Monday, June 05, 2006

Proposal: Have fun figuring out why this is a bad proposal.

Fails 1-7 at quorum against, with 1 against from a non-Monk

Adminned at 07 Jun 2006 08:52:16 UTC

Renumber all Rules in the following manner.
Rule 2.1 becomes Rule 2.25
Rule 2.2 becomes Rule 2.26
Rule 2.3 becomes Rule 2.27
Rule 2.4 becomes Rule 2.17
Rule 2.5 becomes Rule 2.15
Rule 2.6 becomes Rule 2.13
Rule 2.7 becomes Rule 2.1
Rule 2.8 becomes Rule 2.3
Rule 2.9 becomes Rule 2.5
Rule 2.10 becomes Rule 2.7
Rule 2.11 becomes Rule 2.9
Rule 2.12 becomes Rule 2.11
Rule 2.13 becomes Rule 2.10
Rule 2.14 becomes Rule 2.8
Rule 2.15 becomes Rule 2.6
Rule 2.16 becomes Rule 2.4
Rule 2.17 becomes Rule 2.2
Rule 2.18 becomes Rule 2.12
Rule 2.19 becomes Rule 2.14
Rule 2.20 becomes Rule 2.16
Rule 2.21 becomes Rule 2.18
Rule 2.22 becomes Rule 2.20
Rule 2.23 becomes Rule 2.22
Rule 2.24 remains Rule 2.24
Rule 2.25 becomes Rule 2.23
Rule 2.26 becomes Rule 2.21
Rule 2.27 becomes Rule 2.19

Comments

Angry Grasshopper:

05-06-2006 21:43:40 UTC

My idea of fun is voting against this proposal.

Hix:

05-06-2006 21:43:46 UTC

against Helping Bucky out, again.

Elias IX:

05-06-2006 21:44:42 UTC

against

Bucky:

06-06-2006 00:02:47 UTC

If this passes, I volunteer to admin it.

Thelonious:

06-06-2006 15:35:17 UTC

Instead of leaving me to figure out why this is a bad proposal, why don’t you tell us why you think it’s a good proposal.

against

Iron Man:

06-06-2006 15:36:50 UTC

against

No, seriously, what’s wrong with you people.  I spent over half an hour before I signed up for this morass reading that thing, I don’t want to re-read it.  That’s why it’s a bad idea.

Iron Man:

06-06-2006 16:10:50 UTC

This is pefectly legal.

against

Psalms 71.1
In thee, o Lord, do I put my trust: let me never be put to confusion.

Rodney:

06-06-2006 16:49:47 UTC

against

Purplebeard:

06-06-2006 18:34:26 UTC

for Well, I’m stumped.

Greek Diamond:

07-06-2006 11:50:44 UTC

Well if it’s a bad proposal against

Purplebeard:

07-06-2006 12:12:46 UTC

against COV just in case a rule is referenced by its number in a secret rule.

Angry Grasshopper:

07-06-2006 12:14:29 UTC

Purplebeard, as far as secret rules go, you may safely vote for this proposal. =D

Now as far as whatever number references we have in the core Ruleset, that’s another can of worms.