Imperial Nomic: The Final Empire

[Illwei]

HOUSE RELIDAN'S STILL OFFICIAL CENSUS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Lord Ruler
ElectrumSavant 

NOBLE HOUSES
(185) - House Soliel (The_Truthwatcher): Inquisitor
(322) - House Relidan (Illwei): High Prelan
(85) - House Tellen (Negative_Null): Favored House
(103) - House Wafre (DoomStick)
(69) - House Otter (Chinkoln)
(99) - House Ightejyw (Danex)
(26) - House Fura (Furamirionind)
(62) - House Hollow (Kings_Way)
(15) - House Ethorris (Matrim's Dice)
(49) - House Mist (Mist) Obligator
(10) - House Fadran (Channelknight Fadran)

PENDING 

House Hollow:
  (1) - that the Senate be able to remove or appoint positions/roles
  (2) - the Inquisitor be able to resolve calls for judgement,

House Wafre:
  (1) - the words "a flat" in "taxed a flat 8 atium for inconveniencing the Lord Ruler" are unnecessary, so they should be removed  

Edited September 4, 2020 by Illwei

[Mist she/her]

Quote

• 602- All players are allowed to create up to 1 PM per page. They are only allowed to use this PM for the duration of the page. Each PM may have up to 2 players in it, and must include either The Lord Ruler or a proxy The Lord Ruler designates.

I propose that 602 be amended to state, "All players are allowed to create up to 1 PM per page. They are only allowed to use this PM for the duration of the page. Each PM may have up to two players besides the maker of the PM and The Lord Ruler or his proxy and must include either The Lord Ruler or a proxy The Lord Ruler designates. 

[ElectrumSavant he/him]

On 9/2/2020 at 8:41 PM, Doomstick said:

the words "a flat" in "taxed a flat 8 atium for inconveniencing the Lord Ruler" are unnecessary, so they should be removed  

Accepted. This is a clarification worth 10 Atium.

On 9/3/2020 at 9:34 AM, Kings_way said:

I propose that the Inquisitor be able to resolve calls for judgement, as long as they did not call and are not the accused. They are paid 8 atium for each resolved dispute.

On 9/3/2020 at 9:34 AM, Kings_way said:

I also propose that the Senate be able to remove or appoint the Inquisitor, the High Prelan, and obligators. To do this, anyone can petition to the senate. If their petition is seconded, the Senate votes. 

These are proposals for new rules. Per Rule 009, they must be given a name in order to be considered.

[SirWolfe]

I request permission to join the game as House Aot. (Is that how this works?). 

Also, I propose The Withdrawal Act (To be included under Basic Rules):

A. Any existing House may choose to permanently Withdraw from the game.

B. Withdrawal is defined by the intentional and permanent renouncement of all future presence and activity by a House.

C. Withdrawn players may rejoin the game, but they are to be treated as new players forming a completely new House with no ties or connections to the Withdrawn House.

D. A House shall declare their intent to withdraw by publicly announcing "I/We, House [House Name], declare that we permanently and irrevocably have chosen to Withdraw from the game, with full understanding that House [Name]'s atium reserves shall be wiped, and any attempt at rejoining will be treated as forming a new House without any prior activity in the game."

E. The moment the High Prelan publicly recognizes the Declaration of Withdrawal by posting "The Withdrawal of House [House Name] has been noted.", the Withdrawn House is no longer considered to exist.

F. This Proposal is designed to allow players to immediately exit the game without forcing others to continue recording them in the Census or including their voices in votes. This reduces clutter from players who do not wish to play anymore.

[Kings_way he/they]

I propose that, as an edition to rule 207, that the Inquisitor be able to resolve calls for judgement, as long as they did not call and are not the accused. They are paid 8 atium for each resolved dispute. as this is an edition to the rule, and not a new one, I don't need to include a name. I will suggest this rule be named the Inquisitor Act

I also propose Rule 308, The Appointment and Removal Act, saying that the Senate be able to remove or appoint the Inquisitor, the High Prelan, and obligators. To do this, anyone can petition to the senate. If their petition is seconded, the Senate votes. 

