If this person bothered me SO TERRIBLY I suppose I always have the option of not posting here or posting here less
The problem is Enchie, why should you have to post here less because you feel uncomfatable because somebody else is invited in? That makes no sense, it's like having squatters. You suddenlt find you have no access to your home because somebody has broken in ans claimed it. Is that right?
There's an idea - the veto wouldn't work if 100% of the rest of the votes were yes - no abstentions, no "no's,"
Least then the majority would be somewhat protected.
Sorry Estel, I have to poke at this. It is not about protecting the majority. Their posting life is not going to be dramatically altered for the worse if X is not invited. That person is not here yet, so they will not suffer except that they would not have the oppertunity (yet
) to post. the only person who would be efected really is the member here who would veto. If they have real issues, they superseed the desires of a potential member.
Think where we came from, and who we are. We need some mechanisim to protect us before the damage is done. The needs of the members here must far outweigh the needs of those who potentially may be members.
And lets face facts. In reality, there are very few people who would be vetoed. This is a worse case scenario response, not an everyday whim.
I would expect it to be used maybe once.