Re: [spoon-discuss] A proposal for next nweek?

["Glotmorf" <glotmorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 9/30/02 at 12:56 PM Baron von Skippy wrote:

>> >*It must not be able to make proposals
>>
>>This I don't see.  Yes, three people who can get together for the purpose
>>of manufacturing can form a separate club for the purpose of block voting
>>and profit sharing, but...why?
>
>-Sounds to me like it's partly because that's not what a Corporation is
>going to do in his vision, partly that vSOI and WBE already can't make
>proposals and never will, but are natural choices for Corportionhood, and
>maybe partly because M-Tek can, but that's just a guess.-

vSOI could make proposals if you wanted it to. All you'd have to do is change the charter.

WBE can't do anything, because it doesn't exist.  The proposal that's trying to create it is illegal, because it's not creating a society the way the rules say a proposal can create a society.  Wonko's "proposals change the game state" argument doesn't work, because r10 says proposals can't temporarily circumvent the rules.

>> >*It must have resource pools of BNS, Points, and Units
>>
>>And provisions for distributing same to members.
>
>-Why all three, Wonko? vSOI works with points, WBE with BNS, what if M-Tek
>took Units and we didn't need to all have everything?-

WBE as it's proposed uses units too...it has to have them in order to construct its stuff.  Even if M-Tek didn't need points to build things, if it ever wanted to sell what it built it'd need a pool of either points or BNS to receive payment.

>> >*It must have a Minister associated with it who keeps track of its
>> >attributes
>>
>>This'll be a pain in the butt, unless you're thinking of a Minister of
>>Societies.  Otherwise, if I form a club out of the blue, and add a couple
>>members, I can't go corporate unless I somehow find a minister first?
>
>-Ditto. Wonko, this will suck. Unless you expand that: a Corporation must
>have a Minister defined by the Charter who also holds more power in the
>company and is not paid a salary. It's still not great, but it's a little
>better.-

Possibly a Market Minister, or a Corporation Minister.  I take it back about the Minister of Societies...Sorry, Dave, but I think charter changes should stick with you.

>> >*It must have a method for adding new members
>>
>>A good idea, along with provision for losing members, but why make it
>>mandatory?
>
>-Why not make it mandatory?-

Because there may come into existence a club of three people that wouldn't want to remain a club if any of the three were to quit...maybe a short-term venture or a special-purpose thing.  Requiring a method for adding members is like requiring all three types of pools: why should it be required if it's not necessary?

						Glotmorf

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