Wintreath Regional Community

A Link to the Past - Archives => Summersend Festivals => The Registry of Things Past - Historic Archive => 2016: Summersend Festival => Topic started by: Emoticonius on August 19, 2016, 07:02:21 PM

Title: Nomic
Post by: Emoticonius on August 19, 2016, 07:02:21 PM
Rules
Immutable Rules

101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable).

*

102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers.

*

103. A rule-change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule; (2) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of an amendment of a mutable rule; or (3) the transmutation of an immutable rule into a mutable rule or vice versa.

(Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.)

*

104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes.

*

105. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule-changes.

*

106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are voted on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they were voted on.

*

107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application.

*

108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted.

If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment.

*

109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect.

*

110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not "conflict" with that immutable rule.

*

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.

*

112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed.

*

113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed.

*

114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule-changes must never become completely impermissible.

*

115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule.

*

116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it.

*

Mutable Rules

201. 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 alphabetical order by surname.

*

202. One turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on, and (2) throwing one die once and adding the number of points on its face to one's score.

In mail and computer games, instead of throwing a die, players subtract 291 from the ordinal number of their proposal and multiply the result by the fraction of favorable votes it received, rounded to the nearest integer. (This yields a number between 0 and 10 for the first player, with the upper limit increasing by one each turn; more points are awarded for more popular proposals.)

*

203. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a simple majority.

*

204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each.

*

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

*

206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it loses 10 points.

*

207. Each player always has exactly one vote.

*

208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points.

In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve 200 (positive) points.

*

209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules.

*

210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule-changes unless they are team-mates.

The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or computer.

*

211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence.

If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence.

If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs.

*

212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment.

When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players.

The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate.

Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge.

New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards.

*

213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner.

This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner.

As of now, the game begins. The turn order is as follows:

@BraveSirRobin
@Eldarion
@Emoticonius
@Gerrick
@Hugsim
@Pengu
@Rasdanation
@taulover
@xXTheHydraXx
Title: Nomic
Post by: Rasdanation on August 20, 2016, 10:27:50 PM
Hey @Emoticonius, could we possibly go into the next turn if @BraveSirRobin doesn't respond soon?
Title: Nomic
Post by: Emoticonius on August 20, 2016, 10:47:01 PM
The festival runs til the 28th so I'll give him one more day.
Title: Nomic
Post by: BraveSirRobin on August 20, 2016, 11:21:50 PM
I'll forfeit my turn because I'm still slightly confused. 
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 20, 2016, 11:25:55 PM
I'll forfeit my turn because I'm still slightly confused.
Pretty sure this is against the current rules.
Quote
201. 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.
Title: Nomic
Post by: BraveSirRobin on August 21, 2016, 12:26:20 AM
In which case I move to strike rule 201.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Rasdanation on August 21, 2016, 12:35:47 AM
If we were to strike all of rule 201, then there would be no turn order. Therefore, I vote against this proposal.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Crushita on August 21, 2016, 01:01:29 AM
I agree with Radanation and vote against this proposal.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Gerrick on August 21, 2016, 01:18:25 AM
According to rule 203, this proposal fails, correct?
Title: Nomic
Post by: Emoticonius on August 21, 2016, 01:35:01 AM
I too vote against this proposal.
I believe all eligible voters (basically everyone) must vote.
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 21, 2016, 01:54:01 AM
I vote against this proposal.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Rasdanation on August 21, 2016, 02:45:25 AM
For the reasoning of my vote, I voted against for the sole fact that we would be leading into a less stable game if we repealed the whole rule, since there would be no turn order without it. So, I am for allowing people to skip their turns, just BSR attacked the situation in an unfavorable way.
Title: Nomic
Post by: BraveSirRobin on August 21, 2016, 03:06:23 AM
In which case could I move to amend Rule 201 instead to strike the portion about skipping turns?

Also doesn't a proposal have to be seconded before a vote?
Title: Nomic
Post by: Gerrick on August 21, 2016, 04:58:20 AM
In which case could I move to amend Rule 201 instead to strike the portion about skipping turns?

Also doesn't a proposal have to be seconded before a vote?
I don't see anywhere where it says a proposal has to be seconded as each person will present a proposal on their turn anyway.

And I don't think you can change your proposal after you've already presented it and people have voted on it. According to rule 108, your proposal to repeal rule 201 is called proposal 301, so an amendment instead would be an entirely different proposal, which would have to be made on a separate turn since we each only get one proposal per turn.  Unless everybody else is cool with just pretending the repeal proposal didn't happen since this is the first time we've played this (if not, I vote against the repeal proposal 301).

