Talk:319
From Nomicapolis
Simulacrum (Talk | contribs) (→Debate) |
|||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
---- | ---- | ||
With the number of rules we are making right now, isn't there 25 rules very soon? Why difference would it make whether they count towards the total on the census?--[[User:Shivan|Shivan]] 00:38, 17 November 2006 (EST) | With the number of rules we are making right now, isn't there 25 rules very soon? Why difference would it make whether they count towards the total on the census?--[[User:Shivan|Shivan]] 00:38, 17 November 2006 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : We are at 21 with 3 under debate as of 03:49, 17 November 2006 (EST) -- [[User:Simulacrum|Simulacrum]] | ||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | As stated above we are close to the 25 but not quite there yet. I am concerned that if this rule is enacted, it might discourage our inactive players from further participation, so I would be in favor of keeping the cap at some sort of minimum either 0 or -1000 or something else. It does add a bit of initiative to those of us that are active to remain so. Also about the suggestion on moving or removing the inactives on the census page, the current rules specifies how one player can add themself to or remove themself from the census ([[302]]). It does not regulate how other players update the census page (i.e. labeling inactives) and since rule [[116]] permits changes that is not regulated or prohibited, this proposal could additionly tie up a loose end by putting teeth on [[314]] as well as making the census page a more organized page by refactoring the inactives to the bottom of the list or splitting the list to an active list and an inactive one. Your call, proposer. --[[User:Simulacrum|Simulacrum]] 03:49, 17 November 2006 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
<!--END DEBATE--> | <!--END DEBATE--> | ||
Revision as of 08:49, 17 November 2006
Contents |
Proposer's summary and declarations
After having defined inactivity I hereby set fourth three sanctions against those who are inactive. I'm very open to suggestions on this one.
--Shivan 16:48, 16 November 2006 (EST)
Debate
- Of course, the points thing won't operate until 305 goes away. Applejuicefool 17:03, 16 November 2006 (EST)
- I wouldn't mind seeing people go into the red for inactivity. Also it might be nice to say that Inactive Player do not count toward the total count on the census. Or we could just remove Players from the Census to an inactive list and just circumvent the rules. Your rule and your choice. I'll support it as is though.--Dayd 21:33, 16 November 2006 (EST)
With the number of rules we are making right now, isn't there 25 rules very soon? Why difference would it make whether they count towards the total on the census?--Shivan 00:38, 17 November 2006 (EST)
- We are at 21 with 3 under debate as of 03:49, 17 November 2006 (EST) -- Simulacrum
As stated above we are close to the 25 but not quite there yet. I am concerned that if this rule is enacted, it might discourage our inactive players from further participation, so I would be in favor of keeping the cap at some sort of minimum either 0 or -1000 or something else. It does add a bit of initiative to those of us that are active to remain so. Also about the suggestion on moving or removing the inactives on the census page, the current rules specifies how one player can add themself to or remove themself from the census (302). It does not regulate how other players update the census page (i.e. labeling inactives) and since rule 116 permits changes that is not regulated or prohibited, this proposal could additionly tie up a loose end by putting teeth on 314 as well as making the census page a more organized page by refactoring the inactives to the bottom of the list or splitting the list to an active list and an inactive one. Your call, proposer. --Simulacrum 03:49, 17 November 2006 (EST)
Vote
For
Against
