board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Only one screen name?

Post Reply   Page 1 of 10  [ 194 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 3 4 510 »
Author Message
laureanna
Post subject: Only one screen name?
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 8:29 pm
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
As the dubious user of 12 screen names on TORC, I am not sure I can stay with the proposed restriction of only one screen name on B77 (not including RP characters).

When I first signed onto TORC, I used an elven name that was, conveniently, within two letters of being the same as my real name. At first I just talked about Tolkien, the movies, and other things outside myself. The sorts of things I might talk to with a friend in RL, assuming I could find one with my unusual tastes.

Then I started to talk from my heart, about how Tolkien moved me, what the deeper meanings of the movies are, and my own personal road through depression. Unlike the extreme introvert I am in public, and unlike the fully competent person I appear to be on the outside, I was able to show my heart in my discussions. It was truly cathartic, and helped both me and those I posted with, especially in the Depression thread.

Then I started to get paranoid. What if one of those other 45,000 people signed up for TORC, and reading my most intimate thoughts, was a co-worker? What if someone at work knew I was mentally ill? Most of my paranoia was due to my depression, but at the time, I was quite concerned. So I signed on with a new personna. Being slightly dyslexic, annaerual as a screen name made perfect sense: Those who knew me and my screen name (laureanna) would recognize me, and those who knew only my real name (Laurie Ann) would not make the connection. Actually, no one made the connection. And no one could pronounce the name. So I tried another, Eaglechild, which has to do with my family heritage.

Sometime after that, the paranoia lifted, along with the depression, and a funny thing happened. I started opening up in person, to my coworkers and family. Oddly enough, they did not find me to be a paraiah. Since I no longer had to hide my true self, I went back to Laureanna, and even started using it as my email, photo storage, and IM handle with friends outside of TORC.

One day I wandered into the Bards Guild Audition Hall, and found myself instantly addicted to ABC poems and RP, much to my disbelief. I couldn't stop at one RP character, so I started Hobbituated (a family of hobbits) and Janus (and Sanuj, the two headed maia/god). Annaerual and Eaglechild found a new reason for being, as RP characters. They did occasionally get out and harass Holby (but then, one of his secret characters harrassed me, so I felt no qualms about doing so). All personae eventually came out and identified themselves, not feeling comfortable with deception (especially when a young lady tried to hit on Janus :Q )

Posterchild was supposed to be a multi-user screen name for the huge group of people (that never materialized) that were going to put together the META Movie Forum. Eventually, though, Posterchild escaped and started posting on his own, even making an appearance at the last awards ceremony.

I know there are other reasons to have multiple screen names - to deliberately hide a mod identity, a gender, or another side to one's personality, and I agree those reasons are not in keeping with the desired openness of Board 77. But on the other hand, to twist a phrase, "if aliases are outlawed, only outlaws will have aliases". There is no way to keep out multiple screen names, if a person really wants to have them.

What say you?

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 8:33 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
laureanna,

This question is before the committee right now, and you're on the committee. Why are you bringing it first to the general membership?

Seems to me it would be more efficient to let the committee address the agenda first, while members comment in the Dirt & Wires thread, as we've been doing so far.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 8:43 pm
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
Sorry. :(

I saw discussions of post counts, TOE, and such in the Business Room. As you pointed out in the Dirt and Wires thread itself, the thread is not being used for discussion by the membership on issues currently being discussed in the Jury Room, at least not for the past few weeks.

I'll remove this if you like. Sorry I started it. So much for exposing my heart-felt feelings. :(

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 10:01 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
No problem, laureanna. I'm just a neat freak. :help:

But also, I'm afraid it will confuse both members and committee if the same conversation is going on in too many place.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 15 May , 2005 10:16 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5175
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Laur, I would encourage you to repost this well thought out and heart-felt post in the convention so that we can discuss the issue intelligently. I for one am completely open to considering allowing multible screeen names.

I'm going to go ahead and lock this thread to avoid confusion.


Top
Profile Quote
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 5:08 am
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
There is something fundamentally wrong going on in this thread. Am I the only one who sees it that way?

