My State of the Nomic posts aren't doing a good enough job? I can edit the initial post to have an updated list of rules if that's easier for everyone.
*publicly taunts Grey*
Printable View
My State of the Nomic posts aren't doing a good enough job? I can edit the initial post to have an updated list of rules if that's easier for everyone.
*publicly taunts Grey*
I vote in favor of the IT-ARE-PROOF motion.
I vote in favor of Stellian's motion of veto reutilization.
I vote against the Goal-of-the-game motion.
Goal-of-the game is now dead.
So Kyreles' motion to compel voting is still open after all this time? I'm so bad at keeping track. I vote for it then. PASSED
I also vote against nomic_reform. I don't see what's so hard about simply scrolling up to the latest rules update. You shouldn't have to go back more than a page at most.
ROFL
Sorry Kyreles, but that doesnīt work. In the rules it does say that three different people have to vote in favour of a motion before it passes. Further, your motion to compel voting is still open to voting, which means you aren't even allowed to propose any new motions at this moment, because Stellian''s motion of Suffrage Facilitation has already been accepted. Sorry, dude.
I vote in favour of gutīs nomic_reform motion.
I vote in favour of Stellian's motion of veto reutilization
Regarding gut's idea.. while I agree that Kyreles's state-of-the-nomic helps a lot, I think a summary post on the front would be very helpful to people entering the game later, so that they don't need to read the whole thing from beginning to end to understand what is going on.
And I would like to remind gut and Jellyslayer that participants are required to choose a side in the TH wars now and update their signature accordingly. *smiles sweetly*
I vote vote in favor of gut's nomic_reform motion.
I is doin it rite?
Yeah, that was blatant rule violation :p
I vote against:
Kyreles' motion to fix the Nomic: status pending because it was proposed illegally. But if it were legal I would vote against it ;)
The IT ARE PROOF motion (2 for, 1 against) grobblewobble - Way too much to read or put into rules ;)
Stellian's motion of veto reutilization (2 for, 0 against) Stellian - Vote against. One could start hoarding up powerful random characters for emergency vetos and it's way too hard to check. If anything like this passes, it should be restricted to motions that are open when the character is created or it will be abused like hell ;)
I vote for:
motion nomic_reform (2 for, 1 against) gut - passed!
I propose the following motion:
Restricted-actions-motion: A player that proposes a motion is not allowed to vote on it, attempt to veto it or withdraw it. A player that votes on a motion is not allowed to veto it and a player attempting to veto a motion is not allowed to vote on it. Every player always is entitled to interact with every motion just once, where there currently exists 3 types of interaction: proposing, voting (positive or negative) and vetoing.
And indeed: gut and Jellyslayer should be punished for infringing the rules regarding their non-TH-signatures. Either they should stay out of the thread or get a motion passed to remove the rule about it: before that's done one has to abide the rules!
I move that players shall not be allowed to vote on their own motions. Also they shall be allowed to withdraw a motion they submitted by declaring they wish to do so. Furthermore, no player shall be allowed to vote more than once on each motion. For the purposes of voting this may be refered to as Kyreles' motion to fix the Nomic
I cast my vote agasint Joe's Restricted-actions-motion
I cast my vote in favor of Kyreles' motion to fix the nomic.
The State of the Nomic
Rules:Open Issues:Code:§001: Any player may set forth a motion to take some official action. Official actions include, but are not limited to, amendment of or additions of rules.
§002: Motions can be written in bold and / or italics for clarity, if you like or you can write them in an abbreviated form:
"[motion summary] motion: [description]."
Example: "Meaningless Title motion: Kyreless will be granted the meaningless title of The Creator of the Nomic." There is no set format for motions to be submitted.
§003 Votes can be written in bold and / or italics for clarity, if you like. To vote in favor of or against a motion, one must declare one's vote.
§004: If at any point there are three votes from three different players in favor of a motion, the motion passes and is acted upon. If at any point there are three votes from three different players against a motion, the motion fails. If the motion passes, and requires that the rules be amended, the motion-maker must do this as soon as possible, and post the revised ruleset. If the motion-maker fails to do this within 48 hours of the motion's passage, the motion's state is changed, and it fails.
§005 Every player has the option to veto a motion once all by himself. After posting his veto the player must create a random character. If he manages to win the game and proves so by posting the .flg in the YAVP-forum, the motion is vetoed. If he fails, his veto fails. If the motion is passed by acquiring 3 approving votes before the game is ended, the motion is successful and the game is of no further influence on the motion.
§006 All participants in this game of Nomic have to make a choice. Either they join the pro-treasure hunter camp, or they have to join the anti-treasure hunter camp. Those who join the pro-treasure hunter camp have to edit their signature, adding a line that expresses their enthusiasm about treasure hunter. It doesn't matter what exactly you say, as long as it is clear to all that you would never give up on Treasure Hunter because it is the most awesome talent ever. Be creative! Those who join the anti-treasure camp also have to edit their signature, adding a line to express their disgust about the most miserable talent in ADOM, treasure hunter.
§007 Each player may only propose one new motion at a time, and they can only do so if they don't already have any previous motions up for voting.
§008 All Players are 'allowed to taunt grey in this thread'.
§009 In order to introduce a motion you must have voted on all outstanding motions
§010 If a motion is passed or cancelled while a player is attempting to veto it, the player may attempt to veto a different motion using the same game character.
§011 We create an ACCOUNT with username 'nomic'. It will have a public pass, so we can all edit the original post. We take all this mess we have so far, stick t in an initial post, then edit it as if it were a wiki.
If there are mistakes let me know and I'll fix it.Code:Restricted-actions-motion (0 for, 1 against)Joe
Kyreles' motion to fix the Nomic (1 for, 0 against) Kyreles
IT ARE PROOF motion (2 for, 2 against) grobblewobble
Isn't the current veto system already quite abusable as it is?
Oops, I didn't realize my motion of veto reutilization had already passed already (Kyreles, Monk and grobblewobble voted for it). Thanks Kyreles for updating the rules accordingly.
And Kyreles, I might be mistaken, but I count 2 votes for the IT ARE PROOF motion (from Monk and myself) and 2 against (yours and Joe's). It should be kept in the list of open motions.
We need some sort of sanction system for rule breakers like gut, Jellyslayer and myself. I propose... oh wait.
Kyreles' motion to fix the Nomic (1 for, 0 against) I vote for it.
Restricted-actions-motion (0 for, 1 against) I vote against it. I would vote for it if you could vote against a motion and try to veto it at the same time. Actually, I'll try to veto it as well while I still can. My char is a... ugh. Sword-born drakish Necromancer. >.<
Okay, I propose stellian's motion of guilt and shame: Whoever breaks the rules shall be given a humorous title or nickname that will be used in place of their username for the rest of the game (for example, "Stellian the wannabe cat lord"). The first title or nickname to be proposed stays.