That doesn't strike me as effective. It's the status quo from when Betsy brought it up, a status quo that was bothering people.
I'm very sorry if she tipped off anyone about your cunningly concealed herd of cows.
Simon ,'Safe'
Voting Discussion: We're Screwing In Light Bulbs AIFG!
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!
§ ita § - Apr 15, 2005 7:34:08 am PDT #5569 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Laura - Apr 15, 2005 7:36:30 am PDT #5570 of 10289
Our wings are not tired.
Oh I understand that. I'm good with the status quo this time is all.
And probably should stop posting and do some work, and yet my fingers are less than cooperative.
bon bon - Apr 15, 2005 7:47:21 am PDT #5571 of 10289
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.
And when they say "I don't want to. Stop yelling at me." what happens next?
Blocking. Thank you, coders!
NoiseDesign - Apr 15, 2005 7:51:50 am PDT #5572 of 10289
Our wings are not tired
It does seem that between blocking and our policies for dealing with "demon-like behaviour" we have good tools in place to deal with sock-puppets.
If this goes to vote, one of the options needs to be for no change in board policy on this.
I also think that it could be a simple addition to the registration info that doesn't even mention sock-puppets, but merely says something along the lines of "Users with multiple accounts are requested to make a note they they are the same person in the user profile"
Jesse - Apr 15, 2005 7:59:43 am PDT #5573 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
If this goes to vote, one of the options needs to be for no change in board policy on this.
Clearly. Wouldn't a vote have to be change something or don't?
NoiseDesign - Apr 15, 2005 8:01:19 am PDT #5574 of 10289
Our wings are not tired
Clearly. Wouldn't a vote have to be change something or don't?
My experience around here is that all things need to be stated explicitly. The vote ballot has no requirement to have a "no change" option. I'm merely making sure that if we go that route that it makes it onto the ballot.
Jesse - Apr 15, 2005 8:05:36 am PDT #5575 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
I just don't understand how it would not have a "no change" option. Isn't it going to be "Let's add this to the etiquette, yes or no?"
NoiseDesign - Apr 15, 2005 8:07:54 am PDT #5576 of 10289
Our wings are not tired
There is no requirement for that. The ballot could easily read:
Option one:
Change board policy to no double log-ins.
Option Two:
Board faq is changed to add [faq verbage inserted here]
I want to make sure there is a third option
Option 3:
No change.
Topic!Cindy - Apr 15, 2005 8:08:33 am PDT #5577 of 10289
What is even happening?
pr*f*r*nt**l v*t*ng
§ ita § - Apr 15, 2005 8:09:04 am PDT #5578 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
pr*f*r*nt**l v*t*ng
Doesn't affect what's on the ballot.