Obviously all old bills are grandfathered in and lack the time limit. Players with more than one current proposal are also grandfathered in.
This proposal is designed to make the game easier to follow and prevent us from compiling dozens of bills that nobody particularly cares about. I think 4 days is plenty of time for most people to see a bill and vote- but I could be persuaded to slightly increase it if necessary.
Posted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 9:09 pm
by Formerfish
006- why nays?
007- is the office of executive explained anywhere?
008- There is some vague wording I would like to shore up, who would a player capable of making a motion be?
009- NMSA why nay?
VOTE: Aye P010
VOTE: Nay P011 I dont like the unlimited motion clause tacked on at the end
012- someone eli5 me?
015- do we not like this because someone could propose something and then have the group change it and they could pull it anytime they wanted?
016- whyd this fall flat?
017- is this a basic proxy vote allowance?
018- why is this one gaining traction when 015 is trending no?
019- is outside communication allowed in this game? I wondered reading this one how a coalition could start when it would have to be out in the open as it was starting.
020- is there going to be any oversight into these coalitions and their rules?
VOTE: Aye P021
VOTE: Aye P022
VOTE: Aye P023
VOTE: Aye P024
025- why not just limit the words allowed to 3 to account for agreement, disagreement, and abstain. Are we worried about people just not doing anything?
Obviously all old bills are grandfathered in and lack the time limit. Players with more than one current proposal are also grandfathered in.
This proposal is designed to make the game easier to follow and prevent us from compiling dozens of bills that nobody particularly cares about. I think 4 days is plenty of time for most people to see a bill and vote- but I could be persuaded to slightly increase it if necessary.
In post 106, Aronis wrote:Other positions may be added to aid the Chair at their discretion.
@aronis i'm not sure i like this part of your currency proposition
+1
This is abig improvement, but it's still not quite what I'm looking for.
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:52 am
by NotMySpamAccount
VOTE: P027: No VOTE: P028: No VOTE: P029: Yea VOTE: P030: No VOTE: P031: Yea
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:56 am
by NotMySpamAccount
P032
: Any action not prohibited is permitted, unless it relates to official matters in the rules, in which case it is prohibited if not permitted.
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:44 am
by skitter30
In post 144, Inferno390 wrote:P029:
Amend R206:
Votes for proposals should be done using the vote tags and include "Yea" or "Nay" and include the proposal number. A player can also abstain from voting; their vote will not be counted among the number of active votes. To abstain from voting on a given proposal, a player must type Vote: Abstain (proposal number) in the thread.
In post 144, Inferno390 wrote:P029:
Amend R206:
Votes for proposals should be done using the vote tags and include "Yea" or "Nay" and include the proposal number. A player can also abstain from voting; their vote will not be counted among the number of active votes. To abstain from voting on a given proposal, a player must type Vote: Abstain (proposal number) in the thread.
I want to be able to use heal and hurt tags
This is what P025 is for.
I might vote yea on P031 if the number of proposals was upped. I think two would be slightly better with a group of 7 people. If more people come later and we want to amend it, we can. Not sure I'm comfortable with a time limit though.
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:43 am
by Inferno390
@Former:
P006: I'm like 99% sure this is redundant given the rules.
P007: No it is not.
P008: A player can only make a motion should a rule say they can. So right now, there are no motions you can make, but in the future, we can add rules that allow player to make motions.
P012: This one goes hand in hand with P011. Basically, you can motion to do as much as you want on your turn, but if the motion does not pass, you have to cut down the actions in your turn so it follows the given rules.
P015: Not really sure.
P016: There are some issure in the rules with value and inflation, and like I said, I'm not for any new mechanics right now.
P017: Kind of? Basically you can let someone else vote for you.
P018: I think because people don't like the idea of specifically retracting proposals. This one just defines how a proposal can be changed by it's creator and gives a helpful definition.
P019: It is not explicitly against the rules as of yet.
P020: Probably not?
P025: I want to make sure words other than Yea or Nay are legal for processing votes. Right now we're counting them as such, but since it's not explicitly specified in the rules, it could raise some hairline issues later on.
P026 is supposed to read "amend R301." An error due to a wiki update.
Obviously all old bills are grandfathered in and lack the time limit. Players with more than one current proposal are also grandfathered in.
This proposal is designed to make the game easier to follow and prevent us from compiling dozens of bills that nobody particularly cares about. I think 4 days is plenty of time for most people to see a bill and vote- but I could be persuaded to slightly increase it if necessary.
do you require a second?
If you'd vote yes it'd pass and that'd be really exciting
007- is the office of executive explained anywhere?
008- There is some vague wording I would like to shore up, who would a player capable of making a motion be?
009- NMSA why nay?
VOTE: Aye P010
VOTE: Nay P011 I dont like the unlimited motion clause tacked on at the end
012- someone eli5 me?
015- do we not like this because someone could propose something and then have the group change it and they could pull it anytime they wanted?
016- whyd this fall flat?
017- is this a basic proxy vote allowance?
