Nomic: The Constitution Game - Game Over

[Ircher]

With that, we have five again.

Active Proposals

Up to date as of post 75.

1.

Proposal 313

(63) by Jormengand: A player who votes on a proposal before it passes or fails will gain 1 reputation point.
Yea - Jormengand
Nay - Allomancer, Ircher
Not Voting - logan5123, StrangerCoug

2.

Proposal 314

(66) by Ircher: A president shall be elected by a democratic election. Players may not vote for themselves. The first election shall run from the time this proposal passes until 48 hours after such time. The president is whoever wins by plurality; if there is a tie, a run-off election shall be conducted among the tied candidates. Presidents serve for a term of 76 hours starting from the time when they are officially declared president. While a player is the president, they may unilaterally veto any proposal, instantly killing it. A president may not be elected twice in a row. Subsequent elections shall also be 48 hours and shall run when a presidential term has ended.
Yea - Ircher
Nay - Allomancer
Not Voting - logan5123, Jormengand, StrangerCoug

3.

Proposal 315

(68) by Ircher: Transmute rule 203 to immutable.
Yea - Ircher, Allomancer
Nay -
Not Voting - logan5123, Jormengand, StrangerCoug

Requires unaminous consent.

4.

Proposal 316

(70) by Allomancer: A player earns 3 Reputation if they convince someone else to sign up for the game. The referred must specify the referrer's name when signing up and each referred can only specify one referrer.
Yea - Allomancer
Nay -
Not Voting - Ircher, logan5123, Jormengand, StrangerCoug

[StrangerCoug]

VOTE: Nay 313
VOTE: Yea 314
VOTE: Yea 315
VOTE: Yea 316

[StrangerCoug]

Proposal 317: Rule 206 is hereby amended to read "New rules require an absolute majority of active votes to pass unless another rule currently in force or the proposer of the new rule imposes a higher minimum threshold."

[Jormengand]

VOTE: Nay 314 Yea 315 Yea 316 Yea 317

The president rule just seems like an annoying way to ruin everyone else's fun.

[Allomancer]

VOTE: Yea 317

[Ircher]

313 fails while 316 and 317 pass.

[StrangerCoug]

Proposal 318: Rule 212 is hereby transmuted from mutable to immutable.

It's supposed to be a fun game that anyone can join at any time. We shouldn't be making that more difficult.

[Ircher]

I heartily agree.

VOTE: Yea 318

Proposal 319: Amend rule 201 to read, "All players are given at least one vote to vote Yea or Nea to proposals."

[Allomancer]

VOTE: Yea 318
VOTE: Nay 319

[StrangerCoug]

VOTE: Abstain 319

Give me more time to think about that one. I'd be more comfortable with it if some mechanism were in place to ensure that no one is given too much voting power.

[Ircher]

Amend Proposal 319: Amend rule 201 to read, "All players are given at least one vote to vote Yea or Nea to proposals. No player shall be allowed to unilaterally approve a proposal due to extra votes."

This invalidates all current votes. Maybe this amendment is more favorable? This means it requires at least two different players to pass any proposal from a voting standpoint. Other ways of forcibly passing proposals (perhaps through some executive office) are excluded from this restriction.

[StrangerCoug]

VOTE: Yea 319

That's better to my liking.

[Allomancer]

VOTE: Nay 319

[Ircher]

Proposal 320: Players may make motions in addition to proposals. Unlike proposals, which are permanent in nature, all motions are temporary and must cease to be in effect after a certain time. No motion may last longer than 1 week after passing. Motions are proposed, voted upon, passed, and failed in a similar manner as proposals. Numbering shall begin at M001 and increase with each proposed motion. Motions may supersede any and all mutable rules, but they may not override immutable rules. There may be a max of three proposed motions at a time.

So the intended idea behind motions is to allow for temporary changes to the ruleset, and motions possess more sway over the ruleset than mutable rules, but less sway than immutable rules. Consider them as a kind of "emergency" action for when we need a temporary change. I'm not entirely sure the next to last part of my proposal has the intended effect if this proposal becomes a mutable rule. (I guess if not, we can try to transmute it to immutable. Anyway, I'd like someone to verify the part about motions overriding mutable rules is legal and has the intended effect.)

[Allomancer]

VOTE: Yea 320

[Jormengand]

VOTE: Yea 318 Nay 219 Nay 320

[Ircher]

Proposal 219 does not exist, so that vote has not been counted.

Why are you against 320?

[Jormengand]

Typo, should be VOTE: Nay 319

I don't think that making temporary adjustments to the rules is useful, and in a lot of cases it's just going to be annoying to keep track of. It seems a lot more headachey than functional, honestly.

[Ircher]

It's pretty easy to keep track of using the countdown tags. Yes, the use is limited, but as I noted, it's more of an "emergency" measure rather than something to be constantly used.

[StrangerCoug]

VOTE: Yea 320

I thought I voted.

[Ircher]

320 passes. I'll update later.

[Allomancer]

Proposal 321: A player may, at any time, transfer some or all of their Reputation to another player by announcing such transfer in bold in the thread.

[Ircher]

VOTE: Yea 321

[logan5123]

OK so I missed a bit uhh
VOTE: YEA 321 VOTE: YEA 320 VOTE: YEA 318 VOTE: YEA 319
as far as I know that's everything, not sure tho

[Ircher]

320 already passed (though I hadn't updated that yet). Check the 3rd or so post; I think you missed a few proposals.