Nomic

[heuristically_alone]

Proposal 331:

To amend or repeal a mutable law, 3 players must vote to agree with the proposal[/b]

This is so that it doesn't really matter how many players there are active or inactive. That number is up for change. We could also make it x/2 players, where x is the number of players on the list. That way, with an even number of players it doesn't need to be a majority, but a tie. Or x/2-1 to account for assuming at least one player is going to be inactive at all times.

Mod Note:

All amendments must have their own number.

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: Proposal 307=Yea

VOTE: Proposal 308=Yea

VOTE: Proposal 312=Yea

VOTE: Proposal 316=Nay

VOTE: Proposal 318=Yea

VOTE: Proposal 327=Nay

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: My Proposal 331=Nay

VOTE: Proposal 320=Nay
VOTE: Proposal 332=Yay as long as supermajority is clearly defined

Proposal 332: The President must choose a Vice President at the start of a new term. At the end of the term, the Vice President is released. Vice President will have the power to impeach the President and replace him at any time, thus starting a new term

People running for president should state who their Vice President will be.

Mod Note:

Invalid as of 324.

[heuristically_alone]

Also, as of 324, you can only have 1 active proposal; srry!

I had assumed that me voting no on my own proposal would get rid of it. Does it have to get majority No , or can it be removed?

[heuristically_alone]

I propose Proposal 329: Repeal Rule: 324

There are multiple things wrong with this. Firstly, the moderators cannot properly translate what the law even means as seen by post #113. Secondly, it hinders activity by forcing people to wait sometimes long amounts of time in between proposals as a result of a player not voting. And lastly any complaints about the excessive workload on the mods are ludicrous at this point due to the addition of a co-mod.

We could change it so that you can't have more than a fixed amount of proposals at once, say 3.

[heuristically_alone]

Haha on 3 out of the 5 current proposals. No I didn't notice.

@Everyone vote no on my proposal 331 so I can make another proposal!

[heuristically_alone]

Both Xalxe and Kappy want the vote for President. What will you do with your power? What types of votes might you veto?

[heuristically_alone]

I don't care about too much burden or too much offending, so VOTE: kappy for president

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: Yea 333

[heuristically_alone]

I propose Proposal 329: Repeal Rule: 324

There are multiple things wrong with this. Firstly, the moderators cannot properly translate what the law even means as seen by post #113. Secondly, it hinders activity by forcing people to wait sometimes long amounts of time in between proposals as a result of a player not voting. And lastly any complaints about the excessive workload on the mods are ludicrous at this point due to the addition of a co-mod.

VOTE: Nay 329

The law was slightlly ambiguous, but the intended meaning was clear.

I might accept an amendment to the proposal, but not a repeal.

I agree, but I will vote for this law until a counter proposal is made. I cannot make the counter proposal because of Rule 324, hence the reason I wish it repealed. I suggest 2 or 3 proposals are allowed by a single player at once, but you may not make a proposal if there is any existing proposal you have not voted for. That ensures that the all proposals are receiving votes before too many get stacked up.

[heuristically_alone]

Sweet Proposal 331 is declined. I can propose again!

VOTE: Abstain: 329

Proposal 334:

X proposals are allowed by a single player at once. We will hold a vote to determine the value of x. Only a plurality majority is necessary. You may not create a new proposal if there is any proposal you are not voting for or abstaining from.

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: nay: 334/VOTE:

VOTE: yea: 335

I think 2 proposals is fine. We really don't want to over work our awesome mods

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: nay: 336

VOTE: yea: 337
I don't think it should be cheap for extra proposal
VOTE: yea: 338

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: yea: 339
If there is an extra vote , is it still assumed the same number of players for reaching majority purposes. Or, if there were 5 players, and one player used and extra vote, would 5 votes be considered unanimous?

VOTE: yea: 340

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: Nsy 339

Does this mean it is automatically repealed, or can it still be passed but no one can use it because of immutable rule 104?

Either way VOTE: Nay:339

VOTE: Yea:336 (Changing vote)

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: Nay:341
EDIT: Already repealed when Ircher voted nay, so nm

VOTE: Yea:342

[heuristically_alone]

I think it is better to make 104 a mutable law and then ammend it if needed.

[heuristically_alone]

Proposal 343:

Upon commencement of a new term, the President must choose one player to be Vice President for the duration of the term. If the the President is removed from office before the end of term

( i.e. impeachment, no longer on the player's list),

the Vice President becomes President and a new term begins.

The (paranthesis) is references possible scenarios that aren't really a part of the rules yet, so things in (paranthesis) aren't technically part of the proposal. Just to give options of why a President might be removed from office. Also, I think it is easier for Vice President becoming President to be considered the start of a new term instead of just finishing the previous President's term.

[heuristically_alone]

318. The players can vote for a President. The player with the most votes on them for President becomes President.

Just realized something here. "The players can vote for a President". There is nothing to state a playing is required to vote, so at what point do we know the player with the most votes on them becomes President? (Unless a majority is reached)

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: Nay 343 - Do we really need a Vice-President?

Also, prodding JDGA even though it isn't in the ruleset simply cuz he signed up, so he should play or formally /out

VOTE: yea:344

Do we really need a President? Do we really need this game?

Anyhow, I was thinking along the lines of if for some reason the President was no more, there was someone that would immediately step up to the plate. Also, opens up more possibilities for future.

VOTE: yea:345

As long as mods don't mind the task of more editing of dinero.

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: Nay 346

Could be potential yea if the amount of dinero we receive when we receive it increases.

[heuristically_alone]

I prefer the increase of dinero first. Lack of faith

[heuristically_alone]

Is it possible to put a countdown next to the presidential vote (for convenience)

[heuristically_alone]

I thought I remembered a deadline being put. Guess not. Now to just wait and hope some of these non voters come and vote...

[heuristically_alone]

Proposal 349

Win Condition: The first player to kill Hitler wins.

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: 350 yea

[heuristically_alone]

VOTE: 347 yea
348 yea
351 nay

[heuristically_alone]

I like the idea of how it was turning into a clue like game of finding and killing Hitler. I could probably be co mod. But not this week as I got too much going on