Re: DIS: Agora XX CORRECTION: Proposal 344 failed.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote: Argh ** Yes, Chuck did privately vote against 344. And no, Walker did vote against, he changed his public for to a private against about 9 hours later. So it's actually 4:4, fail, we're back to rule 343. Yally did not get 10 points for proposing 344. Walker, Goethe, and omd did not get 5 points for voting against 344. Here are the votes I have recorded. Jun 26 08:55 Walker public vote FOR [CANCELLED] 10:11 ehird public vote FOR [CANCELLED] 12:13 ehird public vote FOR 12:26 Steve public vote FOR 13:20 Michael public vote FOR 14:12 Roujo public vote INVALID 17:56 Walker private vote AGAINST 27 01:19 Yally public vote FOR 02:42 Goethe public vote AGAINST 03:44 Chuck private vote AGAINST 11:20 omd private vote AGAINST I have no idea how I got Chuck in the FOR column. Officially, I'll just blame Roujo and his stunt voting for confusing me. Sorry about that folks! -Dan PS: here's the actual rule -- Rule 343 (Mutable) The game shall end immediately following the end of the voting period on any proposals which were submitted by 00:04:30 GMT +1200 June 29, 2013, and the adoption of any rule changes caused by such proposals, and all Voters having a score greater than the median score among Voters shall win. History: Initial Immutable Rule 112, Jun. 30 1993 Amended for Vigintennial by decree, Jun. 17 2013 Transmuted by Proposal 311 (omd), Jun. 23 2013 Amended by Proposal 326 (Chuck), Jun. 24 2013 Amended by Proposal 342 (Chuck), Jun. 26 2013 Amended by Proposal 343 (Chuck), Jun. 26 2013 [NOT Amended by Proposal 344 (Yally), Jun. 27 2013 -- MISREPORTED] -- I call for judgement on the statement a player can change eir vote. Nothing in the rules support the notion that this is possible, or allow for removing of votes. Instead, the rules claim each player gets a single vote. Walker's initial vote should therefore have been his sole vote and nothing else he attempted should have counted as a vote. Thus, this proposal passed.
Re: DIS: Agora XX CORRECTION: Proposal 344 failed.
On 27/06/2013 9:38 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote: I call for judgement on the statement a player can change eir vote. Nothing in the rules support the notion that this is possible, or allow for removing of votes. Instead, the rules claim each player gets a single vote. Walker's initial vote should therefore have been his sole vote and nothing else he attempted should have counted as a vote. Thus, this proposal passed. FWIW it's not the first time ... I don't know if it ever affected a proposal outcome but it would certainly have affected points. -Dan
Re: DIS: Agora XX CORRECTION: Proposal 344 failed.
Nothing in the Rules, perhaps, except for the provision in R217 which states that game custom is one of two standards to be applied before others where the rules are unclear. On 28 June 2013 11:38, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote: Argh ** Yes, Chuck did privately vote against 344. And no, Walker did vote against, he changed his public for to a private against about 9 hours later. So it's actually 4:4, fail, we're back to rule 343. Yally did not get 10 points for proposing 344. Walker, Goethe, and omd did not get 5 points for voting against 344. Here are the votes I have recorded. Jun 26 08:55 Walker public vote FOR [CANCELLED] 10:11 ehird public vote FOR [CANCELLED] 12:13 ehird public vote FOR 12:26 Steve public vote FOR 13:20 Michael public vote FOR 14:12 Roujo public vote INVALID 17:56 Walker private vote AGAINST 27 01:19 Yally public vote FOR 02:42 Goethe public vote AGAINST 03:44 Chuck private vote AGAINST 11:20 omd private vote AGAINST I have no idea how I got Chuck in the FOR column. Officially, I'll just blame Roujo and his stunt voting for confusing me. Sorry about that folks! -Dan PS: here's the actual rule -- Rule 343 (Mutable) The game shall end immediately following the end of the voting period on any proposals which were submitted by 00:04:30 GMT +1200 June 29, 2013, and the adoption of any rule changes caused by such proposals, and all Voters having a score greater than the median score among Voters shall win. History: Initial Immutable Rule 112, Jun. 30 1993 Amended for Vigintennial by decree, Jun. 17 2013 Transmuted by Proposal 311 (omd), Jun. 23 2013 Amended by Proposal 326 (Chuck), Jun. 24 2013 Amended by Proposal 342 (Chuck), Jun. 26 2013 Amended by Proposal 343 (Chuck), Jun. 26 2013 [NOT Amended by Proposal 344 (Yally), Jun. 27 2013 -- MISREPORTED] -- I call for judgement on the statement a player can change eir vote. Nothing in the rules support the notion that this is possible, or allow for removing of votes. Instead, the rules claim each player gets a single vote. Walker's initial vote should therefore have been his sole vote and nothing else he attempted should have counted as a vote. Thus, this proposal passed. -- Steve Gardner Research Grants Development Faculty of Business and Economics Monash University, Caulfield campus Rm: S8.04 | ph: (613) 9905 2486 e: steven.gard...@monash.edu *** NB I am now working 1.0 FTE, but I am away from my desk** on alternate Thursday afternoons (pay weeks). *** Two facts about lists: (1) one can never remember the last item on any list; (2) I can't remember what the other one is.
