Daniel Lepage on 19 May 2003 21:40:01 -0000


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] The Clock is Off



On Monday, May 19, 2003, at 05:00  AM, Orc In A Spacesuit wrote:

On the note that that's possbily abuseable, I propose the following:
{{__Oh no you don't__
Change the second sentence of setion E.5 of Rule 15 to "If a proposal
declared to be fatally flawed in this manner passes, its effects do not take
place and it is instead shelved, unless the Administrator decides
otherwise."}}

would it not be better to link the passing of fatally flawed declarations to the voting - perhaps if the prop gets over 75% of the vote then it will pass, even if fatally flawed - mind you this could have repercussions too

I still prefer democracy to making Dave do it, as i'm sure there will come to be situations when Dave won't want
to, as there is an arguement in either direction, as it were.

My first inclination was to propose a new kind of vote, a "Ramrod" vote or something, that would be identical to an affirmative vote, except that a majority of Ramrods could overrule a Fatal Flaw. But the problem with this is that even props you might want to guarantee could have undiscoverd problems, and some players wouldn't ramrod any props at all.

?? Even some props that everyone might vote for normally could have undiscovered problems; why does this matter for the Fatally Flawed?

Seems to me that the simplest way would be for somebody else to make a fix prop if the author of the current fix prop stands to gain from their own prop failing.

--
Wonko

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss