Talk:Septischismic family: Difference between revisions

(40 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)

Line 21:

::: I agree with FloraC here. It’s not much of a problem. [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 19:03, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

So Eufalesio and I came to the agreement that the names of this family of temps need another round of assessment.

I maintain that ''septischisma'' is the ideal name for the comma. The derived temp name ''septischismic'' mirrors ''aberschismic'' and ''orthoschismic''. However, this poses the problem of how to name the 2.3.7-subgroup temp. (As a rule, we don't apply the first declension to ''-schisma'', resulting in ''-schic''.) Not changing ''gary'' is an option, but ideally we'd want a name that rivals the monumentality of ''schismic''.

Alternatively, ''septigarisma'' captures the nature that this is the 2.3.7 comma tempered out in garibaldi, and provides the names ''septigarismic'' and ''septigaric'' for the 2.3.5.7 and 2.3.7 temps.

''Garisma'', as I said, doesn't fix any problem, tho its derived temp names ''garismic'' and ''garic'' are neat.

Then we have cassaschismic, and the question of whether it's canonical w.r.t. garischismic or will. It looks like will and cassachismic aren't as closely related as garischismic and cassaschismic are. I'd say it's best to treat will and cassaschismic as separate temps, so renaming cassaschismic based on ''will'' is off the table.

Eufalesio proposes ''ultimate''. I'm afraid this creates ambiguities as ''ultimate'' describes a subjective quality that will mean differently to different ppl. In the spirit that rename should demonstrate clear benefits, I think there are only two options for this: either we make it canonical, adopting the changed name of garischismic, or we don't change anything.

—[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 14:25, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

: I don’t think ''ultimate'' is a good name, but septischisma/septimal schisma could work (though I don’t fully support renaming this temp yet). [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 15:56, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

: Septigaric is good for the 2.3.7 version, possibly ''septigar'' and have the comma be the ''septigarsma'' or ''septigar comma''. But how do you call the 2.3.7.11 version? Undegaric? Garylympian?

: Septigarismic/septigaric follows through with the established patterns, but I'd leave that only for the 7-limit version. For 11-limit and above, ''garylympic'' is a better fit, useful all the way to the 19-limit version.

: As for ''Ultimate'', I make a case that a rename to this demonstrates clear benefits, beyond subjectivity, measured and compared with other alternative sequences that make fierce competition. The rename is an advertisement for what this temperament represents: a detemperament sequence's practical end. --[[User:Eufalesio|Eufalesio]] ([[User talk:Eufalesio|talk]]) 16:48, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

:: in my DMs with Eufalesio I stated that the only the higher-limit version should be called ''ultimate''. The 7-limit or 2.3.7 version can keep its current name or get renamed. [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 18:06, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

:: Well you can't think inside others' minds and say it's the ultimate temp beyond subjectivity. ''Ultimate'' is so much of an everyday word that ppl will always use it their own ways. If you had a more literary way to express the idea, that would be much better.

:: Coming back to the ''septi-'' names, I don't think it needs to be changed for extensions beyond the 7-limit if they are canonical, which means you just refer to it by ''undecimal septischismic''/''septigarismic''. But is the 11-limit extension is canonical? I've heard some in the community argue that cassandra should be dual-named as ''undecimal garibaldi'', thus setting it canonical, which would imply that cassaschismic should prolly be also. I don't feel strongly about this and would be okay either way (plus the possibility of dual-naming); arguably the quality of the names matters more.

:: —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 18:51, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

::: The ultimate temp is obviously 7-limit marvel. (Semi-serious. Other candidates appear increasingly subjective, for example the ultimate rank 1 temp appears to be 31et in the 11-limit as a system with primarily 7-limit focus.) In regards to the name, I don't see why the name needs to be changed tbh? I'm quite used to it. What's the issue with the current name? --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 16:26, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

:::: It's not a problematic name, just suboptimal. Is there a sign in the combination of ''garibaldi'' and ''schisma'' that points to the 2.3.7 subgroup? There is not. So what I'm gonna do is to replace ''gari-'' with ''septi-'', reflecting its nature as the schisma of 2.3.7. Specifically:

::::* Garischisma → septischisma

::::* Garischismic → septischismic

::::* Cassaschismic → (undecimal) septischismic

:::: I think I'll leave gary unchanged, until someone has an idea.

