I think 6 months is too long -- 6 months ago, I was just back from my honeymoon, Buffy's season premiere had just aired, and the board was brand new. But OTOH, 3 does seem like it might feel like we're deciding the same things every time we turn around. 4 is probably Just Right.
(If it does turn out that the vote is 3 vs. 6, I'd vote 3.)
Ok, I think we can agree there's a consensus on six as a ballot option? So can we hear from people who have an opinion on three v. four?
So can we hear from people who have an opinion on three v. four?
Good idea. Go three-or-four people.
You know what's weird? Is that, as Jess (I think) pointed out, 6 months ago was the site's birth, and that feels like foreverago, but 3 months ago was when mieskie was suspended, and that feels like yesterday.
I think it might be the whole get-used-to-site feeling that helps the 6-month anniversary feel like foreverago. Conversely, 6 months ago was the last time I picked any cherry tomatoes from the (now dead) plant on my balcony, and when the TV season (roughly) started, and my birthday.
OK, I think three months is just right. (Note: I'm not sure this will remain my opinion, but I'll spin it out a little.) It's the half-life of the board. If, at this point, we had discussed a single issue two times, for a week each, that seems OK. My birthday was three months ago, and that was forever ago! Time FLIES.
Also? Shit doesn't HAVE to be revisited.
3 Months. It's a more natural division of time.
Clarification: 3 months should be on the ballot, vs. 4 months. My previous post should not be read as an endorsement of the "3 Months" party. Equally, this post should not be read as an endorsement of the "6 Months" party.
All posts should be read as an endorsement of "Monkey".
Tom-- I sort of agree with you about the forming of the ballot with the campaigning-- except if we didn't do this, we would never get to voting. Please believe me on this!