Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Proposal: Burn the General…TO POWER!

Passed 9-6—Rodlen

Adminned at 19 Feb 2009 18:55:06 UTC

Give Amnistar 2 more AP and 50 more Loyalty, but lower his health by 1.

Darth wants the general burnt.  The general always likes a challenge.  He has filled out the Official Challenge Form, filled it out again after High Command changed its name to the Official Challenge Document, filled it out again after the bumbling idiots they have there lost it, and finally just asked for a new High Command by filling out the Unsatisfied General form.  The new High Command is coming in from some group called the DDA, or the DDF, or something like that.  I don’t think they will be as stupid.  Oh well.

Comments

Wakukee:

18-02-2009 02:24:23 UTC

imperial  arrow  arrow  arrow

Rodlen:

18-02-2009 02:26:04 UTC

for Author COV arrow

Klisz:

18-02-2009 02:35:36 UTC

against  Lower his health by only 1? I think burning would do more damage.  arrow

Rodlen:

18-02-2009 02:37:52 UTC

You never said how much he needed to be burnt.

Klisz:

18-02-2009 02:40:30 UTC

I at the very least said it in all-caps, twice.

Also, this proposal says nothing about Gnauga.

Rodlen:

18-02-2009 02:41:55 UTC

He couldn’t fill out the form…DOCUMENT.  High Command ran out of the forms.

Wakukee:

18-02-2009 02:43:30 UTC

Gnauga is choked on some sort of can while trying to show arth a “magic trick”, so he won’t be burning for a while. The medic deemed it unhealthy.

Rodlen:

18-02-2009 02:44:39 UTC

...What medic?

Wakukee:

18-02-2009 02:45:44 UTC

THE medic. You know… form the party… good times.

Klisz:

18-02-2009 02:47:54 UTC

You mean Clucky?

Gnauga:

18-02-2009 03:14:10 UTC

Darknight: he/him

18-02-2009 04:47:48 UTC

LMFAO!! You read that too Gnauga?!?

Darknight: he/him

18-02-2009 04:48:24 UTC

against  arrow

Klisz:

18-02-2009 04:49:04 UTC

...

I hate Bob and George and all it’s little minion comics.

Klisz:

18-02-2009 04:49:31 UTC

Posted at the same time as Donkey Kong.

arthexis: he/him

18-02-2009 05:50:26 UTC

against  arrow

ais523:

18-02-2009 11:05:17 UTC

imperial arrow Let’s not assume what our superiors will do, that way lies mutiny. If the General accepts this challenge, then he has my full backing. If the General declines this challenge, then you are a traitor for even suggesting it.

Devenger:

18-02-2009 12:16:11 UTC

imperial  arrow

The General does not require more Loyalty. He already IS Loyalty.

SingularByte: he/him

18-02-2009 17:03:41 UTC

imperial  arrow

Wooble:

18-02-2009 18:02:13 UTC

imperial  arrow

Amnistar: he/him

18-02-2009 19:20:17 UTC

for  arrow

The general accepts your challenge.

Rodlen:

18-02-2009 19:27:30 UTC

Just one more arrow needed.

Bucky:

18-02-2009 19:58:28 UTC

arrow  arrow what Rodlen said arrow  arrow

Hix:

18-02-2009 20:54:37 UTC

against explicit :NOARROW:.

Surely I’m not the only one that would rather not encourage references to the DDA.

Qwazukee:

18-02-2009 21:57:18 UTC

imperial  arrow

DDA forever!

Amnistar: he/him

18-02-2009 22:08:47 UTC

for touche hix, touche.  without the DDA you get more arros from the general.

Rodlen:

18-02-2009 23:55:28 UTC

Hix: I can understand the lack of an arrow, but please keep your Against votes for the actual proposal, instead of the flavour text.  Unless the flavour text is a scam, that is.

Wakukee:

19-02-2009 01:04:51 UTC

8 for (w/ defs), 4 against, 10 arrows.

Klisz:

19-02-2009 06:17:41 UTC

Amni, please, PLEASE, CoV.

Kevan: he/him

19-02-2009 10:44:32 UTC

against

dogfish:

19-02-2009 10:52:31 UTC

imperial

Devenger:

19-02-2009 15:49:51 UTC

Don’t bother using reasoning, Rodlen; you won’t get Hix’s vote unless you offer your sacrifice to the correct altar at midnight. This’ll pass irrelevant of how unreasonable some people can be.

arthexis: he/him

19-02-2009 20:19:07 UTC

CoV against

arthexis: he/him

19-02-2009 20:23:05 UTC

BTW, just to let you guys now: you’re being setup by Rodlen. When this passes, everyone who voted FOR would be considered infringing Martial Law per rule “2.7.2.1 No Wasters” Don’t worry: I’ll have a fun time reporting you all.

Wooden Squid:

19-02-2009 20:37:14 UTC

imperial

Rodlen:

19-02-2009 22:16:37 UTC

...Arth…wait…you are right about how it would work, but I wasn’t thinking about that.  I would NEVER set myself up to be reported on.

Wakukee:

19-02-2009 22:52:39 UTC

Def does not, as amni’s vote really was the cause of the reduction.

Devenger:

20-02-2009 00:07:43 UTC

CoV against Can’t possibly take a Loyalty infringing action.

Rodlen:

20-02-2009 01:39:48 UTC

imperial  arrow COV, as I’m no longer doing an action that causes damage, I’m doing an action that allows Amni to do an action that does damage.

arthexis: he/him

20-02-2009 02:41:22 UTC

BTW, I am not enacting this: that would be an action dealing damage to Amnistar :P