NomicScum, Game 2

[animorpherv1]

/in

[animorpherv1]

Length is fucking with post editing.

[animorpherv1]

Proposal 1: Each player has twenty-four (24) hours to propose a new rule. In the event that a player does not make the deadline, his/her turn is skipped the first time. The second time, he/she is prodded, and the third time, he/she is eliminated.

[animorpherv1]

EUFLKJDHSKAJDSKJ

FMNBD.FJGDHM,DFNS

SJHSDF,HD,SKLJHS

[animorpherv1]

Proposal 1: Each player has twenty-four (24) hours to propose a new rule. In the event that a player does not make the deadline, his/her turn is skipped the first time. The second time, he/she is prodded, and the third time, he/she is eliminated. This rule takes precedence over Rule 201.

Fixed?

[animorpherv1]

Proposal: Players may only post in English

Post in ALL the non-english languages!

[animorpherv1]

Proposal 1: Each player has twenty-four (24) hours from the start of their turn to propose a new rule. In the event that a player does not make the deadline, his/her turn is skipped the first time. The second time, he/she is prodded, and the third time, he/she is eliminated. This rule takes precedence over Rule 201.

FIXED. PLEASE.

[animorpherv1]

Proposal 1: Each player has twenty-four (24) hours from the start of their turn to propose a new rule. In the event that a player does not propose a rule in his/her turn, his/her turn is skipped the first time. The second time, he/she is prodded and has an extra twenty-four (24) hours, and is skipped at the end of the time. The third time, he/she is eliminated. This rule takes precedence over Rule 201.

[animorpherv1]

Considering I like his/her better than they, not really.

[animorpherv1]

Proposal 1: Each player has twenty-four (24) hours from the start of their turn to propose a new rule. In the event that a player does not propose a rule in their turn, their turn is skipped the first time. The second time, they are prodded and have an extra twenty-four (24) hours, and is skipped at the end of the time. The third time, they are eliminated. This rule takes precedence over Rule 201.

[animorpherv1]

I'm done with it. It's up for voting as of when I posted it...

[animorpherv1]

Yay

I guess people don't like making amendments.

[animorpherv1]

I fully believe that this proposition should work as is. You shouldn't need more than 24 hours to come in here with a proposal anyways. At first, we need to get some stuff set up. That's plenty to do for the first bit. Then, we can come up with some other fun things. Now, I understand that there are circumstances like V/LA. That's the only thing I'd potentially amend into the rule.

[animorpherv1]

I don't get why 48 hours. 24 hours should be perfectly fine, barring real life circumstances.

[animorpherv1]

I hold firm on my stance that I believe this would work.

[animorpherv1]

Maybe I'm bass ackwards, but that's the one I see to be the most redundant.

[animorpherv1]

My goal right now is to lay down basic structure. Most of the suggestions are either redundant or useless to me.

[animorpherv1]

But I don't see the need for most, if not all, of these changes.

Seriously. I find they're useless and stupid.

[animorpherv1]

The rule was pretty clear. Apparently some people don't want to be held accountable for taking their turn in a timely manner.

EXACTLY

. If you can't take your turn in 24 hours, you shouldn't egt a turn. Let me remind you that

some

people like to take the entire deadline. The 24 hours deadline stops it from getting painfully slow.

Think about it. Let's say someone doesn't submit within 24 hours. They get skipped. On the second time, they do it and get prodded, plus are given another 24 hours. On the third, they get eliminated. That's 4 days. Compared to 2 + 3/4 + 2 = 7 or 8 days. And 3 days straight, interest starts to wain. Which will not be good for any game of Nomic.

[animorpherv1]

Meaning you can PM someone without giving them an extra 24 hours.

Normally I'd agree with this, but there's always the chance that the person forgot about the game, so the PM reminder + 24 hours gives them a chance to come in and make the rule.

@Packbat:

Who gets the points? Just the rule proposer or the people who yes + rule proposer?

[animorpherv1]

Well, ani, 48 is just cleaner. Occasionally I spend a whole day away from the website

Also, a question for Mhork:

Do you play mafia? Under current site meta, this is practically lurking.

