JillSorens on 2 May 2002 17:21:57 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[nbo] Vote and Proposal from Jillian

Um yeah I vote AGAINST Marsh.1 and Marsh.2.  And by the way, Mr. Marsh....read all the rules first. :)  I knew your proposal was invalid before I even read the judgment.

So I hereby propose a more ethical and unrelated proposal that I believe is an alright one, I suppose votes will decide eh?

Proposal Sorenson.1
Amend VotingDefinition 2.3 to read:
Players have 2 business days from the date the Proposal was published, with which to vote on the Proposal;
The reasoning behind said amendment proposal is that I feel the game would move even faster if such was the case, while still allowing people time enough to vote.  I imagine everyone has computers at work, and most at home, however, since the two business day allowment that would effectively give a proposal that was published on Friday, not being allowed to be ratified until Tuesday, thus, 4 days as in the original RuleSet.  However, this allows for far more proposals to be submitted and ratified within a given work week.

Proposal Sorenson.2
Amend RulesDefinition A2.3 to read:
Rule names and numbers shall not be altered when a Rule is amended.
Why? Because typos annoy me (even though I occasionally do them myself) and I would prefer not to have to see a typo forever on the RuleSet list...as it is currently written, the Rule says "admended."  Annoying right?
Final Proposal for the time being - Proposal Sorenson.3 
Amend RulesDefinition A2.6 to read
A Rule may neither penalize or benefit a Player or Players specifically by name.
Why? Because Marsh wants to play dirty. :)  And I'm a law-abiding citizen.

Well, I hope I did this alright.  It's currently 10:15 AM, Thursday, May 2.

[-- brought to you by notbob-official@nomic.net --]
[- http://ddickens.pepperdine.edu/nomic/ for now -]
[----- please, remember to trim the quotes -------]