I think I'm in favor of takebacks. Discussion can be, often should be, part of crafting a worthwhile voting proposal. I know we're not set up that way, and I don't know whether we would want to be, whether the benefits would outweigh the drawbacks to be set up that way, or not. Because I'm the type to say, hey, what if we did this, just throw it out there and see what happens. Discussion is good. Sometimes you get ideas on how better to word something, or you learn that one aspect is important to people, while nobody cares at all about another aspect and nobody likes the third part of the proposal.

Do we presently allow significant alteration of a proposal before it goes to vote from the form it's originally presented for discussion? I'm getting "no" from the present discussion. So either that maybe should be an option, A) present a prospective proposal for discussion, and craft the precise proposal after general consensus (is that what we have now? because I'm hearing not so much), or B) allow takebacks if discussion reveals no to little interest or benefit from the idea.

If a proposer changes his/her mind about a proposal during the discussion, the proposer can always alter the wording of the proposal to the antithesis of the original proposal when it comes time to vote.

I think doing this, however, could create confusion during the voting.

Do we presently allow significant alteration of a proposal before it goes to vote from the form it's originally presented for discussion?

We've agreed that the wording of the ballot is the proposer's responsibility, and that changes are allowed during the discussion period. I don't think we've discussed what "significant" changes would be, and frankly I don't want to get into arguments about what percentage counts blah blah -- the principle that it's the proposer's responsibility should extend to any changes the proposer wants to make. That logically includes withdrawing a ballot.

I don't want to get into arguments about what percentage counts blah blah -- the principle that it's the proposer's responsibility should extend to any changes the proposer wants to make. That logically includes withdrawing a ballot.

Yes, I agree vehemently with this. And thank you for stating more succinctly what I was stumbling through.

I might be late in setting up the ballot. I'm going out immediately after work and I'm not sure when I'll get home, or what state I'll be in when I do get home.

(Shoulda dealt with it last night, but didn't think ahead. My bad.)

Are we having a ballot, Jon? I thought we weren't?

Has DX officially made his call?

Not yet. Still thinking about it.

At this point we might as well have the ballot, unless you want to remove it for strategic purposes, which is not the vibe I'm getting. Let's moratorium this issue and lay to rest the Burrell theory once and for all!

I agree with Wolfram. Also, I'm curious to see if it gets more support from the voting population than the vocal posting population.