[animorpherv1]

What about the requests to change the order of penalties? You don't think there's merit to that?

Missed this. I'm not for it, but I'm not against it.

[animorpherv1]

OK then, I had only noticed 202.

[animorpherv1]

Eh. That works I guess.

[animorpherv1]

Sure.

[animorpherv1]

:/

I give you guys what you want and you still vote no.

THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS I WAS FIGHTING IN THE FIRST PLACE.

[animorpherv1]

Oh, and Ani

Well, ani, 48 is just cleaner. Occasionally I spend a whole day away from the website

Also, a question for Mhork:

Do you play mafia? Under current site meta, this is practically lurking.

I do play mafia, but a single day off is hardly lurking. Sometimes one needs to clear their head. Sometimes one needs to buckle down and do whatever work they put off. All I know is that I've yet to have a single person call me out for lurking.

Isn't the current site meta everybody posting all the time or something?

[animorpherv1]

ani, would you mind me retrying your suggestion?

Nope.

[animorpherv1]

Yay.

Whatever.

[animorpherv1]

Chevre, it prods you and gives you an extra 24 hours for a total of 48 anyway.

I would not vote for 48+48 hours.

Er, these posts are good. I will not vote for anything about 24 + 24 hours.

[animorpherv1]

That seems a little convoluted for an initial ruleset, yeah? We shouldn't try to do too much with one bill.

[animorpherv1]

The only one I support is the first one.

[animorpherv1]

The only one I support is the first one.

...and compromise is now officially required for passage. Can you elaborate on your reasons?

The other ones seem to let them get away with too much. You can skip two round every five consecutive turns and just waste the game away for #2, and with #3, you can skip every second turn. #1 gives an incentive to stay active all the time.

That said, I would not be opposed to #4.

[animorpherv1]

Maybe that should be the next thing we work on. Integrating the proposal and amending the rule at the same time.

[animorpherv1]

As do I, but compromises must be made.

QFT

[animorpherv1]

You could reward players that are dependable, like extra votes or more points.

I like this to.

[animorpherv1]

I'm not budging. Both #2 and #3 can -and will- have people skip a turn every so often without punishment.

[animorpherv1]

I'm not budging. Both #2 and #3 can -and will- have people skip a turn every so often without punishment.

Having your turn skipped

is

a punishment - it costs you points.

Let me put it this way - #2 and #3 can both prolong the game unnecessarily and keep semi-inactives in the game, despite at low points.

[animorpherv1]

Vote: Yea

[animorpherv1]

I agree to the boycott.

[animorpherv1]

Unvote

T-Bone, don't be a prick.

Also; plan :"Vote Nay on T-Bone's proposals" is a go.

[animorpherv1]

I'm not being a prick. I don't think we should do majority +1.

Proposition fails I guess since no one wants to be diplomatic. Just as all future propositions will.

How about this cool phrase called "make an amendment on your turn."

[animorpherv1]

Then get someone else to amend it.

[animorpherv1]

I will not agree with a supermajority as long as T-Bone does not vote Yea.

Case closed.

[animorpherv1]

I will not agree with a supermajority as long as T-Bone does not vote Yea.

Case closed.

Have fun trying to pass it within the next, um, three months at least.

[animorpherv1]

I would also like to state that not every rule needs time to discuss. Sure, a lot of them do, but a rule that goes from unanimity to majority, and then super majority LATER (likely within three turns instead of twenty if this passes) does not.

[animorpherv1]

pointless words

Tell me, what is there to discuss about? What benefits of a supermajority are there? Anyone building an alliance of six people in this game really needs to get their pritorties in check. This is Nomic, not Survivor.

[animorpherv1]

You guys have already made clear to me that you will block any attempt to change it to a supermajority later. Therefore, I have nothing to lose by prolonging my effort.

No, we'll block it

if you block this

.

[animorpherv1]

But even if I agree you can still block it so, what's the benefit of me voting Yea for something I don't want?

What if I promise I'll vote Yea until it passes?

I never break my promises if I can help it.

[animorpherv1]

That's a good start.

What else would you need to see?

Just ftr, expecting promises from 5 other people like that is unlikely. You have 3 votes right now. You, me and JDGA. I'm sure you can convince three people.

