Redux of Character Regulation Bylaw, Section 5, Part A
Status messageDisplaying output for plurality voting
Tampa: Under Night's Cloak proposes the following change to the Character Regulation Bylaws.
From what we have seen in our time in OWbN, we feel that this regulation is no longer enforced, or considered, by the majority of games and that removing bylaws that the org no longer follows is the correct action.
Section 5 - Home Chronicle
1. Every OWBN player character (PC) must have one, and only one, home chronicle.
1. A PCâ€™s home chronicle must be an OWBN chronicle in good standing.
2. The player must physically attend games in that specific chronicle.
Section 5 - Home Chronicle
1. Each OWbN player-character (PC) must be based out of a single OWbN Chronicle in good standing.
|Petrolina, BR: Secas by Night||Against|
|Los Angeles, CA - USA, La Sangre De Los Angeles||Abstain|
|Rio Grande, RS - Brazil, Sobre a Areia Sempre Hostil||For|
|Mossoro, RN - Brazil, Mossoro by Night||For|
|La Crosse, WI - USA, The Rivers Edge||For||This bylaw is outdated. The character should be based out of a single chronicle in good standing but I don't see the need to regulate where PC's should be based. Chronicles can choose to house the character or not to house them.|
|Buffalo, NY - USA, Frozen Queen||Against|
|Cape Cod, MA - USA, Rage Across the Cape||For||If someone wants to roll up a forums PC at a foreign game, why not let them?|
|Stockton, CA - USA, Stockton by Night||Against|
|Martinsburg, WV - USA, Martinsburg by night||Against|
|Tampa by Night: Tampa Sabbat||For||Echo LaCrosse. Also, lehighvalley, I think you have the re-write confused with what is existing|
|Florianópolis, SC: Igni et Moriaris||Against|
|João Pessoa, PB - Brazil, Eternal Shadows||Abstain|
|Sacramento, CA - USA, Sacramento By Night||For||The Bylaw isn't enforceable as written... at least the new way is clear.|
|Duluth, MN - USA, Thicker than Blood||Against|
|Fredericksburg, VA - USA, Caine's Chosen: Liberty in Death||Against|
|Orange County, CA: Muerte Libre||Against|
|Indianapolis, IN - USA, Stars Never Rise||For|
|Cedar Falls, IA - USA, Blackhawk Co. by Night||Against||Let's not break accountability in the org past the point of repair. Further, the cries of ''The ST can just not let them into game'' just puts more pressure onto ST's being forced to make unpopular decisions the rules shouldn't allow it in the first place.|
|Jerusalem - Israel, Last Crusade||Abstain|
|Recife, PE - Brazil, Pernambuco by Night: Forever Haunted||For|
|Springfield, IL - USA, Capitol City Cauldron||Against|
|Amador, CA - USA, River of Shadows||Against|
|Kenosha, WI - USA, Memento Mori||For||I'd be open to this. And if someone in my city wanted to base a character across the country, I'd just not let them sign that PC into my game. If they don't trust me to administrate their character, why would they trust me to ST their character?|
|Athens, GA - USA, Athens After Dark||Abstain||We can't cast a vote one way or the other due to our status. However how do we enforce the current rule when we have no why of knowing if someone has attended another game other then that games says so. If their ST team choices to allow it how do I stop it outside of not allowing it to visit my game which I can still do with the change.|
|Northern Virginia, VA - USA, Night Falls||Against|
|Bradenton, FL - USA, Chaos & Entropy||For||If you are against this proposal, you are against America. Not really, but there is no reason we need something that is almost never followed to be in our bylaws.|
|Head Coord||Against||I prefer that people at least have the ability to physically attend a game and that we aren't playing a MUD.|
|Chronicle/Position Unknown||Against||I would be okay with this sans the ''must physically attend games in that specific chronicle.''~;''763|
|Chronicle/Position Unknown||For||Let games run themselves administratively. If they want to allow a PC to be based there from elsewhere that's their perogative.|
|SaoPauloBN||Against||OK with the change, but the rewrite is too vague|