018- why is this one gaining traction when 015 is trending no?
019- is outside communication allowed in this game? I wondered reading this one how a coalition could start when it would have to be out in the open as it was starting.
020- is there going to be any oversight into these coalitions and their rules?
VOTE: Aye P021
VOTE: Aye P022
VOTE: Aye P023
VOTE: Aye P024
025- why not just limit the words allowed to 3 to account for agreement, disagreement, and abstain. Are we worried about people just not doing anything?
026- not sure what this one is about
VOTE: 06- Nay redundant VOTE: 07- Nay I would want at least a rough sketch of what this entails VOTE: 08- Aye VOTE: 12- Aye VOTE: 17- Aye VOTE: 18- Aye VOTE: 19- Nay I think we need to figure out what we are before we let people start to make factions VOTE: 20- Nay
25- why do we want to broaden the words we use and not limit them for sake of ease?
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:40 am
by NotMySpamAccount
P006 is not redundant, a supermajority is not the same as an absolute majority. One is 2/3, one is 1/2.
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:27 am
by Aronis
VOTE: N P006 - no significance VOTE: N P007 - too vague VOTE: N P009 - i feel like my bill addresses the backlog issues better and it already got passed VOTE: N P011 - see above VOTE: N P015 - pretty sure i didn't propose this, but either way it can die VOTE: N P019 - too vague, lacks safeguards that I mentioned earlier, I really just want this old stuff to die so the wiki is cleaner VOTE: N P020 - see above
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:29 am
by Aronis
I'm going to try to update the wiki- I'll put a log of everything I do here in spoilers so if needed, it can be changed back pretty easily
updated through P020- I'll try to finish the 20s/30s soon
Spoiler: Defeated
===P006===
Proposed by: NMSA
Yea (1) - NMSA
Nay (4) - Inferno, Charles510, Formerfish, Aronis
Any rule which has an effect retroactively requires a supermajority to pass.
Players may only make 1 proposal to add or remove a single rule OR 2 separate proposals to amend or transmute a single rule on their turn. In addition, on their turn they may perform any number of motions on their turn.
A player may retract their proposal at any time. When this occurs it does not go into effect and cannot be voted on any longer.
===P019===
Proposed by: NotMySpamAccount
Yea (1) - NotMySpamAccount
Nay (4) - Inferno, Skitter, Formerfish, Aronis
Any group of players may, at any time, declare themselves a COALITION. The CHAIR of said coalition must post the name of the coalition in the thread, as well as all players who are part of it. All listed players must confirm that they are part of this coalition. Once they do, the coalition is official, and can determine its own rules and regulations to be followed by its members. The chair of a coalition may exercise any ex officio right granted to him by a proposal.
===P020===
Proposed by: NotMySpamAccount
Yea (1) - NotMySpamAccount
Nay (4) - Inferno, Skitter, Formerfish, Aronis
If permitted, either conditionally or otherwise, by the rules of his coalition, the chair of a coalition may exercise some or all of the votes delegated by members of his coalition. If the chair does so, the players whose votes are delegated are treated as if they themselves had voted in the standard way. Any vote delegated to a chair may be changed by the delegating player at will.
Spoiler: Passed
===P008===
A Motion is a action that can only be made by a specific player who possesses the capability to do so. The ability to perform a Motion is only given by a rule that states as such. Motions shall begin numbering at M001 and count up by each ordinal number. A Motion may be passed by absolute majority. A Motion's clause always consists of a thing that will happen when it is passed, i.e., "X will occur." Motions cannot change the rules in any way. When a motion passes, the effect stated immediately occurs.
All players have the ability to perform a Motions so as they may ignore any turn restrictions placed on them by other rules. They may do this in conjunction with making proposals, and in conjunction may submit more proposals that the stated limits by any rules. However, should the motion fail, a number of those proposals, chosen by the player who submitted them, must become void and cannot come into effect, so that the player's turn falls under the restriction placed on them by any other rules.
Amend R104 to state: "No-one may edit or delete any post on the the game thread, with the exception of the initial post, which may be edited to display important information at the discretion of the moderator, or in the sole case to adjust proposal numbers so they are in accordance with the numbers of other proposals in this thread, so as to avoid confusion."
A player who creates a proposal controls that proposal. The controlling player may alter their proposal at any time before it is passed. Players may not alter the proposals they do not control, but they met suggest changes that can be adopted by the controlling player. Whenever an alteration is made to a proposal, the new form of that proposal must be posted in the thread and all votes on it are reset, except for the controlling player's vote.
made into r310
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:37 am
by Aronis
P031 also passed with five votes in favor (Aronis, Formerfish, Charles510, skitter30, NotMySpamAccount) - I made it rule 311 and I'm pretty sure the wiki is up to date now
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:41 am
by skitter30
Thanks
Also aronis, your currency propsal needs a better definition for what a game moderator is
Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:43 am
by Inferno390
Time out
How did P012 pass without P010?
Will someone double check that work?