Re: [s-b] Optional voting (sic)

["Peter Cooper Jr." <pete+bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx writes:
> Firstly [[and Peter this is not a criticism, just a clarification on
> my part]]  I have a couple of problems with the proposals as listed on
> the web site.

Oh, please do bring problems to my attention. It's a complex game, and
I certainly don't have it all in my head.

> 1) I did not submit two proposals of the name "ruletag typos".  The
> rules say "Any player may submit a proposal at any time, or may revise
> a Pending proposal e owns by resubmitting it" - so I don't have to
> declare that a proposal is amending a previous proposal or anything
> like that.

Interesting. If that's the case, it's ambiguous whether a submission
is an amendment or a new proposal. At the very least, it makes it
harder on me if when I get a message I need to go back to see if there
may be something with the same name that may be amended instead of the
message being a new proposal. I think I'm going to keep this as a
separate prop for now, especially as it seems a reasonable way to take
your message, and it may makes things easier as it involves less
changes now that people are voting.

But you can of course challenge this ruling. Luckily, determining p66
doesn't exist won't require renumbering everything else.

> 2) The proposal listed as #74 on the web site actually contains two
> proposals.

Also interesting. I guess I just missed that.

I've taken what was listed as the second half of proposal 74 ("Points
cleanup") and assigned it to be proposal 82. From my reading of the
rules, I don't need to assign numbers in order that the proposals were
created, as long as each time I assign a number I use one bigger than
all previous numbers I've assigned, and I do so as soon as I can.

This was as soon as I could. And I don't want to renumber the other
proposals (and, in fact, I don't think I'm allowed to).

I'm looking forward to whatever automated proposaling system we end up
with.

> Since the *forum* is the official place to post, I don't think that
> there is too much problem here.  I'm voting by proposal *name* here,
> but I've included the proposal numbers in comments as a guide.

Well, yes, the forum is the only thing with offical standing. The web
site is just a convenient method of organizing the data that's
disbursed on the forum.

> Since there's nothing in the rules to say that I have to vote by
> proposal number, I think this voting action is a valid one.  Peter, if
> you could let me know ASAP if you think otherwise....

As long as the target of an action is unambiguous, I think the rules
(and game custom) allow it to be an acceptable method of performing
it.

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