:::: —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 16:57, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

::::: I would rather have more community members share their opinions before a temp is renamed. [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 23:32, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

:::::: We'll do it thru a poll then. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 10:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

=== Poll ===

Sign your name with <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>. You may vote for multiple candidates. You may add your own proposals.

; Septischisma – septischismic (full 7-limit temp), gary comma – gary (no-5 7-limit temp)

: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 10:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

: --[[User:Eufalesio|Eufalesio]] ([[User talk:Eufalesio|talk]]) 10:14, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

; Garischisma – garyschismic (full 7-limit temp), gary comma – gary (no-5 7-limit temp)

: --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 13:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

; Comments

: I'd like to vote for whichever name is behind by more than 1 vote, to discourage arbitrary decisions based on extremely small margins. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 13:19, 16 August 2026 (UTC)

: Septischisma/septischismic should be the main name, but garischisma/mic should be a co-official name instead of a deprecated name. [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 15:01, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

----

Closing. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 02:06, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

----

: Should we make garischisma a co-official name or should it be deprecated? [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 16:42, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

:: Is there a reason to dual-name this? Like references or existing music written in it? If not, I don't see why we can't interpret the result at face value. There's not many votes cuz not many ppl care. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 06:28, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

::: My main reason is that barely anybody voiced their opinions here, and because of that I don't see it as representative of the community as a whole, so for now I do not support deprecating garischisma/mic. [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 14:16, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

: I'd like to note generally that I'm against renames if there isn't actually a reason for the rename as per [[Temperament naming#Contemporary rules]], as the names only serve to be convenient shorthands for referring to mappings ultimately. If you decide to keep the new name, can we rename [[Fokkertone]] to smth else? (It was formerly called tridecimal meantone, but I do agree it's not the canonical extension of undecimal meantone, but I'm gonna be honest and say I don't like using this name aesthetically, and this seems (in a sense) to be an aesthetical rename too so...) --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 14:14, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

:: I'll cite the following rule for the rename of this comma, in which regard the new name demonstrates clear improvement:

:: > The [new] name has reasoning behind it that identifies it as appropriate at least insofar as it identifies the comma as unique within reason.

:: —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 14:47, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

If you wondering why I still disagree with the rename, it’s because it was done under the request of one user, and only 3 users actually voted in the community vote. [[Aberschismic]] was fine, because that received near-universal community concensus, but this was done by the request of just a few people. [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 21:43, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

: I do actually like the name if I'm being honest but I share the same concern. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 23:41, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

: I think it'd be fairer if you said this with evidence that the absent extra voices actually existed. At this point you're just hypothesising. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 08:23, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

:: Fair, but often when I've tried to bring up these kinds of concerns in the past I've got the impression that for stuff like this ppl add their 2 cents and don't actually feel strongly on doing anything (though notably this has been true more generally too in my experience (as in regardless of the topic), which I find very frustrating, which is also why I've been trying to be clearer on where I disagree with your changes). --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 20:06, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

: Why are we even debating this anymore? Just mark garischisma/mic as an alternative name and wait a year or so. If the community sticks to septischisma/mic then it’s safe to deprecate garischisma/mic and make septischisma/mic the sole official name. [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 11:50, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

:: The poll is about exactly the sole official name, so your suggestion directly challenges it, which brings us back to everything said before, that it's best of you to provide some solid basis for your argument. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 14:54, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

::: The poll did no help, because it was started '''after''' the command and temp were renamed, so I don’t think it’s an accurate reflection. My concern isn’t the results of the poll, but the fact that it was hastily renamed unlike aberschismic. [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 21:12, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

:::: Wild guesses on the poll's accuracy will not help. In case it's unclear, the poll was closed after 7 days since the 3rd vote, which is how we always did it. There's no precedent of a necessary further delay. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 03:06, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

