unpopular failed by derrick 1-7 with 3 defs
(previous Failure undone by Kevan: an older proposal was still pending.)
Adminned at 01 Jul 2019 20:22:05 UTC
Add a new rule titled Abstain
A Wizard may cast a vote of ABSTAIN on a proposal by including the text “:ABS:” in a comment. When counting votes for a proposal, a vote of ABSTAIN reduces quorum for that proposal by one half of a vote for each EVC of ABSTAIN.
Often Core-like rule are first tried out as Dynastic ones (Atomic Actions were a Dynastic rule for ages before Special Case Rules were eventually made and it added to that)
Each individual vote reduces quorum by the total number of abstain votes?
But even with a better wording this doesn’t seem sufficiently different to a DEF.
A better version would be a non-imperial DEF. This slows down the game more than a DEF.
eh honestly I’d be in favour of abolishing DEFs altogether at this point. is it that hard to decide for or against?
I reason that the king’s def vote has the effect of changing all defs into abstains, but with twice the effect on quorum. A good degree of control there in how fast proposals go through. Long live the King!
[Ienpw III] I think the DEF vote is valuable because sometimes a proposal will come up which I either don’t have time to look at properly or, with the best will in the world, I just don’t understand! In these cases, I very much appreciate being able to put my trust in the king, but still participate.
BlogNomic is an online Nomic: a self-modifying game where changing the rules is part of the game. Players make blog posts proposing additions or alterations to the ruleset, discussing and casting votes in the comments: if enough vote in favour, the rules are changed and play continues.
The game has been running since 2003 and resets every month or so. Have a look around the wiki for more information and history. New players are always welcome and can join in the game at any time.
BlogNomic is powered by pMachine ExpressionEngine.
TyGuy6:
Do you want that in the dynasty ruleset, or…?