Friday, October 21, 2011

Proposal: Bet you weren’t expecting one of these

Failed by CfJ: Consensus Gamestate—Chronos Phaenon

Adminned at 23 Oct 2011 05:05:52 UTC

In rule 1.6 “Resolution of Proposals”, after

The oldest pending Proposal

add

(and such proposals may be failed by any Admin even if they are not the oldest)

Blah, blah, read the FAQ.

Seriously, though, with this many players, this is likely to be useful. Vetos are typically useless in the current ruleset, as good proposals shouldn’t be vetoed and bad proposals tend to fail anyway. There’s no need to stick a veto on there as an extra kick to the proposal while it’s down, so you may as well give them some other purpose.

Not that all this is likely to make much of a difference if Agora does become the Emperor (unlikely as it seems at the moment)…

Comments

ais523:

21-10-2011 16:56:49 UTC

Also, voting icons work in flavour text?

zuff:

21-10-2011 16:58:37 UTC

They’re just smilies in the blog system, I think.

Soviet Brendon:

21-10-2011 17:03:35 UTC

against

ais523:

21-10-2011 17:06:06 UTC

@zuff: They don’t work in the main body of posts, which is why I was surprised.

Klisz:

21-10-2011 17:06:23 UTC

for

ChronosPhaenon:

21-10-2011 17:06:47 UTC

against

Prince Anduril:

21-10-2011 17:07:46 UTC

There’s two instances of “The oldest pending Proposal” but in principle, I’m generally up for clearing the decks a bit

Amnistar: he/him

21-10-2011 17:10:59 UTC

for  I was wondering why this got removed?  Used to be part of the rules.

zuff:

21-10-2011 17:14:20 UTC

for

scshunt:

21-10-2011 17:16:46 UTC

against

Bucky:

21-10-2011 17:18:49 UTC

against  because the wording is screwy and could be interpreted to let admins fail proposals that meet one of the conditions for enactment.

Murphy:

21-10-2011 17:23:54 UTC

against

What Prince Anduril said, and in addition this seems to make the most sense if it replaces the third match-except-for-case near the very end.

Murphy:

21-10-2011 17:24:18 UTC

Replaces the text immediately after the third quasi-match, that is.

Pavitra:

21-10-2011 17:28:36 UTC

against per Bucky

Ornithopter:

21-10-2011 17:29:15 UTC

I’m against the concept, but this is also broken. It would allow us to fail the oldest pending proposal, even if it’s not the oldest.

ais523:

21-10-2011 17:30:00 UTC

against s/k

This is badly typoed.