|
|
Post by Aikanaro on Jun 27, 2005 7:35:20 GMT -5
Of what, specifically - or are you just blanket disaproving - and if so - why? The repealments at least aren't affecting anything that isn't already invalid...
Oh well - Now it's Jalathas' turn to make some pointless proposals before we finally lose unanimity...
|
|
Coral
Forum Frequent
Thievious Raccoon
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Coral on Jun 27, 2005 7:37:05 GMT -5
No, it's because if we do the roleplaying by turn, it gets really slow. And when the roleplaying becomes slow, I quit. I hate slow roleplaying.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aikanaro on Jun 27, 2005 7:38:26 GMT -5
Yes - but the repealments I suggested are for invalid rules - you can vote in favour of them and vote negatively for the rest, you know...
|
|
Coral
Forum Frequent
Thievious Raccoon
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Coral on Jun 27, 2005 7:39:10 GMT -5
Well, I still voted no. So PAH.
|
|
Jalathas
Forum Frequent
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Jalathas on Jun 27, 2005 10:37:33 GMT -5
STOP BEING IMMATURE! First you try to bomb my character's home, now you randomly say no to all the proposals, probably just so it becomes your turn again. Anyways, proposal time.
304. All attacks within the game must be non-physical, and in most cases, limited to the cyberspace. This rule is applied retroactively.
|
|
Coral
Forum Frequent
Thievious Raccoon
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Coral on Jun 27, 2005 10:50:53 GMT -5
Guess what?
NO! =D! PLUS, that rule cannot be passed because one of the rules states that no rules can be passed retroactively! So no matter what, your house go boom!
|
|
Jalathas
Forum Frequent
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Jalathas on Jun 27, 2005 22:59:29 GMT -5
Yeah, see, I have one little problem with your attitude right now, and that is that you're godmoding, refusing to admit that you or your character are wrong, and also that you're being a COMPLETE ASSHOLE! I'm seriously thinking about asking Aikanaro to kick you from this game now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aikanaro on Jun 28, 2005 1:22:35 GMT -5
In the event that it matters: I vote against this proposal.
Now have your turn Coral and let's be rid of this unanimity bullshit...
|
|
Coral
Forum Frequent
Thievious Raccoon
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Coral on Jun 28, 2005 5:29:24 GMT -5
I propose that rule 107 be made a mutable rule.
I would have voted for your proposal Jalathas, but it couldnt be dont due to rule 107. So vote in favor of my proposition and your proposal be doned!
|
|
|
|
Post by Aikanaro on Jun 28, 2005 5:52:02 GMT -5
I'm going to have to vote that one down - retroactively applying rules just generally sound like a Bad Idea.
What I advise instead is not so much having rules apply to a time before they were made - but how about if something that is strongly disagreed with occurs in play then a proposal can be made to replay ('retcon' for the jargon happy people) that part.
But that's for another proposal...
|
|
Coral
Forum Frequent
Thievious Raccoon
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Coral on Jun 28, 2005 7:54:03 GMT -5
Sorry about the dogmoding and all, but I warned you people that this isnt my type of roleplaying.
|
|
Jalathas
Forum Frequent
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Jalathas on Jun 28, 2005 11:31:49 GMT -5
Dogmoding? Anyways, what if the proposal were to make it a mutable rule, then say that retroactive rules can be passed, but only with unanimity?
|
|
Coral
Forum Frequent
Thievious Raccoon
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Coral on Jun 28, 2005 11:36:20 GMT -5
Yes, the dogmoding.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aikanaro on Jun 28, 2005 20:18:43 GMT -5
I'll agree to it being made a mutable rule on the condition that it can only be amended with unanimity.
And, if it gets passed that there can be retroactive rules, also having each retroactively applying rule be considered individuality and the vote on it having to be unanimous.
|
|
Jalathas
Forum Frequent
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain
Posts: 1,076
|
Post by Jalathas on Jun 28, 2005 20:39:35 GMT -5
I agree with that.
|
|
