Sunday, August 23, 2009

Call for Judgment: Well, if he really wants it. . .

Fails with 9 :against: and only 1 :for:—Wakukee

Adminned at 23 Aug 2009 09:33:44 UTC

Ban arthexis.

There is no loophole here, unlike arth’s own CfJ. If he really wants to be banned, he should vote FOR this.

posted by Qwazukee at 23 Aug 2009 00:38:00 UTC Comments (24)

Comments

Qwazukee:

23-08-2009 00:40:08 UTC

against

Rodlen:

23-08-2009 00:47:59 UTC

against Sometimes, it feels like the fair play rules bring us nothing but stuff like this.

Wakukee:

23-08-2009 00:54:34 UTC

imperial

Wakukee:

23-08-2009 00:54:58 UTC

Specific abstain. I will vote after arth does.

Wakukee:

23-08-2009 00:56:30 UTC

arthexis:
08-22-2009 22:24:07 UTC
If you don’t ban me now I promise to annoy you until you have to ban me! :)  <—nvm.  for

Pavitra:

23-08-2009 01:19:02 UTC

for per Wakukee.

redtara: they/them

23-08-2009 01:37:05 UTC

against

arthexis: he/him

23-08-2009 02:55:46 UTC

for I’ll just go idle if it passes, then I can’t be banned, suckers :P

redtara: they/them

23-08-2009 02:57:43 UTC

I’m not sure about that…

arthexis: he/him

23-08-2009 02:58:32 UTC

Explanation: An idle Bill Murray is not a Bill Murray for rule 1.10 Fair Play, which is the only rule that allows players to be banned.

Furthermore, the term “ban” is not even defined in the ruleset. Quaz, you fail at disarming my ploy.

Qwazukee:

23-08-2009 03:36:38 UTC

Ah, but Rule 1.10 doesn’t mention the banning of Bill Murrays. It only says “perpetrator,” which you definitely are.

And, you’re right, ban isn’t defined in the Ruleset. Which means we just revert to the normal English definition which is, fortunately, very clear. Although if you complained and started to go all pie-is-square on us, we could just ban you again.

Might be a good idea to vote against this if you actually want to stick around.

arthexis: he/him

23-08-2009 04:53:29 UTC

And spend another dynasty together with you? Never.

arthexis: he/him

23-08-2009 04:56:12 UTC

Explanation: This is not Blognomic anymore, just people doing whatever they want without caring for popular opinion. I’d rather not play any game that accepts your logic as valid.

redtara: they/them

23-08-2009 05:39:19 UTC

@ Me?

Darknight: he/him

23-08-2009 11:13:03 UTC

against Horray for royal clusterfucks.

Qwazukee:

23-08-2009 13:06:37 UTC

No one’s forcing you to stay here, arthexis.

Qwazukee:

23-08-2009 13:19:13 UTC

Hold on, that doesn’t even make any sense. We use a democratic system, it is literally impossible for people to “do whatever they want without caring for popular opinion.”

Excalabur:

23-08-2009 13:57:31 UTC

*Sigh* 

I seem to have walked into the middle of a fight.

against

I’ll have a proposal up soon to hopefully resolve this situation :)

Klisz:

23-08-2009 14:35:19 UTC

against  against  against  against  against

Bucky:

23-08-2009 14:37:24 UTC

against

Qwazukee:

23-08-2009 15:13:34 UTC

Needs one more X to fail.

Qwazukee:

23-08-2009 15:19:03 UTC

Make that 2 more with the revised Weatherteam number.

Amnistar: he/him

23-08-2009 15:30:31 UTC

against

Wakukee:

23-08-2009 16:07:40 UTC

against I will assume that arth was kidding about the annoying until banned part.  against CoV