Talk:393
From Nomicapolis
(Difference between revisions)
(Opened for voting, vote For) |
(→For) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->{{editsection|4|Add FOR vote}} | <!--DO NOT REMOVE-->{{editsection|4|Add FOR vote}} | ||
# [[User:BobTHJ|BobTHJ]] 14:09, 24 May 2007 (EDT) | # [[User:BobTHJ|BobTHJ]] 14:09, 24 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | # --[[User:Tucana25|Tucana25]] 23:43, 30 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}} | ||
Revision as of 03:43, 31 May 2007
Contents |
Proposer's summary and declarations
The first step in a minor redefinition of Proposals. The goal would be to broaden the definition of a proposal to include a one-time Order to be executed upon passage of the proposal. Also, if there is interest, I wouldn't mind broadening the definition of a proposal to allow for multiple rule changes & repeals in the same proposal (this would make it easier to make a large change in one proposal that would effect several rules). It would probably need to be coupled with a revised numbering system. BobTHJ 11:33, 22 May 2007 (EDT)
Debate
hear hear...--Tucana25 08:17, 23 May 2007 (EDT)
Vote
Discussion is closed. This Proposal must now be voted on BobTHJ 14:09, 24 May 2007 (EDT)
For
Against
Abstain
