There already is a baseline. If one Buffista wants the matter settled enough to propose, and four Buffistas agree enough to second it (that is, agree it should be settled, regardless of their stance on the proposal itself) it goes for a vote. If not enough people can be arsed to vote (is our MVT 42?), it is settled by apathy. If enough Buffistas vote, it is settled by the results of the vote. If, as a result of the discussion, the proposer decides it wasn't worth it, s/he can let the proposal die without going to a vote.
I will wait to see what Betsy comes back to write out as a clarified proposal. If it is only a suggestion that the puppeteers ID themselves, then a consensus seems fine and the proposal would be pulled off the table for voting. If we wanted to add that IDing yourself either in your tag or on your profile page is board policy - then I think we need a vote, even if every poster in this thread seems to agree with it.
And just to wrap up something from last night. In case anyone is unclear on the warn/suspend/ban policy, it is:
The following procedure will be in place for taking action for unacceptable behaviour.
1. A user-complainant will try to resolve the complaint on-thread. If unsuccessful,
2. A user-complainant (does not need to be same person) will post in-thread that it's time to meet in Bureaucracy. In Bureaucracy, user-complainant will outline the complaint with linky citations, and request an Action.
3. At least 10 other users in 48 hours second the need for an Action. If 10 other users do not complain within the 48 hour period, no complaint can be made again about that particular incident, unless it is being used to illustrate, with others, a pattern of demon-like behaviour.
4. As soon as the request for action receives 10 seconds, Stompy sets forth Action.
Warnings will be in effect for four months. After four months, the slate is wiped clean.
A Warning will be notified over email, in the thread of incident, and in Bureaucracy. A Suspension will be notified over email and in Bureaucracy. A Ban will be notified by email and in Press.
Hmm.
All along this has been an Etiquette/FAQ proposal, not a formal bylaw. I agree that we need the 4-day period to discuss it.
My understanding of the bullshit consensus is the following entry in Etiquette:
"Please be aware that posting under multiple pseudonyms annoys some Buffistas. If you use more than one Buffista account for the same person, please identify yourself in the profile of the subsidiary accounts. Thus the secondary account "Zeitgeist" would have the profile entry "this is really Sign O'The Times". This helps people distinguish unlurkers from game-players."
I think Susan W. summed up my feelings on the matter very well. I'm throwing my hat in with the apparent consensus that this is a board etiquette matter rather than something requiring a formal vote and rule, and that now that several people have voiced strong dislike for sock puppetry it would be courteous for people interacting in this manner to identify themselves in profile for the benefit of those bothered by it.
Thus the secondary account "Zeitgeist" would have the profile entry "this is really Sign O'The Times".
I found this confusing, because it took me second to figure out Sign O'The Times represents a regular poster name. Maybe a sample name that's not so abstract?
I think it should be "Bob" and his sockpuppet should be named "Carrot Lover" but that's just me.
OK, Betsy. If I created a sockpuppet called "Life and Everything" (to go with The Universe), board etiquette would require me to put in my profile or tagline that "Life and Everything" is really Fred Pete in disguise.
