Register    Login    Forum    Search    Chat [0]    FAQ

Board index » Emerald Hills General Forums » Announcements » Old Althing Results




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 11:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 9:14 pm
Posts: 84
I will now be reviewing submissions for the March Althing. Please PM me with your submissions.
Submissions must be in by no later than March 1st.


Thanks,
King Solithan


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 9:14 pm
Posts: 84
Vote will be held Easter weekend, discussion to be held at Midreign.

#1)
Change "earn a maximum of 1¼ credits" to "earn a maximum of 2 credits"
Change "Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 1 (one) full credit for one day and ¼ (one-quarter) credit for the other day" to "Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 2 (two) full credits"


#2)
Make Champion a voted on position.
Page 7 strike #3 under Champion
3. “Winner of the Champions Tourney shall be Champion for the reign”




#3)
Make GMR an open voted on position.
Page 8 strike #3 under guildmaster of reeves
3. “Only members of the Reeves guild may vote for or run for GMR”



#4) - from previous althing -

Change #12 in the bylaws to #13 and add this:
12. The Circle of Knights may propose the suspension or removal of a knighthood for cases of serious misconduct such as assault, battery, theft, crimes involving minors, disciplinary problems, or behavior problems within an Amtgard group. Should the behavior or conduct of an EH Knight come into question, any 3 active Knights that meet the criteria listed below may petition the GMoK to have that Knight's belt placed on the CoK agenda for the next meeting. A vote to suspend or remove a belt requires a 75% majority of active Knights (including absentee votes) to pass.
a) The three petitioning Knights must be comprised of at least two Orders of Knighthood AND at least two fighting companies or be of unaffiliated status (ie two different fighting companies, or one fighting company and a Knight who is not in a fighting company)
b) A Knight may not be brought up for a vote more than once in any 6 month period. After a vote, the Knight in question may not have another vote called upon his/her belt in the following 6 months unless a seperate incident occurs during that time, and with the approval of the GMoK.
c) Suspension will be taken as a disciplinary action before Expulsion
d) Suspension of the status, privileges, and rights of Knighthood shall be handled entirely within the CoK and shall not be for a period to exceed 6 months duration. Any restitution or penalty the CoK feels necessary will be decided at the time of the vote of Suspension. The assignment of penalties concurrent with a suspension are the sole purview of the CoK.
e) If a vote proposing Expulsion from the CoK passes, the name of the impugned Knight shall be submitted to the Monarch and Prime Minister for review. If the Monarch and Prime Minister agree that the criteria for removal have been met, the Expulsion goes into effect.
f) Anyone wishing to challenge a suspension or expulsion should file a petition with the Monarch, PM, and GMoK. Said petition must be signed by at least 20% of the populace, and pass a 2/3 majority vote of an Allthing to reverse the suspension or expulsion.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:56 pm
Posts: 1921
Solithan wrote:
Vote will be held Easter weekend, discussion to be held at Midreign.

#1)
Change "earn a maximum of 1¼ credits" to "earn a maximum of 2 credits"
Change "Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 1 (one) full credit for one day and ¼ (one-quarter) credit for the other day" to "Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 2 (two) full credits"

Meh, I am not a big fan of this idea.

Quote:
#2)
Make Champion a voted on position.
Page 7 strike #3 under Champion
3. “Winner of the Champions Tourney shall be Champion for the reign”

Why? Why would you take the fighting position, the person whose job is to protect the Monarchy, and make it by vote instead of by combat prowess? I don't see the reasoning here.


Quote:
#3)
Make GMR an open voted on position.
Page 8 strike #3 under guildmaster of reeves
3. “Only members of the Reeves guild may vote for or run for GMR”

Again, I don't get it. If you want to vote for the GMR position, then pass the reeves test. The person responsible for overseeing all of the rules should be elected by the people who take the time to show that they know the rules.

_________________
Forest Evergreen

Puppet Master of the EH

"Of course you are Forest. You're like the Mr. Burns of EH." - Finn

(insert titles and awards here)


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:21 pm
Posts: 214
Yeah, was there any reasoning submitted with the first item?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 5:35 pm
Posts: 626
wording of the ROP implies it, and makes life easier for the EHPMR

_________________
"Passion overrules Reason" wizard's rule #3 of the Terry Goodkind series "Sword of truth"


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:23 pm
Posts: 854
#1)
Change "earn a maximum of 1¼ credits" to "earn a maximum of 2 credits"
Change "Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 1 (one) full credit for one day and ¼ (one-quarter) credit for the other day" to "Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 2 (two) full credits"

So what about the .25 Fighter Practice credit? Wouldn't that need to be included so that in a Amtgard week members are earning up to 2.25 credits under this new proposal?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 6:35 pm
Posts: 1199
TigerHawke wrote:
#1)
Change "earn a maximum of 1¼ credits" to "earn a maximum of 2 credits"
Change "Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 1 (one) full credit for one day and ¼ (one-quarter) credit for the other day" to "Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 2 (two) full credits"

So what about the .25 Fighter Practice credit? Wouldn't that need to be included so that in a Amtgard week members are earning up to 2.25 credits under this new proposal?