According to rule 103, amendments are allowed instead of just repealing, though, if that's what you're asking.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Hugsim on August 21, 2016, 11:26:35 AM
If it isn't changed, I vote against proposal 301.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Hydra on August 21, 2016, 03:06:26 PM
I vote against it as well.
Title: Nomic
Post by: BraveSirRobin on August 22, 2016, 02:56:31 PM
I do believe that my proposal does indeed fail.  I instead move to amend rule 201 to read as follows:

Proposed Language of 201
201. Players shall alternate in alphabetical order by surname Players shall alternate in clockwise order, taking one whole turn apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, and but parts of turns may not be omitted. All players begin with zero points.

In mail and computer games, players shall alternate in alphabetical order by surname.

This should now allow players to skip turns in the event that they feel they have nothing to contribute to the discussion.  It also streamlines the language as we are in a computer game, so I have also struck a section of the first sentence and replaced it with the computer turn rules.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Michi on August 22, 2016, 04:44:54 PM
I vote against this and propose a counter proposal that allows players to skip if they successfully write a poem that touches the hearts of 2/3 of the player list.
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 22, 2016, 06:20:06 PM
I vote against this and propose a counter proposal that allows players to skip if they successfully write a poem that touches the hearts of 2/3 of the player list.
I don't think that counter-proposals are allowed...

Although this proposal has now conclusively not passed, I will vote for this anyway.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Hugsim on August 22, 2016, 08:45:31 PM
I don't think that BraveSirRobin can take another turn, instead play should pass to the next player, which is @Eldarion.
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 22, 2016, 09:09:40 PM
I don't think that BraveSirRobin can take another turn, instead play should pass to the next player, which is @Eldarion.
Yeah, I think that's probably right. (I was about to point out that everyone must vote, but then I realized that everyone already did.)
Title: Nomic
Post by: Emoticonius on August 23, 2016, 12:42:56 AM
Hugsim is correct. It is Eldarion's turn.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Crushita on August 23, 2016, 12:47:02 AM
Proposal
302.
To amend rule 203 to read: A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is confirmed by a simple majority of eligible voters.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Gerrick on August 23, 2016, 12:58:02 AM
I vote for proposal 302.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Emoticonius on August 23, 2016, 01:21:59 AM
I too vote in favor of this proposal.
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 23, 2016, 01:29:05 AM
I vote for this proposal.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Hydra on August 23, 2016, 01:31:41 AM
I vote for this proposal as well.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Rasdanation on August 23, 2016, 02:13:52 AM
I vote For this. We could most likely go faster through the game with this one ;D
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 23, 2016, 04:39:31 AM
I vote For this. We could most likely go faster through the game with this one ;D
Remember that Rule 105 still says that everyone must vote.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Hugsim on August 23, 2016, 08:33:45 PM
I vote for. I also call upon the next person to change 105 to not require everyone to vote.
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 23, 2016, 10:48:24 PM
I vote for. I also call upon the next person to change 105 to not require everyone to vote.
Rather, transmute 105 so that the person after that can change it.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Michi on August 24, 2016, 06:01:52 AM
I'll vote for this and 2nd Hugsim's motion.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Hugsim on August 24, 2016, 01:17:45 PM
Of course, Tau. Transmute, then change.
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 25, 2016, 06:59:37 PM
Please vote @BraveSirRobin so we can continue to the next turn.
Title: Nomic
Post by: BraveSirRobin on August 26, 2016, 01:33:54 PM
I vote yea.
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 27, 2016, 05:12:41 AM
I believe it is now the turn of @Emoticonius.

Current Points (I think)
BraveSirRobin: -9
Eldarion: 11
Emoticonius: 0
Gerrick: 0
Hugsim: 0
Pengu: 0
Rasdanation: 0
taulover: 0
xXTheHydraXx: 0
Title: Nomic
Post by: Emoticonius on August 27, 2016, 07:47:54 PM
I motion to make rule 116 mutable.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Gerrick on August 27, 2016, 08:25:01 PM
I motion to make rule 116 mutable.
Quote from: Rule 116
116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it.
What would that accomplish?
Title: Nomic
Post by: Emoticonius on August 27, 2016, 09:11:07 PM
I hope to amend it in order to restrict us exclusively to the confines of the rules. Ideally, we should be, even if the rules are ever changing.

Plus I'd like to make creativity a necessity for this game. I have some fun ideas in mind.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Gerrick on August 27, 2016, 11:40:37 PM
Ah, I see. Then I vote for Proposal 303.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Crushita on August 27, 2016, 11:48:58 PM
I vote Against motion 303
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 28, 2016, 12:05:21 AM
I hope to amend it in order to restrict us exclusively to the confines of the rules. Ideally, we should be, even if the rules are ever changing.

