>>27949611>>27949601Sakuran rep here, have only been skimming through the past threads (ie ctrl+f"saku"), wtf happened?
Also, following the original proposal that I think I may have made and was voted upon sometime in February, the reps are supposed to vote in matters forwarded to "The Council"™© representing their thread's opinion. This was established as some threads, namely /infinity/, /meat/, /nasfaqg/ iirc had more than one (2-3) posters in the thread that could potentially swing votes, and later the proper voting system was established after a few raids showcased that off-site poals were unreliable.
In short, reps hold voting power on matters that are to be voted on. Regarding lore, it is true that so far it had to go through them. Most of the time, bringing up /nasa/ and /infinity/ as examples, they'd discuss it in their respective threads and then the rep would make the official announcement to this general to be archived. It is also true that, generally, the word of the rep had more weight and they'd been able to reject lore proposals. To threads like mine, who barely have representation in here (adding onto the fact I have a carte blanche from my thread regarding this general) it hasn't been much of a problem, but if other threads are having arguments about it, maybe it should be clarified that reps only have voting/announcement power, but are equal to other anons (of their thread) regarding their thread's lore.
If two anons of a thread are arguing regarding lore, and are from a thread that discourages discussion of /vtwbg/ matters in there (like mine), meaning they are the only two posters of their thread interested in this project, instead of the rep having the final say, we can let this general decide by looking at the various pros and cons of each proposal, perhaps by putting forth a vote. Not sure howuch the voting system has been utilized in my absence, but it is in place for situations such as these, as well.
