Subject: MN: Re: Year 2, Week 46 Proposals

From: "Wayper, Paul" <WayperP@p...>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 10:43:17 +1000

OK, I'm going to start something new. I'll tell you which proposals are
mine, and what I'm wanting from them, and you can tell me before you vote
what you think. I'd rather retract a proposal than have everyone vote
against it, and I believe if everyone does this we'll be getting more done.

So:

On Wednesday, 24 March 1999 8:44, dunx@l...
[SMTP:dunx@l...] wrote:
> Proposal 653 - Let's go Loop the Loop [Multiple]

Yep, this is mine. Exactly as it states; I'm trying to set up a generic
looping system. It might be long, but I feel it's a lot more bulletproof
than the current DH rules, and there's provision for Aldwych/Amersham loops
and so forth. As far as I can see it also exactly duplicates the process of
looping currently - tell me if you don't think so. In particular, I've
tightened up when a Loop is activated and when it becomes defunct.

The only thing it doesn't do, I suppose, is to make sure that Escapes can
only be played at the Trap Station(s). I personally think that if you've
got the conditions of the Escape action, then you should be able to break
the loop whereever you are. But if that's just me, let me know.

> Proposal 654 - Voting Comments [Enactment]

I'm trying to encourage more people to talk about what's being proposed, and
to give feedback to the authors on proposals they like or, more importantly,
don't like. The comment is a simple, anonymous (unless you want to be
acknowledged) system of letting a proposer know what you think. It's
something I do on the end of more than a few of my votes anyway, but only
the Speaker gets to see that.

> Proposal 655 - Day Tripper! [Enactment]

Seems like a good idea. I admit that it might be a bit powerful with the
current system of time usage, but OTOH if that's the case just amend it when
it's enacted. I don't think it's too powerful, though.

> Proposal 656 - Let's Do the Sidestep Again [Multiple]

If you don't vote for the Looping proposal, then vote for this. A good
little amendment.

> Proposal 657 - Burnt Offering [Multiple]

I'm not too sure about this, with the current (relatively) low voting
populace. We may need more people around to make a proposal limit of five
worth its while. But I'll give it a try.

> Proposal 658 - Gold Rush [Action]

Well, this sounds good. Another random decision that I think should be
submitted to the PBM Dice Server.

> Proposal 659 - God Help Us [Multiple]

It seems these Holy Stations are getting fairly powerful - Charing Cross and
King's Cross St. Pancras being fairly significant. Not that this is a bad
thing, mind...

> Proposal 660 - Loan Clamps [Action]

Oooh, dunno about this one. One bronze? I tell you, I'd be paying the
loan-clamp off first go, and not risk losing all my tokens. This would be
fairly dangerous when combined with a shunt to take eir gold token away...

People! Talk!

Paul Wayper -- DPI ITS Computer Systems Officer
_____________________________________________________________________
SigClean 1.5a prevents all errors in transcription, transmission, and
reception of eMail, destroys sig and email viruses, and stops flames.
Report all bugs to the author. SigClean is FreeWare. (c) 1998-9 PJW

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/l-nomic-d
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com