Sunday, April 25, 2010

That DoV kicked me in the face with its ENERGY LEGS

Remove the paragraph beginning “The Declaration of Victory may be resolved” from Rule 1.9.

Add the following before the paragraph in Rule 1.9 beginning “When a DoV passes”:

A DoV passes if any of the following is true:

* It has been open for voting for 12 hours, has a number of FOR votes that exceed or equal Quorum, and has no AGAINST votes.
* It has been open for voting for at least 24 hours, has a number of FOR votes that exceed or equal Quorum, and has a number of against votes fewer than half of Quorum, rounded down.
* It has been open for voting for at least 48 hours, at least Quorum Colonists have voted on it, and more than half of its votes are FOR.

A DoV fails if any of the following are true:

* It has been open for voting for 12 hours, has enough AGAINST votes that it could not be Enacted without one of those votes being changed, and has no FOR votes other than that of the Colonist who made the DoV.
* It has been open for voting for at least 24 hours, has enough AGAINST votes that it could not be Enacted without one of those votes being changed, and has a number of FOR votes less than half of Quorum, rounded down.
* It has been open for voting for at least 48 hours and half or fewer of its votes are FOR.
* It has been open for voting for at least 48 hours and fewer than Quorum Colonists have voted on it.

When a DoV fails and there are no pending DoVs, Hiatus ends.

Thoughts?

Comments

Wakukee:

04-25-2010 23:53:36 UTC

Yeah, no. I really think that we need to stick to close to the original rules, but clarified. Like, we definately need there to be 24 hours before it is passed unless the emperor has voted. This gives more people a chance to vote.

Basically, we need to say:
You can vote For, Def (meaning a vote of neither for nor against and not counting as a vote, not defer to emperor) or Against.
It passes if, after 24 hours (or 12 hours if the emperor has voted on it), it has been voted on by at least a quorum of players and at more than half of the votes were for.
Otherwise, it fails.

Wakukee:

04-25-2010 23:53:40 UTC

against

Ienpw III:

04-26-2010 00:17:45 UTC

for  for Yes. I agree with this protosal.

Ornithopter:

04-26-2010 00:53:22 UTC

Wak, this isn’t too different from the current version. I think getting unanimous votes one way or the other is a better measure of if a DoV should be allowed to resolve in 12 hours than just having the Emperor vote on it (especially since it doesn’t actually matter which way the Emperor votes), and I’m attempting to mark certain DoVs as controversial and slow them down to 48 hour to allow time for debate.

You’re right about DEFs.

I just noticed that “open for 48 hours and voted down” can coincide with “open for 48 hours and not enough votes”. I don’t think that’s a problem, though, since they have the same effect.

SeerPenguin:

04-26-2010 02:26:11 UTC

for

Bucky:

04-26-2010 03:11:47 UTC

for , but you also need to add a definition of “vote” in the DoV rule similar to the one on the Proposal rule.

Josh:

04-26-2010 06:17:18 UTC

When a DoV fails and there are no pending DoVs, Hiatus ends.

One thing - Hiatus doesn’t (shouldn’t) end until an Ascension Address is posted.

Josh:

04-26-2010 08:32:27 UTC

Ah, right, fails. Sorry, nevermind.

ais523:

04-26-2010 09:41:42 UTC

Not a proposal, but not a bad idea. (Another possibility: make it so that if the Emperor votes AGAINST, that doesn’t make speedily passing a DoV possible, and likewise, if the Emperor vote FOR, that doesn’t make speedily failing it possible.)

Kevan:

04-26-2010 10:51:59 UTC

I think the current mechanic is mostly fine, we just need to fix the shortcut mechanic (which is, I think, only there to speed up an obviously undisputed win, or an obviously spurious failure). Ais523’s approach seems a good direction, although I’m not sure it should go both ways - it’s fine for an Emperor to hand away a Dynasty if he’s satisfied that someone deserves it, but I’d be a little uncomfortable with the Emperor (or a biased admin) being able to speedily fail a hotly-contested DoV.