Nothing in the Rules, perhaps, except for the provision in R217 which states that game custom is one of two standards to be applied before others where the rules are unclear.
On 28 June 2013 11:38, Aaron Goldfein <aarongoldf...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Fool <fool1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Argh ****** **** > > > > Yes, Chuck did privately vote against 344. And no, Walker did vote > against, > > he changed his public for to a private against about 9 hours later. > > > > So it's actually 4:4, fail, we're back to rule 343. Yally did not get 10 > > points for proposing 344. Walker, Goethe, and omd did not get 5 points > for > > voting against 344. > > > > Here are the votes I have recorded. > > > > Jun 26 08:55 Walker public vote FOR [CANCELLED] > > 10:11 ehird public vote FOR [CANCELLED] > > 12:13 ehird public vote FOR > > 12:26 Steve public vote FOR > > 13:20 Michael public vote FOR > > 14:12 Roujo public vote INVALID > > 17:56 Walker private vote AGAINST > > 27 01:19 Yally public vote FOR > > 02:42 Goethe public vote AGAINST > > 03:44 Chuck private vote AGAINST > > 11:20 omd private vote AGAINST > > > > I have no idea how I got Chuck in the FOR column. Officially, I'll just > > blame Roujo and his stunt voting for confusing me. > > > > Sorry about that folks! > > -Dan > > > > PS: here's the actual rule > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Rule 343 (Mutable) > > > > The game shall end immediately following the end of the voting period > > on any proposals which were submitted by 00:04:30 GMT +1200 June 29, > > 2013, and the adoption of any rule changes caused by such proposals, > > and all Voters having a score greater than the median score among > > Voters shall win. > > > > History: > > Initial Immutable Rule 112, Jun. 30 1993 > > Amended for Vigintennial by decree, Jun. 17 2013 > > Transmuted by Proposal 311 (omd), Jun. 23 2013 > > Amended by Proposal 326 (Chuck), Jun. 24 2013 > > Amended by Proposal 342 (Chuck), Jun. 26 2013 > > Amended by Proposal 343 (Chuck), Jun. 26 2013 > > [NOT Amended by Proposal 344 (Yally), Jun. 27 2013 -- MISREPORTED] > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I call for judgement on the statement "a player can change eir vote." > Nothing in the rules support the notion that this is possible, or > allow for removing of votes. Instead, the rules claim each player gets > a single vote. Walker's initial vote should therefore have been his > sole vote and nothing else he attempted should have counted as a vote. > Thus, this proposal passed. > -- Steve Gardner Research Grants Development Faculty of Business and Economics Monash University, Caulfield campus Rm: S8.04 | ph: (613) 9905 2486 e: steven.gard...@monash.edu *** NB I am now working 1.0 FTE, but I am away from my desk** on alternate Thursday afternoons (pay weeks). *** Two facts about lists: (1) one can never remember the last item on any list; (2) I can't remember what the other one is.
