I think the difference is whether it would require a proposal and re-vote to reopen, rather than a group of us just saying that we want to use it again.
Yes, but I feel that if it is going to be re-opened there should be a proposal and re-vote.
Wash: You want a slinky dress? I can buy you a slinky dress. Captain, can I have money for a slinky dress? Jayne: I'll chip in. Zoe: I can hurt you.
'Shindig'
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!
NoiseDesign - Dec 20, 2005 7:08:50 am PST #6070 of 10289
Our wings are not tired
aurelia - Dec 20, 2005 7:14:19 am PST #6071 of 10289
All sorrows can be borne if you put them into a story. Tell me a story.
Is there anything about voting to close a thread that philosophically precludes our far future descendants from voting (via space e-mail with their brains) to reopen it?
My understanding of the LotR addendum is that the thread won't be archived, so it can be reopened. Are you saying that's what you want for Book Club, instead of just proposing a new thread if you get a new idea for how to keep it going?
My understanding is the same as ita's.
Jon B. - Dec 20, 2005 7:32:29 am PST #6072 of 10289
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
My take on our rules and procedures is that any thread could be reopened with a proposal and a vote, but such a vote could not occur until six months after the vote to close (due to our 6 month moratorium rule).
I also agree with ita that the only difference in the LotR thread is that, because it won't be archived, should we decide to reopen it later, we don't need to start a new thread.
Wolfram - Dec 20, 2005 8:58:40 am PST #6073 of 10289
Visilurking
My point is that there have been months without many posts in Literary, and a few months with a lot of posts in Book Club. My proposal is less that there should never be a Buffista Book Club, and more that we really only need one thread to discuss books, rather than two seldom-used ones.
I thought you wanted to close the thread for inactivity in which case I'd ask that the thread not be archived so we can reopen it at some later point if there's interest. But if you want Book Club to continue on in Literary, I just don't see it happening in any form.
Jesse - Dec 20, 2005 9:28:58 am PST #6074 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
My proposal is to close the thread. Period. What happens after that is not my decision, nor part of my proposal.
Kat - Dec 20, 2005 3:26:27 pm PST #6075 of 10289
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo
Jesse, it's my understanding that you get the final wording on the ballot as it is your proposal. Or am I wrong?
Jesse - Dec 20, 2005 3:39:24 pm PST #6076 of 10289
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Oh, right. What I mean is that my proposal is just to close the thread, period, and not anything else.
Laura - Dec 20, 2005 3:50:13 pm PST #6077 of 10289
Our wings are not tired.
Proposal: Close Book Club Thread.
It would be the least complex ballot we've seen. No pre%*^%$ voting needed or anything.
Kat - Dec 20, 2005 3:59:40 pm PST #6078 of 10289
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo
mwah! Laura, as ever, brings in the funny.
§ ita § - Dec 20, 2005 4:26:04 pm PST #6079 of 10289
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
But think of the Australians!