It seems to me that an opponent of change who forces a vote on anything less than the best proposal is not playing fair. I hope you took the time in the private forum to determine that this was the most popular version of title change and that you believed that those in favor of a change were not going to call for a vote on anything. Then and only then would it be proper IMHO for an opponent of action to call for a vote to demonstrate support for the status quo. Otherwise we have a situation in which 4 of the 9 members of TalkBoard can win a contentious issue (which thankfully this is not) by manipulating the process to force votes on unpopular versions of a change.
To be clear, I regard this particular issue as relatively unimportant. I also regard this version of the proposal as quite good, possibly the most popular form of the proposal. Therefore this particular proposal does not look like a serious abuse of process to me. I mostly wanted to make the point that the current proposal does set a precedent for future abuse of the 2/3 vote threshold.
If I'm off base here, please correct me. I don't mind admitting that I'm wrong.
Who's forcing? Someone had to second this remember. And if I was not playing fair I would have imagined that the motion would not have been seconded. There was a long discussion before I rewrote the motion and I was asked if the proposal, which was actually written by several TalkBoard members was to my liking. Furthermore, of the 300+ posts in the thread that spans back
years, I felt the
JDiver post was the best solution by far.
Also, I have an unofficial adviser, he's an ex-TalkBoard member himself and one of the smartest, most level headed people on this website. I asked if making the motion and choosing to vote no on it was appropriate. He indicated it was.
As a final note, I would hope you'd have given me the benefit of the doubt and I do resent your implication that I'm trying to manipulate or abuse any processes. This didn't occur in a vacuum, several members of TalkBoard including our President and Vice President discussed what I was suggesting for 17 hours before we brought this to a vote.