Re: [s-b] [MoC] Ballot for nweek 137

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

I vote as follows:


> Name of Registered Voter: {{ Billy Pilgrim }}
>
> 288: pragmatic vacation (Wooble)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0288
> Vote on 288: {{ FOR }}
>
> 289: No small change (Wooble)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0289
> Vote on 289: {{ FOR }}
>
> 290: Oh, and let's get rid of that wacky paradox (Ivan Hope)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0290
> Vote on 290: {{ FOR }}
>
> 291: Distinct Field Match Trophies (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0291
> Vote on 291: {{ FOR }}
>
> 293: give a title to rule 4E61 (Antonio)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0293
> Vote on 293: {{ ABSTAIN }}
>

I don't think this does much either way... The rulekeeper can just change it
to whatever he wants.


> 295: Think Locally, Act Globally (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0295
> Vote on 295: {{ FOR }}
>

I like the framework.


> 296: Quiggle (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0296
> Vote on 296: {{ SHELVE }}
>

It's a fun idea but it's non-essential and would break proposal 297.


> 297: Let's not be hasty (Ivan Hope)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0297
> Vote on 297: {{ FOR }}
>

I don't see why there needs to be just one PVP (nday 4 to 7) during the
nweek (it's not that particular anymore...), but this does fix the
hypothetical issue of an early voting period ending an overlapping one
prematurely.


> 298: Color Guard of Plaid (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0298
> Vote on 298: {{ FOR }}
>
> 299: Law & Order: Organizational Intent (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0299
> Vote on 299: {{ AGAINST}}
>

Nothing the Rulekeeper can currently do is actually consequential, it's only
cosmetic. This proposal would just make that job more complicated.


> 300: Pisciviciousness (Billy Pilgrim)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0300
> Vote on 300: {{ FOR }}


Just to be a pest...


> 301: No Proposalgangering (Billy Pilgrim)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0301
> Vote on 301: {{ FOR }}
>

In response to Ivan's argument: I think the claiming players or the priest
himself would see to it that "any stretch of reason" would be respected and
reasonable.


> 302: Papering Over it (Billy Pilgrim)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0302
> Vote on 302: {{ SHELVE }}
>
> 304: Win By Tomfoolery (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0304
> Vote on 304: {{ FOR }}
>
> 305: Win By FomToolery (Wooble)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0305
> Vote on 305: {{ AGAINST }}
>
> 306: Mulberry Sounds So Calm (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0306
> Vote on 306: {{ AGAINST }}
>

Weekly reset is a bit much. To clear up the confusion in preceding posts, I
think Ivan was saying that people would be "underpanicked" following
Mulberry in that some legitimate panickers would suddenly be calm, perhaps
without even realizing it. And then they'd have to repanic if they do
notice...


> 308: B abhors a vacuum (Murphy)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0308
> Vote on 308: {{ AGAINST }}
>

I think 288 fixes this more neatly and doesn't have the issue of attempting
to perform wiki changes in an email message.


> 309: B-Chess (BobTHJ)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0309
> Vote on 309: {{ SHELVE }}
>

I like the idea but it has a few issues which others have pointed out.

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