Subject: poof I'm Back....

From: Devon Jacobs {Darkstar} <djacobs@n...>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 16:14:11 -0500

Greetings all.....

Been away a bit.... just catching up on things

On the whole, props 310 and 311 are fine.... this is in fact the way our
government currently works, however some issues have been raised about 311
that make good sense...

There will be a slight problem in the case of a tie vote situation.
every prop requires only 51% of votes for it to pass (except ones
overturning a non-consent issue which require 2/3) knowing that the speaker
sees all of the votes before the end of the voting period and always gets
to vote last, there are basically 3 schools of thought

1. Speaker can't vote at all.... personally I think that kinda sux,
especially if you created the game, and want to see it grow

2. speaker can only vote to break a tie..... While it's an ok theory, it
usually works better when parties have formed, and people start voting
party lines instead of thinking for themselves.... for the most part right
now, props aren't usually that close, So the speaker only gets to vote on a
few props that turn out to be ultra minor interpretations of the rules.

3. speaker votes on everything, SUCK UP AND DEAL!.... I think this is the
way to go, it allows for much more interesting gameplay, and realism, the
only limit I would put on this power is that the speaker would not be able
to vote on consent issues. while he wouldn't be able to vote directly, he
would still be able to voice his opinion and force a full 2/3 majority vote
by denying consent. That way the balance of power isn't skewed too badly.

Devo-nomic
-Devon

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Web -> http://www.northnet.org/darkstar
E-mail -> djacobs@n...
Netrek -> Darkone (DD)
Diablo -> Moadib (Warrior)
Quakeworld -> Darkstar (Deathmonger)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-