I guess I kinda feel that we're trying to close the gate after the horse has left the barn. I kinda feel that this got moved into proposal and voting territory way too quickly. This could have been a b'cacy discussion for a few days. Instead we lept very quickly into a proposal and it's bringing these voting issues up. We've had many discussion where issues have been somewhat resolved that never end up here in light bulbs, and I guess I'm just kinda surprised that this one ended up here.
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!
Way up above I said this:
I am fine with (a) taking no Official Action against multiple log-ins in general; (b) strongly encouraging people who create jokey sock puppets to identify themselves in the profile of said sock puppet; and (c) generally discouraging the use of same. Then we just keep on keeping on with people not being assholes.
I think the "strongly encouraging" and "generally discouraging" parts need to be in writing, and I think we should vote on it.
I don't think there is a consensus (since if there is one, I can't tell what it is), and I'd like to know what everyone thinks.
See, I don't want the term Sock Puppets in there anywhere. If we are going to add the verbage I just want to have it very matter of fact and dealing with users that maintain multiple logins.
I agree with ND.
Oh sure, I agree with that -- I wasn't trying to draft anything, just confirming that I still agree with myself from yesterday.
Hm. I agree with ND that it went too quickly into LB. Is there any way to move something back to B'crazy after it's been in LB? (I mean, is there a precedent.) Maybe Betsy could withdraw her proposal, we go back to B'crazy and hash it out for a few hundred more posts (I'm serious, not being snarky) and then come back to LB if that was what we decided?
Also, just wanted to say that I still heart Buffistas big time. Reading these proposal/voting/admin-type discussions is fascinating to me (ok, maybe I'm just a wonk) and I love how everyone states their points eloquently and then someone comes in and breaks it up with a joke just when things get a little too het up.
So in that vein, I humbly offer:
So, like, just for the sake of clarity, it's worthwhile to add something to Etiquette/Rules (right next to the citation of "please don't sign up as Josh Whedon that's stupid" and "please don't sign up as Fuckface that's juvenile").
Sooo tempted to make a cockpuppet named Fuckface.
Finally, love how apropos my tagline is.
For posterity:
How many bulls does it take to shit a consensus? - aurelia
Well, I know at least one person who could sign up as Fuckface. But he wouldn't.
Hm. I agree with ND that it went too quickly into LB. Is there any way to move something back to B'crazy after it's been in LB? (I mean, is there a precedent.) Maybe Betsy could withdraw her proposal, we go back to B'crazy and hash it out for a few hundred more posts (I'm serious, not being snarky) and then come back to LB if that was what we decided?
Personally, I don't see the value of debating the issue in Bureaucracy for a few days and then bringing it here. Here at least there is a goal to the discussion. Not to mention a time limit.
But for some of us we don't think that the vote is a suitable goal for this, and it's been a big shadow over top of it during the whole discussion.
As Robin said upthread-- the vote is not so that we can be Congress and have all sorts of Bureacrazy... it is really a poll so that we can see how everyone feels. The problem with being a multi-timezone board with users who frequent the board in varying rates is that it is hard to tell whether a consensus has been reached or whether it is just a consensus of those people who have a) had the stamina to make it through the discussion and/or b) happen to be on the board all the time. It is not so much different than consensus as a way to see what the consensus really is. Otherwise someone (and who that someone is I do not knoow, because we do not have a moderator or owner) has to decide what that consensus is. And I think that puts to big a responsibility on the shoulders of ita adn Jon, who will be making the changes, if any, we the Buffistas, deem necessary.
I say-- don't think of this a a presidential election, but more a "where do we want to order takeout from" kind of thing.