I still have not seen a rebuttal to the proposal of multiple GMs other than hypothetical statements that it will cause problems about identical to the problems that already exist.
That is, no new problems, but possibly some benefits.
Unless this request comes from the current GM, I will ignore it.
If you think he sucks and is doing a bad job and something needs to be done about it - have the guts to say so. If you don't think that, then kindly leave that decision to the guy who is putting his spare time and effort into providing you with some interaction. He gets absolutely nothing for it, and not pushing in other people without him wanting them there is the least I can do to honour his effort.
Beyond that? My understanding is that the Zuma GM has been looking for new GM's for a long long time. Vates was part of that, that GM added a lot and it was a pity that when he left it was so abrupt and information was not carried over. We aren't against multiple GM's (although to be fair it often sounds that way) we are against multiple GM's where there is no system to support them and no thought as to if the new GM's are going to work out. Like Tom said, if and when the current GM finds someone he is happy to work with, things can be worked out.
If you mean the rotating GM thing, I just can't see that happening. I doubt Tom is about to tell anyone "Hey thanks for all your hard work over the years, but your era is done here is your replacement." Unless the current GM wants to roll with it I would think its dead in the water.
Poll