Talk:383

From Nomicapolis

Revision as of 00:05, 29 April 2007 (view source) Tucana25 (Talk | contribs) (→For) ← Previous diff		Current revision as of 01:18, 29 April 2007 (view source) Wooble (Talk | contribs) (passed)
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	Voting is closed; this proposal passed. [[User:Wooble|Wooble]] 21:18, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
		+
	Proposed by: [[User:Wooble|Wooble]] 10:11, 26 April 2007 (EDT)		Proposed by: [[User:Wooble|Wooble]] 10:11, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

---

Current revision as of 01:18, 29 April 2007

Voting is closed; this proposal passed. Wooble 21:18, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Proposed by: Wooble 10:11, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

Contents 1 Proposer's summary and declarations 2 Debate 3 Vote 3.1 For 3.2 Against 3.3 Abstain

Proposer's summary and declarations

Proposer's summary

Since there are no more Scorekeeper elections, it makes little sense to have a rule that states what happens if the winner of the Judge election also wins the Scorekeeper election. I was going to propose amending for clarity, but since the current Judge was opposed to this limitation in the first place and at the moment if a Scorekeeper was elected judge and the other players were unhappy with that they could strip him of Scorekeeper status with the same vote totals it would take to amend this rule, I'm just proposing repeal. Unless Tucana25 has changed his opinion on whether it matters if one person holds both offices, I see no chance of this proposal failing, so I suggest that debate run through 5:00 PM today. Wooble 10:20, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

Debate

Add comments

Bring it...--Tucana25 14:32, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

Vote

Debate is closed, this proposal must now be voted on.

For

Add FOR vote

1. Wooble 18:30, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
2. BobTHJ 21:02, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
3. --Tucana25 20:05, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Against

Add AGAINST vote

Abstain

Add Abstention