Saturday, February 03, 2007

Proposal: Enough Already

self-killed
failed by Hix

Adminned at 04 Feb 2007 20:40:42 UTC

Upon passage of this proposal, the mode of speech known as Spivak will be banned, because we can’t be walking around the streets of L.A. talking like that. 

Comments

snowballinhell7001:

02-03-2007 13:39:32 UTC

Sadly, although it was a noble attempt at gender neutrality, it is cumbersome and hard to read aloud.  for

Elias IX:

02-03-2007 13:50:48 UTC

against

Clucky:

02-03-2007 14:35:31 UTC

against

Spivak is fun.

Rodney:

02-03-2007 16:04:59 UTC

against

Rodney:

02-03-2007 16:06:51 UTC

In general, banning things in the ruleset without actually removing them from the ruleset is usually a bad idea.

peacefulwarrior:

02-03-2007 16:25:03 UTC

Right, I didn’t realize that.  Point noted.  I meant to say remove it from the ruleset.  I would modify it, but it appears to be meeting with stiff opposition.

alethiophile:

02-03-2007 19:04:13 UTC

against per Rodney

Excalabur:

02-03-2007 19:10:37 UTC

against Shockingly, you get used to it.  And it’s one of the things that gets us set apart: I actually came to the game because at one point we were an example link from wikipedia for Spivak usage.  At one point it wasn’t mandatory, but everyone did it anyway.

peacefulwarrior:

02-03-2007 19:43:42 UTC

The thing is… I don’t FEEL gender neutral… heh.

Clucky:

02-03-2007 20:19:56 UTC

Now adays, I often used spivak instead of normal prepositions.

Josh:

02-03-2007 20:46:09 UTC

against While I was pretty dead set against Spivak when we introduced it, I’ve become used to it.

Scaramouche:

02-03-2007 21:28:56 UTC

against
I hate spivak but this proposal doesn’t actually include changes of all the Spivak-related rules in the ‘set, so we’d have an antinomy.

Hix:

02-03-2007 21:39:45 UTC

against

ChinDoGu:

02-03-2007 22:18:13 UTC

for Technically this wont add anything to the ruleset so it wont ban it.  But the ruleset dosn’t require its use either… :p

Kevan:

02-03-2007 22:18:30 UTC

against I’m against Spivak as well, but proposals need to be clearer about what rules they’re changing.

viewtyjoe:

02-03-2007 22:19:34 UTC

against

Angry Grasshopper:

02-04-2007 01:39:02 UTC

Not my Spivak, sir or madam!

against

Angry Grasshopper:

02-04-2007 01:39:20 UTC

Hey, does anyone know a Spivak honorific?

spikebrennan:

02-04-2007 03:12:34 UTC

No, ser.

peacefulwarrior:

02-04-2007 15:38:50 UTC

Mamser?

(pron. “mahmzer”, from ma’am + sir)

As in, How ya doin, Mamser Grasshopper?

I would propose this as part of the dynastic ruleset but I already have 2 pending.

Combustable:

02-04-2007 15:58:58 UTC

against

peacefulwarrior:

02-04-2007 20:35:35 UTC

against