Perhaps something that sets up a time limit for votes (say 72 hours or so) and requires a certain quorom of voters (say 65% or so) without which it automatically fails…
Just a suggestion…
Zev Steinhardt
Does anyone know if Soup_du_jour is the same person as SUEp Du Jour on Fathom?
Zev Steinhardt
That was my impression, zev, though I have nothing but the similarity of names to go on there.
We may have another out.
If everyone will remember, I did ask everyone for emails (or at least verify that the address in your profile was current) and to post to the thread if you wanted to join. True, it was not a rule, but it’s something that all of us did – except Soup. Could we rule him/her not a valid player based on that, and because of that, everyone voted on 301 and proceed?
Otherwise, we could be sending emails to a box that is never looked at and we are stuck.
Zev Steinhardt
It was a condition for joining the game. zev, have you received any correspondence from Soup since then, or at all? If not, then Soup did not abide by your posted requirement and for my money isn’t technically a player here.
Other than the initial post, I have not heard anything from Soup. In addition, Soup’s last post here was last night after 3:00AM, well after we became embroiled in this mess. So (s)he came to the board and either ignored the thread, or saw it and decided to do nothing about it. Furthermore, my emails to him/her have gone unheeded (who knows if it’s even a current address).
We may have an out here, folks.
Zev Steinhardt
Sounds reasonable to me.
BTW, even if we rule Soup ineligible and even if we allow Little Nemo to change his vote on 301 so that it passes, we’re still going to need votes from everyone on 302 before we can go on, since 105 is still in effect (albeit mutable).
Zev Steinhardt
And it was something done BEFORE the game-- “who wants to play a game?” time, not “the rules” time, and falls under extra-game civil social law, and not game rules.
I think the best way of saying it was that they were zev’s extra-Nomic requirements for joining the game. Any possible changing of that rule would have to be zev’s call … no voting on it, on proposal 303 or whatever. zev’s call.
Still entertaining ideas, btw, on what Prop 303 should be.
Well, if it’s my call… I say we go on then. If Soup wants to play, (s)he can always post, email and rejoin.
I think the primary thing that we need to do is get the game moving again.
That being the case, Soup is hereby ruled ineligible on the grounds that (s)he did not meet the requirements to play. Proposal 301 is thereby (properly) defeated. We now simply need votes from everyone to finish voting on 302. I’ll send out an email to everyone asking them to hurry up and get their votes in so that we can continue.
Zev Steinhardt
How about a resubmittal of 301, especially considering that Little Nemo said that he would have voted for it (he thought he was voting NO to my original 301).
Zev Steinhardt
I second that; then the next person can put together a proposal to reword 105 (we have to get it mutable first, Iamp).
At the risk of seeming like I need someone to hold my hand through this (er, maybe I do;)), lemme see if I can get a version of Prop 303 (this is not a final version but me trying to see if I have the gist of this down) that makes sense…
Theoretical Prop 303:
New players may join the game by posting to the thread started by zev_steinhardt on the Straight Dope Message Board, expressing interest in joining; such expression includes something to the effect of “I want to play” and “my email address is”, thus indicating a valid, working and used email address (i.e. current. My old email address from GMU, though it is still valid and working, isn’t something I use. My netscape email address would be applicable, though); alternately, they may, instead of publicly declaring an email address, email zev_steinhardt with contact information such that he is able to correctly and fully add them to the game.
Too wordy? Am I missing something?
I vote YES on Prop 302.
capybara, the theoretical change to the (present) immutability of 105 would be Prop 304, and thus not my territory. I think. I’m still Officially Confused, though I’m not sure by what;)
The prop sounds OK, but since this particular crisis has passed, I think we should work on reducing the possibility of the game ending because someone just quits without announcing it. For that, we need 105 gone (or changed), thus needing a resubmittal of 301.
Of course, however, on your turn you can submit what you like. It was just a suggestion. 
Zev Steinhardt
Ok. I vote NO on BraheSilver’s Prop 302, which was “no player may vote no on their own proposal”.
Somehow this doesn’t seem legal, although I can’t find anything in the rules barring it.
It just ain’t right…
I think I already did this but to be clear in all of this confusion; I vote NO for 302.