Re: [s-d] [s-b] Will's Meta Refresh Proposal Proposal

["William P. Berard" <william.berard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Le 27 nov. 07, à 06:39, Kerim Aydin a écrit :

>
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, William P. Berard wrote:
>> I think the downside of refresh proposal is that they come in a All or
>> nothing package. Which, in my opinion, is a real shame, because I see
>> lots of very good Ideas there, and I think ithey deserve to be
>> discussed and voted properly, individually, with points awarded to
>> their creators.
>>
>> So here is my idea, it might be a bit lateral, thinking-wise, but here
>> it goes.
>
> Not to disrupt your idea, but there's another possibility.  One
> can write a proposal in sections, with instructions as follows.
>
> 1.  In addition to voting for this proposal as a whole, please vote
> on each subsection.
> A.  If votes for Subsection A get enough votes, then A happens...
>
> [etc.]
>
> That way a single package can pass with sections that actually fail.
> (Credit to Murphy for this idea).
>

the problem is that I think this would be tricky to apply in an 
Emergency refresh proposal vote situation.


If I read rule 0 right where  vote for a single refresh proposal, as in 
,they have one vote, and pick a proposal, like when people vote to 
elect someone, they do not vote for or against, each individual 
proposal. So I do not think refresh proposal van be voted in any other 
way than a single package, hence my idea of goint to a sub-emergency 
where we could vote for proposal in a referendum fashion (for or 
against, without exclusion.)

But I will amend my text to state that Players can submit LArge 
proposal provided they are divided in subsection and independent vote 
is don for it subsection (and, as such, dependencies withins 
subsections will have to be mentioned)

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