DXM -- Let me know if you would prefer to receive the votes in any sort of fancy format. My coding options are pretty flexible.

e.g. the subject line could read: YYNP-YNY-YP-:Joe Buffista

where "P" means no preference, "-" means no vote, and the rest is self-explanatory. I'm just brainstorming for something that you could easily parse and keep track of.

Thanks, DX, for offering to count the votes.

Jon, that subject format looks fine, thanks. They'll all have the same "From:" line, right, so that I can filter them to a separate folder?

They'll all have the same "From:" line, right

the present code has the from line be the voter's email, but I can change that to whatever you like. How about I change it to "votes@buff...."?

Aw, DX, thanks for taking one for the team. The whole counting thing sounds onerous. A lot like me trying to get my grades into the computer last night.

I'm officially volunteering now to count the next one.

Jon, that would be fine.

t starts writing a 15 question proposal for next ballot

Thanks DX.

It could be worse. I could be counting California recall ballots...

DX, the to line will be "votes@buffistas.org", anyway.

On Angel and the Previouslies:

I'd strongly prefer not to have the syndicated Angel eps discussion in the main Angel thread. I don't think it'll do either conversation justice, and it will lock out the UnAms. One of the most enjoyable things about the original Prev thread when Buffy was first syndicated was getting to hash out the eps with people we never got to talk with in NAFDA. So I'd prefer to keep the Previously thread if at all possible.

That said, I liked the earlier suggestion of moving the Angel Previously discussion into the Buffy thread if it were slightly revamped. That's something I'd like to hear more opinions on.

I see Kat's proposal is simple housekeeping. Trying to get rid of threads that are redundant or else low traffic AND without a vested subcommunity.I see Kat's proposal is simple housekeeping. Trying to get rid of threads that are redundant or else low traffic AND without a vested subcommunity.

This is more or less where I stand. But I'm not at all certain that we're all on the same page as to what constitutes a subcommunity, and whether or if it should get any consideration. To me, the various subcommunities are an important part of this board, even the one's I'm not a part of. They're not the only important thing, or the most, but they do have value.

I'm not saying that anything should be untouchable. I am asking that we try to get a little clearer on what we need to do and how urgently before we move on some of these. I only have a vested interest in one, really, and I know some of you are saying "shut up on this already, Brenda," but I think it's important.

There are lots of changes on this ballot that, if passed, can be put into effect with very little effect on anybody. So it's not a matter of "doing nothing" if thread that have advocates are spared the chopping block, even if only on a contingency basis. I'd be more comfortable if on the DS/SM/Farscape issue, we built some time into it - as in, give it a month or so, and see what happens. If, as we near the Oct. 1 D-day, it still seems like there are big problems to resolve, then go ahead with consolidation if it passed. Maybe Kristen and ita could be appointed the judge and jury on that determination, so we get away from both the advocacy and the extended discussion, but the change gets made only when it's clearer that it's needed. Hell, I'd even vote in favor in that scenario.