Also, not everyone checks the board every day. I consider that shocking, and I will not admit how often I check the board, but the reason we have a long discussion period is to allow people to weigh in, even if they only check the board every few days.

Yeah, as much as I want our support to be timely, the idea of circumventing the voting process makes my skin crawl. There have been times when we've bullshit consensed about things to take action earlier, but once we get to a voting stage, I think we need to follow our own rules. Opportunity for every voice to be heard, and all.

Because I'd like to be sure it's something we all agree we want to do. The voting procedure was put in place because it often seemed we all wanted to do something.

Even if the voting is 100% pro support, I still think affording dissent time to speak up is important in every decision we think is important.

Very much this.

Also, why is this an issue of timeliness? There are plenty of other ways to show your support now (that have been linked elsewhere). If the strike is over soon, no harm no foul. If it's for the long haul, taking the time to follow our procedures is not going to make much difference.

From past experience, support strikers is like supporting people in grief, it's easy to be there at the beginning, it's sticking around that really counts.

Because I'd like to be sure it's something we all agree we want to do. The voting procedure was put in place because it often seemed we all wanted to do something.

We came up with our processes to determine a set discussion time, then a set voting time and we abide by what those votes decide.

Just because one proposal seems as if it will easily pass and we can skip one of those steps, I feel better knowing that our procedures are in place. Most discussions brought up for a vote here are anything but clear and I don't like the idea of a precedent of ignoring those steps and rules.

at first I was very in favor of posting a logo before the vote. Now I understand where the wait-and-vote-ers are coming from and I'd prefer to abide by the voting process as well.

Look, the fact that this vote will end up being unanimous is important, but not the reason that I think the usual procedure should be truncated. I feel a certain sense of urgency with showing support as a collective. Buffistas are a not-entirely-unknown subset of fandom. And I feel that in a fait accomplit like this one, it would be better to rush to support. Caution is easy. The people who create the things that create fandom are getting royally screwed. If ever a cause was tailor-made for us, this is it.

I get that not everyone feels that urgency, or feels that it's valid. I get why people would like to bend over backwards to let hypothetical dissenters have their say. I get why we set up voting in the first place, and why doing anything differently skeeves people.

But I'm frustrated by form over substance, principles and precedent be damned. I feel hoisted by my own petard.

I guess I don't understand what issues (including this one) we might vote on that need to have the voting period truncated? What purpose do you feel shortening either of those periods will serve that is not being served now, Wolfram?

I hope I've phrased this properly. I am only trying to understand your position, and not pick a fight.

I don't know if our cheesebutt requires that we vote. It tells us how to vote, and what requirements must be met when we vote, but there is still stuff upon which we don't vote.

Anyhow, I'm for supporting the writers. I'm also for doing it as quickly as Buffistas can do it ( which is probably not very ).

Also, why is this an issue of timeliness? There are plenty of other ways to show your support now (that have been linked elsewhere). If the strike is over soon, no harm no foul. If it's for the long haul, taking the time to follow our procedures is not going to make much difference.

From past experience, support strikers is like supporting people in grief, it's easy to be there at the beginning, it's sticking around that really counts.

I agree with this.

What purpose do you feel shortening either of those periods will serve that is not being served now, Wolfram?

(Note to Sean: I'm responding in the spirit of trying to explain myself. I see and understand the arguments for voting. I also see that most people don't feel the strange sense of urgency that I do, so of course the voting makes sense to them. But given that I do feel this urgency thing, let me try and help you understand where I'm coming from.)

Simply put, I feel there's an urgency for boards to show broad and visible support for the writers. It's not based on any empirical evidence, and I get that it's totally emotional. As a result, I'm frustrated that we're standing around discussing why we need a vote rather than whether there's any opposition to the idea (which there hasn't been and I'd bet folding money there won't be).

Allyson, bringing the snark, really put it best in B'cracy:

Look, if one of us was like, dying, and a logo would make a magical cure happen, we'd put the friggin logo up, right?

I get that she was kidding, but I really feel like we're bending over backwards to wait a week for this particular vote for only two reasons: 1) to make sure we don't miss the weighing in of one hypothetical buffista who may oppose the idea; and 2) to make sure we don't set a bad precedent. Well instead of alienating the one hypothetical buffista, we're delaying a strong and meaningful show of support to a cause we all think is pretty damn important. That's a price. And in a way, we are setting bad precedent by clinging to our rules when it would be appropriate not to. The Cheesebutt should have some flexibility.

From past experience, support strikers is like supporting people in grief, it's easy to be there at the beginning, it's sticking around that really counts.

To play on the grief example, I feel like we're delaying a grievance call because of a formality that (again in my opinion) was not meant to be used in this context. It's true enough that sticking around really counts, but getting in that grievance call as early as possible means a lot too.