Raro and Ruffhaus again bring up a point that is being somewhat swept under the rug up to this point.
Considering that pause/extend requests require unanimous/two-thirds (respectively) votes to be successful, we can logically deduce that it is *not* required of players to grant these requests. If it *was* required, then there wouldn't be a need for a vote, instead, it could simply be a button where any one person could pause/extend at need.
However, it is clear that the current policy is ignoring this fact. Forced extends and pauses by their very nature ignore the fact that people do not *have* to grant pauses/extends. Now, in certain situations, that's fine and well. But it has happened in the past, and will presumably happen again in the future, that the Mods are granting pauses/extends for things that would *not* have gotten player approval in the game. Whether it's band camp, or a "busy week", or any other request of a similar nature, forcing a pause/extend for the person who PMed the Mods because the players didn't grant their request is making a mockery of the fact that we even have the voting system. Even worse, are the pauses/extends granted when there isn't even an in-game post about it!
Moving forward, I like where Raro is headed. Standardizing the requirements for getting a forced pause/extend would at least be a step in the right direction. I think we can all fairly easily agree that someone who requests a pause/extend with 3 hours left in a 24 hour/phase game and then complains when it isn't granted is being a bit ridiculous? To me, unless a pause/extend was requested in-game AT LEAST one (I prefer more) full phase ahead of the time needed, the Mods should just ignore the request barring a legitimate emergency (I *get* that you can't differentiate between "legitimate" and people just making things up, but again, you're casting judgment on us that people *will* lie about this before even trying it. Maybe give us a shot eh?).
Even if the request *was* given with sufficient time for it to pass, it still doesn't mean that it has to be granted. I further propose that before granting any requests, the Mods should see if the person is attempting to find a sitter via the forum or PMs. If they aren't, why should they get the pause? They aren't exhausting their options.
At this point, assuming the request was made with enough time for it to pass, AND they've made every effort to find a sitter, only then should the case be taken up. At this point, Raro's idea of a "emergency extend" (one phase length) while the Mods investigate the request is a pretty good one. It preserves that phase, preventing a NMR, while also letting the Mods see why the request didn't pass. Perhaps it's for a silly reason, and the people in the game didn't think it deserved a pause/extend? In that case, should the Mods over-rule the players? If you say yes, then, again, what's the point of the voting if it can just be easily over-ruled?
Basically, my main beef with this practice is that it basically makes a mockery of the voting system (when the forced pauses/extends are implemented) and tells the players that their votes basically do not matter since any one player can get them over-ruled. In addition, it encourages an atmosphere of "me first" where players can get pauses thinking only of their own situation (busy week? Get a pause! No worries about the others who might be playing through their own busy week out of respect for the other people) instead of encouraging an atmosphere where people do everything they can to keep playing out of respect for the others' time, and only when it's absolutely unavoidable do they make these requests.