'Touched'
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!
(it really, really, really scares you, Sophia? ;)
That was bad-- My computer just scared me by doing it on my own!
I would hope that those things wot should never be revisited wouldn't get the five initial votes (proposal + 4 secondses) necessary to get revisited.
That is my thought too Jon. I don't really feel a need for a vote on the grandpappy thing, but I am good with whatever is decided.
This reminds me of that. It means we only have a 6th month moratorium on being called Buffistas or something. Some decisions should never be revisited.
I think this fear is overrated. Like Nutty said, anyone who brings up changing the buffistas name is going to get creamed. Not everything is up for proposal and voting, and it's up to the buffistas to figure out what to allow and what not to allow.
That being said, if voting on the grandfather clause scares that many people, then I'll go on record as having no objection to its permanent withdrawal.
That is my thought too Jon. I don't really feel a need for a vote on the grandpappy thing, but I am good with whatever is decided.
Oh, I'm all for the grandpappy clause. I was responding to Sophia's concern.
That being said, if voting on the grandfather clause scares that many people, then I'll go on record as having no objection to its permanent withdrawal.
Sure you're not just saying that so you can bring up the War Thread again? t tries to duck t fails miserably t runs away
My question is what determines a decision being made, vs., "It was mentioned, but we never really talked it into the ground until our eyeballs bled reached consensus, it just wasn't at the top of anyone's list so we moved on."?
For example, I think the Will of the Buffistas is pretty clearly anti-war/politics thread, but I think it's more mixed on general TV/Alias/ME graduate studies.
Like Nutty said, anyone who brings up changing the buffistas name is going to get creamed
Today, yes.
Two years from now? Could be a proposal to be called Bronzers. Secondsies and Twenty-fivesies could happen. And the last haggard, battle torn Buffistas, they shall not have the energy to fight it.
This proposal really falls under, "Who are we, who do we want to be?" for me.
The rules you make now will effect Buffistas five years from now. The community could burn out and only see four posts a day in each thread, and then newbies come in and take over, and all you have to govern are memories of what the old-school Buffistas long ago decided. The benefit of those decisions is that the old school folks have been there, done that, squabbled over every last gerund.
The Bronze was around for 5 years, and still, every couple of months, a battle would erupt over the four post per hour rule, which was designed to A) Conserve bandwidth so folks with dialups could participate without crashing, and 2) sort of force people to use their post time in a more wise manner, since you had to wait at least 15 minutes before posting again, it allowed you time to compose
And, occassionally, there were so many newbies who thought that rule sucked, that they would chatspeak the day away, regardless. And there wasn't enough oldbies to choke the weeds, after a few years.
We're thinking about this in terms of six months. I think about board communities in terms of six years. Tis why I'm anti-change, mayhaps.