Allyson, you've made it pretty clear whom you want making decisions, and whom you don't want involved in the process.

I think you'd be very surpised.

And this is really not helpful.

YMMV

Sophia, I'd rather have a small team of advocates make community decisions on behalf of the community.

Yeah, me too.

Quick! Let's consense!!

Just kidding.

Jesse-- you just about made me bust a gut.

Just so we're all clear, I was only kidding about trying to solidify a bullshit consensus.

Also, reading WX Bureacracy 1 (date 2001) is actually amusing me because we are fighting about thread proliferation. pretty much with the same posters and the same arguments. No wonder we all got irritated, it was the same arguement for 3 years!

Jesse: The Gang of One.

She's so certain, she consenses with her own self.

Allyson, it sounds from your posts as though you think our regular voter turnout of 85-100 is low.

I don't think it is. We may have over 900 registered users, but that's everyone who ever registered. I'd be surprised if our bank of active posters ("active" meaning more than 1 post/week) was more than 150 people. Out of that, an 85-person turnout is pretty good.

As for moderation via a Council of Watchers, eh. I'm another one who has suggested it and seen it get shot down before my page refreshed. I don't think it would be the Worst Idea Evah, but I do think the process of deciding who they were, assigning duties, and figuring out governing policies (things like lifetime duty vs. short terms, elected vs. appointed vs. randomly chosen, etc.) would tear this board apart FAR more than it would save us trouble.

I would love to know how many active users there are at Buffistas, just for general community knowledge sake. By active I mean, "Posts three or more times per week." YAMV, of course.

I do think the process of deciding who they were, assigning duties, and figuring out governing policies (things like lifetime duty vs. short terms, elected vs. appointed vs. randomly chosen, etc.) would tear this board apart FAR more than it would save us trouble.

I unsubscribed from the LAista list because it took 4 people 6 hours and 248 posts to figure out a time to see a movie. Not my place to say, "Shad up, youse, we're going here, at this time, and that's FINAL."

I'm not empress, I know. I have no patience. My judgment is not always Wise.

But Bureacracy is 8 people making 600 posts about an issue, and we're Not Supposed to Talk About That. It bugs. Illusion of consensus. I just feel like on Tim Thread, for example, we should battle it out, and whomever is left standing, wins.

I have a minority opinion on that, I understand why, and it's cool.

Sophia, just wanted to chime in and say your longish post about the Buffistas and your experience of them was wonderful - pretty much sums up my experience (except of course for the getting around to posting so much later)

On the subject of Bureaucracy (the thread and the process - and I never would have spelled that right if it wasn't at the top of the page), I view it as necessary evil. I think this thread accomplishes EXACTLY what is was designed to do. Does it please everyone? No! That's kinda what it was designed to do to. It takes care of the crap that no one else wants to see. And I think, for the most part, people Doblerize enough that I think it's working. Does this sometimes lead to endless bouts of Bureaucracy-roundy-round (this being the conversational equivalent of Nascar)? Sure, but that's the nature of the beast.

-Signed, a newbie poster but eternal lurker.

Also, I am reading over the WX Bureacracy thread for Nutty,

Anyone who is contributing to this process is a saint. A sorely tried and tempted saint, I think Anne would agree, but a saint.

I'd rather have a small team of advocates

Oh, I hadn't understood that.

you've made it pretty clear whom you want making decisions, and whom you don't want involved in the process.

I think you'd be very surprised.

Very curious now. What is Allyson's unexpected slate of candidates? Does she want Hayden as the philosopher king, or Dana as the dignified regent, Plasmo-Moonlit-Angus as a stray alien triumvirate, ita vs MechaKrelboyne as The People's Champions, Shawn and Wolfram retained to file competing class-action thread name proposals? I would have expected Allyson's preferred form of government to be Allyson Threadstraddler, Vengeful Deity, but then that wouldn't surprise me so it can't be it.

But Bureacracy is 8 people making 600 posts about an issue, and we're Not Supposed to Talk About That.

I think this is a "democracy is the worst government ever invented" argument. Sure, most people don't participate, and some have disproportionate influence. When someone feels strongly about something, though, they have a voice and no one can tell them to shut up. If the Bureaucrats bring up something too outrageous for the mass of Buffistas, we can vote it down. With moderators, all we could do is bitch and second-guess.

I phrased that neutrally, but I feel it personally. I feel like an equal contributor here, even though only one or two of the 600 posts are mine. I feel like the votes are fair mandates. When the Stompies have taken some actions without the backing of a vote, I've supported them and agreed, but I could also see myself being convinced to resent them because I had no voice in the process. So democracy makes a contented citizen out of me.

I agree that talk about the Gang of X concept was kind of suppressed, but "bullshit consensus" covers it, and voting fights that.