Monday, February 23, 2009

Proposal: Save the General!  ... Or condemn him.

Self-killed, failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 25 Feb 2009 14:21:27 UTC

If a quorum of votes contain the words “Time Heals”, then add the following to rule 2.3 (Collateral Damage):

If the General does not veto any proposals for a week, then the collateral damage decreases by 25. If the Collateral damage had been 500 or greater and becomes lower than 500 as a result of this, then the general’s health is restored to 10.

If a quorum of votes contains the words “Dead Men Tell No Tales”, then add the following to rule 2.3 (Collateral Damage):

The General may not veto proposals if he has a health of 0 (or below). If he wishes, he may give the Veto power to any other Soldier by making a story post saying that he wishes to do so and to which soldier(s) he wishes to grant this power to.

If a quorum of votes contains the words “While We’re At It”, then amend the following sentence in rule 1.2 (Soldiers)

Soldiers who wish to become Admins shall sign up with a username for the Ruleset Wiki, and submit a Proposal to make themselves Admins.

such that it reads:

Soldiers who wish to become Admins may sign up with a username for the Ruleset Wiki and submit a Proposal to make themselves Admins.

One of the first proposals to offer acceptable, yet not contradicting, options to Soldiers of all levels of loyalty! It is a part of the new “enemy outreach” program initiated by our “slightly suicidal” High Command!

Comments

Qwazukee:

23-02-2009 22:05:57 UTC

against Although the 1st part seems to make sense.

dogfish:

23-02-2009 22:08:02 UTC

arrow  for

dogfish:

23-02-2009 22:48:35 UTC

Sorry, realised the above was not an actual vote. *Time Heals* was what I meant for  arrow

Wakukee:

23-02-2009 22:55:26 UTC

Specific Author For:  for  arrow Time Heals Dead Men Tell No Tales While We’re At It

Rodlen:

23-02-2009 23:37:46 UTC

for Time Heals While We’re At It

arthexis: he/him

24-02-2009 02:13:12 UTC

First, I don’t think the initial rule makes sense, simply because I do not expect this dynasty to last many months for this to actually be relevant. against

Second, why is there an amendment to CORE rules as a SIDE proposal?  against

Gnauga:

24-02-2009 02:36:30 UTC

Time Heals, While we’re at it. for

Darknight: he/him

24-02-2009 07:54:08 UTC

imperial

Kevan: he/him

24-02-2009 11:40:25 UTC

against

Igthorn:

24-02-2009 12:08:16 UTC

against

So it’s three proposals in one? Isn’t that against the spirit of the rules?

Kevan: he/him

24-02-2009 12:37:25 UTC

In a doomed kind of way; if the proposal hits quorum with only minor differences of opinion, none of its components would enact.

I’m against how much this clouds the voting process, though - usually the red and green icons are a clear at-a-glance indicator of public opinion.

Hix:

24-02-2009 15:13:02 UTC

against , of course.

Amnistar: he/him

24-02-2009 16:41:09 UTC

against yea, a few to many ideas for one proposal.

ais523:

24-02-2009 17:24:39 UTC

against This method of using subproposals does actually work mathematically, but is clearly end-running around the spirit of the queue. The forms are meant to be filled out in triplicate. That doesn’t mean you can put something different on each copy of the form…

Klisz:

24-02-2009 17:57:54 UTC

for  While we’re at it, time heals and dead men tell no tales.

Qwazukee:

24-02-2009 22:29:40 UTC

CoV against  arrow

Rodlen:

24-02-2009 23:58:19 UTC

against COV

Wakukee:

25-02-2009 21:44:35 UTC

S/K because I don’t want to clog the queue. Feel free to re-propose any part of this.

Wakukee:

25-02-2009 21:44:56 UTC

against S/K