Saturday, February 04, 2012

Protosal: It’s all about Democracy

In rule 2.4 “Respect and Grievance”, remove the text:

If all Band Members Respect the same Hanger On and no Band Members have a Grievance against that Hanger On, then that Hanger On becomes a Band Member.
If all but one of the Band Members have a Grievance against the same Band Member, and no Band Members Respect that Band Member, then that Band Member becomes a Hanger On.

Add a new subrule to rule 2.3 “In the band”, named “The band evolves”, with the text:

If at least a Quorum of Band Members Respect the same Hanger On and no Band Members have a Grievance against that Hanger On, then that Hanger On becomes a Band Member.
If at least a Quorum of the Band Members have a Grievance against the same Band Member, and no Band Members Respect that Band Member, then that Band Member becomes a Hanger On.

I wasn’t sure if my use of the word “Quorum” would work as I thought it would, that’s why this is a protosal.

Also, I’m moving it around from rule 2.4 to rule 2.3 for cleanliness in the rules: I’m simply thinking this is more closely related to “In the band” than to “Respect and grievance”. That’s just my inner programmer/OCD talking. =P

posted by Greytyphoon at 04 Feb 2012 14:18:44 UTC Comments (5)

Comments

Murphy:

04-02-2012 15:36:25 UTC

I don’t see why it wouldn’t work.  In fact, the core rules use “Quorum” /more/ loosely than this (e.g. “a Quorum of FOR votes”, whereas 3.1 defines Quorum as a number of Musicians).

Spitemaster:

04-02-2012 18:42:10 UTC

for but this isn’t a proposal.

Cpt_Koen:

05-02-2012 20:18:10 UTC

Appendix 3.1 “Keywords”:
Quorum of a subset of Musicians is half the number of Musicians in that subset, rounded down, plus one. If the word Quorum is used without qualifying which subset of Musicians it is referring to, it is referring to a Quorum of all Musicians.

I’d vote FOR, though I’m not convince this would change much from the current version, because of the veto option (“and no Band Members Respect/have a Grievance against that Musician…”)

BTW, is “or” inclusive or exclusive, in English?
If it’s inclusive, we may have a problem.

“Musicians may be Band Members or Hangers On.”
“[...] then that Hanger On becomes a Band Member [but nothing about ceasing to be a Hanger On]”

Spitemaster:

06-02-2012 05:07:12 UTC

Or is inclusive.  We do have a problem.

Kevan: he/him

06-02-2012 12:56:18 UTC

Yes, I would be in favour of this having enacted by now if it had been made as a proposal two days ago.