This comes up a lot.  The standard response is that respecting the queue encourages people to carefully think through their proposals before making them.  The start of a dynasty is normally the only time that this is really an issue.

Yes, this comes up occasionally, and the arguments either way should probably go in the FAQ. A problem with removing self-killed proposals from the queue immediately is that there’s less incentive to get proposals right the first time, if you can just kill them off and try again straight away. It would actually make self-killing proposals the optimum strategy, in some situations - if my perfectly good proposal overlooked something, I could either wait for it to enact, get a slot back and propose a fix, or I could just self-kill it and propose a fully fixed version immediately, which may well enact sooner. There are some environments where this would be okay, but it isn’t great in a date-ordered list of blog posts that everyone has to read through, and where comments are split between blog posts.

Whether vetoes should be immediate is a separate issue, and comes up as a separate issue. For me, it seems odd that if your proposal was so bad or dangerous that the Executor had to veto it, you’d get a pat on the head and your slot back. But if your proposal was merely unpopular, controversial or broken, you’d have to sit out until the queue caught up with you.

Note that your solution wouldn’t actually make any difference in the current case of a controversial proposal - the proposer and Executor are both in favour of it, so it seems unlikely to be self-killed or vetoed.

per Kevan.  There’s good reasons for the queue, unfortunately.

Ah, I understand better now. It’s true that it made me work harder on my drafts because I knew I would only get two of them. Now that I understand /why/ things work as they do now, it’s less of an annoyance and more of a necessary delay. (^_^)

EAV

About the current situation, it was mainly so that Thrawn, Anonyman and me get our slot back. I have some ideas, but I can’t post anything. As I said, I now see it’s better this way. =)

Roujo: as a CfJ, there’s no inherent author vote on this.  It’s reasonably frequent for people to raise a CfJ on a subject they disagree with, so the vote doesn’t count automatically.

(This is also a side effect of them having been anonymous a long, long time ago.)

At the start of the dynsasty, the queue usually gets held up.  It prevents anyone from putting toooo many proposals forward when the queue is quite full.

  per Kevan.

@Excalabur: Understood ^^

.  In addition to Kevan’s arguments against an insta-fail self-kill, this should be a proposal rather than a CfJ.

I think it’s fair enough that “a Guest feels that an aspect of the game needs urgent attention”.

@Bucky: Per Kevan. Also, as I’ve pointed out, I can’t make any proposals right now. =P

There needs to be (Now that we get alot of new players) a newbie guide that contains this argument (Both sides). It should also contain a how to on the posting aspect. You know “Don’t use the Quick Save it does not do what you think it does” “To make a post a proposal you need to select it in the Categories tab” Etc.

A newbie guide would be great - particularly one that summarised how the basic proposal and voting system worked, rather than forcing them to work it out piecemeal from reading the core rules in sequence.

I started working on a Newbie Guide in the Wiki. It’s still a work in progress: feel free to complete it!

http://blognomic.com/wiki/index.php?title=Newbie_Guide

I don’t have a wiki account. Am I? Can I get one.

Sure, the FAQ tells you how to go about it.

for all the usual reasons.

Still want it for Vetoes, though.