Nomic: The Constitution Game - Game Over

[logan5123]

guess who's back
back again
ya boi's back
tell a friend
VOTE: IRCHER WINS

[Ircher]

Up to date as of post 425.

Pending Proposals

1.

Proposal 381

(381, 392) by logan5123: Motions may be extended with a majority vote. Extending a motion sets the countdown to a different amount than originally stated. The time of the extension is chosen in the extension request.
Yea - logan5123, Allomancer
Nay - Ircher
Abstain - StrangerCoug
Not Voting - Jake the Wolfie

2.

Proposal 383

(381) by logan5123: All players found to have violated rule 323, and their alternate accounts, are to be removed from the game. Players removed via this rule cannot rejoin under any account.
Yea - logan5123, Allomancer
Nay - StrangerCoug
Abstain - Ircher
Not Voting - Jake the Wolfie

3.

Proposal 386

(404) by Jake the Wolfie: A player who duels someone who cannot afford to decline loses 5 reputation for beating up the poor.
Yea - Jake the Wolfie
Nay - Ircher, Allomancer
Abstain - StrangerCoug
Not Voting - logan5123

4.

Proposal 388

(421) by logan5123: More than one president cannot be nominated in a party. Parties must vote on a president. Parties individually decide how they vote on presidential nominees.
Yea - logan5123, StrangerCoug
Nay - Allomancer
Not Voting - Ircher, Jake the Wolfie

Pending Motions

[Ircher]

VOTE: Nay 388
I like the concept, but that proposal is poorly worded.
---
387 passes. Ircher wins the duel.

Give 5 reputation to Allomancer.

I'll give you half of it back.

Proposal 389: Amend rule 208 to, "There may be no more than eight pending proposals at any given time. A pending proposal is a proposal that has not yet been acknowledged by the moderator as having passed or failed."

[Jake The Wolfie]

I'll allow 389 if you allow this one:

Proposal 390:

Any player may only have 1 proposal out at a time for free. Any additional proposals will cost them 10 coins.

[Ircher]

Unfortunately, mine would be the fifth one, and the extension motion expired. I'm afraid I can't count your 390 at the moment.

As for whether I'd vote 390, I'd have to think about it.

[logan5123]

VOTE: YEA 389
Hey, so I just had a revelation and it's slightly driving me insane, and I want you guys to feel suffering, so is this statement true: "Any basic statement can be disproved with enough thinking." Like, I was originally gonna say no for stuff like "1 + 1 = 2" but then I thought about it and I was like "but what about base 1" and for "the sky is blue" the most obvious one my original counterargument was "What about colorblindness" but then I thought about "what about animals who can see more or less colors than us" and now I'm in an existential crisis help

[Ircher]

Absolutely. It all depends on what axioms you use.

[Allomancer]

VOTE: Yea 389

[Jake The Wolfie]

1+1=2 in a general sense.

[Ircher]

It doesn't in binary. 1 + 1 = 10.

(Or possibly 1 + 1 = 1 if you define + as logical AND.)

[StrangerCoug]

VOTE: Yea 389

[Jake The Wolfie]

It doesn't in binary. 1 + 1 = 10.

(Or possibly 1 + 1 = 1 if you define + as logical AND.)

In a general sense

[Ircher]

389 passes. Next update is probably tomorrow.

[logan5123]

Also, now that I'm out of existential crisis mode, I just realized that Ircher literally denied my proposal only to immediately make it himself.

Bruh. Just bruh.

390: Players may "credit" proposals to a player other than themselves. Doing so gives any rewards gained upon passing to the credited player.

This not only serves to prevent snipes from mattering but also can be used as leverage to get a player to vote a specific way

without forcing them to do it.

Forcing players to do specific things due to other players actions is a bad thing.

Edit: formatting

[Ircher]

Look here folks, if all things go well in the next 48 hours, I'll approve of such a proposal. I just have to make sure I'm not spending too much time on this game versus other important stuff.
VOTE: Nay 376

I explained why I denied it at the time, and I also explained here why I was willing to do it this time. But fine, I'll give you some of the rep.

Give logan5123 2 reputation.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 391:

Any player may only have 1 proposal out at a time for free. Any additional proposals will cost them 10 coins.
This is to punish one player from hogging all of the proposal space

Proposal 392:

A player gains twice the amount of the gains or losses for each prime number in their proposal number. This is not applied retroactively, 0 and 1 are not considered prime, and this does not apply to costs for making a proposal. (Example: 392 would have x2 for containing the prime 3. 395 would have x4 for having the primes 3 and 5.)
This incentivizes making better proposals on numbers with lots of primes, which increases overall proposal quality.

[Ircher]

10 coins is too expensive for an extra proposal. I can understand not wanting someone to hog the proposal space though. Change it to say 3-5 coins, and I'll agree.

VOTE: Nay 392
It procs way too often.

[Jake The Wolfie]

If there are lots of primes in most proposal numbers, then everyone benefits from it, no?

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 393:

Unless stated otherwise, all points of any type may be freely given to other players.

[logan5123]

VOTE: ABSTAIN 391 VOTE: YEA 393 VOTE: NAY 392
ya yeet

[StrangerCoug]

VOTE: Yea 390
VOTE: Nay 391
VOTE: Nay 392

[Ircher]

VOTE: Yea 390
VOTE: Nay 391
VOTE: Yea 393
---
390 and 393 pass. 391 and 392 fail. Motion M005 expires.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Contract 001:

This contract, the Mutual Support Contract, guarantees that all signatories shall vote in a beneficial way to any other signatory, such as voting for a proposal made by a signatory or voting for a signatory during a duel. If a player is able to vote in a beneficial way but chooses not to, they must pay the offended signatory a minimum of 3 coins within 24 hours. A signatory may choose to pay another signatory in advance to cover for a future offense. In the event that voting beneficially for one signatory is harmful to another, no penalty payment is needed. In the event that a signatory's vote does not explicitly benefits another signatory, they may choose to vote however they please.
To become a signatory of this contract, you must either pay all existing members 1 coin in fees, or 3 coins to 1 member. You must also announce intent in the thread by typing the following:

I hereby join the Mutual Support Contract.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Jake The Wolfie pays all Mutual Support Contract members 1 coin.

I hereby join the Mutual Support Contract

[Jake The Wolfie]

Proposal 394:

The creator of a contract may amend a contract or burn a contract. All signatories of the previous contract, if amended, are no longer signatories of the amended contract and must become new signatories of the amended contract. If a contract is burned, he contract is repealed and all previous signatories of the contract are removed from being signatories.

If anyone would like to re-word this to make this simpler, please let me know.