[Illwei]

1 hour ago, SirWolfe said:

I request permission to join the game as House Aot. (Is that how this works?). 

Also, I propose The Withdrawal Act (To be included under Basic Rules):

Welcome House Aot. 

I second this - er It would go to Senate, but no one seems to be voting. 

@The_Truthwatcher @Negative_Null @Doomstick @Chinkoln @Danex @Kings_way @Furamirionind @Matrim's Dice @Channelknight Fadran @Mist @SirWolfe
I'd like the Houses' opinion on how they think senate should run. Would everyone be okay with me creating a PM for senate votes (it was passed by LR, but there was not House discussion on it saying if they'd be okay) to be recorded in, or should there be a (soft) rule that once something is seconded, all discussion stops until the rule is decided upon?

Also I think there should be a rule in the senate that maybe after it is discussed, the sides supporting it argue their case for it before the final vote? 

these aren't proposals, just ideas. Feel free to steal them for proposals if you have similar ideas or they inspire you.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Illwei

[+Doomstick he/him]

I'm good with a PM

[SirWolfe]

Also, what exactly is a PM? 

[Illwei]

1 minute ago, SirWolfe said:

Also, what exactly is a PM? 

It would be a Group...er...personal message?
-oh shoot my zucchini is burning one sec- okay-
The little mail icon thing? in the top right corner of the page?

It's would be a groupchat kind of  thing for all the houses to place their votes on current seconded proposals so that it can be a tad bit more organized.

[+Doomstick he/him]

i have some rule names:

Spoiler

101 The Acceptance/Rejection Act

102 The Law of Succession

103 The Law of Rewards

104 The Rule of Color Coding

105 The Abdication Act

 

201 The High Prelan’s Appointment

202 The High Prelan’s Clarification Act

203 The Rule of Census MIstakes

205 The High Prelan’s Disappointment

207 The Inquisitor’s Appointment

208 The Ministry Approval Act

209 The Obligator’s Duties

 

301 The Favored House Act

302 The Law of the Senate

303 The Skaa Taxing Act

304 The Class Act

305 The Senate Override Rule

306 THe Chancellor’s Appointment

307 The Voting Booth Act/The Voting PM Act

 

401 The Judgement Act

402 The Greater Expectations Act

403 The Timewaster’s Fine Act

404(5?) The Compensation Act

 

501 The Gambling Rule

502 The House Rule

503 The Mistborn Act

504 The Mistborn Regulations Act

505 The Invitation Act

506 The Atium Loan Act

507 The House Ties Act

508 The Assassination Act

509 The Club Act

 

602 The PM act

603 The Anti-Double Posting Act

I would also like to propose that Rule 404 be changed to be rule 405 and rule 404 be "Rule not found," for joke reasons

I would also like to suggest (not propose) that if a PM is made that it be called the voting booth

Edited September 5, 2020 by Doomstick

[Illwei]

1 hour ago, Doomstick said:

I would also like to suggest (not propose) that if a PM is made that it be called the voting booth

why did I immediately think of the kissing booth

I was thinking "Imperial Nomic: The Senate"  but writing that out it sounds like a weird...something. Video game? like Imperial Nomic is a series with multiple games.

[+Doomstick he/him]

lol

[ElectrumSavant he/him]

On 9/4/2020 at 0:24 AM, Mist said:

I propose that 602 be amended to state, "All players are allowed to create up to 1 PM per page. They are only allowed to use this PM for the duration of the page. Each PM may have up to two players besides the maker of the PM and The Lord Ruler or his proxy and must include either The Lord Ruler or a proxy The Lord Ruler designates. 

Accepted.

4 hours ago, SirWolfe said:

I request permission to join the game as House Aot. (Is that how this works?). 

Welcome to the Final Empire, SirWolfe of House Aot!

4 hours ago, SirWolfe said:

The Withdrawal Act (To be included under Basic Rules):

A. Any existing House may choose to permanently Withdraw from the game.

B. Withdrawal is defined by the intentional and permanent renouncement of all future presence and activity by a House.

C. Withdrawn players may rejoin the game, but they are to be treated as new players forming a completely new House with no ties or connections to the Withdrawn House.

D. A House shall declare their intent to withdraw by publicly announcing "I/We, House [House Name], declare that we permanently and irrevocably have chosen to Withdraw from the game, with full understanding that House [Name]'s atium reserves shall be wiped, and any attempt at rejoining will be treated as forming a new House without any prior activity in the game."

E. The moment the High Prelan publicly recognizes the Declaration of Withdrawal by posting "The Withdrawal of House [House Name] has been noted.", the Withdrawn House is no longer considered to exist.

F. This Proposal is designed to allow players to immediately exit the game without forcing others to continue recording them in the Census or including their voices in votes. This reduces clutter from players who do not wish to play anymore.

Accepted. If any player ever wants to leave the game permanently, I strongly suggest that they officially withdraw in this way rather than just waiting for us to figure out that they are do

@Doomstick I've selected 16 of your law names. I'm awarding 5 Atium per name, so that is a total reward of 80 Atium.

[+Doomstick he/him]

On 8/25/2020 at 9:37 AM, ElectrumSavant said:

003- The Legislative Act: Any player besides the Lord Ruler may make a Proposal or Amendment, which can affect any rule, including the Basic Rules. Players gain 16 Atium for any proposal or amendment that they make that is approved by the Lord Ruler. If a proposal is rejected then the house is taxed 8 Atium for inconveniencing the Lord Ruler. All proposals must follow 17th Shard guidelines, as detailed in the 17 Shard Code of Conduct. Proposals have three states: Accepted, Rejected, and Pending.

I still think that this should say 

Quote

003- The Legislative Act: Any player besides the Lord Ruler may make a Proposal or Amendment, which can affect any rule, including the Basic Rules. Players gain 16 Atium for any proposal or amendment that they make that is approved by the Lord Ruler. If a proposal or amendment is rejected then the house is taxed 8 Atium for inconveniencing the Lord Ruler. All proposals and amendments must follow 17th Shard guidelines, as detailed in the 17 Shard Code of Conduct. Proposals have three states: Accepted, Rejected, and Pending.

because "proposal and amendment" is used twice in this rule before

another solution is this

Quote

003- The Legislative Act: Any player besides the Lord Ruler may make a Proposal or amendment (a new rule or an amendment to a preexisting one), which can affect any rule, including the Basic Rules. Players gain 16 Atium for any Proposal or amendment that they make that is approved by the Lord Ruler. If a Proposal is rejected then the house is taxed 8 Atium for inconveniencing the Lord Ruler. All Proposals must follow 17th Shard guidelines, as detailed in the 17 Shard Code of Conduct. Proposals have three states: Accepted, Rejected, and Pending.

if either is accepted, other rules may need to be changed to reflect this change (as some say proposal or amendment and some just say proposal)

Edited September 5, 2020 by Doomstick

[dannnex male]

I think a PM is a good idea. It should be only for voting though, absolutely no talking. The House that seconds a proposal, thus sending it to the senate, should be the one to introduce the proposal to the senate in the PM. Everyone else then votes by saying “Yea” or “Nay”. If you want to say why you did or didn’t vote for something, do that in this thread. Stuff like “I would vote for it if we change this” should be here too. No amendments should be made to senate introduced rules after someone has voted and before the voting ends. Also, only one vote should be being voted on at a time. We can have a queue in the first post that’s edited regularly, but I think only one vote should be happening at a time. 

[Illwei]

25 minutes ago, Danex said:

I think a PM is a good idea. It should be only for voting though, absolutely no talking. The House that seconds a proposal, thus sending it to the senate, should be the one to introduce the proposal to the senate in the PM. Everyone else then votes by saying “Yea” or “Nay”. If you want to say why you did or didn’t vote for something, do that in this thread. Stuff like “I would vote for it if we change this” should be here too. No amendments should be made to senate introduced rules after someone has voted and before the voting ends. Also, only one vote should be being voted on at a time. We can have a queue in the first post that’s edited regularly, but I think only one vote should be happening at a time. 

