Subject[dq-announce] Voting procedure
Fromecavit@tranzrail.co.nz
DateThu, 5 Jul 2001 08:07:00 +1200
As the current Chair (facilitator / enabler / whatever) I thought I should
bring up the way the gods voting procedure should / could work from now on.


I suggest that it goes like this:

Items ready for voting should be posted on DQ announce (or a link if posted
on the web) well before the Guild Meeting (well done Rosemary). This would
nearly always be after discussion on DQ discussion

A brief agenda (or an agendum) should be posted shortly (1-2 weeks?) before
the Guild Meeting by the Chair / Secretary, listing the items to be voted
on. If any (hopefully minor) changes have happened, then a revised version
of the item should be posted.

Actual voting takes place pre-Meeting once a decent number of gods have
arrived (reason to prevail as to what 'decent' means, minimum of quorum,
obviously). Results announced at start of Guild meeting (this may be out of
character, but it is best done while the maximum numbers are present),
including whether for immediate implementation, or from following quarter.



I yeild the floor to discussion (damn, I watch too much West Wing)

Errol


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-announce-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

SubjectRe: [dq] Voting procedure
FromAndrewW@datacom.co.nz
DateThu, 5 Jul 2001 08:11:43 +1200
That sounds simple, expect that we usually don't implement rule changes
until the next rule book comes out. This keeps confusion to a minimum, and
changes happen at most once a year.

Putting things into playtest is usually the only exception to this.

Andrew

-----Original Message-----
From: Errol Cavit [mailto:ecavit@tranzrail.co.nz]
Sent: Thursday, 5 July 2001 8:07 a.m.
To: dq-announce@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: [dq-announce] Voting procedure


As the current Chair (facilitator / enabler / whatever) I thought I should
bring up the way the gods voting procedure should / could work from now on.


I suggest that it goes like this:

Items ready for voting should be posted on DQ announce (or a link if posted
on the web) well before the Guild Meeting (well done Rosemary). This would
nearly always be after discussion on DQ discussion

A brief agenda (or an agendum) should be posted shortly (1-2 weeks?) before
the Guild Meeting by the Chair / Secretary, listing the items to be voted
on. If any (hopefully minor) changes have happened, then a revised version
of the item should be posted.

Actual voting takes place pre-Meeting once a decent number of gods have
arrived (reason to prevail as to what 'decent' means, minimum of quorum,
obviously). Results announced at start of Guild meeting (this may be out of
character, but it is best done while the maximum numbers are present),
including whether for immediate implementation, or from following quarter.



I yeild the floor to discussion (damn, I watch too much West Wing)

Errol


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

SubjectRe: [dq] Voting procedure
FromRMansfield@aj.co.nz
DateThu, 5 Jul 2001 08:14:13 +1200
This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--=_alternative 006F78E3CC256A7F_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I agree with Andrew.  Benefits of delaying ALL rules changes to 'when the 
rule book comes out' include 

- Since we changed to this method we've had far fewer complaints about 
people trying to keep track of what is current. 
- everybody has the chance of getting a written copy of the changed rules 
- spoken descriptions aren't adequate when you are trying to remember how 
to do something 5 months later.


Otherwise this looks sane and sensible.
Rosemary





That sounds simple, expect that we usually don't implement rule changes
until the next rule book comes out. This keeps confusion to a minimum, and
changes happen at most once a year.

Putting things into playtest is usually the only exception to this.

Andrew

-----Original Message-----
From: Errol Cavit [mailto:ecavit@tranzrail.co.nz]
Sent: Thursday, 5 July 2001 8:07 a.m.
To: dq-announce@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: [dq-announce] Voting procedure


As the current Chair (facilitator / enabler / whatever) I thought I should
bring up the way the gods voting procedure should / could work from now 
on.


I suggest that it goes like this:

Items ready for voting should be posted on DQ announce (or a link if 
posted
on the web) well before the Guild Meeting (well done Rosemary). This would
nearly always be after discussion on DQ discussion

A brief agenda (or an agendum) should be posted shortly (1-2 weeks?) 
before
the Guild Meeting by the Chair / Secretary, listing the items to be voted
on. If any (hopefully minor) changes have happened, then a revised version
of the item should be posted.

Actual voting takes place pre-Meeting once a decent number of gods have
arrived (reason to prevail as to what 'decent' means, minimum of quorum,
obviously). Results announced at start of Guild meeting (this may be out 
of
character, but it is best done while the maximum numbers are present),
including whether for immediate implementation, or from following quarter.



I yeild the floor to discussion (damn, I watch too much West Wing)

Errol


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --



--=_alternative 006F78E3CC256A7F_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"


<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I agree with Andrew. &nbsp;Benefits of delaying ALL rules changes to 'when the rule book comes out' include </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- Since we changed to this method we've had far fewer complaints about people trying to keep track of what is current. </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- everybody has the chance of getting a written copy of the changed rules - spoken descriptions aren't adequate when you are trying to remember how to do something 5 months later.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Otherwise this looks sane and sensible.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Rosemary</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">That sounds simple, expect that we usually don't implement rule changes<br>
until the next rule book comes out. This keeps confusion to a minimum, and<br>
changes happen at most once a year.<br>
<br>
Putting things into playtest is usually the only exception to this.<br>
<br>
Andrew<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Errol Cavit [mailto:ecavit@tranzrail.co.nz]<br>
Sent: Thursday, 5 July 2001 8:07 a.m.<br>
To: dq-announce@dq.sf.org.nz<br>
Subject: [dq-announce] Voting procedure<br>
<br>
<br>
As the current Chair (facilitator / enabler / whatever) I thought I should<br>
bring up the way the gods voting procedure should / could work from now on.<br>
<br>
<br>
I suggest that it goes like this:<br>
<br>
Items ready for voting should be posted on DQ announce (or a link if posted<br>
on the web) well before the Guild Meeting (well done Rosemary). This would<br>
nearly always be after discussion on DQ discussion<br>
<br>
A brief agenda (or an agendum) should be posted shortly (1-2 weeks?) before<br>
the Guild Meeting by the Chair / Secretary, listing the items to be voted<br>
on. If any (hopefully minor) changes have happened, then a revised version<br>
of the item should be posted.<br>
<br>
Actual voting takes place pre-Meeting once a decent number of gods have<br>
arrived (reason to prevail as to what 'decent' means, minimum of quorum,<br>
obviously). Results announced at start of Guild meeting (this may be out of<br>
character, but it is best done while the maximum numbers are present),<br>
including whether for immediate implementation, or from following quarter.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I yeild the floor to discussion (damn, I watch too much West Wing)<br>
<br>
Errol<br>
<br>
<br>
-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --<br>
</font>
<br>
<br>
--=_alternative 006F78E3CC256A7F_=--


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

SubjectRe: [dq] Voting procedure
Fromadara@ihug.co.nz
DateThu, 5 Jul 2001 18:36:17 +1200
>That sounds simple, expect that we usually don't implement rule changes
>until the next rule book comes out. This keeps confusion to a minimum, and
>changes happen at most once a year.
>
>Putting things into playtest is usually the only exception to this.
>
>Andrew

Oops. Yes, I agree, rule changes should, as a rule, be approximately annual,
in line with the rulebook.

Cheers
Errol


-----Original Message-----
From: RMansfield@aj.co.nz <RMansfield@aj.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>
Date: Thursday, 5 July 2001 08:19
Subject: Re: [dq] Voting procedure


>I agree with Andrew.  Benefits of delaying ALL rules changes to 'when the
>rule book comes out' include
>
>


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --