I had a proposal at some point (that got voted down, I don’t remember why off hand) that would allow a proposal to be resolved more quickly if >AI players had already voted FOR.
Gaelan On Oct 24, 2018, at 9:31 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > Especially when pending is free, I think we have a lot of buggy > proposals go into the pool, and the proofreading really doesn't > happen until a quorum-enforced group put on their voting hats > and look closely before voting. I think the formality of that > process is useful. > > *However* I don't think it's so much the straight voting-process > delay as the 1+week at each end waiting for promotor/assessor (not > a dig at the current promotor/assessor, this is true regardless of > officeholder). Maybe if there's a way to speed up either end? > > On Wed, 24 Oct 2018, D. Margaux wrote: >> I’m considering proposing a rule that would enable proposals to be ADOPTED >> through dependent actions. The idea is that a player could announce intent >> to ADOPT a proposal with X support, where X is the number of players who by >> voting FOR could cause the proposal to be ADOPTED if all active >> non-supporting players vote AGAINST and all zombies vote PRESENT. Seems >> like it could result in potentially quicker adoption of uncontroversial >> proposals. >> >> I’m curious whether people think this is a good or bad idea
