Re: [s-d] Re: Wonko amended 175

["Daniel Peter Lepage" <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> A: Why not have a limit of  the number of proposals turn open over an
> nweek?
> It's be easier to have limits and bonuses that way. It would also allow
> timing clumps of proposals.

I was worried about the ministers - I didn't want two Ministers having an
easy time of it while one got all the props. But under Peter's Arbitrarily
Large Ministries prop, that wouldn't be an issue, so we could indeed use
nweek-based limits instead of period-based ones.

> B: There needs to be a way for me to have my proposal stay pending longer
> if it's big and no doubt full of gramttical errors.

Well, you'd get at least 4 ndays, usually more unless your timing was
really bad.

> How about this? We keep the limits on the amounts of proposals as is only
> have it be for new props made during an nweek. Then make it so if you make
> a prop in period one it's pending in periods 1 and 2 nad you can vote on
> it in period three. So if you make it during period 2 you vote on it in
> period one.
> This way we have four days to vote. It pends during two periods and is
> voted on during the third.

I apologize if I was unclear; that's actually what I was trying to say
originally. Voting would open on a prop at the beginning of the first
period that starts at least 4 ndays after the prop was made. You'd get
between 4 and 8 days of pendingness - if you did it right at the beginning
of a period, then you'd get that period plus the next one, but if you did
it near the end, you'd only get the end of the period plus the next one.

-- 
Wonko


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