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.
DX, I think what you could pull out right now is the phrase, "The lurkers agree with me!"
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.
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...
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.
I don't think that asking people to register to be full participants is a big deal.
That's already the case. You have to register to post. "Read Only" != "Full Participant" IMO.
I understand that you have to be registered to post. I was thinking of the many sites that require registration to view. Granted, I really don't participate in any other boards like this; I am thinking of newspaper, magazine and technical sites I visit. Many require registration. As I said, it is no biggee for me either way since I register all over the place with my real name and everything!
Well, in our case, you have to register to keep track of stuff, because without a userID you don't have anything to keep your place for what you have and haven't read. Which is, you know, useful, and the first reason I can think of
to
register.
To clarify tort stuff, and because I like the word tort:
(1) I think it's a great idea that the proposer of a proposal be allowed to withdraw it before the voting period begins, for any reason and without censure or tongue-waggling. (Unless the proposer prefers we waggle our tongues at him.) If the proposer, I don't know, breaks a leg and gets stuck in a hospital with no internet access, or even just changes his mind, there should be the option for the proposer to hand-off advocacy duties to someone else (and stick to the original time-frame).
(2) Said proposal, never having been voted down, should not fall under the moratorium for voted-down things.
I like both of the above. I will put them into Bureaucracy if people would like to consense there about them. Please let us consense about them, because then I will be happy and able to put them into my little Buffista Law document.