== Bad process ==

By the way, for the record, I do not disagree with the new name, but rather the process used to decide that new name. [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 19:44, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

: '''The poll is official. Please do not move it.''' Feel free to submit an alternative process if you can't agree on this one. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 21:15, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

== Protect ==

Can we protect this page until additional discussion about this temp family other than its name warrants? At this point further discussion is like beating a dead horse. With enough time everyone will use ''septischismic'' and ''garischismic'' will be a distant memory. [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 19:36, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

: Discussion about this temp family other than its name did happen, tho not on the wiki. During the last couple of days, Eufalesio and I were talking about some of the add-17 add-29 and add-31 extensions and how each of them maps to an isomorphic keyboard. You're welcome to join a Discord server or two to find out. Protection will hinder development around this temp family so I'm not gonna do it. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 21:15, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

== Rename androschismic? ==

The old names of some of the temps in this family listed followed a clear corresponsence with temps in the garibaldi family, specifically:

''garischismic'' (former name of septischismic) ~ [[garibaldi]]

''cassaschismic'' (now canonical extension of septischismic) ~ [[cassandra]]

''androschismic'' (not renamed) ~ [[andromeda]]

So, should we rename androschismic to disassociate with andromeda to maintain consistency, or perhaps another reason? [[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]] 22:04, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

