'Serenity'
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!
Any time you want to add language about policy or procedures on the board - then I THINK it needs to go to vote.
It seems that this is not clear though. We may need to take a look at this and actually clarify exactly what is intended. "community decisions" is pretty wide open. Things like changing putting "buffista" branded items up in a cafepress store are community decisions, and I don't want to see us voting on those.
We need to clarify exactly what is a community decision.
but Wolfram, we had a consensus that involved adding language about policy to the board - THAT in all previous occurances has been something we vote on. Just because the people who are choosing to be vocal are in agreement does not mean that we just ignore the agreed upon procedures of the board.
But, ND, would you like it if the board made rules like "sock puppets need to put their real name in their profile" (which I think is a GREAT idea, and lets us have SPs without the secrecy squick) without polling everyone? Voting is basically just a way for everyone to have a say in the decision. It's not some traumatic big deal--I think of it as closer to a poll on LJ.
We need to clarify exactly what is a community decision.
feel to make a proposal about it when this one is through.
Personally, I think this issue can be solved by people exercising their right to use the block feature. I don't think any new language needs to go up at all. And if that is what the original proposer thinks too (Betsy HP), then she can withdrawl the proposal.
It kills me that we seemed to have a real consensus from both sides of this issue, yet folks still want to vote on it just because we can.
I was happier with the consensus. It seemed like there was an agreement to address the issue through etiquette rather than policy and procedures. I think etiquette changes can be done by consensus, whereas policy requires a vote. Etiquette violations (if consistent and abusive) can trigger disciplinary action in themselves, but only as a pattern of behavior. Why isn't that sufficient for the dealing with multiple board identities? It gives us the leeway to let it slide when it's obviously a joke, and gives us a way to address the issue if it's being abused. And it's not voting on every issue. It seemed like the best and healthiest solution.
but Wolfram, we had a consensus that involved adding language about policy to the board - THAT in all previous occurances has been something we vote on.
It has? Figuring out a change in policy has required a vote, unless there is a clear consensus. Codifying that consensus into language - not the same thing. We made a number of changes to the FAQ last year that didn't require a single vote. If everyone is on the same page - why go through the aggravation. It's like drafting by committee.
I'd rather not see a vote at all. I'd like to see a trend of issues in LB not having to be voted on all the time. Voting to me seems like a last resort - a necessary evil. Like the kids couldn't settle it themselves on the playground and had to get the teacher to sort it out. It kills me that we seemed to have a real consensus from both sides of this issue, yet folks still want to vote on it just because we can.
This. Plus, voting gives this issue more legitimacy than I think it deserves. I'd prefer a vote to see if it should go to a vote, but failing that level of stupidity, I'd rather see the consensus that was established, acted upon.
ETA: Hold the phone! I like *this* best!
Personally, I think this issue can be solved by people exercising their right to use the block feature.
Also I'm with ND about (not) setting precedents on what we vote on. The less we legislate behavior and humor on this board, the better.
Again, I think we can make changes to Etiquette by consensus.
Changes to Policy by vote.
I think we should deal with this as an Etiquette question.
Figuring out a change in policy has required a vote, unless there is a clear consensus.
I could be wrong and welcome finding when this happened, but I think that once the voting was approved in 2/2003 - that we have voted on all policy changes.
We made a number of changes to the FAQ last year that didn't require a single vote. If everyone is on the same page - why go through the aggravation. It's like drafting by committee.
We any of those changes dealing with policy or procedures on the board? Because I looked and I couldn't find ones that were.