Okay, it seems discussion has finally winded (wound?) down on this proposal and we've pretty much agreed on the main part of the text. So a couple of final details:

1) Should I include Clause A (Auto-close) in the final proposal? I've seen several pro-thread people say they don't mind it, but I haven't seen anyone who is opposed to the thread or on the fence about it say that this clause will make any difference. At this point, unless someone says it might make a difference to them, I'm not inclined to include it.

2) Should I include Clause B (First to go) in the final proposal? Same thing as above.

3) Do we have someone to count votes? (I think Nilly volunteered somewhere upthread.)

4) When does voting start? (Due to my own personal responsibilities, my final draft of the proposal will be posted no later than 3:00 P.m. EST/12:00 p.m. board time.) So as far as I'm concerned the ballot can be set up anytime after that.

I don't like either of those clauses, but only B would make a difference to me, and even then I'm still likely to vote for it.

I know I said earlier that I liked both clauses, but I didn't pay attention to the set up of Clause A.

For reference:

Possible clause A: (Auto-close) This thread will automatically close after 6 months unless a vote of confidence is taken to keep it open. The vote of confidence may be prefaced by a standard discussion period in lightbulb at anyone's request and does not require seconds.

Possible clause B: (First to go) At the exclusive discretion of ita (or her designee to monitor board resources) if any thread needs to be suspended or closed to conserve board resources, this thread will be the first one to go.

I think I'd set up A, not so it was auto-close, but just so there'd be a vote of confidence, to provide an opportunity to shut it down. It is entirely possible if the thread is humming along and not bothering anyone, people will forget to bring up that it needs a vote of confidence. I say this, because one of the earliest pieces of legislating we did (moratorium, or grandfather or something completely different) had a provision for a gut check at three months (because we were afraid we'd hate whatever it was), and the date sailed by.

IOW, in six months, if anyone is unhappy, they can call for a vote on whether or not the thread should be kept open. But I wouldn't auto-close it, because people might just forget. Do you know what I mean?

IOW, in six months, if anyone is unhappy, they can call for a vote on whether or not the thread should be kept open. But I wouldn't auto-close it, because people might just forget. Do you know what I mean?

Well the purpose of the clause is to avoid the necessity for someone to come along and say hey, let's close the thread. Some people have stated (correctly I believe) that once a thread is open it's really difficult to garner the momentum to close it. This way the auto-close mechanism is automatic and does not have to be triggered by anyone in particular.

Anyway, like I said, nobody has come along and said that Clause A or B will satisfy their concerns of proliferation and/or resource strain, and absent that, I'm not inclined to include either of them.

I'd rather not include the sub-clauses. I like to keep all the threads on an even footing. I don't want mailing lists, or PF threads or first head on the chopping block. If we're going to add a thread, it should be able have full standing, and if we can't do it on those terms then we shouldn't do it.

I'll also note again that I think that any attempt to run the book club within the confines of Literary will be stillborn.

Actually, it would be helpful if some of the people who are especially concerned about resource issues could weigh in on whether either or both of these clauses are helpful or not. If they are, I'm happy to go with adding either one.

I'm generally concerned about resource issues, but am really against a last-in, first-out addition to the proposal -- maybe the Book Club thread will be the most amazing thing to ever happen to Buffistas and 90% of us would agree to get rid of the Buffy thread before we get rid of Book Club. I exaggerate for effect.

How about some kind of pact that we don't claim "sub-community status" if and/or when the board has to go through consolidation. That wouldn't put the thread first on the chopping block, but at some point, this sub-community thing has got to give (and I say that, realizing the only other threads I still post in regularly, are sub-communities).

I'm on the side of "no clauses, and we won't be pissy if we're told we're a drain on resources." Or, yeah, if we adversely impact on resources, I think we're big enough to let it go. Though I reserve the right to pout.

Do we have someone to count votes? (I think Nilly volunteered somewhere upthread.)

She did.

ita - can you make sure votes@... points to her?

When does voting start? (Due to my own personal responsibilities, my final draft of the proposal will be posted no later than 3:00 P.m. EST/12:00 p.m. board time.) So as far as I'm concerned the ballot can be set up anytime after that.

I'll be busy at that time, but should be able to get a ballot up a few hours after that, say by 10PM EDT, 7PM board time.