Any particular reasoning behind your vote, Yoda? Do you just think that since milking the cows does not do anything, we need not spend any more time fiddling with the rules of it?

Just curious. Always nice to know if there is some way a proposal can be altered to make it more palatable.

I think the captains should actually have cows to begin with…

Whatever milking the cows turns out to do, I like this.

Perhaps an amendment so that a captain must have Cows as a Pet and a “Milking Gloves” treasure to be able to milk the cows?

As a note: as the ruleset currently stands, denying this proposal will not prevent captains without cows from milking them.

However, we can have a better proposal. 

I like this because we can easily “fix” something such as a captain selling the gloves or going idle with them by adding new gloves.  But limiting it to just captains with cows makes it too limited IMO (I.E. only 3 captains currently have cows, and there is no mechanism for changing pets once further along, ect)

This is BlogNomic.  Common sense takes second place to aesthetics.

too limited? what are you talking about? this proposal already limits it to only 1 captain currently (whoever has the gloves).

i think it would make pets have more of a role by filtering effects through them.

“Milk the Cows” (requires milking gloves)
“Herd the Penguins” (requires flavored ice)
“Pluck the Parrots” (requires an angry cat)
“Tip the Monkeys” (requires a monkey grinder organ, and better than ‘grind the monkeys’ or spank, ah, never mind…)
“Plaster the Pandas” (requires bamboo sake)

and if you can’t use your treasure, it becomes a bargaining chip. trade up, or sell it out of spite.

This would not limit it to 1 captain if more milking glove treasures were created. It says “each” captain.

per aaron’s idea