Sunday, October 23, 2011

Proposal: Quorum Drano 2

Self-Killed

Adminned at 23 Oct 2011 17:05:09 UTC

Immediately idle each Artist who does not have cast a valid vote on at least one of:

  1) This proposal;
  2) The Consensus Gamestate CfJ; or
  3) The original Quorum Drano Proposal.

For the sole purpose of this Proposal, deferential (:DEF:) votes shall be counted as valid, even if there was no unidle Critic when they were cast. Such deferential votes, if cast on this proposal, will count as explicit Votes of abstention, and have no effect whatsoever except to void earlier voting icons by that voter on this proposal.

Kudos to Pavitra. Let’s game on.

posted by ChronosPhaenon at 23 Oct 2011 12:26:08 UTC Comments (41)

Comments

Amnistar: he/himIdle

23-10-2011 13:33:37 UTC

for Though I still think it would have been neat to play a game with this many people.

southpointingchariot: Idle

23-10-2011 13:37:36 UTC

for I think it would have been neat to play a game this many actual players

Roujo: he/himIdle

23-10-2011 13:43:22 UTC

for Notice: Undefined variable: cfjcount in /home/blognomic/www/ee/system/core/core.functions.php(634) : eval()‘d code on line 50

Pavitra: Idle

23-10-2011 14:33:59 UTC

for I agree with southpointingchariot.

Also, I see the same error as Roujo.

Ornithopter: Idle

23-10-2011 14:45:37 UTC

for

Darknight: he/him

23-10-2011 14:45:58 UTC

for

Elias IX: Idle

23-10-2011 14:56:18 UTC

Whoa this game moves too fast for me to keep up

Kevan: he/himIdle

23-10-2011 15:00:30 UTC

for Although I think your DEF clause shoots itself in the foot by going on to say that such votes will “have no effect whatsoever except to void earlier voting icons”.

Brendan: he/himIdle

23-10-2011 15:06:03 UTC

for

ais523: Custodian

23-10-2011 15:18:54 UTC

for Although if open proposals can specify how to count votes on them, I have a great scam where I make a proposal on which AGAINST votes count as FOR votes.

Kevan: he/himIdle

23-10-2011 15:21:47 UTC

[Roujo] Looks like Darth edited the sidebar to list the number of CfJs (the title was previously just “Pending Calls for Judgement”), a couple of days ago, but didn’t copy the bit of code that handles zero. Fixed.

ChronosPhaenon: Idle

23-10-2011 15:22:32 UTC

[ais523] They can’t specify how to count votes on them. But they can specify effects contingent on those votes, other than passing or failing itself.

Josh: he/they

23-10-2011 15:31:01 UTC

for

ChronosPhaenon: Idle

23-10-2011 15:35:10 UTC

[Kevan] The intention is to honour the DEFs in the first Proposal, not on this one.

Murphy: Idle

23-10-2011 15:35:13 UTC

for

Prince Anduril: Idle

23-10-2011 15:46:34 UTC

against Dislike the idea that people have to post on specific proposals to not be de-idled. This game is running really fast at the moment. Just because people don’t follow it for a couple of days is no reason to idle them.

redtara: they/themIdle

23-10-2011 15:48:39 UTC

for I suppose.

ChronosPhaenon: Idle

23-10-2011 15:51:07 UTC

[Anduril] That’s why I’ve referred to two old posts also. That will give us a good cut on whoever is really voting.

scshunt: Idle

23-10-2011 16:05:17 UTC

for

Amnistar: he/himIdle

23-10-2011 16:07:26 UTC

against  to keep it from qouruming before the 48 hours pass.

scshunt: Idle

23-10-2011 16:14:25 UTC

People have had plenty of time to vote on these three proposals. I think we should be less concerned about getting a quorum too soon.

On top of that, if anyone does get idled improperly, it’s easy to re-idle them.

Bucky: Idle

23-10-2011 16:15:57 UTC

against

zuff: Idle

23-10-2011 16:28:43 UTC

for

flurie: Idle

23-10-2011 16:35:50 UTC

for

I agree with the idea that it’s a little annoying to have to vote in order not to be idled, but there’s no longer a glut in the queue, so finding this post in 48 hours shouldn’t be too difficult, and even so there aren’t any adverse gamestate consequences that would come of being idled right now.

Ely: Idle

23-10-2011 17:33:25 UTC

for ping.

monqy: Idle

23-10-2011 17:45:27 UTC

for

Spitemaster: Idle

23-10-2011 19:33:55 UTC

for
Seems like a good plan to me.

Shadowclaw: Idle

23-10-2011 20:21:07 UTC

for

Sgeo: Idle

23-10-2011 21:16:12 UTC

for

scshunt: Idle

23-10-2011 21:32:58 UTC

By my count, Agora Nomic, Blorg, CWW, digibomber, dupdog, Elias IX, lass, Libby, rebelyellow, Schrodinger’s Cat, Tavros Nitram, Winner, and Yally will be idled.

scshunt: Idle

23-10-2011 21:34:04 UTC

Oh, and Phatom Hoover

Sgeo: Idle

23-10-2011 21:50:35 UTC

Brought up in IRC: The fact that we are not, in fact, certain of who validly voted on those proposals.

scshunt: Idle

23-10-2011 21:51:18 UTC

Yup…

scshunt: Idle

23-10-2011 21:51:31 UTC

Oh right, CoV against for that reason.

Sgeo: Idle

23-10-2011 21:53:19 UTC

CoV against

Pavitra: Idle

23-10-2011 21:53:22 UTC

CoV against per IRC. This depends on pre-ratification gamestate via validity of votes. (For example, would Ely have been idled by this if they hadn’t voted on it?) It seems silly to reintroduce ambiguity, given how much trouble we went to to get rid of it.

ais523: Custodian

23-10-2011 22:15:46 UTC

CoV against; it’s just been pointed out on IRC that if the arrival bug actually happened, people who weren’t actually Artists at the time they apparently voted wouldn’t actually have voted.

omd: Idle

23-10-2011 23:22:17 UTC

for can’t we just paper over the ambiguity? :p

Wooble: Idle

23-10-2011 23:34:52 UTC

against

ChronosPhaenon: Idle

23-10-2011 23:42:20 UTC

I’ll self kill this presently.

ChronosPhaenon: Idle

24-10-2011 00:04:33 UTC

against S-K. I’ll not repost.