Re: [s-d] [s-b] [MoC] Ballot for nweek 137

[ihope <ihope127@xxxxxxxxx>]

I Vote as follows:

> Name of Registered Voter: {{ Ivan Hope }}
>
> 288: pragmatic vacation (Wooble)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 288: {{ FOR }}

I'm all for doing scheduled things manually if it's not too difficult
and people might not want them to happen at all; it makes it clear
just when stuff happens.

> 289: No small change (Wooble)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 289: {{ FOR }}

But "positive integers" should further be amended to "non-negative
integers" so that we can have 0 mackerel.

> 290: Oh, and let's get rid of that wacky paradox (Ivan Hope)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 290: {{ FOR }}
>
> 291: Distinct Field Match Trophies (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 291: {{ FOR }}
>
> 293: give a title to rule 4E61 (Antonio)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 293: {{ FOR }}
>
> 295: Think Locally, Act Globally (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 295: {{ FOR }}

Though it should be possible to override everything about these Properties.

> 296: Quiggle (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 296: {{ FOR }}
>
> 297: Let's not be hasty (Ivan Hope)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 297: {{ FOR }}

If 296 and 297 both get passed, how many sparks will there be?

> 298: Color Guard of Plaid (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 298: {{ FOR }}
>
> 299: Law & Order: Organizational Intent (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 299: {{ MAYBE }}
>
> 300: Pisciviciousness (Billy Pilgrim)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 300: {{ AGAINST }}
>
> 301: No ProposalgŠängering (Billy Pilgrim)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 301: {{ AGAINST }}

"Within any stretch of reason"? So in theory, I could say that two
proposals are "nearly identical" because they both make changing the
state of the game easier; I think you'll agree that that's very much a
stretch of reason.

> 302: Papering Over it (Billy Pilgrim)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 302: {{ PERHAPS }}
>
> 304: Win By Tomfoolery (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 304: {{ FOR }}
>
> 305: Win By FomToolery (Wooble)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 305: {{ FOR }}
>
> 306: Mulberry Sounds So Calm (Hose)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 306: {{ AGAINST }}

I'd rather not have to repanic every Mulberry, and people would be
underpanicked the first couple days after Mulberry; perhaps we should
say instead that people can be depanicked by any PEP 20 days after
last panicking.

> 308: B abhors a vacuum (Murphy)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 308: {{ AGAINST }}

Ministerial obligations could pile up over time, making things ugly.
Of course, we do have at least about three ways to change the
rules--Oracularities are the fastest, I think--so we could always
clear out obligations somehow.

> 309: B-Chess (BobTHJ)
> http://b.nomic.net/index.php/null
> Vote on 309: {{ AGAINST }}

"A King is created in the possession of each player and located on a
random square of the Field. If any two Kings are adjacent, this
process is repeated until no Kings are adjacent." If you want to
interpret this as it is, this process is repeated forever, because the
Kings are never removed. Also, multiple Kings can be generated in the
same space, and there are a couple other ambiguities and such as well.

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