Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-26896471-20151004010902/@comment-26896471-20151010115417

I also think it's too soon to change the Moot for tonight, simply because even if the change was highlighted, that wouldn't give enough of a window for people to go on the Wiki and notice the change. I have repeated this in correspondences with CCC, so it is on record.

I have to say though, I've worked very hard outside of this thread to try and find the best compromise, and I genuinely believe I have found it. Six hours is not ideal for me either. I did not vote for it in the poll. I think it's very short sighted of anyone to make the accusation of hypocricy.

Coming in to the task of finding a suitable time for the Moot, I was under the impression that what was desired was a greater participation in the Moot, a time which would allow as many people as possible to attend. Therefore, I proposed six hours forward. That IS the time, at current calculations, that is most suitable for all. Changing it to that time, just for one week, would have been it's community consensus had attendance increased

I've since been told, however, that the aim is not to welcome as many people into the Moot. The aim is to keep the quality of those who attend the Moot high. While I can see where they're coming from, losing BlueSonic and CCC from the Moot would be to lose two great editors, this surprised me somewhat.

The real question, then, is this. Are we looking for quality over quantity with the Moot? Changing it to six hours forward will allow more people to attend. Keeping as it is will keep "the quality high". Maybe moving the Moot two hours back will be the right balance between the two.

We need to decide what we want out of this discussion.