Subject: PROPOSAL: Limit to active proposals

From: "Feyd " <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 19:44:43 -0000

I think it cool that so many proposals are being thrown out here. 
however, we are getting too many to consider how they might interact 
with each other. Doc, I kinda hope you don't accept this, but here 
goes:

PROPOSAL: Limit to Active Proposals
Only a single proposal or a single point of order may be presented in 
a single mail message.
A player may have only 3 proposals active at one time. An active 
proposal is one that is pending (i.e. neither accepted or Denied by 
the Doc).

Feyd

---

From: Ottis Airhart <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 13:52:02 -0600

In my humble opinion, this might be best suited as an amendment to Rule 3
versus being a new rule. It would keep our ruleset down.

At 07:44 PM 12/15/2000 +0000, you wrote:
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>[email-masked]
>
>

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: 15 Dec 2000 15:16:18 -0500

> >proposal is one that is pending (i.e. neither accepted or Denied by 

REJECTED for the above good reason (of course the "single point of
order" bit should go in Rule 5, not Rule 3); it also could be
considerably less wordy, since the phrase "pending proposal" is
already defined. And it doesn't say what to do about it if someone
makes a fourth pending proposal. (E.g. ignore it.)

And finally, does it help much? How many instances of players having
more than 3 pending proposals have we had so far? And we have, what,
8 players right now? That allows for 24 simultaneous pending
proposals. Perhaps individual and total limits combined would be
better.

-- 
- Doc

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: 16 Dec 2000 18:46:21 -0500

Directive D3: Fear of Rejection

Another angle on the proposal glut might be to observe that the
current rules provide perks for accepted proposals, but no penalties
for rejected ones -- thus no incentive not to flood the system.

The current rules also provide for both ignoring and rejecting
proposals, but do not specify different effects for the two actions.
If rejection carried some penalty, but ignoring didn't, then the
distinction would be meaningful, whereas at present it isn't.

Players are directed to give some thought to proposals addressing
this. 

-- 
- Doc