Talk:341
From Nomicapolis
TomFoolery (Talk | contribs) |
TomFoolery (Talk | contribs) (→Proposer's summary and declarations) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
<!--WARNING: Do not add header tags "==" to above this line. Doing so will break the links.--> | <!--WARNING: Do not add header tags "==" to above this line. Doing so will break the links.--> | ||
== Proposer's summary and declarations == | == Proposer's summary and declarations == | ||
| - | + | Debate will end for this proposal at 12:00, 06 December 2006 (EST) | |
| - | + | ||
== Debate == | == Debate == | ||
Revision as of 20:37, 29 November 2006
Contents |
Proposer's summary and declarations
Debate will end for this proposal at 12:00, 06 December 2006 (EST)
Debate
Hey, Tom! As requested, I'm commenting on your Governor General draft. 317 already determines who the winner will be in such a case as mentioned in your draft - So the GG's duty there would just be to "declare" that person the winner. The GG would not decide the winner. In fact, you might want to make this proposal an amendment to 317. If it is your intention that the GG would determine the winner, then you could write that in, or if it is your intention that the GG would simply announce the winner, then you could import some of the verbiage from 317. Personally, I think the "most points" winner is the way to go there.
As far as the 2-vote reward thing for the winner, that's a little complicated. I think we're going to need to introduce some kind of legislation defining Nomicapolis as an ongoing game divided into rounds before we do that. That way, we can say "The winner of the round receives two votes on all matters in the subsequent round of play," or something. In fact, I've got an idea for that now. I'll introduce it, and you'll see what I mean Applejuicefool 12:21, 28 November 2006 (EST)
Vote
For
Against