Basically I was thinking that instead of the seconder posting in the PM, there would be someone who's job it is to post. the reason is because if the seconder posts right when they choose to second, then it might cut off a vote midway and the people have to work around it. 

My Idea was you'd have the big post at the Front, containing:
  - A list of PM rules, spoilered. (for accessability, looking through the main rules is tedious every time if you need to find something)
  - The queue of pending seconded proposals

Then you'd have, after a vote has been decided, a new post by the person 'running' the senate?, containing:
  - The seconded proposal, in full
  - Who proposed, and who seconded
  - (a current vote count/Updated vote count after the fact?)

and then there would be the Houses' posts, which would be Yea or Nay (colored for clarification), and nothing else in between.

Then afterwards the person would post in the thread with the results and who was on either side.

Edited September 7, 2020 by Illwei

[dannnex male]

I agree with all except the color, that seems unnecessary. Do we need clarification between “Yea” and “Nay”?

”Did you mean Nay as in Nay or Nay as in Yea?”
Thats not gonna happen.

Also, I don’t know that we need a person in charge of posting proposals that have been seconded. The person who seconded could just...use their brain and see if a vote is going. If there is, they don’t post, if there isn’t, they post it. If a vote is going, they can tell the Pm maker in this thread to add it to the queue. We should clarify how long votes last. Is there a rule on that already?

[Illwei]

5 minutes ago, Danex said:

We should clarify how long votes last. Is there a rule on that already?

No. not on length requirements. What seems reasonable? 24 Hours? 48 hours? We want it to try and be faster than TLR kinda...

EDIT: People using their brains? what is that? :P.

Edited September 7, 2020 by Illwei

[+Doomstick he/him]

I propose the rule of Voting Period: A proposal in the senate runs until somebody ends it, but must run for at least 24 hours. If there are any votes that are not cast, the majority is decided excluding those votes (so if there are a total of 9 votes and 4 people vote Yea and 2 vote Nay, the proposal passes even though a 2/3 majority of all votes was reached).

[dannnex male]

18 minutes ago, Doomstick said:

until somebody ends it,

I don’t think anyone should have the power to end a vote. I think just going to 24 hours is fine. Otherwise, someone could end a vote whenever they want. Say 4 people vote Yea, and everyone else hasn’t seen it yet but they would have voted nay, and then someone just ends it. 

[+Doomstick he/him]

13 hours ago, Danex said:

I don’t think anyone should have the power to end a vote. I think just going to 24 hours is fine. Otherwise, someone could end a vote whenever they want. Say 4 people vote Yea, and everyone else hasn’t seen it yet but they would have voted nay, and then someone just ends it. 

 

13 hours ago, Doomstick said:

until somebody ends it, but must run for at least 24 hours.

So after 24 hours someone can say “the vote is over”

this way, people who have not voted in the 24 hour period’s votes count if someone forgets to end it

Edited September 7, 2020 by Doomstick

[Illwei]

31 minutes ago, Doomstick said:

So after 24 hours someone can say “the vote is over”

this way, people who have not voted in the 24 hour period’s votes count if someone forgets to end it

Hence why I think this should be a specific person's job to post. They can be responsible for keeping track of the votes and making sure they don't count votes that are too late.

Idk there's always the idea that people can use their brains :P.

[+Doomstick he/him]

22 minutes ago, Illwei said:

Hence why I think this should be a specific person's job to post. They can be responsible for keeping track of the votes and making sure they don't count votes that are too late.

Idk there's always the idea that people can use their brains :P.

