I like it, but I do not think eliminated bears should be able to be part of a bear moot bear moots are for the living

...actually. I’m not sure this works. If Kevan is not a signatory to this rule then he is just voting on a proposal that happens to have Bear Moot in the title and there is nothing that says he can’t do that

I think we need to make bear moots explicitly not proposals to avoid imposters crashing our party

Hmm, this doesn’t actually allow the Den Mother to cast VETO votes.

It doesn’t take into account that the Den Mother can be removed between vetoing and adminning. Or maybe it does, and the intent is that the proposal remains vetoed. It seems to me, though, that ousting the Den Mother should nullify any hanging vetoes.

I think to fix this, we need to clarify that Den Moots are *not* proposals, they are just resolved in the same way that proposals are resolved.

Then, while non bears could still cast votes, the den moot could only be resolved by a person who signs the rule and thus counts the votes the right way.

might not be enough time to fix in this iteration. but we can certainly workshop the proper wording and try again

past the time to fix it… sorry pokes but unless Bucky rules that “The eligible voting population consists of Bears: only votes from Bears are valid on a Bear Moot, and Quorum for determining if a Bear Moot is Popular or Unpopular is a quorum of Bears.” applies even if the admin admining a proposal isn’t a signatory, gonna have to vote

Worse, “an Emperor who is not a Signatory to a Treaty is not required to follow its provisions”, so non-Bears can vote just fine on a [Bear Moot] proposal. This guts the intent of the proposal.

s/k

This does make me want to create a Bulls Treaty once my proposal quota frees up.