add proposal 388/0 1 16 Jan 2001 05:18:21 16 Jan 2001 22:39:46 Joel Uckelman I Second That 1. Create a new Rule entitled "Consent by Seconding", with the following text: "An Approvable Motion requiring P seconds in N days is granted consent upon receiving seconds by P unique eligible voters other than the Motion's owner within N days of its recognition. No Motion may be granted consent in this way unless explicitly allowed by the Rules. Any Approvable Motion requiring seconds for which the required number of seconds is left unspecified is considered to require one second. Any Approvable Motion requiring seconds for which the required period within which the seconds must occur is left unspecified is considered to to have a period of three days. An eligible voter may second an Motion requiring seconding by publicly indicating e is doing so." 2. Strike the word "unanimous" from Rules 120 and 229. 3. Change the title of Rule 230 to "Tacit Consent" and Amend Rule 230 to read: "An Agent introducing an Approvable Motion may request consent at the time of its introduction, or until such time as the granting of consent could still occur prior to the nweek's voting, unless the Rules explicitly prohibit it. N-day P-consent on a Motion is granted if no more than P eligible voters object to the Motion within N days of its recognition. The appropriate level of consent is considered to have been requested automatically for any Approvable Motion which may be adopted only by that level of consent or greater. N-day unanimous consent is equivalent to N-day 0-consent. Any Approvable Motion for which the required level of consent for adoption by consent is left unspecified is considered to require unanimous consent. Any Approvable Motion for which the required period without objection for adoption by consent is left unspecified is considered to have a period of three days." ---- add proposal 385/1 1 16 Jan 2001 06:00:47 16 Jan 2001 22:39:46 Poulenc Mediocrity Enact a new rule entitled "C/RG: Mediocrity" with text as follows: The Mediocrity game is an instance of a Challenge/Response game with the following attributes: game name: Mediocrity sub-game admin title: the Supremely Mediocre duration: until repealed repetetive: when finished entry fee: 2 The initial S.M should specify what limits are being used for the game set. The limits may contrain quantities that include those described below or others. The bracketed number following each quantity is recommended as the minimum for that quantity. However these quantities are only guidelines and do not determine compliance. In some cases a maximum will also be listed here. The limits may include: (x) The level of Mediocrity game to be played (min. 1) (y) The number of players required for the C/R game to start (min 3) (z) The number of level n-1 sub-games to play as part of each level n game. The S.M is encouraged to be creative and come up with other limits that may apply to Mediocrity games. A level n game of Mediocrity sub-game consists of z n-1 sub games, unless n=1 in which case it consists of z individual challenges. The challenge shall use the following form: The S.M shall post to the public forum a message announcing the sub-game and asking players to submit their quantities. Players then have three days to respond with their quantites by private email. A valid entry specifies one quantity. At the conclusion of a level n Mediocrity sub-game the winner is determined. If n is greater than 1 the winner is the participant who won the most mediocre number of level n-1 sub-games during that level n game; that is whose number of level n-1 wins is exceeded by as many participants as it exceeds. The winner of a level 1 sub-game is the player whose specified quantity is the most mediocre. Prizes shall not be awarded for individual challenges making up a larger Mediocrity game. Instead, at the conclusion of the game announced by the first S.M of the game the entire collection of all entry fees collected for the individual challenges that made up that game shall be paid to the winner. This is an exception to rule 336. ---- add proposal 389/0 1 16 Jan 2001 06:12:25 16 Jan 2001 22:39:46 Poulenc Foully voting AGAINST every single proposal on every ballot really drives me up the wall you will know if youre the one im talking to i really think something ought to be done about this blatant misuse of democratic principles and this is a holy crusade t Enact a new rule, titled "Against negative voting" with text as follows: If, on a ballot containing at least five proposals, an agent is found to vote against at least three and for no proposals then that agent shall owe a debt of 20 points to the first agent to point out eir breach of good conduct within three nweeks of the offence. ----