, all the time, called, "Jamaican Me Crazy 1: A discussion of how wrong ita is."

Because you know I can get 60 people to register, vote, and then YOU will have to create the thread, my friend.

I mean, seriously, would we create an entire thread for lurkers to stare at white space? I just don't think it'd happen.

Although that would be kinda funny.

YOU will have to create the thread, my friend.

And then what? You'll need to come back on a day with less apathy.

But I stand by my point. Members are members, and the distinction between a registered poster's vote and a registered non-poster's vote should always stand.

And, really, the blood and tears and sweat of people all up in creating polls and rules and structure shouldn't be tossed out willy nilly. We can just do what both my high school and my university ended up doing--making rules after the fact to cover the loopholes in course choice that I was exploiting.

Couldn't make me stop what I did, but they made sure it wasn't happening again.

The most negative comments of question # 13 (like comment 3 or 40) seem to have an insider voice. They imply they participate in other threads besides the social ones or one pointed complaint that sounds more personal than coming from a lurker.

That was my feeling as well. I didn't get the sense that owner of the "agenda" comment was a lurker. In fact, looking at all of the write-in comments on the various questions, I was pleasantly surprised by the positive comments from some of the lurkers. (Hey, the lurkers support us in polls.)

Mostly, I think the poll results are interesting and I thank the people who took care of making this possible.

You know what was in Matt's photo (in natter) that I didn't know was there? A lurker!

Which is all my way of saying that lurkers have joined muffaletta and cilantro in my mind (i.e., delicious!). A strange bone of contention that goes nowhere. It's not like there's some action we're talking about right now.

We don't do anything willy nilly. We're incapable.

No actions, just shooting the "who we are and why I need to state my opinion for no apparent reason other than to watch myself type" shit. That's what I'm doing, anyway.

Wait, is everyone else serious?

Heh.