Mal ,'Our Mrs. Reynolds'
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!
Question: If a proposal doesn't get the requisite number of seconds, does that also get sent to been-there-done-that-hell for 3 or 6 or 12 months?
I think it should, but that raises the sticky question of how long a proposal is considered "live" for seconding before it gets put on the closed list. Since the whole voting thing was started to avoid decisions being made by "whoever's in the thread at the time."
It was a silly joke, I made it. I confess.
And I didn't want to be left out of the heaping abuse on Sean, but didn't feel the need to swear, so I repeated it.
I think it should, but that raises the sticky question of how long a proposal is considered "live" for seconding before it gets put on the closed list.
Yeah. t sigh How about within 24 hours of it being proposed? You'd have to second something within the same meeting where it was raised by Robert's Rules of Order wouldn't you? If you waited long enough everything would get seconded.
Definitely between 3 and 6 months, things change too quickly around here (despite the evidence of Bureaucracy) for a year. That noted, I'd vote for 6 months, because the point is to remove some friction from reconsidering everything. Three months won't be enough time for that.
Up your ass with a prickly pear, Sean. White font: I love you, Man. t sniff
I feel 6 months is the best option. It allows enough time for things to cool off. Whereas three months seems to flash by here. I think revisiting a topic after 3 months would lead to feelings of, "Didn't we JUST talk about that?"
Also are we talking about 3-6 months from the time of proposal or the time of being voted down?
How about within 24 hours of it being proposed?
I was thinking 48 hours but I'm not married to it.
I like 24 hours too. But if a motion is not seconded it doesn't mean it's closed. It means it needs to be re-motioned (or re-moved) and then the seconds start again. Although maybe we want to put a week limit between re-motions so it doesn't get silly.
From the time of being voted down, I think.
I'd say a 24 hour period for seconding is too short. Wolfram, for example, has 3 and it's only been a few hours, but some people can't access the board every few hours. I was off for over 24 just yesterday/day before.
Please ignore the crazy person. I forgot where I was.
For selfish reasons I'm inclined to say 48 too, but I honestly think 24 is long enough for sufficient active members to see a proposal and second if they want to. And as long as it can be re-motioned after a week (without having to wait the 3 or 6 month period) I think 24 hours is sufficient.
I actually think this (the how long from seconding) could be aded to this proposal.
For selfish reasons I'm inclined to say 48 too, but I honestly think 24 is long enough for sufficient active members to see a proposal and second if they want to.
From the voting patterns we've seen, the majority of voters do their voting in the first 24 hours. It might be worth cosidering (just as a strategic point for folks doing proposals) that if you propose something on Saturday you might have less chance of getting your seconds than on a Tuesday (during the day). But we'll just leave that notion out there as a bit of parliamentary cunning.