Talk:329
From Nomicapolis
(Difference between revisions)
(→Debate) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit§ion=2 Add comments] | <!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit§ion=2 Add comments] | ||
<!--BEGIN DEBATE--> | <!--BEGIN DEBATE--> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Could the member of the 'lowest numbered proposal' hijack proceedings if they choose to allow the full 14 days of debate? | ||
| + | --[[User:Tucana25|Tucana25]] 23:58, 25 November 2006 (EST) | ||
<!--END DEBATE--> | <!--END DEBATE--> | ||
Revision as of 04:58, 26 November 2006
Contents |
Proposer's summary and declarations
The purpose of this proposed rule is to make sure that lower-numbered rules are dealt with, and not just left sitting in debate or in vote. Applejuicefool 10:36, 25 November 2006 (EST)
Debate
Could the member of the 'lowest numbered proposal' hijack proceedings if they choose to allow the full 14 days of debate? --Tucana25 23:58, 25 November 2006 (EST)
Vote
For
Against
