Sunday, August 01, 2010

Proposal: Stone crushers for the Crushing of stone !!!

Vetoed. 4 arrows. Almost but not quite a PP. Fails. - lilomar

Adminned at 02 Aug 2010 17:03:47 UTC

Create a new form entitled “MAO”.

Describing of excellent the form it follows:

Please to welcome introduce MAO form for great Treason reducing!!! Also the wiki spam cleaning.  Wiki full being all kind of pages of discuss spam not being ever have make Gamestate, for typical Promoting equipment for crushing of stone!!!!

Here is how form working.  First, user of form to make great cleanup, these are the steps:
1. User find five (05) wiki page on Blognomic wiki never been Gamestate, also each page these having been made earlier than 01 July 2010 00:00:01.  Let us call these page “Spam”.  But for this purpose being, if one Citizen give make a specific page that is Spam for this form, no other Citizen is doing so with that wiki page for that other Citizen’s use of this form!!!
(2) Of the five wiki page that is the Spam, User deletes the content!
iii Within 24 hours being after User has done two above steps, User complete and submit form!!! In accordance with instructions on form text user have to follow them.  Well there you have it but keep to reading below now.
Number Four.  The User can be using this form as a Weekly Action but not more many times than that.
05.00 The User follows all steps and submits form in traditional and proper respectful fashion he enjoys Reduction of Treason points by one but not going below the zero.

Here being Text of glorious form MAO:

Hi I am citizen name being: _______ !!!
Hi nice to meet you.
I telling titles now of five (05) wiki Spam pages I already cleaned them up in last 24 hours past: ___, ___, ___, ___, ___
All those Spam pages meeting standards for to use this good Form.
I choose one from column A and one from column B

COLUMN A               COLUMN B
Pork fried rice             Shrimp toast
Happy lucky family         Egg drop soup
Moo goo gai pan           I’M.TRAPPED.IN.A.FORTUNE.COOKIE.FACTORY

My choices being here: ___, ___

Signatory required for form is:

Any Three Citizens, each agreeing that Form requirements is met.  Please to be using nice grammar and style of words but not is bad if it is not the case !!!

Additional requirements being:

Any Citizen other than User of nice MAO form, but if requirement of content delete five Spam wiki page not being met like form says, then User and Citizen who pass form they both TRAITORS and getting Three (3) Treason points!

posted by spikebrennan at 01 Aug 2010 03:14:46 UTC Comments (20)

Comments

lilomar:

01-08-2010 04:57:36 UTC

arrow not necessarily because it fits the theme, but because I lold.

for

Bucky:

01-08-2010 05:03:56 UTC

against .  This appears to reward deleting dynastic history pages.

ais523:

01-08-2010 05:13:13 UTC

arrow against per Bucky

lilomar:

01-08-2010 05:19:31 UTC

Citizen Bucky raises an excellent point. As hilarious as this form is, and as useful as it would be if it had the intended consequences, it is much too dangerous for mere clones.

veto

lilomar:

01-08-2010 05:26:05 UTC

oops…
arrow  veto

glopso:

01-08-2010 05:59:09 UTC

Lol. But against  per Bucky and the broken Engrish may introduce loopholes.

spikebrennan:

01-08-2010 06:02:42 UTC

Dynastic history having been gamestate! So is not to be for deleting please.

lilomar:

01-08-2010 06:06:57 UTC

I’m pretty sure that the dynastic histories are not gamestate, as there are no rules regulating them.

I haven’t procedurally vetoed this, so if it turns out that they are, I can reverse this to my former vote up until it makes the long climb up the queue.

ais523:

01-08-2010 06:11:33 UTC

Wow, I didn’t even realise it was possible to revert a veto. Why don’t those work the same way as selfkills?

lilomar:

01-08-2010 06:13:07 UTC

maybe for this very situation?

scshunt:

01-08-2010 06:27:00 UTC

arrow  imperial

Bucky:

01-08-2010 07:30:23 UTC

Dynastic history pages were gamestate a long time ago; however, any history pages more recent than that would be Spam according to this form.

Kevan: he/him

01-08-2010 07:35:35 UTC

[lilomar] You can’t revert a veto in any meaningful sense - “Proposals the High-Programmer has Voted to VETO are considered vetoed.” and “vetoed” proposals can never be passed.

Nice sentiment, but there are at least 1900 spam pages in the wiki at the moment.

Wakukee:

01-08-2010 08:09:54 UTC

against Many non-gamestate pages are useful.

Darknight: he/him

01-08-2010 08:42:56 UTC

against Though as Kev pointed out, we do need to try to clean those out sometime down the road

flurie:

01-08-2010 13:13:29 UTC

arrow  imperial

lilomar:

01-08-2010 14:52:15 UTC

Kevan: Do

If a Citizen uses more than one Voting Icon in comments on a Votable Matter, their Vote is the last voting icon they use.

and

If the High-Programmer casts a Vote of DEFERENTIAL on a Proposal, it serves the purpose of cancelling any previous Vote on that Proposal that was cast by the High-Programmer.

not hold in the case of VETOs for some reason? If not, why is it specified that

If a Citizen Votes against their own Proposal, that Vote may not be changed.

but there is no similar clause for VETOs?

Keba:

01-08-2010 22:38:23 UTC

[Kevan] Did you forget to vote?

against at least per Bucky and Kevan. Additionally, reading the form is not fun. :)

Kevan: he/him

02-08-2010 10:52:48 UTC

Your vote is now DEFERENTIAL, but the proposal remains “considered vetoed”. You have voted to veto the proposal, even if you later changed that vote. (Which is why we have all the faff about comments on EVCs rather than “votes”.)

Maybe we should tack a veto clause on for clarity, since it’s the same issue; a self-kill or a veto is taken as a sign that there’s no need to continue voting on it.

lilomar:

02-08-2010 12:27:29 UTC

Um, I didn’t vote DEFERENTIAL, I haven’t actually changed the VETO vote.