On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Eritivus wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-10-27 at 06:22 +, Eritivus wrote:
>> > 7706 3 omd Fast Track
>> ENDORSE scshunt
>
> If this was a valid ballot [*], I retract it.
>
> I vote FOR 7706.
>
> [*] It seems scshunt isn't registered?
After a bit of research -
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Henri Bouchard wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
>> On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 22:23 -0400, omd wrote:
> [...]
>>> 7701 1 Henri Credits
>> AGAINST; broken, amendments cannot be made simultaneously
> [...]
>
> Wait, why not?
>
> -Henri
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 22:23 -0400, omd wrote:
[...]
>> 7701 1 Henri Credits
> AGAINST; broken, amendments cannot be made simultaneously
[...]
Wait, why not?
-Henri
On 27 October 2014 20:34, omd wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Sprocklem wrote:
>>> 7706 3 omd Fast Track
>> AGAINST. This is IMO a terrible way to go about this and the Expedition
>> proposal seems, at least at a cursory glance, better implemented. Also,
>> I don't trust omd.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Sprocklem wrote:
>> 7706 3 omd Fast Track
> AGAINST. This is IMO a terrible way to go about this and the Expedition
> proposal seems, at least at a cursory glance, better implemented. Also,
> I don't trust omd.
I think that my proposal has more solid wo
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Oct 2014, Alex Smith wrote:
>
>> My current opinion on that proposal is: a) omd does not currently know
>> of a way to scam it; b) omd thinks the proposal is genuinely good for
>> the game; and c) omd will nonetheless probably com
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014, Alex Smith wrote:
My current opinion on that proposal is: a) omd does not currently know
of a way to scam it; b) omd thinks the proposal is genuinely good for
the game; and c) omd will nonetheless probably come up with some way to
scam it later on.
I suddenly got this stra
On Sun, 2014-10-26 at 12:40 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Sun, 26 Oct 2014, omd wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Kerim Aydin
> > wrote:
> > >> 7706 3 omd Fast Track
> > > AGAINST. For some reason I don't trust omd with rapidly-adopted
> > > proposals right now.
> >
> >
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> 7700 1 Henri Office Salary
> AGAINST while no-one's willing to scorekeep.
People would be willing to scorekeep if the salary of scorekeeper was
greater than the salary of the other offices. Scorekeepor is probably
the most demanding
On Oct 26, 2014, at 3:38 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> For perspective, my personal favorite times in the game were mid-2001
> (tri-currency zombie auctions)and 2005 (Discordian Cards).
I'll have to check those archives out.
—the Warrigal
On Oct 26, 2014, at 3:51 PM, Eritivus wrote:
>
> So what is the full text of the rule change? I worried that it might be
> the full diff of the rules the change would effect, which is not
> directly included in Henri's proposal, and which seems too restrictive.
I'd say "text of a rule change" mea
On Sun, 2014-10-26 at 19:15 +, Tanner Swett wrote:
> I was thinking that it may be useful to have a proposal say something
> like "Enact a rule saying 'blah blah blah N blah', where N is the
> number of things that have happened in the past 14 days." I can't
> think of a good example, so on sec
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014, omd wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >> 7706 3 omd Fast Track
> > AGAINST. For some reason I don't trust omd with rapidly-adopted
> > proposals right now.
>
> Oh, come on, don't punish me for scamming. The proposal's pretty
> strai
> On Oct 26, 2014, at 12:12 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >> 7698 1 ais523 Ribbons 2014
> > AGAINST. Too retro. Let's move forward folks.
>
> Can I count on your votes for my "Agora: 2008 Edition" proposal series?
Heh. I was going to say to you "underlying idea we cycle in and out
and coo
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> 7706 3 omd Fast Track
> AGAINST. For some reason I don't trust omd with rapidly-adopted
> proposals right now.
Oh, come on, don't punish me for scamming. The proposal's pretty
straightforward.
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014, Tanner Swett wrote:
> > 7710 3 G. Defining Reasonable Review
> AGAINST - I think a proposal should be able to effect a rule change
> without actually literally containing the text of the rule change.
Can you give an example? Happy to vote against this if it kil
16 matches
Mail list logo
