Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 7993

I vote AGAINST. Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com > On Dec 17, 2017, at 12:02 PM, Corona wrote: > > I vote AGAINST as "conditionally" is not rigorously defined and I > believe that would cause issues. > > On 12/10/17, Aris

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 7993

I vote as follows: On 2017-12-11 13:03, Aris Merchant wrote: I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the quorum is 7.0, the voting method is

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 7993

I vote as follows: > ID Author(s) AITitlePender Pend fee > --- > 7993* Alexis 1.0 Conditional Ban Alexis 1 AP AGAINST. I was sorely tempted to vote for

Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 7993

I'm leaning towards voting against, but for now, I vote PRESENT. On 12/14/2017 9:35 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: I vote AGAINST. Conditionals are a significant convenience, and they make gameplay more interesting. Removing them should be a last resort. I believe our precedents should be enough to

Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 7993

I vote AGAINST. Conditionals are a significant convenience, and they make gameplay more interesting. Removing them should be a last resort. I believe our precedents should be enough to prevent abuse; if not, there is certainly a less extreme legislative solution. -Aris On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 7993

I vote FOR. On Sun, 10 Dec 2017 at 21:04 Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran > Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal > pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the