Talk:392
From Nomicapolis
m (I forgot to sign my comment) |
(passed) |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
I see nothing inherently wrong with that. | I see nothing inherently wrong with that. | ||
--[[User:Darus67|Darus67]] 12:18, 18 May 2007 (EDT) | --[[User:Darus67|Darus67]] 12:18, 18 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | :: Yes, that was my intention. If you don't require hardly any labor from your citizens, then they will like you even better. I figured the equation should be more biased to losing popularity than gaining it, however, as popularity is already fairly easy to gain from Proposals. [[User:BobTHJ|BobTHJ]] 12:28, 18 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I don't necessarily see any objections, but i'm also not the scorekeeper...that would seem to be the largest hastle. --[[User:Tucana25|Tucana25]] 15:28, 18 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | : As long as the rule that allows me to resign as Scorekeeper at any time isn't repealed, I'm happy to at least try out all sorts of complexity. Although I may be forced to write software to track all of this stuff before long :) [[User:Wooble|Wooble]] 20:01, 21 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | :: Not that I'm gunning for the job, but if you ever decide you don't want to be Scorekeeper, I would be happy to assume the responsibilities. [[User:BobTHJ|BobTHJ]] 22:50, 21 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
<!--END DEBATE--> | <!--END DEBATE--> | ||
== Vote == | == Vote == | ||
| + | Discussion is closed. This proposal must now be voted on [[User:BobTHJ|BobTHJ]] 02:07, 23 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I hereby declare this proposal passed [[User:BobTHJ|BobTHJ]] 10:48, 23 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
=== For === | === For === | ||
<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->{{editsection|4|Add FOR vote}} | <!--DO NOT REMOVE-->{{editsection|4|Add FOR vote}} | ||
| + | # [[User:BobTHJ|BobTHJ]] 02:07, 23 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | # [[User:Wooble|Wooble]] 07:08, 23 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | # --[[User:Tucana25|Tucana25]] 08:19, 23 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
# <!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE--> | # <!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE--> | ||
<!--DO NOT REMOVE--><br /> | <!--DO NOT REMOVE--><br /> | ||
| + | |||
=== Against === | === Against === | ||
<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->{{editsection|5|Add AGAINST vote}} | <!--DO NOT REMOVE-->{{editsection|5|Add AGAINST vote}} | ||
Current revision as of 14:48, 23 May 2007
Proposed By BobTHJ 11:21, 18 May 2007 (EDT)
Contents |
Proposer's summary and declarations
A first attempt at setting up industry. This allows Canton Leaders to regulate the industry level of their canton. Set it too low, and you have little to no production. Set it too high and you will become unpopular (and as a result may lose your leadership position). May 25 is the closing of debate. BobTHJ 11:21, 18 May 2007 (EDT)
Debate
Do you intend popularity to increase if the Industry Index is set very low? That will happen with the formula as written. I see nothing inherently wrong with that. --Darus67 12:18, 18 May 2007 (EDT)
- Yes, that was my intention. If you don't require hardly any labor from your citizens, then they will like you even better. I figured the equation should be more biased to losing popularity than gaining it, however, as popularity is already fairly easy to gain from Proposals. BobTHJ 12:28, 18 May 2007 (EDT)
I don't necessarily see any objections, but i'm also not the scorekeeper...that would seem to be the largest hastle. --Tucana25 15:28, 18 May 2007 (EDT)
- As long as the rule that allows me to resign as Scorekeeper at any time isn't repealed, I'm happy to at least try out all sorts of complexity. Although I may be forced to write software to track all of this stuff before long :) Wooble 20:01, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
- Not that I'm gunning for the job, but if you ever decide you don't want to be Scorekeeper, I would be happy to assume the responsibilities. BobTHJ 22:50, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
Vote
Discussion is closed. This proposal must now be voted on BobTHJ 02:07, 23 May 2007 (EDT)
I hereby declare this proposal passed BobTHJ 10:48, 23 May 2007 (EDT)
For
Against
Abstain
