Hey DMS,
I have a question, how do we want other members to continue conversations that feel like they are being filibustered? I noticed that Walter (@wandrson) mentioned me in a post on the Banning of Alcohol thread. Where He was questioning the proxy system enforcement of DMS from our last meeting. I was about to post that “No one checked my proxy vote to the best of my knowledge. It seemed that my proxy was granted based on trust that I wouldn’t lie about it.” But, I didn’t post this because in my opinion I would be adding to the already off-topic conversation from the original post about the alcohol topic.
I’m not trying to chastise Walter, I see that he is pushing an agenda for more openness and control for the membership. I agree and support that agenda, I’m just also watching him continue to push topic after topic into debating that point or discussing the ways of implementing it rather than having a conversation about the topic at hand.
I use to think the solution was to reply as a linked thread. But, seeing that makes Walter look like he is spamming the Talk forum much like the Ramen Spectrometer Science thread felt which I dislike. Not replying as a linked thread starts to feel like Walter is filibustering many threads with his agenda. I’ve been called out for filibustering in the past as well. Sometimes it takes filibustering to get a point across to enough people for it to have it’s proper time. So how can we call a filibuster off without punishment of the member, because sometimes they are needed?
Please do not beat on Walter about this, he is just the current example, I’m probably a better target anyways. Plus, I seriously doubt this will be the last time or that it will be limited to only Walter and I as so many are involved and change needs to be able to start from the bottom as much as from the top.