Talk:309
From Nomicapolis
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
My mistake, a simple copy / paste error. Oh well. [[User:Simulacrum|Simulacrum]] 21:16, 16 April 2006 (PDT) | My mistake, a simple copy / paste error. Oh well. [[User:Simulacrum|Simulacrum]] 21:16, 16 April 2006 (PDT) | ||
| - | :Was there a rule that got left out (either [[104]] or [[105]] that should have read something else)? Is it something we need to get added? [[User:Applejuicefool|Applejuicefool]] 07:10, 17 April 2006 (PDT) | + | :Was there a rule that got left out (either [[104]] or [[105]] that should have read something else)? Is it something we need to get added? Maybe we need an amendment rather than a repeal of [[105]] after it becomes mutable... [[User:Applejuicefool|Applejuicefool]] 07:10, 17 April 2006 (PDT) |
<!--END DEBATE--> | <!--END DEBATE--> | ||
Revision as of 14:12, 17 April 2006
Please substitute this template. To do so add subst: in the template call. This is how it should look typed: {{subst:vote}}
When it is fixed please remove these instructions by editing the page normally.
Contents |
Proposer's summary and declarations
This is our first step in getting rid of the double rules that were created by accident in the beginning (Rules 104 and 105. As per rule 103 immutable rules cannot be repealed but they can be turned into mutable rules with unanimous consent. Once this rule becomes mutable we can repeal it. Let's open this proposal for voting right away.
Debate
My mistake, a simple copy / paste error. Oh well. Simulacrum 21:16, 16 April 2006 (PDT)
- Was there a rule that got left out (either 104 or 105 that should have read something else)? Is it something we need to get added? Maybe we need an amendment rather than a repeal of 105 after it becomes mutable... Applejuicefool 07:10, 17 April 2006 (PDT)
Vote
For
- sinblox 19:50, 15 April 2006 (PDT)
- Applejuicefool 22:30, 15 April 2006 (PDT)
- Simulacrum 21:17, 16 April 2006 (PDT)
Against
