Sunday, August 02, 2009

Proposal: ground your groundhogs, lest they be wet

Veto of a Self-Kill. - Qwazukee

Adminned at 03 Aug 2009 17:16:06 UTC

create a new dynastic rule entitled: “happiness"with the following text:

add a new statistic to the GNDT: happiness level. the maximum happiness level of a bill murray is 100 ;the minimum happiness level is 0. a bill murrray will lose happiness equal to the atmospheric depression once per day(i.e. if a bill murray’s happiness is 50 and the atmospheric depression is 3, his happiness level becomes 47 at 00:00:01 UTC and 44 at 00:00:01 UTC the next day).

add a sub rule to dynastic rule “happiness” with the following text:

a bill murray is exempt from this rule if they are grounded.

a bill murray can gain happiness by doing a good deed, the happiness gained is equal to the number of steps taken to preform the deed.

set every bill murray’s happiness level to 50

lets try this again

i think there needs to be a reason one would want to become grounded



08-02-2009 14:15:51 UTC

Ok, this is better. A few minor issues:

Your exemption bit doesn’t really do anything, because it causes an exemption to the new, unnamed subrule (not to the actual “happiness rule) due to where it’s placed. You don’t really need a subrule there; it would work better if you just included that text in the actual rule.

Also, you’ll want to use good grammar, syntax, capitalization, and stuff in the future; we can fix all this pretty easily (and legally), but people are less likely to vote for your stuff if it doesn’t look clean.

On the other hand, the rule is sensible (even if bits of it don’t do much), so I see no reason to vote against.


Ienpw III:

08-02-2009 15:38:12 UTC



08-02-2009 15:41:49 UTC

against Because, who is performing these actions? I for once dislike tracking stats that increase or decrease automatically at a certain time interval, specially if the interval is small.

Furthermore, as Qwaz pointed out, the sub-rule does not have its intended effect, because the text should be on the rule itself.


08-02-2009 19:09:56 UTC

against  No capitalization - I’m a Grammar Nazi, as some of you may remember.


08-02-2009 19:28:19 UTC

imperial Let it go, Darth. I’ve talked to him, and I hope he will capitalize in the future. Until then, vote how you feel the proposal should go. Remember that admins can change obvious gramatical mistakes in the ruleset.


08-02-2009 23:30:19 UTC

against per art


08-02-2009 23:31:16 UTC

One more thing:
“add a new statistic to the GNDT: happiness level.”

That shouldn’t be in the rule.

Still, CoV for


08-02-2009 23:31:57 UTC

Also, my previous vote was pretty much just an excuse to link to the Arth Vs. Darth discussion.


08-03-2009 07:12:29 UTC



08-03-2009 15:28:57 UTC

...CoV again per arth against

Ienpw III:

08-03-2009 15:54:10 UTC

CoV imperial


08-03-2009 23:20:13 UTC

against I’m just self killing this on the fact that Darth Cliche’s proposal is alot better than mine, and I can just propose a change to it if I want.


08-04-2009 00:15:26 UTC