I’m saying that votes won’t be late until someone declares that the vote is over

[Kings_way he/they]

On 9/5/2020 at 2:57 PM, Kings_way said:

I propose that, as an edition to rule 207, that the Inquisitor be able to resolve calls for judgement, as long as they did not call and are not the accused. They are paid 8 atium for each resolved dispute. as this is an edition to the rule, and not a new one, I don't need to include a name. I will suggest this rule be named the Inquisitor Act

I also propose Rule 308, The Appointment and Removal Act, saying that the Senate be able to remove or appoint the Inquisitor, the High Prelan, and obligators. To do this, anyone can petition to the senate. If their petition is seconded, the Senate votes. 

I proposed these earlier, but I don't know if they were noticed

[ElectrumSavant he/him]

On 9/7/2020 at 2:37 AM, Doomstick said:

I propose the rule of Voting Period: A proposal in the senate runs until somebody ends it, but must run for at least 24 hours. If there are any votes that are not cast, the majority is decided excluding those votes (so if there are a total of 9 votes and 4 people vote Yea and 2 vote Nay, the proposal passes even though a 2/3 majority of all votes was reached).

On 9/7/2020 at 4:18 PM, Doomstick said:

So after 24 hours someone can say “the vote is over”

this way, people who have not voted in the 24 hour period’s votes count if someone forgets to end it

Rejected. I don't think that a time limit is necessarily a bad idea. My main problem with this is that 24 hours seems too short a time limit. While I don't want votes to take forever, I also don't want proposals to be rammed through by a small group because the other people didn't check in once every day.

On 9/8/2020 at 11:27 AM, Kings_way said:

I propose that, as an addition to rule 207, that the Inquisitor be able to resolve calls for judgement, as long as they did not call and are not the accused. They are paid 8 atium for each resolved dispute. as this is an edition to the rule, and not a new one, I don't need to include a name. I will suggest this rule be named the Inquisitor Act

I'm very hesitant to delegate judicial powers to someone else. Having the Inquisitor act as a judge is fine, but I would want very specific limits on the Inquisitor's judicial power: things like being unable to rule on cases involving the Lord Ruler, the Inquisitor not having the power of Judicial Review, a process where people can appeal their judgment to the Lord Ruler, etc. If we didn't have very specific rules on the Inquisitor's judicial powers, then theoretically the Inquisitor could just pass Judgment awarding himself 1,024 Atium and win the game automatically. Remember, what currently balances the Lord Ruler having judgment abilities is that the Lord Ruler can't have Atium and can't win the game. An Inquisitor does not currently have such restrictions.

On 9/8/2020 at 11:27 AM, Kings_way said:

I also propose Rule 308, The Appointment and Removal Act, saying that the Senate be able to remove or appoint the Inquisitor, the High Prelan, and obligators. To do this, anyone can petition to the senate. If their petition is seconded, the Senate votes. 

Approved. It could be argued that the Senate already had this power, since the Senate can pass proposals, and there is no rule against a proposal that specifically appoints a role to a specific individual.

On 9/5/2020 at 6:09 PM, Doomstick said:

I still think that this should say 

because "proposal and amendment" is used twice in this rule before

another solution is this

if either is accepted, other rules may need to be changed to reflect this change (as some say proposal or amendment and some just say proposal)

Alright, @Doomstick. I accept that further clarification would be useful. I'm going to clarify the rules so that in cases that apply to both proposals and amendments, the group term "rule changes" is used instead. That counts up to... 10 different rule clarifications. That means that you earn 100 Atium total from this clarification.

 

Another note: As yet, although there are existing rules for the role of a Chancellor (Rule 306, the Penrod Act) who would manage the Senate PM, but the Senate has not yet chosen a Chancellor. As the Lord Ruler, I am barred from selecting this role- only the Senate can do this. So far Illwei of House Relidan is the only person who has volunteered for the role, but becoming Chancellor requires being chosen "via the Houses' votes". I'm interpreting this to mean a simple majority vote. So the first person who can get a simple majority of the other Houses to publicly approve them as Chancellor will become the Chancellor, unless the rules change. You can approve multiple people at the same time, but you can't vote for a single person more than once. It's similar to the selection of a Prime Minister.