Patlin
Explorer
As I mentioned earlier in the general thread, the fortunate circumstance of having more plentifull judges might make it desirable to have slightly more detailed rules for voting on proposals. Here's what I suggest:
Proposal I
YES votes need to exceed NO votes by at least 2 to pass, with a minimum of 3 YES votes. If NO votes exceed YES votes by at least 2, with a minimum of 3 NO votes, the matter is closed. Voting will remain open until either of these conditions has been met for a continuous period of 48 hours, at which point the decision becomes official.
It is possible that a proposal will neither pass nor be officially closed. Example: A proposal may gain 4 yes votes and 3 no votes and attract no further votes. In such a circumstance, the proposal has not passed and does not become a rule barring a change in circumstances.
Proposal II
This one may be redundant, as I'm not sure it isn't allready the rule. It is, if not rule, at least traditional that a Judge not vote on his/her own proposal. I suggest this be an official rule.
Proposal I
YES votes need to exceed NO votes by at least 2 to pass, with a minimum of 3 YES votes. If NO votes exceed YES votes by at least 2, with a minimum of 3 NO votes, the matter is closed. Voting will remain open until either of these conditions has been met for a continuous period of 48 hours, at which point the decision becomes official.
It is possible that a proposal will neither pass nor be officially closed. Example: A proposal may gain 4 yes votes and 3 no votes and attract no further votes. In such a circumstance, the proposal has not passed and does not become a rule barring a change in circumstances.
Proposal II
This one may be redundant, as I'm not sure it isn't allready the rule. It is, if not rule, at least traditional that a Judge not vote on his/her own proposal. I suggest this be an official rule.
Last edited by a moderator: