Nomic [Resurrected]

[+Doomstick he/him]

I still think that rule 303 is two amendments 

and I think that rules come into effect at the end of the turn

Edited July 18, 2020 by The Last Post

[theTruthshaper]

1 minute ago, The Last Post said:

I still think that rule 303 is two amendments 

I understand what you are getting at. Xino, you should remove the non-negative points part. It doesn't serve any purpose currently and when we create the debt system, we can add it there.

3 minutes ago, The Last Post said:

and I think that rules come into effect at the end of the turn

Quote

205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it.

 

[+Doomstick he/him]

Ok

[MetaTerminal he/him]

I still think all the additions are natural outgrowths of the original rule, and it serves no purpose excluding them.

Quote

Players shall alternate in clockwise order, taking one whole turn apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, and parts of turns may not be omitted.

All players begin with zero points.

In mail and computer games, players shall alternate in numerical order by member number.

Emphases mine. The amendments specifically deal with those two parts, both part of the same original rule. They are all amendments to a single rule.

Quote

A rule-change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule

Of a mutable rule, singular.

If we insist, then I have no problems with it; but it's well within what the rules allow and I would not have any issue supporting it. If I was Judge, I would say it were a single rule. There's no difference, functionally, of starting the vote over again without the zero thing, except to delay the game further, and it will be added back in (to this rule, probably) later.

[dannnex male]

1 hour ago, MetaTerminal said:

Think Truth is correct. Votes for 303 and 304 opened after the vote for 302 closed.

But theoretically they shouldn’t have. We messed up. We were supposed to do all 3 votes at the same time. Otherwise that’s not doing 3 proposals in one turn, that’s having two turns in a row, where you proposed one rule, and then 2 others. 

[MetaTerminal he/him]

39 minutes ago, Danex said:

But theoretically they shouldn’t have. We messed up. We were supposed to do all 3 votes at the same time. Otherwise that’s not doing 3 proposals in one turn, that’s having two turns in a row, where you proposed one rule, and then 2 others. 

Quote

111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote.

No rule says all proposals must be simultaneous. Indeed, this rule actually implies otherwise. And it still encompasses one turn, since in one turn you can propose up to three rules - not ’you have to propose up to three rules all at the same time’, but presumably ‘over the course of your turn’.

[Gears]

I vote for 303 and for 304. I also think that we should vote for each proposed rule sequentially, so 302 then 303 then 304.

[theTruthshaper]

@The Last Post didn't vote, right? Do we need all the votes or can we stop when there is a majority?

I would say that we go on to the next turn, simply because the turns are very slow currently and TLP can't change the outcome of the vote anymore. This should be a one off for now because I want this game to take off

Edited July 18, 2020 by The_Truthwatcher

[+Doomstick he/him]

I vote for all proposed changes

[xinoehp512 he/him]

That seems to be everyone!

I vote for 303, which passes with 6/6 votes. I also vote for 304, which passes with 5/6 votes.

That brings my total points to 32, and means it is now @MetaTerminal's turn.

[MetaTerminal he/him]

My turn! 

Rule 305. Players may propose 'contracts' composed of two parts, a condition and a reward (in a number of points). The number of points in the reward must be able to be represented by no more than five of the characters '0123456789.E' (where E represents *10^ in mathematical notation.) If a player satisfies the condition, the number of points in the reward will be transferred from the contract maker to the contract fulfiller. Players may not lose points that they do not have; however, if the full amount of a contract cannot be paid, debt will instead be incurred. Points awarded to a player in debt to a second player will instead be awarded to that second player until the full amount of the debt is repaid. If a player incurs multiple debts, they will be repaid in the order that they were incurred.

Rule 306. That rule 206 be repealed.

Rules 305 and 306 are open to vote. I vote for rule 305 and for rule 306.

The following rule isn’t open to voting yet, I’d like to have some discussion about it in accordance with 111.

Rule 307. That there be a board, consisting of an 4x4 grid of alternating black and white squares, like a quarter of a chessboard. This is the ‘gameboard’. Every player has a grey token on the board (‘their’ token) which they may move on their or someone else’s turn by one orthogonal square (ie they may move one square vertically, or horizontally, but not diagonally.) Every player’s token starts at the top-leftmost square.

Is this a good idea? We can start tying winstates or achievements to arriving on certain squares, travel restrictions, tolls, ownership of squares, recolouring squares. If it’s too hard to keep track of I’d like to implement an alternate game mechanic to get started.

Or we could change point scoring, but I didn’t have any good ideas about that, so other people will have to suggest those.

