Ok guys - jump off the literally thinking band wagon for a second and get pragmatic. We are talking about brand new people - first posters. They say "hi" and i wanna vote, and they are there. We have had the occasional "You guys are crazy - God is great" thing a few times, and we knew these people would not last long. Some of us would sit back and watch, and others would jump in the feeding frenzy. I'm suggesting that we let the newbies introduce themselves before voting. That is about a open as it can be, and includes everyone who wants to be here.
Beyond that though - Dan's Idea was better anyway. So that is where I am sitting with it now - Especially if we are close to having everything we need right now.
Tim Rhodes wrote:
> Bill wrote:
> >These problems are definitely real - I agree it is not an easy thing to
> >do. What we are really talking about is participation I think.If we are
> >going to "vote" on things, then suppose we have a group like the Snow
> >Leopard collective, with users registrting individualy, a group could skew
> >the vote a particular way. What we need is an "outer circle" in which
> >everyone who has been here for a little while can watch the newcomers and
> >decide weather they have some major issue that would exclude them. Maybe
> >exclusion is better than inclusion as a system - and all the oldsters will
> >not have to deal with the issue.
> Yes, once we have a solid Them in place we'll be able to really streamline
> the process and move on to establishing a lasting Church...
> (BTW, if this is starting to sound like a slippery slope, there's a reason
> for that -- once you've created a working self-replicating memeplex you will
> have abdicated all your control of it over to natural selection; a less than
> noble, egalitarian cause.)
> -Prof. Tim, Humble Servant of the Glorious Meme, Second Order, CoV