This is the full text of the section affected:
"A. In the Emerald Hills, we have the privilege of being able to play Amtgard on both Saturday and Sunday. Our credit system is set up for a person to be able to (normally) earn a maximum of 1¼ credits in their chosen class per weekend. Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 1 (one) full credit for one day and ¼ (one-quarter) credit for the other day. Full credit award breakdowns are listed in the following table:"

And the section on fighter practice:
"¼ - Warrior - Fighting Practice — used to fine-tune weapon skills. (Normally held during the week)"

So, two points: First, Fighter practices are held during the week, and the credit limit is for Saturday and Sunday, so there is not (normally) an overlap; Second, you cannot choose a class credit aside from warrior at a fighter practice, so it is not covered by the limit "on their chosen class," since there is no choice.

_________________
Brennon wrote:
The V8 mindset is not about "what is the minimum I can get away with doing" but rather "how can we all use these rules fairly so the game runs smoothly and we all have a good time."


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 4:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 6:35 pm
Posts: 1199
Aylin_Karyn wrote:
Yeah, was there any reasoning submitted with the first item?


It has been discussed for several years in different contexts. But the 3 main reasons I see for making this change are:
1) The Rulebook states that the limit is 1/day. "Only one attendance credit may be given on a single day." This is from the Classes and Levels page under the Battlegames section. So it is reasonable to say that an "attendance credit" is signing in on a day when Battlegames are played, as opposed to "event credits" or "fighter practice credits." Technically this section supercedes our corpora now, but it just isn't that big an issue to enough people. We already have a precedent based of this reason alone, when we changed our dues to line up with the Rulebook said dues were, even though our dues were LOWER.

2) Ease of bookkeeping: First off, the ORK does not count anything less than 1 credit as an "attendance." This causes issues with voting eligibility lists with low attendance people not making the cut due to a Sunday attendance. There is a workaround, but essentially it is only useful if a player points out that they have enough attendances, and the PM can go back and look. ALSO a park attendance report does not show up attendees that got less than 1 credit. This is useful for weeding out fighter practices from a time period, but also it leads to parks not having the numbers they should. (Although this is less of an issue now that we calculate size by active residents per month) This has also caused players to refuse to sign in at a Saturday park to get full credit at their Sunday home park. From the PM side it is super easy to make a mistake and enter someone for a full credit instead of a 1/4 credit, and they just end up getting 2 credits anyway because it is hard to check for that, especially with how visitor credits are entered monthly by the Kingdom PM. So just get rid of all of those problems and go to: if they show up on a regular park day they get 1 credit. 1 credit = 1 attendance on attendance reports. Simple.

3) Encourage traveling. I feel that people are less likely to make the effort to travel to another park if they won't get full credit for attending. When I was just starting out I did everything I could to maximize my credits, because being 6th level was my first goal. It isn't a big deal to me now, but in the beginning it was. And we should want to encourage newbies to travel.

Also, as a historical note this wasn't originally a restriction, it was a bonus. Because the rulebook referred to "weeks" of experience rather than credits. We should have been getting 1 credit per week, period. But the EH gave a bonus for showing up on the second day, to encourage travel. Since the 7th ed. Rulebook unambiguously states credits are 1/day, instead of 1/week; It became a restriction relative to kingdoms that don't have a credit rule at all, and it is one I don't see the need for.

_________________
Brennon wrote:
The V8 mindset is not about "what is the minimum I can get away with doing" but rather "how can we all use these rules fairly so the game runs smoothly and we all have a good time."


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 4:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:05 am
Posts: 497
Location: Tahlequah, Oklahoma
Just a quick thought....were is the stuff the CoK was supposed to have prepared for the January Althing and why is it not included on this one?

_________________
Duke, Squire Docsi HardAnvil
aka the Mad Dwarf
GMR of Dreadmoor
Squire to Sir Logan T. Black
Clan Chieftain of the Turtle Clan
Ship's Surgeon, HMS "Turtle's Revenge"
Gaslight Sky Pirate

"Dwarves and mountains have one thing in common: It takes an almighty hammer and a tremendous amount of persistence to overcome them."


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 4:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 6:35 pm
Posts: 1199
Technically it is not too late yet. The Althing agenda can be amended until 2 weeks before the Althing. Since the Althing is on the 30th, the agenda can be amended until the end of next week.

_________________
Brennon wrote:
The V8 mindset is not about "what is the minimum I can get away with doing" but rather "how can we all use these rules fairly so the game runs smoothly and we all have a good time."


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:23 pm
Posts: 854
"From the PM side it is super easy to make a mistake and enter someone for a full credit instead of a 1/4 credit, and they just end up getting 2 credits anyway because it is hard to check for that, especially with how visitor credits are entered monthly by the Kingdom PM."

I can see if the EHPM did not print off the monthly visitor creds, put the Sat and Sun dates down for each previous month that those visitor creds were for...then go and check against the credits entered by a park PM for those dates. However I DID do it that way because it was important enough to do the job right;) I also passed this method on to Dailyn.

