Current Proposals: Difference between revisions

From GCD
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
(12 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Adding 'autobiography' to the genre list==
You can also see a list of [[Passed Proposals]] and the list of [[Unsuccesful Proposals]].
proposed on 3. March 2010
one reminder on 8. March 2010


The reason for this is that autobiography (or autobiographical) is an
----
easily defined and specific genre of creators producing comics about
Back to [[Policy Procedures]]
their own lives. The current alternative 'bio' is not as precise. I'd
----
include Harvey Pekar and Dennis Eichhorn in the category, despite
[[Category: GCD Organization‏‎]]
their not actually drawing the comics themselves. Pekar has shown
himself producing layouts in his stories, if that helps convince
people.
 
In a list of categories if one merges the likes of superhero and super-
hero and discounts foreign language genre categories, 'autobiography'
is already among the top 30 used genres, with over 1200 uses.
 
Ten minutes thought has produced the following comics that fall
exclusively into the genre:
 
Peep Show, Collier's, Melody, American Splendor, Real Stuff, Real
Smut, Real Schmuck, Real Life, Real Girl, Voyeuse, the Fantagraphics
series about sexual experiences the title of which I can't bring to
mind at the moment, Binky Brown, Streetwise, Last Days In Vietnam, The
Dreamer, A Sailor's Story, Get A Life, Alec, Total Sell Out, Assume
Nothing, Our Cancer Year, Confessions of a Cereal Eater, Yahoo, Life
Is Cheap, Fortune And Glory, Fun Home, Nowhere, A Child's Life, The
Bakers, Epileptic, Palestine, Fax From Sarajevo, Peter Kuper's
ComicsTrips, A Few Perfect Hours, Tuesday, We Are On Our Own, Lewis
Trondheim's diary book, Self-Loathing Comics, My Troubles With Women,
Life Under Sanctions
 
These all have stories that fall into the genre
 
Weirdo, Jizz, Palookaville, 9-11, Dirty Plotte, Wimmin's Comix,
Keyhole, Tomato, Maus (partially), Hup, Naughty Bits.
 
To save you counting, that's over 50 titles, and I reckon that's more
than enough to warrant a genre classification.
 
==Freeing reservations of inactive indexers==
proposed on 6. March 2010 reminder sent on 14. March 2010
 
First let me say what this proposal is *not* about.
This is not about introducing time limits for the reservations (a
reservation is any open change in the editing queue of an indexer) of
indexers who actively work on the site.
 
This proposal concerns the freeing of reservations from inactive
indexers. The goal of the proposal is to avoid having reservations in
limbo for a long time due to inactive indexers. The proposal is to have
an upper limit which we can work with until a general concept of
expiration of reservations is agreed upon and is implemented.
 
As you might know we recently freed the reservations from indexers who
haven't logged into the new site at all, after giving them another
reminder email. I suggest to do this regularly for inactive indexers.
 
For the purpose of this proposal inactive equals not having logged in
for three months. I use three months since this was the longest period
which came up when we discussed the expiration dates for a reservation.
 
Shorter time frames should be discussed together with the general
concept of expiration of reservation once we get around to that.
 
To give some data:
Looking at indexers not having logged in since the first of January,
this concerns about 30 indexers with about 250 reservations. Almost half
of them by an active member who said he is quite busy currently. So not
that much of a concern, but we shouldn't let these numbers grow.
 
--- start proposal ---
 
Indexers who haven't logged in for two months and have a reservation
(which is any open change) will get a reminder email. The email says
that if they don't work on their reservation within a month they will be
discarded. Indexers who did get a reminder email and haven't logged in
for three months will get their open changes discarded.
This proposal is automatically invalid once a general concept of
automatic expiration of changes is agreed upon and implemented.
 
--- end proposal ---
 
==Passing unopposed proposals==
proposed on 11. March 2010
 
--- start proposal ---
 
A proposal made in accordance with the then-current rules governing
proposal structure shall automatically take effect if and only if:
* No list member continues to object to the proposal after two weeks time.
* The proposal was sent prefixed with REMINDER: after the 8th day, specifying the final day for objections.
* At least two weeks have passed (15 days if the day on which the proposal was introduced is counted as the 1st)
* At least 72 hours have passed after the REMINDER.
 
For the purposes of this proposal someone is considered to be continuing
to object simply by saying so.
Absence from the lists during the consideration period does not confer
any special privileges with regards to objections made after the
proposal takes effect.
Amended proposals (as explained in the proposal on the basic structure
of proposals) work the same way as original proposals- the clock
restarts from the day of the amendment is made.
 
A proposal with no objections, but no reminder email is closed four
weeks after the start of the proposal. It can be restarted with a clean
state (it did not fail, there were no objections).
 
--- end proposal ---
 
I reworded Henry's original proposal (which I think did pass, at least
in spirit  :-)  to make the reminder email part more workable. I didn't
see anyone needing two reminders, one reminder in the second week with
some time afterwards should be fine.
 
The purpose of the last paragraph is to take care of a proposal where
everyone including the person starting it forgets about it, otherwise
proposals would be in some kind of limbo state.
 
I would suggest as a good practise that the reminder email also includes
a reminder that the replies to the reminder email should remove the word
reminder from the subject line to keep reminder emails sticking out.
(Yeah, 5 times  :-)
 
Henry's original comment:
This proposal does not address what happens if objections remain after
two days.  It does not address how a proposal that has taken affect is
recorded or how, when and under what circumstances a proposal may be
reversed or revisited.  Specifically, while the proposal does not grant
special objection privileges to absent list members, it does not prevent
the absent member from using some other normal method to revisit or
reverse the proposal.

Latest revision as of 01:31, 22 April 2020

You can also see a list of Passed Proposals and the list of Unsuccesful Proposals.

Back to Policy Procedures

Retrieved from "https://docs.comics.org/index.php?title=Current_Proposals&oldid=8145"