The honorable Mr. Spiff has made his viewpoint abundantly clear and his logic behind it. As much as I disagree with his viewpoint and his logic, as I have said before, that alone does not make it incorrect. I respect him for his opinion.

As I have stated before, the central issue is how as a community resolves problems and whether or not making unilateral decisions without gaining any input from either the elected representatives of the community or the community at large a good precedent.

I clearly do not think that is sets a good precedent, especially when you consider all of various factors involved, such as the misleading explaination. If he wanted to do it, that was his perogative, but don't give the community an reason that has more holes in it then a slice of swiss cheese.

Reguardless of if this motion passes or not, the debate will not end on this topic. There will be people on both sides of the issue that feel like they got the short end of the stick.

But what this motion does, is give the community as a whole time. Time to work out a better compromise while not making a certain segment of it feel like they have been disenfranchised since things were put back to how they were.

It seems like there are several arguments that keep coming up every time this topic comes up for debate. How to attempt to resolve all of these different issues hasn't been a topic that I've seen debated?

That is a debate I would like to see because it can cause out of the box thinking to get the best possible solution. Now, we see in one fell swoop, the posts don't count towards one's post count. (Not withstanding Mr. Spiff's nice use of x86 assembler...I started laughing when I saw that) If they don't count, why have the conversation later?

One such example of thinking outside the box, would have been to put a clause in this motion so that it resets to the current state in 90 days or the end of a motion's voting, if the TB doesn't pass another motion addressing all of the issues of OMNI.