It seems to me that many of the threads running in this section are around the taking of decisions. Should we ban [i:b493ac5809]xyz[/i:b493ac5809], What is our policy on [i:b493ac5809]abc[/i:b493ac5809] and so on.

What isn't clear to me is when the issue is decided. As an example - the way we go about banning people. Everyone seems to be in agreemet (community decision or vote), so what next?

Likewise discussions on particular members (ban or warn?) good points of view on either side, but as yet no decision.

Now I'm not suggesting we rush that process of course. Healthy debate is good and naturally fosters community spirit. However there comes a point where views are fairly entrenched one way or the other (or indeed everyone is just saying "I agree"). Further contributions are probably doing more harm than good to community spirit once this point has been reached.

Is it possible to set a cut off date for community regulation matters? Vote by such and such a date? So if someone is up for banning or whatever, then there is a set time for the voting to take place.

Perhaps there could be a "clerk of the temple" who looks after this and provides a summary when the decision time is reached.

The discussions around the decision could then be locked and archived in a "Temple Records" area for reference

This would also help our esteemed admin to know when to activate the decision of the Temple.

You've raised a valid point here. Though, I'd disagree with you about the 'banning people' thread, though everyone seems to be an agreement, there are still loads of issues that need to be raised. Mostly technical stuff about how the voting will work,etc. Or What happens if someone survives a ban? do they get a clean slate? What happens if some gets 3 warnings over a period of a year or two years? Do they still go up for banning? Loads of little things that we need to work out now. I'll try to raise some points later.

Generally, though, I think he should go like this.

Someone riases a point. We argue, dicuss, hammer out the point until we've got something that we're pretty much sound on. Some one will go through the thread and write a final proposion, taking into account whats been said in the thread, then well vote on it. I would say a week is a good enough time frame for the vote.

(Obivously, if someone raises a point that is simple enough or as 100% support, like Garners spamming statement- we could pretty much skip the voting for sake of time saving. But if it's an issue that has some contention, i say it goes to the vote)

I say that once a thread has seemed to reach it's concluesion, we have a vote on it.

I Think a week is a good time frame for voting.

The banning people threads should probably last a week too.

After the vote has taken place, I think it should be moved to teh dungoen forum.