git ssb

%I/jxpdJpWwxwdeO2AJ58MHbymR4y5T+zg4zZkHwz7GY=.sha256

{
  "previous": "%blo1odKvh6I81Ek8Oq2P5bPeHGKUip3QuYJpk06cx/M=.sha256",
  "author": "@3PGWnoMIY5ebs6sJjkwc7DKjxrgcrOeIUC2YegkMtIY=.ed25519",
  "sequence": 231,
  "timestamp": 1502636849603,
  "hash": "sha256",
  "content": {
    "type": "post",
    "root": "%5HLiBQHugiAikDyki2Z4qfy/Fb+RE33w+dAfAAwsaPA=.sha256",
    "branch": "%5HLiBQHugiAikDyki2Z4qfy/Fb+RE33w+dAfAAwsaPA=.sha256",
    "channel": "nomic",
    "recps": null,
    "text": "I think there is a small amount of grey area. As rule 301 says explicitly that the rule is defeated after 24 hours of failing to meet the threshold I suppose you could argue that play could continue, although the remaining players would still be required to vote. I think rule 302 makes it explicit that play can continue which is why I support this proposal.\n\nAnother thing to think about is the wording around rejoining the game in the pending rule 302. It feels like explicitly stating that players count towards the quorum add ambiguity as well as making it harder to rejoin the game as the act of rejoining counts as a vote against whatever proposal is being voted upon. \n\nFortunately, I believe, this aspect of your rule conflicts with rule 301's \"a rule-change is adopted if and only if at least 80% of active players vote in favor of it\". Rule 302 only changes the reserve to a player, not an active player and thus the way their vote is cast is irrelevant, only that they will be an active player for the next vote. I apologize that I didn't notice this in your informal proposal and was not able to participate in the formal debate. I believe that if we want to change it so that rejoining players' votes count immediately that could be possible with a simple amendment to 302 so that reserves who vote, rejoin as active players rather than simply players.",
    "mentions": []
  },
  "signature": "LN08BpI8zaG4mEzu0hnZDscTTl95EfSz4mV5FX4I8+7UAvGv9vlpRvnbFCUNNggIWapIFHHEoF06UDUdbuaABA==.sig.ed25519"
}