Friday, January 25, 2013

Proposal: Million Dollar Speaky

Passes 11-0. Josh can’t gain 2 credibility since he has maximum possible value. Cpt_Koen, Kevan, Klisz, Murphy lose one credibility for not having voted. — Quirck

Adminned at 27 Jan 2013 11:59:56 UTC

In the rule entitled Commitments, add the following sentence at the end of the rule:

Any Commitment thus cited in a Tabloid Headline post ceases to be a Commitment.

In the rule entitled Urgent Questions, change the last two paragraphs to read:

The named Honourable Member should then respond to the story post with a comment containing an answer to the urgent question. The answer may be detailed or brief, evasive or specific, but it must address the question asked in the body of the post. Upon answering the question they gain 1 Credibility. Each Urgent Question may be answered by the named Honourable Member only once.

If the named Honourable Member has not responded to the urgent question within 48 hours, any Honourable Member may once reduce their Credibility by 3.

One of the concerns raised was regarding the lack of definition for “proof”. I’m deliberately not touching that, mostly because I’m entertained by the idea of standards of proof being determined by precedent and challenge rather than predefinition.



01-25-2013 19:13:38 UTC

for I’m thinking of including a rule for a Point of Order resolved by the Speaker, but I figured I’d put my other two proposals through first.

quirck: HE/HIM

01-25-2013 19:57:20 UTC



01-25-2013 21:15:34 UTC



01-25-2013 21:17:46 UTC


Clucky: HE/HIM

01-25-2013 22:31:37 UTC

for  arrow


01-25-2013 22:34:12 UTC



01-25-2013 23:12:08 UTC

for  arrow


01-26-2013 01:37:58 UTC

Does the wording “any Honourable Member may once reduce their Credibility by 3.” imply each and every member could do so once regardless of whether others have done so?


01-26-2013 17:53:24 UTC

No. If it said “each” or “every”, it would.


01-26-2013 19:32:22 UTC



01-26-2013 20:07:55 UTC

for Ok then.


01-27-2013 14:29:43 UTC

for  arrow