Saturday, June 29, 2019

Proposal: count me out

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.

Comments

TyGuy6:

29-06-2019 18:24:45 UTC

Do you want that in the dynasty ruleset, or…?

Madrid:

29-06-2019 18:49:37 UTC

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)

Farsight:

29-06-2019 21:06:20 UTC

imperial

Kevan: City he/him

29-06-2019 21:51:00 UTC

against 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.

Brendan: he/him

29-06-2019 21:57:30 UTC

imperial

derrick: he/him

29-06-2019 22:30:42 UTC

against

A better version would be a non-imperial DEF. This slows down the game more than a DEF.

redtara: they/them

30-06-2019 00:02:33 UTC

against eh honestly I’d be in favour of abolishing DEFs altogether at this point. is it that hard to decide for or against?

TyGuy6:

30-06-2019 05:51:01 UTC

against

TyGuy6:

30-06-2019 06:13:53 UTC

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!

Farsight:

30-06-2019 17:09:22 UTC

[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.

Kaia:

01-07-2019 16:56:40 UTC

imperial