The background:

1. I have a strong feeling about screen names, and have had a long history of strong feelings about them. I've been meaning to start a discussion about it for some time, because I am tired of the one-sided flippant remarks that some make about "devious" and "duplicitous" screen names.
2. I saw that the single-screen-name decision was about to be quickly and efficiently decided upon without any of the membership noticing.
3. The "dirt and wires" convention thread is pretty much dead. No one has posted anything of importance for weeks. Clearly, a post about multiple screen names to that thread would get little notice.
4. Others have started new threads about specific controversial topics with clear titles and clear purpose. This seems to foster the highest form of intelligent discussion, and the widest participation among the membership.

The events:
1. I, as a netizen of this board, with as much right to start a thread as anyone, started a thread.
2. Jnyusa chided me for starting a thread. Which seems odd, considering that everyone else in this messageboard has the right to speak up.
3. I explained myself, as above, and Jnyusa said "no problem". She reiterated that she thought it would confuse the members.
4. I disagreed with her thinking, so I did nothing. It was my choice not to move the thread, delete the thread, or lock the thread. All of these choices were available to me as an admin. I also chose not to post in the Dirt and Wires thread because I do not think it is the proper venue.
5. Voronwe chose to supercede my wishes, and lock the thread.

Perhaps I am making too much out of this. Perhaps it has something to do with running a fever (last time I was this sick, I spoke my mind with no trace of "pollyanna" and got myself banned at a certain message board).

So I am unlocking this thread and asking the members these questions:
1. How do you feel about multiple screen names?
2. Were you even aware, until I opened this thread, that we were discussing multiple screen names?
3. Were you planning to post about it in the Dirt and Wires thread?
4. Is this thread too confusing for you?
5. Should I just be quiet and do what TPTB say and lock this thread?

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
Impenitent
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 6:01 am
Try to stay perky
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2677
Joined: Wed 29 Dec , 2004 10:54 am
 
Laure, you are perfectly in your rights to start a thread on a topic of interest to you.

Jn, you were in your rights also in giving your opinion and criticising Laure's choice, because we are all entitled to state our opinions

V, I hate to say it, but you did jump the gun in locking without Laure's specific say so. Admins don't have the authority to do so unless it be spam or at the originator's request, as I understand it.

Is it confusing? It might be. Depends on how on top of things any individual is. I'm not on top of things, but I saw the thread title and originator and both stimulated me to check further. Laure, you may wish to link to the thread where further discussion is occurring, to facilitate cross-referencing. (Just a suggestion)

As to the multiple screen names thing...I'm aware of the problems some people have. I've tried multi-names for RP, but always forgot which name I was logged in with and caused confusion aplenty for my co-writers. I've also changed names mid-stride for reasons best left unstated here.

I think multi-names can work if who is who remains transparent.

The only problem I can foresee is when votes/elections come up if/when a member decides to cheat (Can be tracked down but would be a pain).

I don't feel strongly about it either way.

and Laure....get better soon. :hug:

_________________

[ img ]

"Believe me, every heart has its secret sorrows, which the world knows not;
and oftentimes we call a man cold when he is only sad." ~Robert C. Savage


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 6:17 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
laureanna wrote:
So I am unlocking this thread and asking the members these questions:
I'm responding.
l wrote:
1. How do you feel about multiple screen names?
Don't care either way. I've never made use of multiple user names because a) I quit rping very shortly after I joined TORC and b) I have no use for more than one. If other wants to have twelve though, that's fine by me.
l wrote:
2. Were you even aware, until I opened this thread, that we were discussing multiple screen names?
No, but I'm not necessarily aware of a lot that goes on.
l wrote:
3. Were you planning to post about it in the Dirt and Wires thread?
No, but whether I am or am not going to post about something certainly doesn't make or break an issue.
l wrote:
4. Is this thread too confusing for you?
No. It's fairly simple: some people want to be allowed to have multiple user names.
l wrote:
5. Should I just be quiet and do what TPTB say and lock this thread?
No, because we're a member operated board so you are TPTB, just as I am, just as Jn is, just as Impy is, et cetera.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 6:24 am
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Would multiple IDs work if they were handled like RP IDs, in that before one could be registered it would have to be publicly claimed by a current poster? Then someone who secretly registered a second ID would still be subject to a hearing under the charter, because of the secrecy.

The main problem I see is that our votes are currently run using polls, and since voting in polls is anonymous, the possessor of multiple IDs could vote multiple times. Public acknowledgment of multiple-ID ownership wouldn't prevent this.

