Talk:329
From Nomicapolis
TomFoolery (Talk | contribs) (→Debate) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<!--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 == | ||
| - | 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. [[User:Applejuicefool|Applejuicefool]] 10:36, 25 November 2006 (EST) | + | 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. I fixed Tom's "two repealed rules" problem below. I will give this 24 more hours for comment on the change before bringing it to a vote. [[User:Applejuicefool|Applejuicefool]] 10:36, 25 November 2006 (EST) |
== Debate == | == Debate == | ||
Revision as of 13:53, 28 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. I fixed Tom's "two repealed rules" problem below. I will give this 24 more hours for comment on the change before bringing it to a 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)
If I proposed 356, and 355 has one vote, voting could start on 356. As soon as 355 passes or fails, there would be no proposal with a lower number than 356, and per 329 sec 2: "A proposal which has already received at least one vote may be voted on as long as there are proposals with lower numbers still being voted on. " we would have to stop voting on it. --TomFoolery 10:30, 26 November 2006 (EST)
Also, if 326 passes 329 sec 3 would reference two repealed rules. --TomFoolery 10:30, 26 November 2006 (EST)
Vote
For
Against