: See the reason for the rename I cited in the reply to Godtone. It's not about disassociation. I think we've agreed earlier that the association with garibaldi isn't a problem to begin with. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 07:46, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 ::: I agree with FloraC here. It’s not much of a problem. <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 19:03, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
+So Eufalesio and I came to the agreement that the names of this family of temps need another round of assessment.
+I maintain that ''septischisma'' is the ideal name for the comma. The derived temp name ''septischismic'' mirrors ''aberschismic'' and ''orthoschismic''. However, this poses the problem of how to name the 2.3.7-subgroup temp. (As a rule, we don't apply the first declension to ''-schisma'', resulting in ''-schic''.) Not changing ''gary'' is an option, but ideally we'd want a name that rivals the monumentality of ''schismic''.
+Alternatively, ''septigarisma'' captures the nature that this is the 2.3.7 comma tempered out in garibaldi, and provides the names ''septigarismic'' and ''septigaric'' for the 2.3.5.7 and 2.3.7 temps.
+''Garisma'', as I said, doesn't fix any problem, tho its derived temp names ''garismic'' and ''garic'' are neat.
+Then we have cassaschismic, and the question of whether it's canonical w.r.t. garischismic or will. It looks like will and cassachismic aren't as closely related as garischismic and cassaschismic are. I'd say it's best to treat will and cassaschismic as separate temps, so renaming cassaschismic based on ''will'' is off the table.
+Eufalesio proposes ''ultimate''. I'm afraid this creates ambiguities as ''ultimate'' describes a subjective quality that will mean differently to different ppl. In the spirit that rename should demonstrate clear benefits, I think there are only two options for this: either we make it canonical, adopting the changed name of garischismic, or we don't change anything.
+—[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 14:25, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
+: I don’t think ''ultimate'' is a good name, but septischisma/septimal schisma could work (though I don’t fully support renaming this temp yet). <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 15:56, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
+: Septigaric is good for the 2.3.7 version, possibly ''septigar'' and have the comma be the ''septigarsma'' or ''septigar comma''. But how do you call the 2.3.7.11 version? Undegaric? Garylympian?
+: Septigarismic/septigaric follows through with the established patterns, but I'd leave that only for the 7-limit version. For 11-limit and above, ''garylympic'' is a better fit, useful all the way to the 19-limit version.
+: As for ''Ultimate'', I make a case that a rename to this demonstrates clear benefits, beyond subjectivity, measured and compared with other alternative sequences that make fierce competition. The rename is an advertisement for what this temperament represents: a detemperament sequence's practical end.  --[[User:Eufalesio|Eufalesio]] ([[User talk:Eufalesio|talk]]) 16:48, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
+:: in my DMs with Eufalesio I stated that the only the higher-limit version should be called ''ultimate''. The 7-limit or 2.3.7 version can keep its current name or get renamed. <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 18:06, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
+:: Well you can't think inside others' minds and say it's the ultimate temp beyond subjectivity. ''Ultimate'' is so much of an everyday word that ppl will always use it their own ways. If you had a more literary way to express the idea, that would be much better.
+:: Coming back to the ''septi-'' names, I don't think it needs to be changed for extensions beyond the 7-limit if they are canonical, which means you just refer to it by ''undecimal septischismic''/''septigarismic''. But is the 11-limit extension is canonical? I've heard some in the community argue that cassandra should be dual-named as ''undecimal garibaldi'', thus setting it canonical, which would imply that cassaschismic should prolly be also. I don't feel strongly about this and would be okay either way (plus the possibility of dual-naming); arguably the quality of the names matters more.
+:: —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 18:51, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
+::: The ultimate temp is obviously 7-limit marvel. (Semi-serious. Other candidates appear increasingly subjective, for example the ultimate rank 1 temp appears to be 31et in the 11-limit as a system with primarily 7-limit focus.) In regards to the name, I don't see why the name needs to be changed tbh? I'm quite used to it. What's the issue with the current name? --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 16:26, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
+:::: It's not a problematic name, just suboptimal. Is there a sign in the combination of ''garibaldi'' and ''schisma'' that points to the 2.3.7 subgroup? There is not. So what I'm gonna do is to replace ''gari-'' with ''septi-'', reflecting its nature as the schisma of 2.3.7. Specifically:
+::::* Garischisma → septischisma
+::::* Garischismic → septischismic
+::::* Cassaschismic → (undecimal) septischismic
+:::: I think I'll leave gary unchanged, until someone has an idea.
+:::: —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 16:57, 14 August 2026 (UTC)
+::::: I would rather have more community members share their opinions before a temp is renamed. <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 23:32, 15 August 2026 (UTC)
+:::::: We'll do it thru a poll then. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 10:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)
+=== Poll ===
+Sign your name with <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>. You may vote for multiple candidates. You may add your own proposals.
+; Septischisma – septischismic (full 7-limit temp), gary comma – gary (no-5 7-limit temp)
+: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 10:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)
+: --[[User:Eufalesio|Eufalesio]] ([[User talk:Eufalesio|talk]]) 10:14, 16 August 2026 (UTC)
+; Garischisma – garyschismic (full 7-limit temp), gary comma – gary (no-5 7-limit temp)
+: --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 13:07, 16 August 2026 (UTC)
+; Comments
+: I'd like to vote for whichever name is behind by more than 1 vote, to discourage arbitrary decisions based on extremely small margins. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 13:19, 16 August 2026 (UTC)
