[Proposal] Coordinator bylaws - 3.iii "objections to coordinator proposals"

-------------

Proposal

-------------

 

As CM of Chicago New Moon Rising, I submit the following proposal.  It does fall under the gun and will be subject to vote after current coordinator props have concluded.  Any coordinator props submitted after this prop will be delayed until this prop concludes, unless forego their ability to autopass.

 

----------

Before

----------

3. Genre Coordinators must pass before Council any plot, R&U bylaw revision, R&U named characters, Coordinator-NPC Character Resurrections, territory requests, in character enforced policy, or in character binding edict they wish to use which they can reasonably expect to affect multiple chronicles and these proposals need not be seconded, but go immediately into discussion.
   1. If no opposition is voiced during the week of discussion, the proposal is considered passed and enforceable. Once passed these are considered binding to all chronicles and a chronicles refusal to adhere is grounds for OWBN disciplinary measures. Opposition must be in regards to the content of the proposal and must give those reasons why the objection is voiced. This is to allow Coordinator's the opportunity to respond and/or make changes/remove the proposal and its contents.
      1. exception to above - Player Character (PC) specific information, such as but not limited to PC's holding regional positions or PC's important enough to have been included in genre documents (i.e. tribal packets, clan packets, status packets etc.) may be updated by notification to council, should the PC specific information change during the duration that the document is current. Adding or removing player characters and their respective information from genre documents is expressly NOT covered by this clause, and should be handled through the normal council approval processes.

----------

After

----------

3. Genre Coordinators must pass before Council any plot, R&U bylaw revision, R&U named characters, Coordinator-NPC Character Resurrections, territory requests, in character enforced policy, or in character binding edict they wish to use which they can reasonably expect to affect multiple chronicles and these proposals need not be seconded, but go immediately into discussion.
   1. If no opposition is voiced during the week of discussion, the proposal is considered passed and enforceable. Once passed these are considered binding to all chronicles and a chronicles refusal to adhere is grounds for OWBN disciplinary measures.
                a. objection to a proposal
      1.  A Council member, the HC, or an AHC may object to the proposal at any time of the Autopass Discussion window. This objection removes the proposal's ability to autopass and must instead proceed to Vote.
         1. To object to a proposal, post with "[OBJECTION][PROPOSAL] Proposal name" in the subject line of the message, where "proposal name" is the title of the draft proposal, while also removing the "[AUTOPASS]" from the subject line. 
         2. In the body of the message, include the statement "I [name] of [Chronicle Name] object to this proposal" followed by the reasoning behind the objection.
         3. Opposition must be in regard to the content of the proposal.
            1. This opposition must have some degree of detail to it, e.g. in the case of Grandfathering, a further reason must be given beyond the status of a Grandfathering / no Grandfathering Clause in the prop itself.
            2. Exec is considered to be the final arbiter on what is or is not a detailed enough reason to object to a prop.
   2. exception to above - Player Character (PC) specific information, such as but not limited to PC's holding regional positions or PC's important enough to have been included in genre documents (i.e. tribal packets, clan packets, status packets etc.) may be updated by notification to council, should the PC specific information change during the duration that the document is current. Adding or removing player characters and their respective information from genre documents is expressly NOT covered by this clause, and should be handled through the normal council approval processes

----------

Justification

----------

First, I do apologize to our coordinator team, I know many of them have props to release in the next few weeks and this change effects their ability to do so.  However knowing that they plan to do so, I wanted a better system for objecting to those props.  As a game that is generally against "no grandfathering"  I personally still attempt to keep a reason directed at the content of the coordinator proposal.  Our bylaws require that an objection be relevant to the prop itself.  Grandfathering, while relevant to the prop, has very little to do with the material submitted.  This change will require chronicles to express a concern with the material, and not just whether or not that material can be grandfathered or not.  Which I feel is instrumental in future props because many times games are satisfied with the material but are against a prop simply because of its grandfathering status.  Objections are however meant to be about the material and change to our genres.  Not whether or not that material can be grandfathered.