Dragonmarked

[stonegod]

Hmm, that's three. Well, I can't remember if this is actually effective, but I'm going to vote NO to all of these that have three YES votes until I can get a look at the text of the feats, classes, etc. If worse comes to worse, I'll have to call my brother and have him read them to me.

They haven't become legal yet, so there is nothing against the rules procedurally, but there is also no means to change a vote procedurally (meaning, since KO has not really judged anything recently, that you have just kiboshed these until we get a new judge or change the rules).

 

[Moggthegob]

I will laos propose dragonmakr visionary and itsspells at later date but i think it can waitu ntul having a greater mark is even possible.

 

[Rystil Arden]

They haven't become legal yet, so there is nothing against the rules procedurally, but there is also no means to change a vote procedurally (meaning, since KO has not really judged anything recently, that you have just kiboshed these until we get a new judge or change the rules).

Huh? No, I meant I couldn't remember if 1 NO was enough or not. As for changing a vote, judges can do that at any time. I will do so once I know what these thing actually do.

 

[stonegod]

Huh? No, I meant I couldn't remember if 1 NO was enough or not. As for changing a vote, judges can do that at any time. I will do so once I know what these thing actually do.

We have 3 yes and 1 no; it needs to pass by 2 more YES than NOs with at least 3 YESes. So, they will pass it seems. But not for another 2 days.

 

[Rystil Arden]

We have 3 yes and 1 no; it needs to pass by 2 more YES than NOs with at least 3 YESes. So, they will pass it seems. But not for another 2 days.

Yeah, damn it. That means with KO2 not voting, it's currently impossible to stop any proposal with NO votes. That's incredibly scary to me.

 

[stonegod]

Yeah, damn it. That means with KO2 not voting, it's currently impossible to stop any proposal with NO votes. That's incredibly scary to me.

Its possible if only two folks vote YES w/ one No.

However, I agree that if KO wishes to step down that we may wish to look for another full time judge.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Its possible if only two folks vote YES w/ one No.

However, I agree that if KO wishes to step down that we may wish to look for another full time judge.

No, then the NO was pointless because the third judge would have had the same effect by not voting. Without votes from KO, the NO vote is entirely meaningless, as it is no different from just not voting. Even if we have all 5 judges, I thought we modified the LEW rule so that you needed 4 YES to overcome 1 NO for that reason--that's why I mentioned to Erekose that I wasn't sure.

 

[stonegod]

No, then the NO was pointless because the third judge would have had the same effect by not voting. Without votes from KO, the NO vote is entirely meaningless, as it is no different from just not voting. Even if we have all 5 judges, I thought we modified the LEW rule so that you needed 4 YES to overcome 1 NO for that reason--that's why I mentioned to Erekose that I wasn't sure.

That's not what is in the main thread; If we changed it somewhere else (which we might have), its not reflected there.

Can do a thread search later.

 

[Rystil Arden]

That's not what is in the main thread; If we changed it somewhere else (which we might have), its not reflected there.

Can do a thread search later.

I think we did because the modified way is better for 5 judges (after all, there aren't enough judges to produce the 4/2 split needed by the rules to override NO votes, right?). I think the reason we have the wrong thing in the main thread is because someone copy/pasted from LEW without making the changes

 

[stonegod]

I think we did because the modified way is better for 5 judges (after all, there aren't enough judges to produce the 4/2 split needed by the rules to override NO votes, right?). I think the reason we have the wrong thing in the main thread is because someone copy/pasted from LEW without making the changes

I've searched through the Detail thread and did not find this change. So, as it stands, 3 YES votes cement a proposal.

We can propose a change in another thread. Can't be retroactive, however.

If someone wants to be nice to RA, they can revoke their vote for the time being.