Monday, July 31, 2006

Support for local proposals

I was wondering about making a proposal that requires local proposals to have a FOR vote from at least 1 traveller other than the proposer (and meet all the other conditions) in order to pass.  This would prevent proposals from passing just because nobody could get there to vote it down.  (Obviously the Arbiter can veto any local proposal but I’m not sure that’s really enough.  What if the arbiter was away?  Or perhaps didn’t see a particular proposal as veto worthy?)

The wording would be a little tricky so before I make a real proposal, would you be likely to support such a proposal?

posted by Thelonious at 31 Jul 2006 10:21:01 UTC Comments (6)

Comments

Kevan: Concierge he/him

31-07-2006 10:33:21 UTC

Excellent idea.

Bucky: Idle

31-07-2006 15:53:34 UTC

Concern:  It will kill most Local proposals due to apathy.

Kevan: Concierge he/him

31-07-2006 16:52:16 UTC

Killing most local proposals sounds fine to me, looking at the recent ones.

Would the secondary ‘FOR’ vote have to be a legal in-range one, or just a token blessing from anyone, anywhere?

Bucky: Idle

01-08-2006 00:19:15 UTC

I’d say token blessing because it saves the trouble of going 200 years out of our way to validate someone else’s idea.

Shadowclaw: Idle

01-08-2006 01:50:14 UTC

Sounds fine to me.  I say that the second vote should be a legal FOR vote, rather than just a token blessing.

Thelonious: Idle

01-08-2006 08:29:46 UTC

Well, it looks like there’s some interest so I’ve made a proposal.

I’ve actually made the proposal cover all proposals not just local ones.  It was easier to word that way and, come to think of it, why should global proposals get away with just the proposer’s vote?

Anyway, further comments are probably best against the proposal itself.