Yes it would be easier to get one cred per day...less time would be spent by the EHPM having to double check creds. With fighter practice it still could become up to 2.25 creds per week ..and that should be in our corpora IF this passes the Althing vote was my point.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 2:25 pm
Posts: 60
Forest Evergreen wrote:
Quote:
#2)
Make Champion a voted on position.
Page 7 strike #3 under Champion
3. “Winner of the Champions Tourney shall be Champion for the reign”

Why? Why would you take the fighting position, the person whose job is to protect the Monarchy, and make it by vote instead of by combat prowess? I don't see the reasoning here.


I think it's a good idea because of 3 things on our corpora pg7 F.Champion #5
"c: Organizing battlegames on days when no pre-determined scenarios are scheduled
d: Running the Weaponmaster Tournament
e: Running the Relic Quests at Midreign and Coronation"

The person who is going to come up with good battle games may not be able to win in a tournament for the spot (perhaps there skill lies in group tactics or magic, or they've gotten to a point in their life when they can't fight anymore). The flip side of that is true as well, just cause you can win one on one doesn't mean that you'll be any good at running things.

Forest Evergreen wrote:
Quote:
#3)
Make GMR an open voted on position.
Page 8 strike #3 under guildmaster of reeves
3. “Only members of the Reeves guild may vote for or run for GMR”

Again, I don't get it. If you want to vote for the GMR position, then pass the reeves test. The person responsible for overseeing all of the rules should be elected by the people who take the time to show that they know the rules.


personally, i know that i don't know the rulebook well enough nor track movement fast enough to be a reeve, but i sure the heck know who i would go ask if i have a question on the rules, or needed clarification of how the rulebook applies to the scenario at hand. I'm ok with the GMR having to be reeves qualified and have experience reeving on the battlefield. Also, i know that in the past there have been problems with figuring out who can and can't vote because people thought they were qualified and then weren't because the version of the test changed, or they couldn't take the test until the last minute for various reasons. so it makes it a lot easier on the PM.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:38 pm
Posts: 504
I'm against making Champion an elected position because doing the position well can count towards a sword belt. There should be a fighting component to that.

I'm in favor of giving a credit to anybody who attends Amtgard on any day at any established park. Want to play both days? Awesome, go do it. Hell, I would be in favor of giving more than two credits to somebody who hit a Saturday and a Sunday park.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:47 pm
Posts: 990
Solithan wrote:
Vote will be held Easter weekend, discussion to be held at Midreign.

#1)
Change "earn a maximum of 1¼ credits" to "earn a maximum of 2 credits"
Change "Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 1 (one) full credit for one day and ¼ (one-quarter) credit for the other day" to "Those who attend Amtgard on both days will receive 2 (two) full credits"[/i]


NO!

Solithan wrote:
#2) Make Champion a voted on position.
Page 7 strike #3 under Champion
3. “Winner of the Champions Tourney shall be Champion for the reign”


NO! As a matter of fact... HELL Frigging NO!

Solithan wrote:
#3)Make GMR an open voted on position.
Page 8 strike #3 under guildmaster of reeves
3. “Only members of the Reeves guild may vote for or run for GMR”


NO!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: March Althing
 Post Posted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 10:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 9:14 pm
Posts: 84
This is to be included as its a continuation of old althing business.
Added to be point #4) to the up comming agenda.

Change #12 in the bylaws to #13 and add this:
12. The Circle of Knights may propose the suspension or removal of a knighthood for cases of serious misconduct such as assault, battery, theft, crimes involving minors, disciplinary problems, or behavior problems within an Amtgard group. Should the behavior or conduct of an EH Knight come into question, any 3 active Knights that meet the criteria listed below may petition the GMoK to have that Knight's belt placed on the CoK agenda for the next meeting. A vote to suspend or remove a belt requires a 75% majority of active Knights (including absentee votes) to pass.
a) The three petitioning Knights must be comprised of at least two Orders of Knighthood AND at least two fighting companies or be of unaffiliated status (ie two different fighting companies, or one fighting company and a Knight who is not in a fighting company)
b) A Knight may not be brought up for a vote more than once in any 6 month period. After a vote, the Knight in question may not have another vote called upon his/her belt in the following 6 months unless a seperate incident occurs during that time, and with the approval of the GMoK.
c) Suspension will be taken as a disciplinary action before Expulsion
d) Suspension of the status, privileges, and rights of Knighthood shall be handled entirely within the CoK and shall not be for a period to exceed 6 months duration. Any restitution or penalty the CoK feels necessary will be decided at the time of the vote of Suspension. The assignment of penalties concurrent with a suspension are the sole purview of the CoK.
e) If a vote proposing Expulsion from the CoK passes, the name of the impugned Knight shall be submitted to the Monarch and Prime Minister for review. If the Monarch and Prime Minister agree that the criteria for removal have been met, the Expulsion goes into effect.
f) Anyone wishing to challenge a suspension or expulsion should file a petition with the Monarch, PM, and GMoK. Said petition must be signed by at least 20% of the populace, and pass a 2/3 majority vote of an Allthing to reverse the suspension or expulsion.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Board index » Emerald Hills General Forums » Announcements » Old Althing Results


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: