Talk:376

From Nomicapolis

Revision as of 14:03, 13 February 2007 (view source) Dayd (Talk | contribs) m (stupid login) ← Previous diff		Revision as of 00:30, 14 February 2007 (view source) Tucana25 (Talk | contribs) (→For) Next diff →
Line 22:		Line 22:
	<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->{{editsection|4|Add FOR vote}}		<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->{{editsection|4|Add FOR vote}}
	# --[[User:Dayd|Dayd]] 09:03, 13 February 2007 (EST)		# --[[User:Dayd|Dayd]] 09:03, 13 February 2007 (EST)
		+	--[[User:Tucana25|Tucana25]] 19:30, 13 February 2007 (EST)
	#<!--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}}

---

Revision as of 00:30, 14 February 2007

Proposed by: Dayd 10:01, 6 February 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 12:00, 13 February 2007 (EST)

This proposal is for the appointment of Canton leaders. Eventually I would like Cantons to have more of a purpose and this will allow a Player to control individual Canton's purposes. --Dayd 10:04, 6 February 2007 (EST)

Debate

Add comments

i like this idea...i assume that we will need to develop some sort of connection between performance as head of canton with popularity. Also, do we want to reserve the center canton as a 'government' area that will not have a titled 'head'? --Tucana25 05:18, 7 February 2007 (EST)

At the moment I am still seeing the Center canton as just another canton, just less populous. So I don't think it really needs to be reserved. Perhaps over the evolution of the Cantons it will become small and area which will end up making into a government center or possibly something else. --Dayd 09:39, 7 February 2007 (EST)

Well lets do it then...--Tucana25 21:05, 7 February 2007 (EST)

Good stuff. Glad I didn't miss a major coup. Sorry. Good to be back online. --Finisterre 09:29, 8 February 2007 (EST)

Well if there aren't any problems with this I'm going to give it another day and then put it to a vote. --Dayd 14:11, 8 February 2007 (EST)

Vote

Debate is closed, this proposal must now be voted on. --Dayd 09:03, 13 February 2007 (EST)

For

Add FOR vote

1. --Dayd 09:03, 13 February 2007 (EST)

--Tucana25 19:30, 13 February 2007 (EST)

Against

Add AGAINST vote

Abstain

Add Abstention