Buffistas

You're talking to Serenity. And, Early... Serenity is very unhappy.

River ,'Objects In Space'

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!

First Previous Next Last Recent

msbelle - Apr 14, 2003 8:17:01 pm PDT #702 of 10289

I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb

Nutty,

I think the problem is, that is not what I proposed. The way I understand it, and I am open to input here, is that some one proposes something in Bureau. People second that. It comes here so people can debate the pros and cons of it as a proposal. I think adding things like time that a warning is active and steps from warning to suspension alter the proposal beyond what was posted.

I regret now that I did not cover all issues in my original post. I am really all for just taking over, but I don't think that is what is what the board will tolerate.

Hil R. - Apr 14, 2003 8:19:32 pm PDT #703 of 10289

Sometimes I think I might just move up to Vermont, open a bookstore or a vegan restaurant. Adam Schlesinger, z''l

I am really all for just taking over, but I don't think that is what is what the board will tolerate.

I think that what we decided was that the original proposer can modify the proposal. That way things brought up in here can get in, but we don't have to try to get the group to agree on how to word it.

Daisy Jane - Apr 14, 2003 8:20:49 pm PDT #704 of 10289

"This bar smells like kerosene and stripper tears."

I agree with Hil. I think you can modify, but I'd rather you didn't. Doesn't mean you can't.

Steph L. - Apr 14, 2003 8:21:13 pm PDT #705 of 10289

Unusually and exceedingly peculiar and altogether quite impossible to describe

I have no comment on msbelle's pants.

However, I like the proposal.

I'mk not sure if we're talking length of time or not. If we ARE, I favor 6 months after a warning and then clean slate. I also favor 10 Buffistas who are offended.

If we are NOT talking length of time yet, or number of Buffistas, then ignore the preceding paragraph.

But my stance is firm on msbelle's pants.

Daisy Jane - Apr 14, 2003 8:22:33 pm PDT #706 of 10289

"This bar smells like kerosene and stripper tears."

You're getting footprints on them Steph! Besides, you shouldn't be standing. You should be resting.

msbelle - Apr 14, 2003 8:23:52 pm PDT #707 of 10289

I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb

get offa my pants!

Heather, would you be against the time period thing even if it was worded as 6 months or 2 months? I tend to draft things in a yes/no set-up, but time period could be a choice. ONLY a choice of 2 things though - do not get me started.

Steph L. - Apr 14, 2003 8:24:42 pm PDT #708 of 10289

Unusually and exceedingly peculiar and altogether quite impossible to describe

I am lying on my stomach. But I am not lying about being in favor of the proposal. (Man, that was cheesy.)

What IS the next step, after we vote on this proposal? Do we vote on a length of time for the warning to be in effect? Or do we draft the wording of the Official Warning?

msbelle - Apr 14, 2003 8:29:01 pm PDT #709 of 10289

I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb

drafting of the official warning should be going on at the same time as this discussion. It should not be voted on IMO, but should be agreeable to the stompies.

Next step would be one person put up a proposal about time of warnings and procedure from warning to suspension (unless I include those on this ballot also) - everyone else start requesting people to be warned.

Daisy Jane - Apr 14, 2003 8:39:20 pm PDT #710 of 10289

"This bar smells like kerosene and stripper tears."

I'm against adding it because...well maybe it's moot now that there doesn't seem to be much of an argument about the 1st proposal. I just didn't want arguments about the time issue getting caught up in arguments about the procedure.

Laura - Apr 14, 2003 8:40:47 pm PDT #711 of 10289

Our wings are not tired.

I think that what we decided was that the original proposer can modify the proposal. That way things brought up in here can get in, but we don't have to try to get the group to agree on how to word it.

Yes, this.

I put the latest version of wording of an official warning about the 2nd post of this discussion.

I would like to see as much as possible concerning the warning, suspension, banning process covered as quickly as possible. Hopefully finalizing these procedures will lead to more peace and harmony.

First Previous Next Last Recent