Edit:
TED wrote:
laureanna wrote:
5. Should I just be quiet and do what TPTB say and lock this thread?
No, because we're a member operated board so you are TPTB, just as I am, just as Jn is, just as Impy is, et cetera.
TED, you rock. Exactly.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Impenitent
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 7:00 am
Try to stay perky
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2677
Joined: Wed 29 Dec , 2004 10:54 am
 
Primula_Baggins wrote:
Would multiple IDs work if they were handled like RP IDs, in that before one could be registered it would have to be publicly claimed by a current poster? Then someone who secretly registered a second ID would still be subject to a hearing under the charter, because of the secrecy.
When (if?) B77 is open, there will be no way of cross-checking that a new registration is not an old member repackaged (except by elaborate means, checking ISP etc - and do we really want to institute the 3rd degree?)

So if this is a real concern, requiring registration of multiple ids will rely on the basic honesty of the poster.

I don't see a way of preventing it if people have nefarious motives. Putting a policy in place would act as a stick, threatening punative measures if deception occurred but in practice unable to prevent it.

I still don't really care either way. I think if one is AWARE that a small minority want to be deceptive with screen names, one is more or less innoculated against it.

_________________

[ img ]

"Believe me, every heart has its secret sorrows, which the world knows not;
and oftentimes we call a man cold when he is only sad." ~Robert C. Savage


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 7:10 am
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Well, outlawing secondary IDs also relies on people's basic honesty, because of course one can still register them (once we're open).

The ISP/IP address type of check could wait until there is reason to suspect a covert secondary ID or a banned person sneaking back in—it seems "un-B77" to routinely run these checks on new registrations.

However, I think if we do allow this, we will have to restructure our voting system to use emailed ballots rather than polls. This means no true secret ballot is possible, and it is much more difficult for the vote counters. If we decide to admit secondary IDs, I would urge that we wait to allow it until the immediate round of huge boardwide votes is over—until the charter is ratified, at least.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 7:19 am
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
Prim wrote:
TED, you rock. Exactly.
Aw, thanks. I do what I can.

Multiple IDs do make voting difficult, but people could have different IDs with different email addresses and then the same problem would arise with email ballots. Although, if anyone is that hardcore about abusing the vote system then that's just sad.

I'm not entirely all for multiple IDs because I think they are silly (aside from RP characters). I don't see why anyone should care whether a co-worker or 3rd grade teacher is reading his or her thoughts unless you are discussing business that is not your own or blowing up people's spots or discussing the illegal activities of a co-worker or that 3rd grade teacher. For example: Steve from accounts receivable is embezzling funds and may be a member of this board because we both like this particular subject. This is something that you wouldn't want a co-worker reading, but it is also something that you shouldn't post about anyway because of the danger it poses to be freely discussing these sorts of activities. I'm not sure where this post is going, but all I can say is I think multiple social usernames are silly, but people are free to do whatever they want regardless of what I think is or is not silly.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 7:27 am
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Yeah, TED, the email voting system could also be abused, but only by someone with a concealed secondary ID, which I think we ought to have a rule against for that reason.

The rule won't prevent secret secondary IDs, but when we find out about them we can take action.

On a poll, there is no check at all. A properly registered secondary ID could vote in apoll and we would never know—oh wait.

We can disable registered secondary IDs from voting in polls. Just create a new user group that does not have permission to vote in any polls, and put the secondary IDs in that group instead of All_Members.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Frelga
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 8:09 am
A green apple painted red
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: Thu 17 Mar , 2005 9:11 pm
Location: Out on the banks
 
So I am unlocking this thread and asking the members these questions:
1. How do you feel about multiple screen names?


I haven't given that much thought to them. On TORC I found them harmless but confusing. I would prefer, when interacting with the same person under different names, to know that I am interacting with the same person. There were a few times when I was not aware of the multiple identities, and while nothing embarassing has occurred I did feel mildly annoyed afterwards.

On TORC, I've considered getting a separate ID for an RP character, but that seemed like too much bother.

Here, I can see how voting in polls could become a problem, although what Prim proposed could be a good solution. Certainly if someone wants to be dishonest, they will find a way. OTOH, if one feels very strongly about a subject of the vote, and is very invested into the outcome, the temptation to vote multiple IDs could be quite strong. Let me make clear that I am not thinking of anyone in particular who might act that way, and I hope no one will. I know for sure that laureanna would not.