Plus I'd like to make creativity a necessity for this game. I have some fun ideas in mind.
Confining actions in this game to purely what is mentioned in the rules makes little sense to me. For example, the rules don't mention discussing proposals at all. If I'm interpreting your plan correctly, it would mean that Gerrick's question to you and your subsequent response would be against the rules, which IMO is counterproductive.

Hence, I vote against proposal 303.

Also, could you elaborate on your second paragraph and how it's related to Rule 116? I might change my vote if I understand it a little better.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Gerrick on August 28, 2016, 01:07:37 AM
Confining actions in this game to purely what is mentioned in the rules makes little sense to me. For example, the rules don't mention discussing proposals at all. If I'm interpreting your plan correctly, it would mean that Gerrick's question to you and your subsequent response would be against the rules, which IMO is counterproductive.

Hence, I vote against proposal 303.

Also, could you elaborate on your second paragraph and how it's related to Rule 116? I might change my vote if I understand it a little better.
Eh, Rule 111 allows for debate.
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 28, 2016, 01:27:51 AM
Confining actions in this game to purely what is mentioned in the rules makes little sense to me. For example, the rules don't mention discussing proposals at all. If I'm interpreting your plan correctly, it would mean that Gerrick's question to you and your subsequent response would be against the rules, which IMO is counterproductive.

Hence, I vote against proposal 303.

Also, could you elaborate on your second paragraph and how it's related to Rule 116? I might change my vote if I understand it a little better.
Eh, Rule 111 allows for debate.
True, I chose a bad example. However, it's ambiguous on debate during the voting, which we are currently doing.

However, it does appear that we may actually be breaking Rule 111, now that I am rereading it.
Quote from: Rules
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.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Rasdanation on August 28, 2016, 02:02:31 AM
Well if that's the case, then I vote for this proposal, we should make the game a bit faster, since we are running out of time.
Title: Nomic
Post by: Emoticonius on August 28, 2016, 02:09:12 AM
I...don't see how that applies. Debate is allowed by that rule and we are debating. Besides, confining ourselves to the rules in a game where we constantly change the rules isn't as confining as you make it out to be. We could require rule changes to be proposed in the form of haiku, as an example. It could be fun. :D
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 28, 2016, 02:36:42 AM
I...don't see how that applies. Debate is allowed by that rule and we are debating. Besides, confining ourselves to the rules in a game where we constantly change the rules isn't as confining as you make it out to be. We could require rule changes to be proposed in the form of haiku, as an example. It could be fun. :D
I'm not sure whether you're addressing the first or second part of my post. I'll treat it as both.

For the first part (which relates to Proposal 303):
Rule 111 reads:
Quote from: Rule 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.
This brings up several issues, from my perspective:
This is just one rule; you can find more of these cases if you look at the other ones carefully. Simply put, the rules currently in place are just not designed to be strictly followed, so I don't support an amendment of Rule 116 toward that direction.

As for the second part of my post:
Let me use BraveSirRobin's turn as an example. He proposed a rule change, and less than 10 minutes afterward, Rasdanation voted against it. Robin had not begun the voting period, so all of our votes were invalid. BraveSirRobin should have had the opportunity to change the text of his proposal, as Rule 111 stated, but his attempts to do so led to claims that such an action would be against the rules (even though our/Rasdanation's initiation of the voting period was illegal).

In every turn so far, there hasn't been a prevote debating period, as Rule 111 mandates; rather, the debating has been simultaneous with the voting.

Well if that's the case, then I vote for this proposal, we should make the game a bit faster, since we are running out of time.
@Wintermoot @Emoticonius Can we continue this game after the Festival ends (perhaps moved to the Amalyan Quarter)?
Title: Nomic
Post by: Emoticonius on August 28, 2016, 02:47:41 AM
The schedule did say forum games could last beyond the festival.

The rules have been somewhat ambiguous from the beginning. Besides, we can change the process in which a rule is proposed or voted on if we really want to.
Title: Nomic
Post by: taulover on August 28, 2016, 03:47:27 AM
The schedule did say forum games could last beyond the festival.

The rules have been somewhat ambiguous from the beginning. Besides, we can change the process in which a rule is proposed or voted on if we really want to.
I think the biggest problem is that Robin's modified proposal didn't get a chance to be voted on, which is a direct consequence of us breaking the rules and voting prematurely. And (in the current ruleset at least; see Rule 107) rules aren't retroactive, and I don't think they should be in any case.

As for the ambiguity of the rules, that is exactly why I oppose making the rules more strict.

Also (in a rather unrelated topic), in case you guys missed the rule for transmuting (I know I certainly did until I chanced upon it about 5 minutes ago):
Quote from: Rules
109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect.