board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Advanced search
Unanswered topics | Active topics
Board index » Board Management » Threads of Historical Interest

Binding vote reconsideration committee

Locked   Page 20 of 23  [ 442 posts ]
Jump to page « 1 … 18 19 20 21 22 23 »
Has enough of a change in circumstance occured to make another ballot necessary on this issue? (STRAW POLL ONLY)
Poll ended at Wed 27 Jul , 2005 4:45 pm
Yes
  
 67% [ 8 ]
No
  
 33% [ 4 ]
Total votes: 12
Author Message
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 01 Aug , 2005 8:40 pm
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Ah, okay. Then I withdraw my objection.

_________________

The 11/3 Project
Top
Profile
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 01 Aug , 2005 8:46 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Frelga wrote:
You know, I agree. Err... "deemed nececssary"?
I thought of 'deemed' there also. Or, to preserve the Charter language, we need only change 'it' to 'this' if people are having trouble with the current construct:


D) Delete the thread (this is a permanent deletion). According to the Charter, a thread may be deleted by boardwide vote if this seems necessary to preserve the peace, security or continuance of the board.

or

D) Delete the thread (this is a permanent deletion). According to the Charter, a thread may be deleted by boardwide vote if this is deemed necessary to preserve the peace, security or continuance of the board.

Edit

I don't know what to say now about the name edits. I guess I'd still go with just the non-member names.
Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 01 Aug , 2005 8:51 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
"deem" OTOH is one of my favorite words, so I'm putting it in. :D And it's so Tolkien too...
Top
Profile
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 01 Aug , 2005 8:53 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
:D
Top
Profile
Ara-anna
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 01 Aug , 2005 9:29 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
oh alright, give us the ballot.

:scratch: Just a bit confused thats all. Too much budget stuff, damn feds finally signed the transit/highway bill and now the mad dash to gobble up money and all that.

and deemed is better.


I deem we need a drink after this.

_________________

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone
Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 01 Aug , 2005 9:52 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
I deem I need one now! Gotta love working from home...:P
Top
Profile
tolkienpurist
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 01 Aug , 2005 10:54 pm
Unlabeled
Offline
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Thu 03 Mar , 2005 4:01 am
Location: San Francisco
 
Is it permissible to say that I agree with everything that's been pointed out since Ax posted the ballot?

Um, just one thought:

Why not just say, under the "Delete the thread" option, "Delete the thread. The thread will be removed permanently and will not be moved to deleted thread storage." or something like that. That way, it's 100% clear that deleted thread storage is not involved, and doesn't quite have the ring of "permanently and completely".
Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 01 Aug , 2005 11:52 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
I don't know, that's awfully clear and precise. :D
Top
Profile
tolkienpurist
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 12:34 am
Unlabeled
Offline
 
Posts: 1646
Joined: Thu 03 Mar , 2005 4:01 am
Location: San Francisco
 
OK, fine. How about the following?
Quote:
This thread represents the hallowed intellectual property of individual members of board77. The Rangers of board77 maintain a repository for those threads which are kind of deleted, but not actually deleted, and certainly not deleted permanently and completely, called "deleted thread storage." In contrast, if you select this option, you are voting to delete this thread PERMANENTLY and COMPLETELY - verily, casting the intellectual property asunder, banishing it to the very nontransparent depths of the ocean, deeming this thread not even worthy of the second-class-citizen closed-off status of the deleted thread storage forum. You are making a board-altering decision that can never be undone - nay, not even by the valiant efforts of the Google Cache. If you value your fellow posters' - or your own - sacred thoughts so little, please select this option.
Ahem.

:devil:
Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 12:59 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
Is that an ahem or an amen at the end? ;)

Could we be done? I would still like a little more clarity on the names option, in terms of Voronwe's understanding vs. Hobby's idea. I lean towards the latter, but as I said before, I don't think there will be much practical difference.
Top
Profile
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 1:54 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5186
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
I'm fine with Hobby's suggestion (though I'm not quite sure how it would be worded in the ballot).
Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 2:36 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
I have been thinking about that. How about:

B) Replace screen names with anonymous placeholders (real-life names have been removed already). This will apply to names of individuals mentioned in discussion, as opposed to direct address. The disclaimer may also be changed (see Question Two).

