One thing that I should have mentioned in my post from yesterday – an important element of the WSFS consultative votes both last year and this year was that statements were published both for and against the proposed changes, written by people who already had skin in the game – the proposers and people who had spoken or written against each proposal.

I feel that this is a very important element of any future membership vote, and if that does become part of the process, something would need to be built into the rules about it. I wrote yesterday’s post before I had listened to Octothorpe’s discussion of the issue (starting at 40 mins in), and I was interested that one of the Octothorpe editors admits to having their opinion swayed by one of the published statements.