Originally Posted by JJT_Defender

How much time does a TG member have to change their incorrect score before being submission being removed voted no rejected?

The answer to your question has already been written:
"The score will be rejected if the player does not make the necessary correction before the adjudication process concludes. If the correction is not made in time, the submission will be rightfully denied, and the player will need to resubmit".
In case of an incorrect score you must vote NO. When there are enough NO votes the submission will be rejected, according to the normal adjudication process.
If the player decides to make the correction in time then you will receive a notification and your vote will be automatically canceled, in order to avoid surprises that can compromise your credibility. The submission will then be subjected to a new adjudication process, in which case you will vote YES.

Barthax, datagod, Excelliron liked this post

I like the idea but suggest the cost to correct a typo be 2 SP otherwise, assuming the submitter votes on their own score, the cost to fix is more than the cost to ask for rejection and then to resubmit.

Excelliron liked this post

What about resetting the voting process , when the rules change……. Or not allow rules changes at all…

Originally Posted by JJT_Defender

How much time does a TG member have to change their incorrect score before being submission being removed voted no rejected?

They will be able to change it as long as it hasnt been fully adjudicated yet. If the score gets adjudicated before they can change it, that adjudication stands, and the user will need to simply resubmit.

Originally Posted by timmell

What about resetting the voting process , when the rules change……. Or not allow rules changes at all…

Decisions regarding rule changes involve numerous variables, making it impractical to have a fixed policy beyond the general principle of avoiding such changes whenever reasonably possible.

Completely prohibiting rule changes is an overly rigid type of approach, and that kind of approach to things has historically caused more harm than good to Twin Galaxies. Therefore, the most effective policy is to evaluate each situation on a case-by-case basis.

The term "rule change" can encompass anything from minor adjustments, such as correcting text formatting, to significant overhauls like a complete rewrite. To implement what you may be suggesting, we would need to avoid a broad, all-encompassing definition of "rule change." Doing so would inevitably lead to debates about what does and does not qualify as a rule change—bringing us back to the necessity of a case-by-case approach as the most practical and balanced solution

Excelliron liked this post

Originally Posted by Barthax

On the face of it, this is an understandable and welcome change to the confusion (from my perspective) that happened with the MultiVerse scenario.

I would suggest, for the hindsight recording of entire threads: when such a change is made, automate a new comment into the thread to signify when the change occurs. This will mean that people can view the thread and understand at what point in the discussion the change occurred.

Prediction: people will still vote in a thread based on the initial comments and not read through. Can't teach everyone, meh. :P

Originally Posted by Barthax

On the face of it, this is an understandable and welcome change to the confusion (from my perspective) that happened with the MultiVerse scenario.

I would suggest, for the hindsight recording of entire threads: when such a change is made, automate a new comment into the thread to signify when the change occurs. This will mean that people can view the thread and understand at what point in the discussion the change occurred.

Prediction: people will still vote in a thread based on the initial comments and not read through. Can't teach everyone, meh. :P

hello