IBC

So I've heard some talk of unease about the 5-1 currently required, so I have a proposal to make. When dealing with matters where rules have already been established (ie overturning a rule), we go with 5-1 required to overturn. When dealing with an area where there are currently no rules, or a decision such as bringing in a GM (the details of exactly what topics would be what should probably be debated), we would use the 4-2 majority vote. I propose this, because in areas which we don't have rules set for, I think it is more important to get some rulings out there and this will likely prevent some of the delays we have seen so far when trying to reach a 5-1 decision for either accepting or rejecting a proposal.

agree

I think that's fairly reasonable

RedSox wrote:I think that's fairly reasonable

Same here.

Dodgers wrote:So I've heard some talk of unease about the 5-1 currently required, so I have a proposal to make. When dealing with matters where rules have already been established (ie overturning a rule), we go with 5-1 required to overturn. When dealing with an area where there are currently no rules, or a decision such as bringing in a GM (the details of exactly what topics would be what should probably be debated), we would use the 4-2 majority vote. I propose this, because in areas which we don't have rules set for, I think it is more important to get some rulings out there and this will likely prevent some of the delays we have seen so far when trying to reach a 5-1 decision for either accepting or rejecting a proposal.

Good idea ...

Ok that's five of us.

Yeah, no poll is really necessary here.

I think we need to make it clear going into a discussion which type it is though.

RedSox wrote:I think we need to make it clear going into a discussion which type it is though.

Agreed ...

Agreed, I meant to post that.