I propose that at anytime someone may say, "Thread talk!" And then for the next two hours no one may post anything but funny ideas for future thread titles. Hard to get upset and argue when you are cracking up over someone posting Angel 4: Two Souls, No Waiting or Firefly 3: Taking Up A Collection To Send Jasmine To FOX.

If those are the types of things that might crack you up, that is..

And remember, a motion to adjourn is always in order.

And remember, a motion to adjourn is always in order.

Good luck with that one. (remembering desperate pleas of 'can we stop talking about gerunds!')

Nutty - You can send me your document and I can work on it and we don't need to even mention it here until a beta version is all done.

I propose "Firefly 3: Big Damn Zombies, Sir."

Hee!

Yes!

Allyson, quit hogging all the fault! I'll take my half too, and I apologize to the board for any recent handwringings I might have caused.

Don't forget to share, you two. There's plenty of fault for everyone to get some.

Well, as the one who asked some specific questions of Allyson, and seemed to stir this rutting kerfuffle up again, I think I have a portion of that blame coming my way. And as a newbie, that racks up bonus mileage (or something).

Okay all, I'm going to be really honest here, and it's embarassing.

I don't understand the language you use.

I don't understand what a quorum is.

I didn't understand what preferential voting meant until Kristen explained it to me in about eight words all under two syllables.

I don't understand the language used in the proposals.

I don't like to vote because I don't know whether a YES vote means that I want something, or that I don't want something.

You're speaking 72 IQ points above me.

And i am so tired of feeling stupid. It makes me angry, embarassed, and pissed off.

And i am so tired of feeling stupid. It makes me angry, embarassed, and pissed off.

WORD.

When proposals are made, with their user-complainants and the heretofores and the whatnots and wherefores, I get confused. If I can't understand the proposal, I figure I won't understand the ensuing discussion -- then I look in Lightbulb to make sure, and yep. There's a lot of posts I don't understand. So I don't follow the discussion, and I don't vote because I don't understand the proposal or what I should be voting for.

I'm a college-educated professional, so I don't think it's that I'm stupid.

It's frustrating. I still don't understand what the grandfather proposal does.

I'm sorry, Wolfram. I shouldn't have used you as an example. That was rude.

Me too, Betsy. I've felt bad all night about snipping at you, and this is the first time I'm gotten back to a computer to apologize. After this post, I'm stepping back from right hand threads for a few days for my sake as much as everyone else's.

There's a lot of posts I don't understand.

And this. I'm a law school grad and I find myself having to read some of the voting mumbo-jumbo over and over and sometimes it still doesn't sink in. So count me among the educated and stupid people too.

See y'all in the lefties.

I still don't understand what the grandfather proposal does.

Right now, after we vote on something, no one can bring up the same topic again for six months. This was one of the main selling points of having voting -- that old decisions wouldn't be continuously revisited. The grandfather proposal extends the "six-month-rule" to decisions that we made before we started voting on things. For simplicity, Betsy proposed that no old decisions could be revisited until Sept. 20 (six months after she first made the proposal).

That doesn't mean that all old decisions are going to be revisited on Sept. 20. Just that they can't be reviewed before that date.

Is that more clear?