Re: [s-b] Ballot for nweek 129

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 8/15/07, Geoffrey Spear <geoffspear@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Proposal   Author                     Title
> 141           Wooble                   Fix Faction Loophole


FOR

142           Peter                      We're from the future, and
> we're here to help


AGAINST [[altering the game state itself after the fact would be easy
enough, but there's no way to go back and change players' actions]]

143           Wooble                   Spivak is not English


AGAINST

144           bad_leprechaun     The Ministry of Goods


FOR

145           Wooble                   Trying to track previously

failed proposals by a given Author is a pain


AGAINST [[in full agreement with Peter here. see his ballot. plus, the way i
read it, enforcement of this rule only requires tracking previously failed
proposals in that nweek, not in past nweeks. it's on the same ballot, so not
that much of a pain really]]

146           bad_leprechaun     Legislative Dominance don't come cheap


FOR

147           Charles                   Priestly Indecision


AGAINST [[was planning to vote for, but now that i think about it priests
already have long enough to decide. and this could be used to stall even
more (priest submits a bogus answer right before the end of the nweek, then
submits a proper answer a few days later once he's taken the time to work it
out). plus, it's a three nday waiting period.]]

148           Eugene Meidinger  Eugene never wins


AGAINST [[that would leave all the fun out of winning, now wouldn't it
Eugene?]]

149           Charles                   No More Membership Tests!


FOR [[we couldn't apply 1-17 anyway, and the group of players as a whole is
less likely to slip up than the registrar. just be wary of dealing with
provisionals ;-)]]

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