Talk:369

From Nomicapolis

Revision as of 02:43, 17 January 2007 (view source) Dayd (Talk | contribs) (Voting open) ← Previous diff		Revision as of 07:31, 17 January 2007 (view source) Finisterre (Talk | contribs) Next diff →
Line 31:		Line 31:
	<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->{{editsection|3|Add FOR vote}}		<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->{{editsection|3|Add FOR vote}}
	# --[[User:Dayd|Dayd]] 21:43, 16 January 2007 (EST)		# --[[User:Dayd|Dayd]] 21:43, 16 January 2007 (EST)
		+	# --[[User:Finisterre|Finisterre]] 02:31, 17 January 2007 (EST)
	#<!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->		#<!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->

---

Revision as of 07:31, 17 January 2007

Proposed by: Dayd 01:53, 12 January 2007 (EST)

Contents 1 Proposer's summary and declarations 2 Debate 3 Vote 3.1 For 3.2 Against 3.3 Abstain

Proposer's summary and declarations

Proposer's summary Debate will end for this proposal at 12:00, 15 January 2007 (EST)
This is a proposal to reset the Census page each round thereby getting rid of inactive players.
Alright so everyone's lazy...I figured as much...In that case I'll change it to my original idea which is "Any player that is not active for a complete round will be removed from the Census at the beginning of the next round." Only problem with this is if there happens to be an extremely short round because someone loopholes. But I suppose that will create less hassle than the way I've proposed. --Dayd 21:29, 12 January 2007 (EST)

Debate

Add comments

Ugh, more bureacracy. How about just dropping players marked inactive and keeping everyone else? (not only forgot to sign, but I seem to have gotten signed out, and I can't recall my password and there's no "forgot password" link. Think we can maybe move to a wiki that isn't so bloody crippled? -- chuck)

I don't know how crazy i am about this idea... --Tucana25 16:07, 12 January 2007 (EST)

I must also confess to being less than enamoured to this proposal too- in a game of NOMIC where the brunt of updating the game wiki lies with the players, rather than a macrobot or a gamemaster, I question the need to willingly introduce more necessary commitments. Even if it would only be tri-monthly, its still one more thing to forget and one more thing to frighten new players away. I'm a NO. --Finisterre 04:11, 13 January 2007 (EST)

Ha! My eloquent comment above has been made redundant with the changes I have just noticed Dayd has made. Whoops! I guess I'm a YES now. --Finisterre 04:13, 13 January 2007 (EST)

Vote

Debate is closed, this proposal must now be voted on --Dayd 21:43, 16 January 2007 (EST)

For

Add FOR vote

1. --Dayd 21:43, 16 January 2007 (EST)
2. --Finisterre 02:31, 17 January 2007 (EST)

Against

Add AGAINST vote

Abstain

Add Abstention