Talk:324

From Nomicapolis

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

Proposer's summary and declarations

This rule will prevent abuse of rules. It is also a conerstone in real life legislation.--Shivan 12:12, 23 November 2006 (EST)

Debate

Add comments

Quick question: Is this up for vote already? Look at 303 and 313. The way I read em, 303 requires 3 days of debate unless the proposer declares an early end to the debate. 313 says the debate will last at least 24 hours. So since 303 takes precedence (c.f. 210), we need to wait 3 days unless Shivan cuts it short. Is my reasoning faulty? Applejuicefool 14:38, 25 November 2006 (EST)

I'm opposed to this because i think this proposal makes the game less interesting as well as being easily circumvented. Say I make a proposal that the member who drafted proposal 345 shall henforce be known as king of wikiville. i'm not saying...im just saying... (oh...and i like hitting the sig w/ timestamp better than calculating EST) One more thing, did i do something incorrectly causing this page to ask me to do something with templates...if so i don't know how to do such a thing and would appreciate guidance. Thank You --Tucana25 23:44, 25 November 2006 (EST)

By 303 this proposal should be up for vote at 12:13 today, unless Shivan calls a vote, We cannot vote before then. --TomFoolery 10:10, 26 November 2006 (EST)

We have met the time constraints of 303, I am voting. --TomFoolery 14:02, 26 November 2006 (EST)
None has anything to add exept for the vote thing on this one, so I vote now! --Shivan 06:24, 27 November 2006 (EST)

Vote

For

Add FOR vote

1. --TomFoolery 14:03, 26 November 2006 (EST)
2. --Shivan 06:25, 27 November 2006 (EST)
3. Applejuicefool 10:54, 27 November 2006 (EST); (Can't think of a situation in which naming a player in a rule would be a good thing. Would be in favor of later amendment to exclude loopholes to this rule)

Against

Add AGAINST vote

1. --Tucana25 17:37, 26 November 2006 (EST)
2. --Dayd 09:43, 27 November 2006 (EST)