Subject: [MacroNomic] Votes

From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 11:05:34 -0400

175:FOR
176:FOR
177:FOR
178:FOR
179:FOR.  lambda and I belong to a club called the SGC.  I would have
prefered that it have a more stringent passage requirement with ACCEPT as
the default vote, so players would only have to do anything if it bothered
them, but I'll fix that next batch.
180: Mine.  I did this because I don't think players who have only just
begun should be able to fail other people's proposals.  Only people who
have been in the RP should be failing by Trotsky points.
183:FOR
184:FOR
185:FOR
186: The principle or the implementation?  I know I have a bit of an
obsession with long rules, but I think they make everything harder to
understand.
187: I proposed this because I noticed that it's been about 40 proposals
since something failed.  I think if we've gotten into a rut like that,
players should be encouraged to make risky proposals.
188: lambda, have I offended you in some way?
193:FOR,reluctantly.   I'm not sure what public humiliation entails, and we
do already have confessions.  Also I can't see how it prevents judges from
all disagreeing.
194:FOR

--
-Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	Thank heavens, the sun has gone in, and I don't have to go out and
enjoy it.
		-Logan Pearsall Smith