Edited July 19, 2020 by MetaTerminal

[Gears]

The game board seems difficult to track as we cannot lay eyes on a physical board. If we were playing in person, I would be perfectly amenable to this rule. However, given the difficulties involved, I think not.

I vote for Rules 305 and 306

[+Doomstick he/him]

For and For

i do not like the game board idea

[dannnex male]

Also For and For

I feel like people would forget about it really really quickly, but we do need game mechanics soon. 

[MetaTerminal he/him]

Well, that’s enough to pass both motions, but @The_Truthwatcher and @xinoehp512 still both need to vote because of how the rules work.

I’ll have a think about what mechanics we might want to start including, but I’m very free to take suggestions. Alternatively I could spend the slot fixing something we wanted changed. Maybe how points are collected?

Edited July 19, 2020 by MetaTerminal

[theTruthshaper]

Hmm, I am still against 306 (removing 206), but it really doesn't matter now. (I don't suppose Chesterton's fence means anything to you all?)

I am for 305.

Also, I have 10 points currently, since 204 was repealed after my vote.

 

Also, if you want gameplay, we could make it possible to challenge others to various online games, in exchange for points.

 

 

Edited July 19, 2020 by The_Truthwatcher

[+Doomstick he/him]

33 minutes ago, MetaTerminal said:

Well, that’s enough to pass both motions, but @The_Truthwatcher and @xinoehp512 still both need to vote because of how the rules work.

I’ll have a think about what mechanics we might want to start including, but I’m very free to take suggestions. Alternatively I could spend the slot fixing something we wanted changed. Maybe how points are collected?

Maybe the total amount of points needed?

[xinoehp512 he/him]

18 minutes ago, The_Truthwatcher said:

Also, I have 10 points currently, since 204 was repealed after my vote.

I don't think it works that way... 204 was repealed at the conclusion of the vote, thereby canceling any points you would have earned from voting against it.

I vote for 305 and for 306.

I think the board idea is cool, although it seems I am in the minority.  I could create a representation of it on the doc, if that would help.

[theTruthshaper]

I don't think you should delete the rules that have been repealed. I don't remember the exact wording, does anybody know where we can get it from?

[xinoehp512 he/him]

7 minutes ago, The_Truthwatcher said:

I don't think you should delete the rules that have been repealed. I don't remember the exact wording, does anybody know where we can get it from?

Does it matter? It has been repealed: it no longer has effect. It ceased to have effect the moment the vote was completed.

[theTruthshaper]

1 minute ago, xinoehp512 said:

Does it matter? It has been repealed: it no longer has effect. It ceased to have effect the moment the vote was completed.

Yes but my vote was before that, wasn't it?

[xinoehp512 he/him]

4 minutes ago, The_Truthwatcher said:

Yes but my vote was before that, wasn't it?

But it wasn't a winning proposal until it took affect.

[+Doomstick he/him]

Now I would call for judgement, but that would make Xino be the judge, which would not be real judgement 

[theTruthshaper]

Danex would be the judge, right? Since this is about xino's turn

@Danex I summon thee as Judgement!

Edited July 19, 2020 by The_Truthwatcher

[MetaTerminal he/him]

I don’t think that’s how it works  any person’s judgement is real judgement, even if you disagree with it.

It is @xinoehp512’s turn as Judge - it’s my turn. He is the one preceding the one moving (ie me).

Quote

the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question.

If it’s any help, I agree with xino here - the rule took effect the moment it was passed (and the moment it was passed was the moment it was ‘winning’) so Truth doesn’t get any points. Short shrift but ‘s how I see it. As for Chesterton’s Fence: it might now be more frustrating to lose a vote but this stops people engineering votes for their own gain. I’m okay with the trade-off. We can reinstate it later if we want.

Rules 305 and 306 have both been passed! I get 29 points.

I have two ideas for 307, both involving NPC’s: either that there be a Bank/Casino that you can incur debt to if your points drop below zero (and there be some way of losing points) - this would probably turn into a property/points trading game? Maybe you could play games against the Bank somehow. There would be room here around games against the Bank, the rules of the Bank, maybe taxes or loans or bonuses when players fulfil certain conditions.

Alternatively, we create a Merchant who can hold items which you can buy; then it would probably become a trading game with different items - that would maybe tie nicely into contracts - and we could set different win conditions (well, getting lots of points, because of 112) on having certain sets of items, or being granted abilities from items. (There could be x point-gain conditions and they’re assigned to players randomly and perhaps secretly? That might need a game-master or something, so, hrrm.)

If other people have ideas I would love to hear those as well. 

Edited July 19, 2020 by MetaTerminal