I wanna die in bed surrounded by fat grandchildren, but guess that's off the menu.

Jenny ,'Bring On The Night'


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!


Burrell - Mar 20, 2003 10:04:12 pm PST #76 of 10289
Why did Darth Vader cross the road? To get to the Dark Side!

I'm leaning towards 6 months, but that only because I can imagine wanting to poke my own eyeballs out if something kept being raised again and again.

I feel new thread votes could be brought back up every three months without much friction.

Bah! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha hooo! t wipes tears from eyes A ha ha ha ha ha ha hee hee ho hoo hoo!


Rebecca Lizard - Mar 20, 2003 10:06:34 pm PST #77 of 10289
You sip / say it's your crazy / straw say it's you're crazy / as you bicycle your soul / with beauty in your basket

I like four months better than three months or six months.


DavidS - Mar 20, 2003 10:14:34 pm PST #78 of 10289
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."

How about some kind of control on repeat proposals beyond just once? Two rally attempts, then it is dead, dead, dead.

See, but that requires another vote/decision. If we go with six months we've got a ready brake on that. I cannot emphasize enough that this issue is in place primarily to reduce friction. As somebody who has been very active in discussions about board protocols since back at WX, we're trying to self-medicate here. We know we talk a lot. We know we analyze and dissect. But unchecked we swallow our own asses whole and everybody gets really really grumpy.

We are looking at how to preserve open discussion and democratic decisions without eating our own asses. So we have open talks, but we put a stop on it at some point. Six months is better than three months. For me at least, it is much more important to have the friction removal / brake aspect in place than it is to have quick-acting responsive board changes. Slow changes are better in most cases.

It's been very very difficult to move to a voting process. These wheels should turn slowly.


Kat - Mar 20, 2003 10:17:05 pm PST #79 of 10289
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo

Hec has convinced me. I like 6. Six months is a ready brake.

And frankly, to paraphrase Nutty from bureaucracy, if a non-show thread can't survive 6 months gestation, maybe it shouldn't be a thread?

edited for homonym issues.


askye - Mar 20, 2003 10:19:27 pm PST #80 of 10289
Thrive to spite them

I'm confused and tired and shouldn't be trying to make decisions at midnight about stuff like this.

I'm going to bed and I'll think about this, by the time I get back online I'm sure there will be many more posts on the subject.


Deena - Mar 20, 2003 10:20:21 pm PST #81 of 10289
How are you me? You need to stop that. Only I can be me. ~Kara

Withdrew the question as not really appropriate for this thread.


Gandalfe - Mar 20, 2003 10:47:25 pm PST #82 of 10289
The generation that could change the world is still looking for its car keys.

See, I'm for open discussion, as opposed to limiting it. This is, after all, a discussion board, isn't it? I think that 6 months is just too long - that is saying that we still could not revisit issues that came up in the first month or so this place was open. Think about that. Think about what you were talking about at the end of September - were your views on it exactly the same as they are now?


Kat - Mar 20, 2003 10:54:13 pm PST #83 of 10289
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo

Think about what you were talking about at the end of September - were your views on it exactly the same as they are now?

Yes. Because we weren't talking about all the changes we wanted to make. We were talking about how great things were.

I'm a stubborn git, and my opinions aren't often easily swayed. But let me tell, my opinions on new threads - haven't changed at all. My opinion on unchecked, unfettered growth, also not so much with the changing.

I have no problem with 6 months though.

I think the constant meta discussion drives people insane and makes people bail and say fuck it. Moreover, I hate rehash because it irritates me personally. If every week a person who wanted a war thread brought it up, I'd be crying for a user filter after every post they made.

t deletia to remove snark.

The thing is, we're a discussion board. We aren't a nag-until-you-get-what-you-want board.


P.M. Marc - Mar 20, 2003 11:04:25 pm PST #84 of 10289
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear

The thing is, we're a discussion board. We aren't a nag-until-you-get-what-you-want board.

In fact, yep. I'm going to just let Kat post for me in all the threads, I think.


Gandalfe - Mar 20, 2003 11:04:56 pm PST #85 of 10289
The generation that could change the world is still looking for its car keys.

See, the idea of telling someone that THEY CANNOT SAY SOMETHING is utterly and absolutely abhorant to me. Browbeating them is fine, I have no problem with that, but free speech is fairly important to me, strange as that might seem.

And, as far as the meta annoying people, I hate to say it, but keeping the board small means that the meta goes all over the place, whereas if there are certain places for the meta (like Kafka, and here) it gets contained to those people who want to deal with it.