Even simpler: players can submit proposals but a different person has to pend them, after checking for mistakes. Oh, and it has to be an active player.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018, 11:32 Gaelan Steele <g...@canishe.com> wrote: > Proto: create proposals with 1 support. Supporter SHOULD check the > proposal against [list of common mistakes we keep somewhere] > > Gaelan > > > On Nov 1, 2018, at 9:58 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > When I wrote Paydays (I think I drafted that text), I purposefully wanted > > Speaker to be a sinecure with a salary, as a perk for winning. > > > > Aside: I really hate the lack of pending, and just plopping proposals in > > the pool without review (including mine). Watching the proposals in the > > last couple weeks has really just turned me off trying to participate in > > that process. YMMV. > > > > > >> On Thu, 1 Nov 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: > >> Hold up, were you even around when we had shinies? Are you just an > Agoran > >> History nerd? This seems like a mistake only a person who joined before > >> your time cold have committed. > >> > >> On Nov 1, 2018 10:30, "Timon Walshe-Grey" <m...@timon.red> wrote: > >> > >> I submit the following proposal: > >> > >> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > >> Title: With not very much responsibility comes fewer shinies > >> Adoption index: 2.0 > >> Author: twg > >> Co-authors: > >> > >> Amend rule 2559, "Paydays", by changing the text "For each office" to > >> "For each office that has official duties". > >> > >> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > >> > >> > >> -twg > >> > > > >