+: Septischisma/septischismic should be the main name, but garischisma/mic should be a co-official name instead of a deprecated name. <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 15:01, 17 August 2026 (UTC)
+----
+Closing. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 02:06, 27 August 2026 (UTC)
+----
+: Should we make garischisma a co-official name or should it be deprecated? <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 16:42, 27 August 2026 (UTC)
+:: Is there a reason to dual-name this? Like references or existing music written in it? If not, I don't see why we can't interpret the result at face value. There's not many votes cuz not many ppl care. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 06:28, 28 August 2026 (UTC)
+::: My main reason is that barely anybody voiced their opinions here, and because of that I don't see it as representative of the community as a whole, so for now I do not support deprecating garischisma/mic. <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 14:16, 28 August 2026 (UTC)
+: I'd like to note generally that I'm against renames if there isn't actually a reason for the rename as per [[Temperament naming#Contemporary rules]], as the names only serve to be convenient shorthands for referring to mappings ultimately. If you decide to keep the new name, can we rename [[Fokkertone]] to smth else? (It was formerly called tridecimal meantone, but I do agree it's not the canonical extension of undecimal meantone, but I'm gonna be honest and say I don't like using this name aesthetically, and this seems (in a sense) to be an aesthetical rename too so...) --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 14:14, 29 August 2026 (UTC)
+:: I'll cite the following rule for the rename of this comma, in which regard the new name demonstrates clear improvement:
+:: > The [new] name has reasoning behind it that identifies it as appropriate at least insofar as it identifies the comma as unique within reason.
+:: —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 14:47, 29 August 2026 (UTC)
+If you wondering why I still disagree with the rename, it’s because it was done under the request of one user, and only 3 users actually voted in the community vote. [[Aberschismic]] was fine, because that received near-universal community concensus, but this was done by the request of just a few people. <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 21:43, 5 September 2026 (UTC)
+: I do actually like the name if I'm being honest but I share the same concern. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 23:41, 5 September 2026 (UTC)
+: I think it'd be fairer if you said this with evidence that the absent extra voices actually existed. At this point you're just hypothesising. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 08:23, 6 September 2026 (UTC)
+:: Fair, but often when I've tried to bring up these kinds of concerns in the past I've got the impression that for stuff like this ppl add their 2 cents and don't actually feel strongly on doing anything (though notably this has been true more generally too in my experience (as in regardless of the topic), which I find very frustrating, which is also why I've been trying to be clearer on where I disagree with your changes). --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 20:06, 6 September 2026 (UTC)
+: Why are we even debating this anymore? Just mark garischisma/mic as an alternative name and wait a year or so. If the community sticks to septischisma/mic then it’s safe to deprecate garischisma/mic and make septischisma/mic the sole official name. <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 11:50, 19 September 2026 (UTC)
+:: The poll is about exactly the sole official name, so your suggestion directly challenges it, which brings us back to everything said before, that it's best of you to provide some solid basis for your argument. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 14:54, 19 September 2026 (UTC)
+::: The poll did no help, because it was started '''after''' the command and temp were renamed, so I don’t think it’s an accurate reflection. My concern isn’t the results of the poll, but the fact that it was hastily renamed unlike aberschismic. <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 21:12, 19 September 2026 (UTC)
+:::: Wild guesses on the poll's accuracy will not help. In case it's unclear, the poll was closed after 7 days since the 3rd vote, which is how we always did it. There's no precedent of a necessary further delay. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 03:06, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
+== Bad process ==
+By the way, for the record, I do not disagree with the new name, but rather the process used to decide that new name. <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 19:44, 22 September 2026 (UTC)
+: '''The poll is official. Please do not move it.''' Feel free to submit an alternative process if you can't agree on this one. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 21:15, 22 September 2026 (UTC)
+== Protect ==
+Can we protect this page until additional discussion about this temp family other than its name warrants? At this point further discussion is like beating a dead horse. With enough time everyone will use ''septischismic'' and ''garischismic'' will be a distant memory. <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 19:36, 22 September 2026 (UTC)
+: Discussion about this temp family other than its name did happen, tho not on the wiki. During the last couple of days, Eufalesio and I were talking about some of the add-17 add-29 and add-31 extensions and how each of them maps to an isomorphic keyboard. You're welcome to join a Discord server or two to find out. Protection will hinder development around this temp family so I'm not gonna do it. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 21:15, 22 September 2026 (UTC)
+== Rename androschismic? ==
+The old names of some of the temps in this family listed followed a clear corresponsence with temps in the garibaldi family, specifically:
+''garischismic'' (former name of septischismic) ~ [[garibaldi]]<br />
+''cassaschismic'' (now canonical extension of septischismic) ~ [[cassandra]]<br />
+''androschismic'' (not renamed) ~ [[andromeda]]
+So, should we rename androschismic to disassociate with andromeda to maintain consistency, or perhaps another reason? <span style="display: inline-block;transform: rotate(15deg);background:#E1EBF2;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow: 3px 3px 4px #0008;">[[User:Hotcrystal0|hotcrysta]][[User talk: Hotcrystal0|l0]]</span> 22:04, 22 September 2026 (UTC)
+: See the reason for the rename I cited in the reply to Godtone. It's not about disassociation. I think we've agreed earlier that the association with garibaldi isn't a problem to begin with. —[[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 07:46, 23 September 2026 (UTC)