Talk:356

From Nomicapolis

Revision as of 14:05, 18 December 2006 (view source) Tucana25 (Talk | contribs) (→Against) ← Previous diff		Revision as of 17:25, 19 December 2006 (view source) TomFoolery (Talk | contribs) (→For) Next diff →
Line 21:		Line 21:
	# --[[User:Dayd|Dayd]] 01:33, 16 December 2006 (EST)		# --[[User:Dayd|Dayd]] 01:33, 16 December 2006 (EST)
	# [[User:Chuck|chuck]] 18:06, 16 December 2006 (EST)		# [[User:Chuck|chuck]] 18:06, 16 December 2006 (EST)
		+	# --[[User:TomFoolery|TomFoolery]] 12:25, 19 December 2006 (EST)
	#<!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->		#<!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->

---

Revision as of 17:25, 19 December 2006

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 December 2006 (EST)This is intended to get rid of all the rules to repeal rules littering the current rule set. Added that this rule isn't self repealable.

Debate

Add comments

"This rule cannot be repealed by this rule." ... This comment is about how cool self-reference is :) chuck 12:08, 14 December 2006 (EST)

Vote

Debate is closed, this proposal must now be voted on. --Dayd 01:33, 16 December 2006 (EST)

For

Add FOR vote

1. --Dayd 01:33, 16 December 2006 (EST)
2. chuck 18:06, 16 December 2006 (EST)
3. --TomFoolery 12:25, 19 December 2006 (EST)

Against

Add AGAINST vote

1. Mike Rosoft 10:27, 17 December 2006 (EST) (This rule is phrased in a completely wrong way - what about a rule - such as proposal 344 - that repeals another rule and has other effect in addition to that? Sorry, I didn't find time to mention this before the proposal was up for voting - I only visit this site once in a while.)
2. --Tucana25 09:05, 18 December 2006 (EST)

Abstain

Add Abstention