Talk:348

From Nomicapolis

(Difference between revisions)
(Against)
(For)
Line 25: Line 25:
<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=4 Add FOR vote]
<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=4 Add FOR vote]
# --[[User:Dayd|Dayd]] 19:19, 12 December 2006 (EST)
# --[[User:Dayd|Dayd]] 19:19, 12 December 2006 (EST)
-
# <!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->
+
# [[User:Applejuicefool|Applejuicefool]] 10:11, 14 December 2006 (EST)
 +
<!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->
<!--DO NOT REMOVE--><br />
<!--DO NOT REMOVE--><br />
 +
=== Against ===
=== Against ===
<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=5 Add AGAINST vote]
<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=5 Add AGAINST vote]

Revision as of 15:11, 14 December 2006


Contents

Proposer's summary and declarations

Proposer's summary"Debate will end for this proposal at 12:00pm EST 17 DEC 2006." This is intended to end proposals that amend the same rule at the same time. Looking for information if the wording is good. --Dayd 21:19, 5 December 2006 (EST)

Another intent is so that player A doesn't: amend 400 as such while player B: repeal 400. Well what happens if both pass. What happens if B passes before A?

Debate

Add comments

I think it is more interesting when this is encouraged instead of forbidden. More like politics... --Tucana25 22:20, 5 December 2006 (EST)

I also added this proposal to the current events on the front page. --Tucana25 23:26, 5 December 2006 (EST)

Should the same rule be both amended and repealed, the intended result is that it should remain repealed, either before or after the amendment; in the latter case, the repealing proposal should follow to its new number and not try to abolish a non-existent rule; in the former one, the proposal to amend it becomes moot because a repealed rule cannot be amended. The current rules do not seem to count with this possibility; I have prepared a draft to deal with the situation. - Mike Rosoft 09:05, 8 December 2006 (EST)

Vote

Debate is closed, this proposal must now be voted on. --Dayd 19:19, 12 December 2006 (EST)

For

Add FOR vote

  1. --Dayd 19:19, 12 December 2006 (EST)
  2. Applejuicefool 10:11, 14 December 2006 (EST)


Against

Add AGAINST vote

  1. --Tucana25 23:17, 12 December 2006 (EST)



Personal tools