Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-9531161-20140217041620/@comment-5394692-20140217093624

1st path sounds horrible due to its vagueness. It takes out the fun of contributing, which is one of the main incentives on why we're here. But you mentioned "negotiations", so i guess compromises and exchange of ideas are allowed. I'm assuming a choice can be modified to fit everyone's vision is allowed after it's declines by one stubborn minority?

2nd is...well. Hard to say. That's what actually got us into this mess. Sure, it may have a chance of "everyone getting along" but there's also another where people overreacting might result it to something much worse. It's a mixed bag.

Is there some kind of middle ground. I thought a 2/3 or whatever marjory was already quite in the middle, byt you seem to want the "all or nothing" route. Well, we could go 2/6? Maybe I can count my frontal cortex as another admin or cut Nimrod in half? lol