The official proposal has been selected from the eligible pool of proposals from the results post. Thanks to everybody that contributed to these proposals. The following proposal has been selected based on the selection rules. All players now have the next 24 hours to voice their vote in favor or against the proposal.
@lextenebris proposes:
An Addition to Totem Behavior:
Every round, the Totem will post all rule-compliant proposals for voting.
The official proposal of the LAND
All players can vote by either responding to this post with a {YES} or a {NO} somewhere in their comment. Players may change their votes until the end of the 24 hour period, but can only vote once. If there is more voting power in favor of the rule than against, it will pass!
Player Resources:
Delegation Tools
Totem Forest Discord Link
Totem Tools Github
{No}
I agree with @eonwarped. This rule will get far, far too chaotic the way it is.
Posted using Partiko iOS
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
{NO}
Given the rule that we can only vote once per voting round, I see this rule as being too chaotic for my liking. If we can vote once per proposal like on normal ballots this would get my approval.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
{YES}
Here's the problem with the current voting architecture:
There's barely any reason for a vote. It's not a case of selecting among a multitude of choices and then casting a vote for the one you want, it's a simple binary yes or no. This effectively means that there is no real reason for people to make proposals of any interest unless they are guaranteed to be the only one making a proposal or the next one up.
The threat of losing half of their LAND was clearly not sufficient and doesn't provide an interesting enough set of choices.
That's a problem.
Of course, in the absence of all proposals being voted on, thus making voting an interesting process in and of itself, with the continuing possibility of losing half of your LAND any round you forget to propose, we will continue getting fairly un-interesting proposals, which I think is a problem. I could be wrong.
Vote as your conscience guides you.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
So I understand this as you would want to count YES votes on different proposals as against as well, which is not how I interpreted the rules. If this were the case, I could also get behind the proposal.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If @eonwarped is right, then that needs to be in the proposal. I have no problem with the idea of it; I just think your proposal needs more information.
We have one vote yay or nay. With your proposal, I assume that there would be no nay votes -- people would be able to vote on only one proposal and it would be a yay vote. I would like to see that specifically in the proposal itself.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
That – doesn't even sound like English.
So, no.
A vote is a vote, regardless. It counts as the square of your voting power applied in favor or against a specific proposal. Despite the fact that it hasn't been formally defined, we have all been functioning under the assumption and the precedent that since only one rule can be accepted per turn, in the event of multiple competing proposals, only one of them could be accepted and it is most sensible for that to be the one with the most positive voting power.
In the case of a time, purely mechanically the results are currently undefined which would leave it to the discretion of the Totem, but we have several precedents already set within the mechanics for that decision to be made and if it's considered significant enough to worry about, someone could definitely make the proposal of setting it very specifically. And, having opened the scope for number of proposals at once to be competing, they might actually have the chance for people to actually see and decide on that ruling.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Just to clarify what I was saying. If there are two proposals A,B with 2 voting yes on A and 1 voting yes on B, under my interpretation both A and B would pass (the ambiguity raised was clarified in discord as overruling the one change meta rule).
In the event where you count the A votes as "against B", then it is consistent and only A would pass.
Posted using Partiko Android
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
If there are any arbitrary number of proposals, it doesn't matter. Mechanically, it's defined that every round only one proposal will be promoted to a rule. By precedent, because voting is really just the allocation of voting power, the square of your ante, the proposal with the highest voting power should be the one selected by the Totem to become the rule.
There is absolutely no need to count of vote for one proposal as a vote against another proposal because we are using a derived voting power statistic to make the decision in the first place. Only one rule can be established.
By precedent, we already have a means of disambiguation.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit