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.

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.

My proposal is to close the thread. Period. What happens after that is not my decision, nor part of my proposal.

Jesse, it's my understanding that you get the final wording on the ballot as it is your proposal. Or am I wrong?

Oh, right. What I mean is that my proposal is just to close the thread, period, and not anything else.

Proposal: Close Book Club Thread.

It would be the least complex ballot we've seen. No pre%*^%$ voting needed or anything.

mwah! Laura, as ever, brings in the funny.

But think of the Australians!

Eh, if the Aussies want preferential, we can weight the votes as follows:

1st choice (weight: 100%)
2nd choice (weight: EAT IT!)

Yeah, I understand it with the LotR thread. With this one, I'd think I'd want the option to archive it, since if there was revived interest, a new thread could be started without too much loss of continuity. Since it'd be starting with a new book.

Part of the benefit of closing threads is the neatening, and I wouldn't want it to sit out there forever, closed but not archived.