The one legitimate use of alternate ID I've seen on other boards was when a participant wants to ask advice on an intensely personal subject from the group of people she trusts without revealing her identity. In one case (not TORC), it was a woman who was facing an abusive situation, and she registered as "anonymous_board_member" or some such to seek support. She did feel compelled to disclose her true identity as the conversation progressed, and in any case most of us recognized her even before she fessed up.

2. Were you even aware, until I opened this thread, that we were discussing multiple screen names?

No. I am not aware of many things in this world, though. But if the subject is this important to someone, starting a separate thread is certainly an appropriate step.

3. Were you planning to post about it in the Dirt and Wires thread?

No. I probably wouldn't even if I knew it was, as it is not something I was concerned about personally. In fact, I probably wouldn't have even checked this thread, except it was locked when I first saw it. I can never resist a locked thread.

4. Is this thread too confusing for you?

Remarkably, no.

5. Should I just be quiet and do what TPTB say and lock this thread?

I don't see why, and frankly was puzzled that the thread was locked at all.

Perhaps I am making too much out of this. Perhaps it has something to do with running a fever (last time I was this sick, I spoke my mind with no trace of "pollyanna" and got myself banned at a certain message board).

I hope you feel better soon. Fever is no fun, and it does make it harder to remain cheerful and objective.

_________________

GNU Terry Pratchett


Top
Profile Quote
*Alandriel*
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 10:49 am
*Ex-Admin of record*
Offline
 
Posts: 2372
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 10:15 am
 
Laureanna: elsewhere I've seen you say you'd (probably?) have to resign from the pannel since RL has kicked in so I come here to post re multiple IDs.

As you can probably guess, that discussion has taken place on B77 before. Sadly I can't find the original thread to back up what I'm about to say. I guess it got deleted some months back when we started to open up more.

Thing is... back then (and just as valid now) was great concern over the 'deceptions' that can take place when multiple ID's are allowed. Many posters (from the 'original' lot) spoke up and shared how they've been hurt and misled by people using (and abusing) multiple ID's when allowed to post board wide with them. There has also been intense discussions over the pro's and con's why some Mods elsewhere have chosen different names to excercise their authority with.
In the end though - pretending that you are someone else is plain and simply a deception. Many times it's harmless, but often also what was meant as a harmless prank can turn into something very ugly. Back then, the membership at large decided that it was not worth the potential risks. After all, you are who you are - why hide that (except in the RP forum where many of us go around in different clothes). Being somebody else is 'fantasy' and as such ought to stay in the realm of fantasy - hence the restrictions for multiple IDs to the RP forum.

But, you might say, I would like to pretend to be someone else and I ask you, at the cost of what and which true benefits to do get out of it?

How would you feel if you post together with another person's ID and then find out, weeks and months later perhaps, that that poster really was someone else, and ID known to you? Wouldn't you feel misled?

Sure it can be funny - but I've personally seen it too many times that the fun is carried too far and people get hurt in the end.

B77 has not gone as far as completely disallowing multiple IDs, but putting them where they belong - into the 'fantasy' forum ;) I think that's the best compromise possible :)
_______________
Resident witchâ„¢ [ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Rowanberry
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 10:53 am
Can never be buggered at all
Offline
 
Posts: 828
Joined: Fri 04 Mar , 2005 3:50 pm
 
I'm a bit sitting on the fence regarding multiple screen names. Myself, I don't find them necessary, even for RPing purposes; I get perfectly well into my character, even if I post with my regular screen name. Someone else may be able to get better into the right mood it they're posting as their character; I don't have problems with it as long as I know who is behind the secondary username. But, what I'm NOT comfortable with is people hiding behind a secondary identity. (This especially bothered me in the case of the TORC mods; fortunately, at least some of them came out of the closet in this regard.)

For the record, on most sites I frequent, multiple identities are forbidden or only allowed in exceptional situations, for example if a user has login problems with their regular screen name and has to inform the board admin about it. Still, the possibility of abuse can never be fully ruled out, though it is of course dealt with if found out.

Get well soon, Laure. :hug: And, don't worry, here you are allowed to speak your mind, as long as you don't offend anyone.

_________________

People, you and me, are not trusted. The right doesn't like us because we don't do what we're told by our betters, and the left doesn't like us because it secretly thinks we would be on the right given half a chance and a lottery win. And both think we should not make our own decisions, because we might make the wrong ones. ~ Terry Pratchett


Top
Profile Quote
Jnyusa
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 1:12 pm
One of the Bronte Sisters
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5107
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 8:54 am
Location: In Situ
 
laureanna,

I did not chide you. I asked you why you did this when there was an identical discussion in the Jury Room and you are on the committee.

