Yes on 307.
Add my voice to the chorus. YES on 307.
Zev Steinhardt
While we’re waiting on the voting for 307, since I get to propose 308, I’d like to cast this out for public opinion.
In short, I will propose changing 203 to require only a majority to pass something (Note: Transmuting a rule from immutable to mutable or vice versa will still require a unanimous vote as per Rule 109).
Sound good to you folks?
Zev Steinhardt
Sounds like a good idea to me.
One thing - if we switch to majority voting, we’ll probably need to change the scoring rules soon. Otherwise, there’ll be too much temptation to play games like “wait until everyone else has voted and then vote no if it’s going to pass anyway”. Personally, I’d like to completely seperate voting from scoring as a matter of principle.
I vote yes on 307.
Oh yeah, I have to vote too. Well, in that case, a hearty YES on 307.
Oops. Sorry, Treviathan, I mangled your name. I still vote YES on 307, whoever proposed it.
Still waiting on a vote or two before continuing…
Zev Steinhardt
Didn’t capybara say he was moving and wanted his vote automatically counted as yes if he couldn’t get on?
Yes. In fact, capybara even emailed me a YES vote (I just haven’t updated the site). We’re still waiting on Johnny Bravo.
Zev Steinhardt
Some of you people who argue that the time limits are too long and would slow down the game might post a bump.
The dang time limits are too long!
bump
How ironic it would be if we can’t pass a rule dealing with the loss of players from the game because one of the players has disappeared.
Johnny Bravo was posting (in another thread) as recently as eight hours ago.
I have already sent him two emails asking for his vote…
Zev Steinhardt
I predict the next poster to be… Johnny Bravo!
Sent another email asking Johnny Bravo to either vote or drop out.
Zev Steinhardt
OK, I heard back from him and he has dropped out of the game. That means that 307 passes and we can move on. Furthermore, with the passage of 307, we won’t be held up by people not voting anymore.
Oh, yes, that also means that it’s my turn.
My proposal will really be very simple. I’d like to make it easier to pass proposals. However, we still require a unanimous vote to do so. So, therefore, my proposal reads as follows:
The first condition is designed to make proposals easier to pass. The second condition is designed to prevent 2-0 votes if (for whatever reason) 12 people decide not to vote on an issue.
Please also note that to change a rule from mutable to immutable (or vice versa) would still require a unanimous vote (as per Rule 109).
I am not yet placing a Call For Votes. I am putting this out as a matter for debate.
Zev Steinhardt
Just popping in to apologize for not coming back to this thread. It’s my fault entirely, and I’ve emailed the wise and understanding Zev with my resignation from the game.
Regards.
Johnny.