Spring RTS Engine

I second KDR's titling of Lurker as Indlovuzaki.

Titles
Peet - Nanny
nemppu - Mother Superior
Lurker - Indlovuzaki (Great She-Elephant)

Felix the Cat wrote:I second SinbadEV's nomination of Peet for the title of Nanny.

This wasnt valid because the last proposal before it was invalidated, and the rule says it must be in the period between the acceptance of a proposal and the start of a new vote.

Edit: Tough the rule says the period between a proposals acceptance and the next round of voting... since it doesnt specifies wich proposal I guess this period starts after the first acceptance and goes on forever :) up to the judge to decide...

I nominate myself to the title of Dirtbag.

manored wrote:I would like the judge to clarify his understanding of this proposal then he starts the vote.

Basically, before every vote I issue I have to make a post containing the new titles for every player. A proposal for a new title is made every vote (or else the vote is invalid), and any proposal can be nominated any time between the issuing of that proposal and the start of the next vote.

If you get a title, the only thing that really changes right now is that I have to record your title in my prevote post.

I thought he wanted clarification of my already crystal-clear proposal. We shall find out!

lurker wrote:I thought he wanted clarification of my already crystal-clear proposal. We shall find out!

You tough correctly :)

BTW, lurkers proposal is invalid because it directly conflicts with a current rule.

Oh, I have to specifically mention that it modifies 212?

Yes, the structure was different enough I didn't know it was intended to be an amendment.

I think I'll just go back and add that to the post and then KDR's nomination can take hold. That fine with you? I won't be editing the body of the proposal one word.

The nomination can't predate the proposal... so KDR's motion is invalid to your proposal if you edit it significantly. But you can still edit it and wait for another nomination.

Go back and look. I edited the footnote, but the proposal hasn't changed one word.

212 I propose we amend,
for the killing, [of proposals] must come, to an end;
If a vote is initiated, all proposals are halted, all nominations are dead, old nominations must be created new at the end of the vote, new nominations may not be issued until the vote is complete. The post nominating a halted proposal must quote the proposal in question in it's exact original wording.

(I presume this is what you meant to propose, lurker?)

Pretty much, though I don't see the point in declaring a new 'halted' state. Just leave them as plain old proposals; trying to parse the rules is already impossible to do with any certainty.

A vote is in action. All proposals are now dead.

Motion 315: In times of old, proposals lie. I say, "Let them no longer die." The spector of death shall come to them no more. But their nominators must quote, or be shown the door.

Proposed by: lurker

Any poster may vote either for or against the current motion. If the motion passes it will become a rule. A player voting for a passed motion will

receive 10 points, a player voting against a failed motion will receive 10 points. The first side to reach 4 votes wins.

I vote nay. The motion doesn't keep enough of the original rule intact. As it stands under the current motion proposals can be nominated at any point in time (including during votes). Running multiple votes simultaneously is going to be borderline impossible on in a single thread.

Also, keep in mind, with the nomination addition rule, basically someone can just choose any non accepted proposal in the thread and force to vote whatever proposal they want without any agreeance of the rest of the players. Effectively, it means that the game could be held hostage by whoever the most active player is

Also an interesting thing to note. I don't have to follow the title nomination rules when I place a vote, because I'm not a "player"

I vote nay and nominate SinbadEV to receive the title of Count

I vote nay and nominate manored for the title of "Cock o' the North".

1. "all nominations are dead, old nominations must be created new at the end of the vote, new nominations may not be issued until the vote is complete"
All of that would stay intact; there would be no possible way to start any concurrent votes.

2. I'll vote nay. You're right that I should have added something about only allowing nomination of each proposal once.

3. Because I'm still interested in the result, I'll nominate/advocate Peet for promotions.

Edit:
4. I just noticed that you can make proposals during the voting period.

5. Immutable rule 112 deigns to take control from static rule 003.