[animorpherv1]

Oh Also T-Bone; what's your AIM? I need it because my old AIM screwed up.

[animorpherv1]

Vote Yea

You see? Taking small steps towards a goal is sometimes more effective than taking a giant one.

[animorpherv1]

CSL/Feirei hasn't voted.

[animorpherv1]

I didn't even know this game had a wiki.

Dibs on not first Honourable Record Keeper. I have no clue how to edit wikis and make them look nice at the same time.

That said, I don't understand the need for any of those. Can we not just tack the responsibilities onto the rule Maker? It'd make more sense that way.

[animorpherv1]

Vote:Nay

[animorpherv1]

I still don't like

consecutive

voting strikes. Lets people get away with a lot more.

[animorpherv1]

Welp. I didn't notice the 5 total strikes.

Maybe an addition for V/LA players? So that a strike is taken off or something?

[animorpherv1]

We don't have that rule yet if I am correct, so no.

[animorpherv1]

Should a player be removed from the game for any reason, any potential candidate must contact the thread creator via PM. After 24 hours have passed, the moderator must post a list of all candidates. Everyone then gets 24 hours to vote on which candidate they would like to enter. If there is a tie, then a revote occurs between all tied participants. If a tie occurs again, roll a dice between all participants that are still tied.

This is NOT being voted on currently. Anything to make it better?

There.

[animorpherv1]

Vote no one?

[animorpherv1]

We can fix that.

[animorpherv1]

I still know someone who missed it.

[animorpherv1]

I'd like to add a "no candidate" submission in the list of people, if at all possible.

[animorpherv1]

Feels better to me.

Thanks.

[animorpherv1]

@Chevre;

1. Nobody Special

[animorpherv1]

Vote: Yay

[animorpherv1]

The proposal now has 5 of the 6 votes required for passage. I doubt it needs my support, and I wouldn't be broken up if it failed anyway.

VOTE: Nay

I'm going to say that this "Nay" is one of the worst "Nays" I have ever seen.
Aside from "Nay because I want you to lose points" and "Nay because I can."

[animorpherv1]

VOTE: Nay

Vote: Nay

unvote yay
vote nay

Feel free to be part of the problem.

[animorpherv1]

You realize that the "vote nay" points only come if it

passes

, right?

I'm meaning the 'Vote Nay with no reason' thing.

[animorpherv1]

I'm not.

[animorpherv1]

The reason is because I don't want to vote Yay. Why should I vote Yay?

Because we had this

exact

rule earlier under consideration and you voted yes for it. In fact, everyone but Mhork did.

[animorpherv1]

Changed my mind. Sue me.

Why

did you change your mind?

[animorpherv1]

Changed my mind. Sue me.

Why

did you change your mind?

I don't see a need for the rule to be implemented. As somebody (I can't recall who) said, less people means less people for me to beat.

You do realize that not voting earns five points, yes? If we get rid of the ability to do it continually, then it stops a win by not voting, etc.

[animorpherv1]

What does that have to do with anything?

It has to do with you

winning

[animorpherv1]

Yeah that's really confusing. If I'm correct, the proposition at hand has NOTHING to do with resolving people gaining points by not voting.

being afk = not voting

not voting = gaining points

[animorpherv1]

Yeah that's really confusing. If I'm correct, the proposition at hand has NOTHING to do with resolving people gaining points by not voting.

being afk = not voting

not voting = gaining points

[animorpherv1]

Ooh, just saw a problem - fixing:

Should a player be removed from the game for any reason, any person with an unbanned Mafiascum.net account may become a candidate to replace the removed player by posting a request to that effect in the thread within 24 hours of the removal. If, after these 24 hours have passed, one or more such candidate has posted, each current player shall be given 24 hours during which they may vote for the admittance of one of these candidates or against the admittance of any candidate. If at the end of the voting one of these candidates has the support of a simple majority of players, that candidate shall become a player.

Oh yeah. >.<

I thought we were voting on THIS.

[animorpherv1]

Good thing we accepted Ani's rule which would have prevented this situation.

I'm sorry that no one can pass important rules.