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

See above for extension of the discussion period for connie's vote.

I'm not judging the call--just describing it as ad hoc and not de jure.

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.

I couldn't agree with this more.

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.

But I agree with this too. At the risk of sounding like an utter sap, I have to quote Churchill: "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."

In general, lurkers are pretty nice to me in email, though none have supported my statement that they only get one third a vote, and not even the bullshit promise of 40 acres and a mule.

Yet.

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.

Oh, so you've been to bureau before.

Oh, so you've been to bureau before.

Yup. But curiously, I've never been to me.

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."

How badly will I be harmed if I second this proposal?

I mean, seriously, would we create an entire thread for lurkers to stare at white space?

Ooh, can we? It could be like one of those pages in official documents that say "This page intentionally left blank."

'Cept we'd probably start posting in it and spoil the joke.

On the topic at hand, there were only two or three comments that really made me bristle, but I didn't assume any of them were from lurkers unless they were specifically signed that way. Most of them were just repeating things people have already said here.

I'm now really curious what people who are so bitter about the so-called "core" Buffistas get out of the board. I mean, if you're that angry, why are you even here?

I know. It made me sad to read -- especially the third comment (I think -- the one about agenda) on the last open response. I know I got a little snipey in the conversation here, leading up to the poll, but I'm pretty transparent, and b.org and I were on a break (much of the entire internet and I are on a bit of a break right now) at the time, and made sure to say so (here, at the time, not in the poll, I'll stop getting parenthetical, now).

The poll was awesome, y'all. Thank you so much for compiling and running it. I'll repeat my own comment here, without botching the wording, the way I did when I answered it on the poll.

In one section, we were asked which specific threads are important to our experience at b.org. I would have liked a similar question asking which types of threads (TV buckets, single TV show threads, Natter-y threads, etc.) are important to my experience. I guess we kind of answered that in question 3. I just felt question 5 was asking me the wrong question, because right now, we have few threads for shows I love, and TV is one of the reasons I post here. We can already tell which specific threads get the most use by looking at the board.

Definite thanks to everyone who had a hand in the poll. The results were quite interesting, as were the comments. I'm trying to remember if I added a comment myself - nothing pinged me when I read the comments last night. I should probably check again.