Saturday, July 02, 2016

Proposal: OBJECTION!

Times out and Enacts 2-1-2 -Larrytheturtle

Adminned at 04 Jul 2016 03:01:49 UTC

After the bulleted list in the Rule “Apocrypha”, add the following (unbulleted) paragraph:

The Editor shall only use the first method if all Maps whose date have arrived or passed have been used. If a Map specifies a Rule that would not be possible or permitted for the Editor to add, it is considered used.

Add a new rule “Objection!” as a subrule of “Apocrypha” with the following text:

The Editor may Object to a map that they find unacceptable for any reason. When they do so, they must post a story post and its title should begin with “Objection: X” where X is the name of the rule being Mapped to, this is the Objection. The Editor should not mention the Author of a Map in an Objection. A Map is considered used if it specifies a rule that is the subject of an Objection that is neither Upheld nor Overturned. Scribes may post FOR and AGAINST votes on any Objection, with the appropriate voting icons, within 24 hours of it being posted; the Editor is considered to have voted For if they have not yet posted a valid voting icon. Only a Scribe’s most recent valid vote is considered to be their vote. Any votes posted after 24 hours are considered invalid. After 24 hours the Objection becomes Closed. If the For votes on a Closed Objection are greater than or equal to the number of Against votes on it then it is considered Upheld, otherwise it is considered Overturned. If an Objection is Upheld then any Map specifies the rule X is considered Used. If an Objection is Overturned then it returns to being unused and can not be Objected to again.

A way for Brendan to maintain his ability to veto things while still prioritizing Maps. This would not prevent a rule that was Objected to from being added randomly.

Comments

Bucky:

07-02-2016 02:56:42 UTC

imperial

Clucky:

07-02-2016 02:58:45 UTC

imperial

RaichuKFM:

07-02-2016 19:08:06 UTC

for

qwertyu63:

07-02-2016 21:16:45 UTC

imperial

Bucky:

07-03-2016 19:54:00 UTC

CoV against  in favor of It’s Dangerous to avoid cluttering the blog with Objections.

Larrytheturtle:

07-03-2016 20:12:36 UTC

Considering that maps are one of the main things to do so far, it is kinda rediculous if he is objecting to that many things that it clutters the blog.

Bucky:

07-04-2016 00:23:57 UTC

As a secondary reason, I would like a trickle of chaotic random rules to continue even if we start throwing around Maps.

Larrytheturtle:

07-04-2016 00:34:28 UTC

Eh, I understand if people feel that way, I just don’t personally. I feel like so far we don’t have much semblance of a coherent game and we usually would by this point. Having everything be mapped might not help much but I just like it better and I feel like people will pick rules that are more useable that random ones will be.