Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Revision and a new proposal

[Eric Gerlach <egerlach@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 10:15 PM 2002-04-09 -0400, you wrote:
> On 4/9/02 at 9:50 PM Eric Gerlach wrote:
>
> >{{
> >__Can we talk about this later, honey?__
> >
> >{{
> >__Shelving a topic__
> >
> >A Player may vote "SHELVE" for a proposal on a ballot.  For the purposes
> >of
> >vote counting, votes of "SHELVE" count as votes against the
> >proposal.  However, if the proposal fails no effects occur, as if the
> >proposal had not failed.  This rule supercedes rules 124 and 154 in this
> >regard.  Instead, at the beginning of the next nweek [[ recall that
> >counting happens during the same nweek as voting ]], a new proposal is
> >created which has the same text as did the final revision of the proposal
> >that failed.  This proposal is treated as if it had been proposed by the
> >original proposal's proponent.
> >
> >If a proposal is vetoed by the Administrator, this rule does not affect
> >that proposal.
> >}}
> >
> >[[ This allows us to postpone otherwise good proposals until the next
> >nweek
> >if they have fatal, fatal bugs in them, rather than the proponent losing
> >charm and points, not to menation having to repropose. ]]
> >
> >}}
>
> Does the shelved proposal count against the following week's bandwidth limit?

It is treated ath if it came from ith proponent, so yeth.  However, if 
people think that ith a bad idea, ith thimple to fix.  I'd like to get an 
idea of public opinion on that firtht.  Ith not affecting anything thith 
week anyway, tho if we need to fix it we can do that next nweek.  That okay 
by you, Glotmorf?

Bean