Perhaps the Board could consider vetoing No Tech Plays and Imperial Exception like the Board did with Overworked and Underappreciated?

I’m confused by this. I don’t see why a veto is necessary in any of these cases or what it has to do with this flavor text post I made.

Ok then

I’m not being dismissive or argumentative here. I’m sorry if it comes across this way.

All of these proposals are already failing. Unless I’ve missed something in the ruleset a veto in this case isn’t necessary or have any different effect here. I vetoed Overworked and Underappreciated because I know I don’t want to be spending time messaging 15 players each time their Stress changes. I voted no on the other proposals you mentioned but didn’t feel strongly enough to veto them (mostly because they’re failing anyways already)

There’s been some debate in the past over whether an emperor is obligated to veto failing proposals when the queue gets too long. I believe that idea has fallen out of favor. The emperor has enough to do.

Oh, are vetoed proposals also removed from the queue?

Yes, but as Brendan has pointed out, the Emperor is not required to Veto failing proposals simply to shorten the Queue.

Vetoed proposals don’t get removed from the queue immediately. They stay until its their turn to be processed as the “oldest Pending Proposal”, under the resolution rule, at which point they fail.

(The game has dabbled with “fast vetoes” in 2010 and probably earlier, removing vetoed proposals from the queue immediately, but it didn’t stick.)

The two proposals Lawnomos mentions here had already been withdrawn by their proposers, so a subsequent veto wouldn’t have changed anything.