[Nomic] Stuff (plus new proposal)

[Adam Biltcliffe]

On Sep 26 2004, M.E.W. O'Leary wrote:

> I'm visiting Abi at the moment and don't really have time to sit down 
> and go through all the details of proposals. However, I trust people to 
> raise the same objections I would. Therefore I'm voting aye to all 
> proposals made since my last post.

Excellent! Only Maz to respond and the Ministry can come into existence.

> On another issue, I believe the last notice of Consensus is invalid, as I 
> never voted in favour of it. The rules which I voted in favour of were 
> substantially equivalent to what was passed, but I think this is a 
> dangerous precedent to be setting. I'd like to know people's opinions on 
> this.

If you didn't vote in favour of the proposal, it can't be a Consensus of 
Opinion. I'll remove the rule in question from the web page. If it's 
'substantially equivalent' to the rules you were in favour of, do you want 
to vote in favour of it now (so Wild Card can issue another NoC and we can 
put it back), or do you have specific objections?

I still think we need to revise the voting system, specifically to address:

- Make sure proposals and revisions thereof are sufficiently distinct that 
this confusion can't arise so easily - Eliminate the need for unanimity 
(although I know people are against this) - Give proposals a time limit, so 
the outcome of a proposal is definitely known after a particular point

I also propose the following new rule:

==========
Insufficient Notices

Any voting entity who creates a document purporting to be a Notice of 
Consensus which is not in fact valid shall be guilty of the crime of Taking 
Insufficient Notice. ==========

adam