Craig Daniel on Mon, 28 Jun 2010 09:13:34 -0700 (MST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Hm. I can't find any indication that non-enacted proposals are useless.

On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 12:04 PM, M P Darke <darkemalcolm@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I object to that amendment, if that is possible. This is for the reason that that action causes what would, in one of the old Rulesets,

You're welcome to raise an objection, but the rules don't make it a
dependent action, so I doubt your objection does anything.

> be known as a Dictatorship, at least if the Players wish to avoid carrying out actions on the LOGAS.

And? What would be the point of a scam that didn't do things people
might not prefer to see happen?

(Also, getting a Kick in the Ass is a really very minor consequence;
it's hardly a proper dictatorship.)

 - Rule 700
spoon-discuss mailing list