Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] NWEEK 50 BALLOT

["Glotmorf" <dwhytock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2 Oct 2003 at 23:48, Daniel Lepage wrote:

> 
> On Thursday, October 2, 2003, at 11:40 PM, Glotmorf wrote:
> 
> > On 2 Oct 2003 at 16:31, Daniel Lepage wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Thursday, October 2, 2003, at 03:02 PM, Baron von Skippy wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> I take myself Off Leave, having returned from DC.  I think I
> >>>>> still have time to cast my votes, but otherwise I yield to my
> >>>>> proxy to BvS.
> >>>>
> >>>> It's debatable whether the Baron could have used your proxy.
> >>>> Although r208/2 states that the holder of a proxy may cast votes
> >>>> in the name of the proxy donor, it also states that the donor is
> >>>> considered to have cast those votes, which, since you were On
> >>>> Leave, seems like a violation of r15.A, which states that a
> >>>> player who is On Leave cannot vote.
> >>>>
> >>> -Well, which takes precedence? We do have that system for a
> >>> reason.-
> >>
> >> r15 takes precedence, by virtue of a lower id number and higher
> >> chutzpah. But it's not clear that there's a conflict; one says you
> >> can cast votes in eir name, and we'll consider those votes to have
> >> come from em; whereas the other says e can't vote... so one could
> >> argue that either you can't do anything because e can't vote, or
> >> that you can vote but those votes won't be considered to have come
> >> from em, or that the votes, while being considered to have been
> >> cast by em, weren't actually cast by em, so it's legal...
> >
> > I'd opt for the latter...that a player on leave can't cast a
> > vote since that would be an action, but a player that has that
> > player's proxy can cast a vote in eir name, and it's
> > considered to have been cast by the on-leave player.  Not
> > considered to be cast, but to have been cast, as in a fait
> > accompli -- it's done, it happened, regardless of how.
> >
> > Though, as it says in a rule somewhere between the two, a vote
> > cast by someone holding X's proxy isn't a vote that X actually
> > casts, and therefore X's Activity doesn't go up.
> 
> That's not what it says; the part you're thinking of is in the 
> definition of Activity (r154/23.B.3.) where it states that a player's
> Activity goes up at the end of each nweek if e voted on the ballot
> using at least one non-proxied vote.

True...though it references the end of the nweek, so by that 
time the vote is considered to have been cast by the player.

Anyway, I maintain my agreement that there's no conflict.

Interesting note: r154.B.3 references "voluntary leave", but 
such is not defined elsewhere in the ruleset, especially 
considering a player is, according to r205, a player is placed 
both on leave and on forced leave if eir activity goes down 
for long enough.

So without a proper definition of "voluntary leave", does that 
mean the Activity of players who are on leave should go down?

						Glotmorf

-----
The Ivory Mini-Tower: a blog study in Social Technology.
http://ix.1sound.com/ivoryminitower

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