Thus ANYONE who is being "talked about" is depersonalized, while people actively involved in the discussion are not.
Top
Profile
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 2:46 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5186
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
That's fine with me. How about the placeholders. Are we going to decide what they are going to be?
Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 2:48 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
If we don't specify, the standard ***** will be used, I believe, and at this point I don't think anyone is objecting to that. :D
Top
Profile
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 3:36 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
tp, I think we'd better stick with your first suggestion. :D

I particularly liked
Quote:
which are kind of deleted, but not actually deleted, and certainly not deleted permanently and completely
:D

Quote:
D) Delete the thread. The thread will be removed permanently and will not be moved to deleted thread storage. According to the Charter, a thread may be deleted by boardwide vote if deemed necessary to preserve the peace, security or continuance of the board.
I think the parentheses would still work well there, and that a comma with 'it' might serve better than 'and', and that perhaps we should capitalize Deleted Thread Storage throughout the ballot, thus:

D) Delete the thread (the thread will be removed permanently, it will not be moved to Deleted Thread Storage). According to the Charter, a thread may be deleted by boardwide vote if deemed necessary to preserve the peace, security or continuance of the board.

Quote:
B) Replace screen names with anonymous placeholders (real-life names have been removed already). This will apply to names of individuals mentioned in discussion, as opposed to direct address. The disclaimer may also be changed (see Question Two).
Here is another possible wording, note I changed the order of 'have been removed already'.

B) Replace the screen names of individuals indirectly referred to in the discussion with the anonymous placeholder *** (real-life names have already been removed). The disclaimer may also be changed (see Question Two).
Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 3:46 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
Cerin--

You're not one of those annoying people who HAS to have the adverb before the verb, are you? Because then I find agreeing unlikely to happen. :D

I'm fine with the rewording on D and the caps for DTS throughout. I am concerned that if we say "indirectly referred to" people may misunderstand which names are targeted; if I say "Joe is a jerk" am I referring to Joe directly or indirectly?

BTW, can't use a comma in the parenthetical section of D; it needs a semicolon. ;)
Top
Profile
Eruname
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 3:56 pm
Islanded in a Stream of Stars
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8748
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:24 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website
 
Oh geez....most people aren't even going to notice the grammar. I know I certainly don't. :P

_________________

Abandon this fleeting world
abandon yourself.
Then the moon and flowers
will guide you along the way.

-Ryokan

http://wanderingthroughmiddleearth.blogspot.com/
Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 4:02 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
The problem is that we are bound by the grammar when it comes time to implement whatever gets approved, and if there is an unclear instruction that results from a misplaced piece of punctuation, it can make a huge difference.

Read "Eats, Shoots, and Leaves" if you don't believe me. :D
Top
Profile
Cerin
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 4:03 pm
Thanks to Holby
Offline
 
Posts: 2039
Joined: Sat 26 Feb , 2005 4:02 pm
 
Axordil wrote:
You're not one of those annoying people who HAS to have the adverb before the verb, are you? Because then I find agreeing unlikely to happen.
No, I don't think so. :D I just thought it sounded better, but am happy to defer to your preference. :P

Quote:
I am concerned that if we say "indirectly referred to" people may misunderstand which names are targeted; if I say "Joe is a jerk" am I referring to Joe directly or indirectly?
That would be indirectly. Directly would be, "Joe, you're a jerk." But if you see a potential problem there, I again defer. :)

(I think the semi-colon v. comma is a matter of preference, too.)

:D
Top
Profile
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 02 Aug , 2005 4:11 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
Cerin--

I agree about the indirect/direct thing. We may have to provide an example or two in the discussion in any case, and that seems to me a better use of our time than struggling for the perfect wording that would make an example unnecessary. So let's use yours, which is more than sufficient unto the need.

I'm going to leave this up for another couple of hours for comment, but I want to submit it for the vote TODAY.
Top
Profile
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Locked   Page 20 of 23  [ 442 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page « 1 … 18 19 20 21 22 23 »
Jump to:
Board index Contact us | Delete cookies | All times are UTC

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited

Privacy | Terms