There was also an exchange about this in the Jury Room, and it was on the basis of that that Voronwe locked the thread, not because I asked a question in this thread.

I hope you can see now why I questioned this, because six of the committee members are discussing the issue here instead of addressing the clause of the charter where this appears. Now we all have to go back and forth to see what was said in two threads about one sentence.

But you know, the really important thing is not that we work as a team but that every member get to do whatever they want. So I'll post a link to this thread in the Jury Room, if someone hasn't already done so, and we can discuss and ratify this sentence here in this thread. Since the issue is more important to you than it is to everyone else, you can handle the voting.

Jn

_________________

"All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."
Epigraph on the tombstone of W.C. Fields.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 2:40 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5175
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
laureanna, you left out one small relevant piece of the "procedural history". After Jn suggested that it would be better to discuss this issue in the convention first,
laureanna wrote:
I'll remove this if you like. (
I took this statement as permission to lock this thread. I'm sorry if that was incorrect. If you, or Impenitent, or anyone else, thinks that I am unfit to be an admin I will gladly step aside. I too have majory real life issues (both personally and professionally) that are currently requiring great amounts of time and energy, and I really do not need the extra aggravation.

What most upsets me is this statement:
Quote:
2. I saw that the single-screen-name decision was about to be quickly and efficiently decided upon without any of the membership noticing.
Laureanna, you did not even give us a chance to discuss it in the convention. The implication that the committee would have just disregarded your concerns is extraordinarily upsetting to me.

If, every time a committee member decides that an issue raised in the convention should be discussed first by the membership, I have to ask this question: what's the point of having the committee in the first place?

I am very upset and discouraged. :(


Top
Profile Quote
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 3:43 pm
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
voronwe wrote:
I am very upset and discouraged. :(
Me too. Too discouraged to argue about it anymore. I've resigned from the constitutional group. I clearly don't have the constitution for it. Every time I bring something up, it seems, I've covered ground that was already covered, or that is inappropriate to cover now, or that does not go along with what everyone else wants, or is "just not the way we do things". I've lost all enthusiasm for the whole process and I just don't care anymore.

You know you are not unfit for duty, V. It's just that you did something that, in my imperfect understanding of the new rules, was not something an admin should do - you locked a thread without being directly asked to do so. I can see how you interpreted it differently from me. I was just irked that when I said, essentially "I will take care of it" and was waiting for a reply from Jn, you came in and did it instead, before I was ready to take action myself.

Jn - chide is not the right word, but I couldn't think of a gentler one. You were pointing out my error. I did not know that (some) committee members are not allowed to discuss (certain) issues about the future of B77 outside of the jury room.

I'm not aware of the discussion that lead to V's locking the thread. I'll have to go back and search for it.

But you know, the really important thing is not that we work as a team but that every member get to do whatever they want. So I'll post a link to this thread in the Jury Room, if someone hasn't already done so, and we can discuss and ratify this sentence here in this thread. Since the issue is more important to you than it is to everyone else, you can handle the voting.

Sounds like you are feeling tired and discouraged, too. Since I'm clearly not the team player you expect me to be, it is just as well I've left.

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
Axordil
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 16 May , 2005 3:48 pm
Not so deep as a well
Offline
 
Posts: 7360
Joined: Tue 11 Jan , 2005 3:02 am
Location: In your wildest dreams
 
A lot of things impacting the membership are being decided by the convention. That's what it's for. That's why we've asked for input in the business room from the membership. That's why we have open discussions on everything in the convention threads.

I operate on the assumption that everyone who cares about how this site is set up and operates looks in on the discussions. Heck, that's how we got most of our newer conventioneers. That doesn't mean there isn't room for discussions here...but it does mean that the potential for confusion exists as to where the decisions are actually being made.

Anyone, conventioneer or other member, opening a discussion here on something before the convention needs to note right off the bat that it is indeed being discussed there, as opposed to the post count thread, which may predate the convention (and certainly has not come up for dicussion) or the ToE threads (which were not being discussed at the time in the convention, and which now supply a model for charter amendment from the membership).

_________________

Destiny is a rhythm track on which we must improvise.

In some cases, firing the drummer helps.


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 10  [ 194 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page 1 2 3 4 510 »
Jump to: