Friday, September 01, 2006

Proposal: Proposal: A second attempt at voting harmony

Timed out 2-6.—Kevan

Adminned at 03 Sep 2006 19:27:05 UTC

If the Rule “Harmony” exists, add to the end of “Harmony” the words:

If the oldest pending proposal which has been open for voting for more than 48 hours has had at least two valid votes cast on it, and all musicians performing the same style have voted the same way on it, immediately before the proposal is enacted or failed X/3 votes(rounded down) the same as those cast by those musicians are cast on the proposal, where X is the number of musicians performing that style.

The enacting or failing admin should make a comment on that proposal describing the votes cast by this rule, for example “Dissonance: FOR” if 2 additional For votes have been cast because all Dissonance performing musicians voted FOR.



09-01-2006 17:06:34 UTC

Still not quite as tight as it could be but I’ll for it for now.


09-01-2006 17:18:34 UTC

against I’d rather see then S-K and reproposed in a more solid wording.


09-01-2006 18:00:52 UTC



09-01-2006 23:21:09 UTC


Angry Grasshopper:

09-01-2006 23:43:09 UTC

Simplify, simplify.


09-02-2006 01:57:04 UTC

against I’d rather see the effort of vote calculation being a voluntary one from a Musician, rather than a compulsory one from the enacting Admin. (Because the Admin has the power to deny the vote bonus by changing his own Style or Vote, as much as anything.)


09-02-2006 07:56:00 UTC



09-04-2006 01:36:56 UTC

against just to speed the queue