Nomic: The Constitution Game - Game Over

[Allomancer]

354: A player newly joining the game gains 25 coins.

[Ircher]

Up to date as of post 250.

Pending Proposals

1.

Proposal 348

(229) by Ircher: Transmute rule 327 to immutable.
Yea - Ircher, logan5123, Jake the Wolfie, StrangerCoug
Nay -
Not Voting - Allomancer

This requires unaminous consent.

2.

Proposal 352

(244) by StrangerCoug: Rule 349 is hereby transmuted from mutable to immutable.
Yea - StrangerCoug, Ircher, Allomancer
Nay -
Not Voting - logan5123, Jake the Wolfie

This requires unaminous consent.

3.

Proposal 353

(249) by Allomancer: A player may duel another player by announcing their intention do so in in bold in the thread. Starting a duel costs 5 coins. Only one duel may take place at a time. The player challenged may decline the duel within 24 hours, which costs 5 coins. All players not in the duel have one vote to vote for a winner of duel, which they do by posting a vote tag with the dueler's name. The dueler with the majority of votes wins the duel. If there is a tie when all active players have voted, the defender wins the duel. The loser of the duel loses 10 Reputation and the winner gains 10 Reputation.
Yea - Allomancer
Nay -
Not Voting - Ircher, logan5123, StrangerCoug, Jake the Wolfie

4.

Proposal 354

(250) by Allomancer: A player newly joining the game gains 25 coins.
Yea - Allomancer
Nay -
Not Voting - Ircher, logan5123, StrangerCoug, Jake the Wolfie

[logan5123]

oof sniped
VOTE: YEA 353 VOTE: YEA 354

[logan5123]

although, tbh, idk how I feel about the price for dueling only being 5 coins
considering that you get 50 a day
and 25 upon joining

[Jake The Wolfie]

You get 5 coins a day.

[Allomancer]

VOTE: Yea 348

Proposal 355: Players can make contracts between one another. Contracts must be followed by all signatories, but may not override the rules. Contracts shall provide the process for becoming a signatory, and can limit who may become a signatory. A player may not leave a contract except as provided for by the contract or by unanimous agreement of all signatories. Contracts may be amended or repealed as provided for by the contract or by unanimous agreement of all signatories.

[Ircher]

I like the idea of 355, but I feel it's maybe a tad but too formal? (Also would I be in charge of maintaining info about contracts? I guess it is my job.) In addition, there is no stated penalty for breaking a contract.
---
348 just passed., (I'll update later), so I'll finally make the following motion:

Motion M007: The proposal limit is hereby raised to eight proposals for 72 hours.

I would like to try out raising the proposal limit for awhile and see how it goes. If it goes well, I could be convinced to agree to a more permanent change.

Also:

Give 1 rep to logan5123.
Give 1 rep to Allomancer.
Give 1 rep to StrangerCoug.
Give 1 rep to Jake the Wolfie.

[Allomancer]

VOTE: Yea M007

[StrangerCoug]

Give Jake The Wolfie 5 reputation points

VOTE: Abstain 353
VOTE: Yea 354
VOTE: Yea 355
VOTE: Yea M007

[Ircher]

VOTE: Yea 355

348, 354, and 355 pass. Motion M007 also passes, so the cap on proposals is now 8.

Proposal 356: Breaking a contract for any reason results in a -30 reputation penalty.

We need to discourage people from breaking contracts.

Proposal 357: If a third (rounded to nearest) or more of active players abstain on a proposal, the proposal automatically fails.

If this many peoplen are abstaining on the proposal, then the proposal is controversial and probably shouldn't pass. (Yes, there are cases where proposals pass 3-2, but abstentions lower the number of supporting votes required to pass.)

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 358:

Players can bribe other players by giving them coins equal to half or more of the recipient's total coins. Doing so will make the Briber lose 5 reputation. A bribe can force a player to vote in a particular way.

[Allomancer]

VOTE: Yea 356
VOTE: Nay 357
VOTE: Yea 358

[Jake The Wolfie]

Hey guys let's abstain on 357 to get the epic maymays

[logan5123]

VOTE: YEA 356 VOTE: YEA 358
I'm kinda indecisive on 357, so, and this may lead to an infinite loop, but
VOTE: ABSTAIN 357

[logan5123]

wait, has 353 still not gone either way?
I kinda want to fix a denied rule, so...

359: Players may spend 200 reputation in order to get a Vote Token. Players may not have more than 3 vote tokens at a time. Players may spend one (I) vote token in order to vote on one (I) given proposal an extra time. Majority may be shifted using Vote Tokens.

I know specifying one (I) wasn't necessary but I wanted to.
For fanciness' sake.

[Allomancer]

VOTE: Yea 359

[Ircher]

VOTE: Abstain 353
VOTE: Abstain 359
Whereas 2 was too low earlier, 200 seems a bit too high. Especially when we can now bribe people using coins and 5 reputation. I would be more of a fan of say a 25 or 30 rep requirement.
---
353, 356, and 358 pass.
---

Proposal 360: The position of the president shall be established. The president shall have the right to unilaterally veto a single proposal during their term by specifying VOTE: VETO ###.

Proposal 361: The president shall reign as president for one week before a new president must be selected. This proposal automatically fails if proposal 360 fails.

Proposal 362: Whenever a president's term ends and at the time of passing of this proposal, a presidential election shall occur. During the first 48 hours (known as the primary phase), players may nominate another player as a candidate for the general election. Players may not self-nominate. After the primary phase ends, the general election phase begins. Players may vote for any legal candidate put forth during the primary phase. Once a candidate reaches an absolute majority of votes, that candidate becomes the president. This proposal automatically fails if proposal 360 fails.

[Allomancer]

VOTE: Yea 360
VOTE: Yea 361
VOTE: Nay 362

[Ircher]

What's wrong with 362?

[Jake The Wolfie]

The President's power cannot be unilaterally used because of rule 319.

[Ircher]

319 only refers to extra votes. The presidential veto does not give the president extra votes, so it can unilaterally kill a proposal.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Isn't there a Judiciary branch, or is this Vladimir President?

[Ircher]

There's no way to override a veto right now, no. You could always make that proposal later.

[logan5123]

Honestly, on the "too high" part, future rules will probably lower the value of Reputation, so I thought that 200 would be enough for the future.
I don't want people to stack vote tokens, you know?
VOTE: ABSTAIN 360 VOTE: YEA 361 VOTE: YEA 362

[StrangerCoug]

VOTE: Yea 357
VOTE: Yea 360
VOTE: Yea 361
VOTE: Yea 362