I think it's different, brenda, because the decision (and the burden, sort of) is on the person who made the proposal. If DX wanted to take it through to a vote, he could do that, because the initial proposal got enough seconds.
Doesn't matter that we took him off that boat, Shepherd, it's the place he's going to live from now on.
Mal ,'Bushwhacked'
Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!
We open it up, we talks the talk, we votes, we shuts it down. This thread is to free up Bureaucracy for daily details as we hammer out the Big Issues towards a vote. Open only when a proposal has been made and seconded according to Buffista policy (Which we voted on!). If this thread is closed, hie thee to Bureaucracy instead!
Dana - May 06, 2003 12:34:42 pm PDT #1208 of 10289
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.
Sophia Brooks - May 06, 2003 12:37:07 pm PDT #1209 of 10289
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
I'm with Jon!
Hee!
Also
There is always going to be a backchannel as long as we each have email addresses and separate identities.
So when we become the Buffista Borg-- no more backchannel?
Wolfram - May 06, 2003 12:40:28 pm PDT #1210 of 10289
Visilurking
If we do decide that we can withdraw proposals without a vote at this stage, then I'd definitely say that the moratorium should not be in effect.
Is there anyone who disagrees with this?
DXMachina - May 06, 2003 12:43:45 pm PDT #1211 of 10289
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
Wasn't the whole point of voting to avoid the "bullshit consensus"? And isn't that more or less what we have here? (I'm not saying it is bullshit - just that most voices here have been arguing against so we're potentially determing that a decision has been made.)
The difference is that it is not the consensus of the moment that is imposing its will on the proposal, but rather that the advocate for the proposal is voluntarily withdrawing it, for whatever reason. Yes, in this case it would be because there appears to be overwhelming opposition, even if everyone hasn't had a chance to speak, but that consensus has not taken the decision out of my hands, which I think is what people were complaining about. I could still allow it to come to vote if I so desire. Richard Nixon would, he was a strong believer in the Silent Majority. :)
I, OTOH, have no such illusions.
Jon B. - May 06, 2003 12:44:50 pm PDT #1212 of 10289
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
So when we become the Buffista Borg-- no more backchannel?
www.buffistas.borg?
Dana - May 06, 2003 12:45:00 pm PDT #1213 of 10289
I'm terrifically busy with my ennui.
DX, I think what you could pull out right now is the phrase, "The lurkers agree with me!"
Wolfram - May 06, 2003 12:52:58 pm PDT #1214 of 10289
Visilurking
Ah the lurkers, a fickle bunch they are. They'll support you in their silence, and then stand by as you're torn asunder with nary a word in your favor. Put not your faith in lurkerdom for they have no faith in you.
DXMachina - May 06, 2003 1:07:09 pm PDT #1215 of 10289
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
It really would be funny if the whole "Buffistas who don't read the voting thread always vote 'yes'," thing were true...
Okay, maybe just to me...
Cindy - May 06, 2003 1:22:44 pm PDT #1216 of 10289
Nobody
It really would be funny if the whole "Buffistas who don't read the voting thread always vote 'yes'," thing were true...
Okay, maybe just to me...
No, not just to you...
Laura - May 06, 2003 1:24:29 pm PDT #1217 of 10289
Our wings are not tired.
FWIW, As the proposal was stated I would vote Yes. I don't think that asking people to register to be full participants is a big deal. I am registered with a large number of information and technical sites that I never post to, but still I am registered to have access. Not a biggee to me. I expected that the notion would be most unpopular here.
I have skimmed much of the discussion, but little of it deals with the actual proposal.