Monday, August 02, 2010

Proposal: Additional ways to spot traitors

Times out at 1-12 with 6 arrows. Failed, with a PP to citizen Spike-R. - lilomar

Adminned at 04 Aug 2010 06:36:18 UTC

Add a new INDIGO rule entitled “The Stench of Treason”, with text as follows:

If a Proposal passes with no counted AGAINST Votes, the Citizen who is the author of that Proposal is awarded a Treason point for “Forming a Cult of Personality”.
If a Proposal passes with only one counted AGAINST Vote, then the Citizen who cast that AGAINST vote is awarded a Treason point for “Antisocial Behavior”, and the Citizen who is the author of that Proposal is awarded a Treason point for “Failing to be sufficiently persuasive.”
If a Proposal passes with exactly nine counted Votes, each Citizen who cast a Vote on the Proposal (including the Proposal’s author) is awarded a Treason point for “Failing to complete the Minyan”.
If a Proposal fails with exactly one more counted AGAINST Vote than FOR votes (e.g., 7-8) then the Citizen who cast the latest counted AGAINST Vote on that Proposal is awarded a Treason point for “Assassination”.
If a Citizen casts a Vote of DEFERENTIAL on a Proposal after the High Programmer has already cast a Vote of FOR or AGAINST that Proposal, then such Citizen casting such DEFERENTIAL Vote is awarded a Treason point for “Being an obsequious toady”.
If a Citizen posts more than one comment containing a Voting icon to a Proposal, the Citizen is awarded a Treason point for “Wasting precious resources.”

Please to be voting on, nice proposal !!!

Comments

scshunt:

02-08-2010 14:03:27 UTC

arrow  against  We need more ways to lose TP before we add this, in my opinion.

Kevan: City he/him

02-08-2010 14:08:18 UTC

We also need a mechanic for “being awarded a treason point”. What happens if nobody realises that a point has been earned, or nobody gets around to doing it? Can they sweep in and add it retroactively, three weeks later?

against

flurie:

02-08-2010 14:15:41 UTC

arrow  for Yes voting for the voting of yes !!!

Kyre:

02-08-2010 14:51:46 UTC

arrow  against I rather like the semi-chaos of the rule, but I agree with Kevan’s point. I think you should add some language along the lines of “The admin who enacted the proposal should within 1 hour…”

Keba:

02-08-2010 15:25:18 UTC

arrow against per Kevan and Kyre.

Besides, CoVs should still be allowed.

Anonyman:

02-08-2010 16:05:17 UTC

arrow  against

Qwazukee:

02-08-2010 16:47:53 UTC

against

Purplebeard:

02-08-2010 17:17:34 UTC

against

Bucky:

02-08-2010 18:40:43 UTC

against

Darknight: he/him

02-08-2010 18:46:17 UTC

against

Galdyn:

03-08-2010 01:26:45 UTC

against

lilomar:

03-08-2010 13:22:02 UTC

arrow  against

flurie:

04-08-2010 03:07:48 UTC

CoV for make speedy failing !!! against