Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Proposal: Proposal: Raising the Stakes II

Time-out. Passes 18-4. ~~Chronos Phaenon

Adminned at 28 Oct 2011 12:57:09 UTC

If the Rule “Dead Body Collection Service” exists,replace:

If a player Represented by a Proposal votes AGAINST that Proposal, it counts as if the author of that Proposal has voted AGAINST it (in other words, it has been Self-Killed), for the purposes of the rule “1.6 Resolution of Proposals”.

With:

If a player Represented by a Proposal votes AGAINST that Proposal, it counts as if the author of that Proposal has voted AGAINST it (in other words, it has been Self-Killed), for the purposes of the rules “1.6 Resolution of Proposals” and “2.* Dead Body Collection Service”.

Replace the * in the above text with the appropriate number.

This is the valid proposal.  Ignore the other one.

Comments

arthexis: he/him

26-10-2011 19:30:32 UTC

for

Clucky: he/him

26-10-2011 19:37:04 UTC

for

Pavitra:

26-10-2011 19:37:47 UTC

for

scshunt:

26-10-2011 19:52:27 UTC

for

Brendan: he/him

26-10-2011 19:55:53 UTC

for

Bucky:

26-10-2011 20:27:25 UTC

against .  It’s one thing to allow others to kill your proposals, it’s quite different to allow others to kill your proposals and destroy your SP.

southpointingchariot:

26-10-2011 21:11:37 UTC

for

Josh: Observer he/they

26-10-2011 21:31:43 UTC

for

Amnistar: he/him

26-10-2011 21:42:58 UTC

for it makes nominations have a cost of 1 SP if it fails, not destroying SP.

arthexis: he/him

26-10-2011 21:53:17 UTC

I think its fair.

Ornithopter:

26-10-2011 21:59:34 UTC

for @Bucky: That’s the risk you take when you have them represent you.

Prince Anduril:

26-10-2011 22:29:03 UTC

against

Moriarty:

26-10-2011 22:52:31 UTC

for This makes it more important to select your representatives carefully.

Winner:

26-10-2011 23:22:30 UTC

for

Kevan: he/him

27-10-2011 00:09:24 UTC

for

omd:

27-10-2011 03:41:25 UTC

for

lazerchik:

27-10-2011 05:14:14 UTC

for

Darknight: he/him

27-10-2011 06:00:02 UTC

for

zuff:

27-10-2011 08:31:18 UTC

for

SingularByte: he/him

27-10-2011 13:39:31 UTC

for

Ely:

27-10-2011 13:49:14 UTC

against for numeric rule reference. This is quite a bad idea in BlogNomic, since rule numbers tend to change.

ChronosPhaenon:

28-10-2011 10:39:15 UTC

for

scshunt:

28-10-2011 17:06:22 UTC

CoV against because it’s unclear who the admin can act ON BEHALF OF. See http://blognomic.com/archive/representative_death1/ for a cleaner version.

Ornithopter:

28-10-2011 18:52:07 UTC

for I agree with Ely, though. It’s better for rules to only refer to other rules by name.