Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Proposal: Dictatorial Conductor I

Self-killed, failed by Angry Grasshopper.

Adminned at 01 Sep 2006 11:46:33 UTC

Add a new Dynastic rule “DIctator”:

The Conductor has Dictatorial Powers, as follows

Add a sub-rule “RfC” to it:

At any time, the Condutor may submit a Request for Comments, hereby referred to as a RfC, to change the Ruleset or Gamestate, by posting an entry in the “RfC” category that describes those changes. RfC’s can either be Pending, Enacted, or Failed. When a RfC is first put forward, it is considered Pending.

Any Musician may cast eir Vote on a Pending RfC by making a comment on that entry using a voting icon of FOR, AGAINST or DEFERENTIAL. Any Musician who has not cast votes on a RfC are considered to have cast a DEFERENTIAL vote on that RfC.The Conductor may not vote AGAINST a RfC and eir vote on a RfC is always considered to be FOR, even if not explicitly cast.

If a Musician casts more than one Vote on a RfC, only the most recent of those Votes is counted. If a Musician leaves the game or goes idle, eir Vote still counts, if it is a FOR vote, otherwise it no longer counts. The Conductor may vote to veto a RfC, if e does so, that vote may not be changed.

A vote of DEFERENTIAL in a RfC will always count as a FOR vote. The Conductor cannot cast a vote of DEFERENTIAL.

The oldest pending RfC may be enacted by any Admin (and the Ruleset and/or Gamestate updated to include the specified effects of that RfC) if either of the following is true:

  * It has a number of explicity FOR (not counting DEFERENTIALS) votes that exceed or equal Quorum, has been open for voting for at least 12 hours, and has not been vetoed.
  * It has been open for voting for at least 24 hours, it has more than 1 explicity FOR (not count DEFERENTIALS) other than the Conductor’s, less than half of its votes (counting any DEFERENTIALS) are AGAINST, and it has not been vetoed.

The oldest pending RfC may be failed by any Admin, if any of the following are true:

  * It has enough AGAINST votes that it could not be Enacted without one of those votes being changed.
  * It has been open for voting for at least 24 hours and cannot be enacted.
  * The Conductor has voted to VETO it.

Whenever an Admin marks a RfC as enacted or failed, e must also mark eir name, and report the final tally of votes (or the fact that the proposal was vetoed).

Add the RfC Category to the Expression Engine.

Comments

Rodney:

30-08-2006 23:54:16 UTC

against Why do we need yet another gamestate changing object, when we already have two perfectly fine ones.

Bucky:

31-08-2006 00:00:52 UTC

Buckybot says… this is scammable.

Poe:

31-08-2006 01:15:42 UTC

against

Poe:

31-08-2006 01:16:31 UTC

Very much an easy way to break the game, like Buckybot says.

Kevan: he/him

31-08-2006 01:29:53 UTC

against

epylar:

31-08-2006 03:38:36 UTC

against clutter.

Cosmologicon:

31-08-2006 04:38:42 UTC

against

Thelonious:

31-08-2006 07:54:14 UTC

for bwa ha ha

Thrawn:

31-08-2006 11:19:46 UTC

against

Hix:

31-08-2006 14:33:52 UTC

for Aren’t we _trying_ to break the game?

gazebo_dude:

31-08-2006 22:24:21 UTC

There’s probably a more compact way to do that - break the game - so against

Angry Grasshopper:

31-08-2006 23:58:54 UTC

I like dictatorial powers, but what is the functional difference between an RFC and a Proposal?

against

ChronosPhaenon:

01-09-2006 16:15:40 UTC

against S-K