Not a problem, I was just wondering about why we decided to limit it.

Because frankly, even if the number were 2, 9, or 11, I'd probably be voting yes in the hope of getting through this one.

But I'm happy with it as it stands if that's what the decision was.

I printed and got caught up last night and have 5 mins. left on my lunch break. I trotted here to advocate for 4, because there was a request backthread asking 3 and 4s to come on it and advocate away. But there're ~125 more messages that I just scanned/don't really have time to read; and we've gone from 3, 4 and 6 on the table to having only 6 on the table? And you're posting it tonight?

Yes. If 6 does not work for you, vote no.

Okay. VOTE NO against 6.

The Phoenix started about 6 months ago. Think about how much discussion has gone on in 6 months. That's a long time to have something banned from being brought up.

Natter 6 started Dec. 28. Today is March 25 and we're on Natter 10. 4 full Natter threads (almost) = 3 months.

I think that 3 months is too little time, and 6 too much.

Four would mean that instead of twice a year, items can be looked at again three times a year. Four = about 6.5 Natter threads. And that's about right.

VOTE NO on 6.

The Phoenix started about 6 months ago. Think about how much discussion has gone on in 6 months.

Every time someone says this it reaffirms my thought that 6 months isn't that long. YMMV

Java - If you vote yes, you're also agreeing that we'll revisit in three months to take a vote of confidence on this decision (only), to see if we think 6 months is too long, too short, or just right.

The ballot is ready to go. Usual place.

thanks jon!

Let me know if you want any language changed, Sophia.

So, do we count early votes, or do we make people vote again?

(As long as nothing changes in the ballot, I'd say keep them.)