Well, I think Jn's suggestion that we handle this like ratifying the Charter is an excellent one—then the matter is simply settled, once and for all, and can be added to the charter.
Finally, if Imp's text is approved (are you going to vote on this?), I think it would make an excellent addition to the Charter as an article all by itself. We could paste it right it. So ... perhaps you could make sure that this vote meets the requirements for ratification and then we've killed two birds with one stone.
Ratification requirements:
• discussion for ten days (check the start date of this thread)
• vote for ten days, two weekends inclusive
• 39 people must vote for the vote to be valid
• 67% of those who vote must approve
This thread started May 4, so discussion could end this Saturday, May 14—though maybe we should let it run through the weekend? Last weekend we were not near a consensus, and I think we ought to have a full weekend of discussion of Imp's proposal.
If we ended the discussion May 15, the vote could begin Monday the 16th but would have to run until the 30th, a full two weeks, to include two weekends. Of course discussion could go on longer if there still appeared to be issues.
In the constitution threads, Jn puts up a draft ballot for discussion some time before the vote begins. Imp, would you be willing and able to draft a ballot on this? Or is there another volunteer? I can help, of course, and I'm sure Jn will offer advice if needed.
It might be best if we tried to arrive at a single proposal that could then go up for an up-or-down vote of the full membership. In other words, the participants in this thread are, in a way, an ad hoc committee like the constitution committee. But anyone may join the discussion at any time.
How does this sound to people?
Edit: "Grown-up" sounds a little patronizing to me. I think to avoid "adult," "discussion of topics not appropriate for children" is clear.