TTttPF
On 02/08/2012 05:25 PM, Pavitra wrote:
>> 7164 2 Murphy, etc. Grumpy Old Men
> FOR
>
>> 7166 3 omd, etc. We've all been ignoring this
> AGAINST
>
>> 7167 2 441344fixing another problem with WotE
> Risky, but the ruleset doesn't *currently* have any cases of "without
> [
On 2/9/12, Pavitra wrote:
> TTttPF
>>> 7173 1 omd What could possibly go wrong?
>> AGAINST. Taunting the police serves a purpose; don't stomp it with the
>> new mechanic.
>
I retract my previous votes on proposal 7173 and vote AGAINST it.
I submit a proposal with title {Scrap Restricted Behaviour} and
adoption index 3 and text
{
Amend Rule 2125 (Regulation regulations) by replacing the text
{
d) The rules explicitly state that it MAY be performed while
certain conditions are satisfied. Except as allowed by the
On 6 February 2012 00:11, omd wrote:
> Well, I'm unbelievably tardy as usual, but...
>
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it. For this decision, the eligible
> voters are the active first-class players at the time of this
> distributio
