'Destiny'
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
This way lies madness and despair.
I'm already there. I'm Worst Case Scenario Gurl. What's the Worst Case Scenario? Can we live that? It's where I'm at, mentally, all the time. What's the worst thing that can happen if we make this decision?
To me, if all of our decisions turn to pumpkins at midnight, it's anarchy. Hey, where's Victor?
To me, if all of our decisions turn to pumpkins at midnight, it's anarchy.
They don't. Trust the Buffistas to have the minimum amount of good sense to decide which decisions can be re-discussed, and which are eternal.
They don't. Trust the Buffistas to have the minimum amount of good sense to decide which decisions can be re-discussed, and which are eternal.
Why?
If eternal yammering really is the true price of freedom, and if we can yammer long enough to render the grandfather clause proposal moot, then should we quietly sort of pretend we consensed over it? Like quietly allowing old men to keep their rent control until they die? Not like, with all the thread realignment I'm foreseeing, anything else (except emergencies) can get voted on in the next, oh, month.
Betsy, as proposer, I guess I'm sort of asking you whether you'd feel OK withdrawing Grandfather as almost unnecessary, so Allyson may proceed. Or anyway, I think I'm under the impression that it's almost unnecessary, so correct me if I'm wrong. What do you think?
Put it up in Discussion, and I'll withdraw it if we agree it's unnecessary. I'm uncomfortable unilaterally withdrawing it, because part of my impulse to withdraw is that I'm sick of the whole damned thing.
Suggestion - we hold the grandfather proposal like a big stick.
If someone challenges a decision that would fall under it, before the six months expires, then discussing and voting on it gets priority above that challenge. If not, yeah, what Nutty said about consensing around it, sounds good. Although, I am not going to argue against Betsy if she still wants to go with it, because she's already waited so long. FWIW, I don't think we need the complete list before we vote on Betsy's and I have no problems with how she originally worded it.
xpost with Betsy. Her post made me decide to withdraw this suggestion.
They don't. Trust the Buffistas to have the minimum amount of good sense to decide which decisions can be re-discussed, and which are eternal.
Why?
Because the alternative is another long and torturous series of endless kibbitzing and quibbling to define the rules and framework of, among other things, what is up for re-discussion and what isn't, what falls under the moratorium and what doesn't, and whether the original moratorium vote included ordinarily non-re-discussable elements or not.
In other words, trust the Buffistas to avoid all the things you say you hated about this thread.
Betsy, Lightbulbs is open for you.
In other words, trust the Buffistas to avoid all the things you say you hated about this thread.
Wolfram, I don't trust that. Because it keeps happening. Immortaliz(s)ation? Dude. You can't stop.
Backing away before my ish becomes my war.
100 people decide for 900. I'm thinking it's a problem, but I'm working within the confines of it, because there seems no way around it. It's the elephant in the corner of every decision by vote. The illusion of consensus.
Wolfram, I don't trust that. Because it keeps happening. Immortaliz(s)ation? Dude. You can't stop.
Don't take everything so seriously, Allyson. It was a simple spelling question, and it's what we do here.
Are you saying you don't trust the Buffistas or are you saying you don't trust me? Because if it's the latter, well at least you can trust the Buffistas to keep me in check. Or haven't you been paying attention?