The Council of Wyrms

[Cainehill]

Making it 7 nays (5 living) to 5 yeses, meaning 12 is still defeated.

[Ygorl]

If it's 5 to 5, the proposition passes. Assuming that Grundle and B'hemet are in fact deceased (and have been throughout the voting period) we've still got a contest. Otherwise, we'll all just continue munching mortals in private. Kir'Doq of T'ien Ch'i could still kill it with a nay vote, though.

Everyone (including Ironhawk) should bear in mind that it is not a competition of who has eaten the most in history, it is only a contest of who can eat the most during one particular month. As such, everyone can compete on equal grounds.

[Reverend Zombie]

Ygorl said:
I was updating the web page, which included noting that propositions 12 and 13 had been defeated. However, it appears that two dead wyrms (Grundle and B'hemet) voted on proposition 12.

B'hemet was alive! Back from the dead for a turn or two now...

[Huntsman]

Ygorl said:
If it's 5 to 5, the proposition passes. Assuming that Grundle and B'hemet are in fact deceased (and have been throughout the voting period) we've still got a contest. Otherwise, we'll all just continue munching mortals in private. Kir'Doq of T'ien Ch'i could still kill it with a nay vote, though.

Everyone (including Ironhawk) should bear in mind that it is not a competition of who has eaten the most in history, it is only a contest of who can eat the most during one particular month. As such, everyone can compete on equal grounds.

My bad. I thought Prop 10 allowed the representative of a dead wyrm to vote but, in fact, it does not.

Murmur of C'tis

[Cainehill]

Ygorl said:
If it's 5 to 5, the proposition passes. Assuming that Grundle and B'hemet are in fact deceased (and have been throughout the voting period) we've still got a contest. Otherwise, we'll all just continue munching mortals in private. Kir'Doq of T'ien Ch'i could still kill it with a nay vote, though.

5 to 5 shouldn't pass - it doesn't have the slightest illusion of a majority. Imagine you and I are playing a game of chess, and I say, "Hey! I propose that knights should be able to move like rooks!"

You say "Hell no!", I say, "Yes!" - same proportion of voting as 5 to 5.

That's why most representative democracies have someone who can break a tie, voting only in the case of a tie, because otherwise, a tie would, and should, fail.

[Ygorl]

The current charter dictates that a tie vote passes. The intention was to allow controversial proposals to pass, so that more things happen. Given that virtually none of the proposals have passed so far, this seems like a reasonable bit of foresight on the part of the constitutional committee. The example you gave only applies, I think, when the voters are divided into two opposing camps - in that case, you're guaranteed to have anarchy. In our case, however, it's every wyrm for himself, and it seems to me there shouldn't be a problem. Maybe my intuition is wrong though...

...and you could always propose an amendment to change things.

[Reverend Zombie]

Cainehill said:

5 to 5 shouldn't pass - it doesn't have the slightest illusion of a majority. Imagine you and I are playing a game of chess, and I say, "Hey! I propose that knights should be able to move like rooks!"

You say "Hell no!", I say, "Yes!" - same proportion of voting as 5 to 5.

Seems to call for some sort of quorum requirement.

[Zooko]

QUORUM REQUIREMENT? What do you think Proposition 13 was about? BWARGH!
--Sak

[puffyn]

Mistakes were made, and I would like to apologize to all my fellow wyrms for not noticing before now that it was impossible to upload images to the wiki. That was never my intent, and I have now fixed it. Apep has assured me that those responsible were summarily eaten (but very wyrmanely), and that it won't happen again, but if it does, he'll eat them, too.

-puffyn

[The Panther]

Turn 18 has been sent. Next deadline is Thursday at 8 PM MST. News:
1. Ermor has staled.
2. Tvitno, the Caelum Death Elder, has won the Death Match.
3. No wyrms in the HOF died.