I, for one, need to start planning now how I can use the Pharmacy Museum as a way to write the whole trip off on my taxes.

Heh. Good luck! That would be sweet.

Can. Not. Wait. For NOLA. My first F2F! And Heather's first F2F! Wheeeeeeeeeeee! I've never been to New Orleans and I am psyched.

Not getting involved in the post-vote shenanigans, because obviously I am not impartial At All.

Accept and move on.

(And thanks for all the work that went into having the vote this early.)

I said it earlier, but move on.

Me....whatever number we're up to now.

We should be talking hotel options at this point, yes?

I'm at work in a theatre right now. I'll take a look at this more when I get home. I am giving anyone who wants a revote to speak up and make their case. Now is the time to discuss it. After this we either revote or we move on and if we move on then this issue is closed. So if disussion is to be had NOW is the time.

I didn't vote, I didn't really want NO to win, I have mad love for preferential voting, and especially seeing the results I think in retrospect it should've been used. And, I am currently listening to a very odd Jona Lewie track called The Seed That Always Died. But I'm in favour of moving on. The voting method may not have been perfect, but it was valid, it was agreed upon beforehand, and there was nothing procedural to be a problem. So I think the vote and the result were legitimate.

I suggest we learn from this and consider preferential voting for the next one. But for this one, I'm happy regarding NO as the legitimate choice.

So can I be one of the thirty, if I wasn't one of the sixty?

I didn't vote, I didn't really want NO to win, I have mad love for preferential voting, and especially seeing the results I think in retrospect it should've been used. And, I am currently listening to a very odd Jona Lewie track called The Seed That Always Died. But I'm in favour of moving on. The voting method may not have been perfect, but it was valid, it was agreed upon beforehand, and there was nothing procedural to be a problem. So I think the vote and the result were legitimate.

I'm with billytea, on every point in this paragraph, except for maybe not wanting NO to win (the reason I didn't vote was that I couldn't decide, and could see that it was going to be close, and didn't want my "Oh, just pick one already!" vote to be the deciding one). Also, not listening to Jona Lewie. But agreeing with every other point there.

I was for "check all you can attend". I didn't vote for NOLA. But ya know what? A whole bunch of people did. And I'll still plan/try to be there.

Accept. Move on.

Accept and move on.

I have no idea how to even bring this up, but oh well, I will anyhow ... are we still actually anti-preferential voting, or is it just residual dread around the idea from what happened when it first came up? That is, would anyone actually have thrown up their hands and shrieked if asked to rank the cities 1, 2, 3, 4, or does everyone just think other people would? Because I feel like I've heard a lot more of the latter.

(NB: I still think sticking with NO is the right pick. This is more about future decision-making.)