Thursday, March 30, 2006

Proposal: proposal Ûµ (now open for voting!)

failed 3-4, lars atomica

Adminned at 01 Apr 2006 07:51:21 UTC

Add a new rule, “The Lottery”:

Each Gostak may make an official post entitled “Gostak Honor Roll”.  This post may contain up to one instance of the name of each non-idle Gostak.  Anytime during or after the ‘’‘Friday to be Opened by Consumer Only’‘’, an admin shall roll DICEX for all non-idle Gostaks, where X is the number of instances of that Gostak’s name in posts entitled “Gostak Honor Roll”.  The highest roll of DICEX is called the ‘’‘Target’‘’.  Any Gostak whose roll of DICEX is equal to the ‘’‘Target’‘’ may declare victory at any time.

No Gostak may make more than one post entitled “Gostak Honor Roll”.

Delete any posts entitled “Gostak Honor Roll”. (done upon enactment)

Add a new rule, “Tuesday”

The ‘’‘Friday to be Opened by Consumer Only’‘’ is April 3, 2006.

posted by 90000 at 30 Mar 2006 03:06:21 UTC Comments (10)

Comments

Bucky:

30-03-2006 03:29:54 UTC

against  due to high scammability.

90000:

30-03-2006 04:20:09 UTC

for I’m pretty sure scams wouldn’t be tolerated on something like this.

smith:

30-03-2006 04:38:36 UTC

against

Josh: Imperator he/they

30-03-2006 07:05:53 UTC

for

Rodney:

30-03-2006 13:28:43 UTC

for

Hix:

30-03-2006 18:44:10 UTC

against
Multiple Honor Rolls may be made by a single Gostak before this proposal goes into effect, but they would all count when determining X for any Gostak.  Also, saying that a Gostak “may declare victory at any time” doesn’t help em get votes on eir DoV unless e has also achieved victory.

Hix:

30-03-2006 19:19:20 UTC

Ach, sorry.  My first reason above is invalid because of the ‘delete any posts entitled “Gostak Honor Roll”’ bit.

Bucky:

30-03-2006 22:10:25 UTC

There were a couple of others that Hix didn’t spot, either.  For example, an admin could repeat the DICE rolling as many times as e needs to get the favorable result.

Purplebeard:

31-03-2006 10:14:49 UTC

for

Angry Grasshopper:

01-04-2006 06:24:47 UTC

against