Not in a Lenin way.

How about a Jeremy Bentham way, then?

Awww, man, I miss the 11th Hour.

The women's genre website? Yuppers. Majorly. A friend and I occasionally bat around the idea of reviving it, but then thankfully come to our senses. Someone should, though.

Matt can speak for me ANY time. His walk through history was awesome and I completely agree with his more recent post.

OK. Jon, did you edit the text I originally sent you, or are you OK with my updating what I'd originally written? I'll need to take out or rewrite bits that have chagned due to time-passage, but it should be a quick thing to do.

So are we bullshit consensing that it doesn't mean to be ratified? I mean, basically, it's a bunch of links and summary, so NSM with the Jerry Maguire-style mission statement, but I wanted to check.

Also, where will this be linkable from? WHere will people find it when they're in the middle of a discussion?

So are we bullshit consensing that it doesn't mean to be ratified?

You've got my bullshit. Consense. Vote thingie.

Also, where will this be linkable from? WHere will people find it when they're in the middle of a discussion?

FAQ? Links?

Modifications to new ettiquette text:

• Maybe you've started posting, and you feel like you don't fit in. Maybe you think your posts are being ignored. The good news? Most of us feel like that at one time or another. Honestly. The bad news? There's probably no easy way to fix it. Some suggestions: remember that threads like Natter move very fast, and it's impossible for everyone to keep up with everything that's said there. Also remember that there are a boatload of threads, most of which have their own subcommunities, and many of which move at slower paces. No one person belongs to every section of the board, and no one person makes all the decisions. If you still have an issue, bring it to Bureaucracy, and we'll talk about it.

• We're a very independent group here. Because of this, we react badly to anything that comes across as preaching. We also react badly when told we should modify our behavior to accommodate someone or something. But there's more good news: it's entirely possible to have a disagreement with people on the board and still remain a member of the community. No one will kick you off the board for having a different opinion. Just think before you post.

Do we want a guacamole link? Do we have text for the FAQ guacamole citation?

We should probably do a general edit/de-wordinessation of the etiquette while making these updates. It started as a short alternative to the filk text, and we've been adding things to it without cutting. I'd like to keep it at easy-skim length.

I was thinking the same thing, Lyra. Sounds like a good idea.

I consense.

(edit: about bullshit-consensing George. Not about de-wordinessing the etiquette doc, which I also agree with, but wasn't what I was posting about.)

I'd like it to be part of the FAQ/About/How-to/Etiquette chunk in the left nav (not linked from within those documents or the links page, which a lot of people will never scroll all the way through, especially in mid-discussion), and it should be labeled in a way that is not "cheesebutt" nor even, sadly, "George", but something possibly meaningful to newbs. Site history? Site culture?

A semi-related not from the etiquette page

Consistent demon-like behavior may earn a warning from the Stompy Feet.

This should say a warning from the community, or something -- because the Stompy Feet aren't the ones who decide this.