Nomic II - Moratorium Wins!!!

Empking · Post Post #225 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 5:43 am

I don't know.

Moratorium · Post Post #226 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 5:44 am

Changing my vote:

Yes to P33

(unlimited rules instead of 25 only)

Lowell · Post Post #227 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 5:48 am

Oh god, unlimited rules? Pass.

popsofctown · Post Post #228 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:05 am

Moratorium wrote: P61: Anyone who isn't in the lead in money right now shouldn't be voting yes to give everyone money if they are truly playing to win.

psh, if everyone was playing to win i wouldn't be playing.

popsofctown · Post Post #229 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:06 am

right now that is, my proposal wouldve passed

Lowell · Post Post #230 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:22 am

popsofctown wrote:
Moratorium wrote: P61: Anyone who isn't in the lead in money right now shouldn't be voting yes to give everyone money if they are truly playing to win.
psh, if everyone was playing to win i wouldn't be playing.

Or, I could be forming an alliance of players to change the rule at the last minute to whoever has the LEAST amount of money wins.

... think about

that

!

Juls · Post Post #231 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:27 am

P62-P69 have been proposed.

skitzer · Post Post #232 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:31 am

Nay on P60
Nay on P61
Nay on P62
Yay on P63
Nay on P64
Nay on P65
Yay on P66
Nay on P67
Yay on P68
Yay on P69

Fixed tag.

Empking · Post Post #233 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:36 am

Nay to those I'm not voting on.

Lowell · Post Post #234 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:38 am

No on 48-59

YES on 60-62

No on 63-69

Still not getting what commodities do.

Lowell · Post Post #235 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:40 am

no on 33

MOTION TO CENSURE dizardin

. Too many rules!

MOTION TO CENSURE moratorium

. For shits and giggles, and until I understand the corporations.

Juls · Post Post #236 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:43 am

@Lowell. The person who proposes a commodity is the owner of that commodity and they set the price. Other players can buy that commodity and use it in game. So say you had a commodity called "Double Vote" and its effect is that someone's vote counted double then you could sell this to other players for them to use in the game and you would be adding to your bank account.

Juls · Post Post #237 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:47 am

Motion to censure dizardin expires on May 5, 2009 @ 12:35p.m. CDT.
Requires 8 yes votes to pass(votes will be tallied in this post)

Players voting yes: (0)

Juls · Post Post #238 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:47 am

Motion to censure Moraorium expires on May 5, 2009 @ 12:35p.m. CDT.
Requires 8 yes votes to pass(votes will be tallied in this post)

Players voting yes: (0)

dizardin · Post Post #239 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:57 am

Moratorium wrote: P55: There's no stipulation as to how many times this can be used (I hereby gavel 12 times on proposal 99 which states I automatically win, yay!).

Actually, since there's no invocation described with it, it wouldn't provide extra votes beyond the one that it provides normally. This was certainly the intent, and how I'd hope the Mod would rule it functions.

dizardin · Post Post #240 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 6:58 am

Lowell wrote:
MOTION TO CENSURE dizardin
. Too many rules!

That sucks. Obviously not voting for that.

chenhsi · Post Post #241 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 7:00 am

No to Proposals 60, and 62 - 68

Yes on Proposals 61 and 69

No to censuring dizardin and moratorium

Moratorium · Post Post #242 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 7:10 am

No to censuring dizardin and moratorium

Lowell · Post Post #243 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 7:13 am

You guys are so little fun.

Juls · Post Post #244 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 7:13 am

No votes aren't required for censuring, only yes votes need to be cast.

dizardin · Post Post #245 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 7:14 am

With regard to the proposed censure of Moratorium and myself:

1:

Lowell has proposed censure, per the guidelines of R11. This means he has posted in thread the motion, appropriately following the syntax of R11.

2:

Censure is

not

a Rule, given it is posted in thread per R11, it is not PM'd to the Mod, and it does not show up in the Proposed Rules list.

3:

SR1 states, with regard to Rules:

It is assumed that the person who proposes the rule has submitted a yay vote for the rule.

4:

R11 states that:

To support the motion of censure, other players must post
vote to CENSURE {player name}

5:

R11 states nothing about any implicit vote being cast in favor of censure, unlike SR1.

Therefore, it is my conjecture that there are 0 votes for censure of anyone, from what I've seen.

-- your friendly neighborhood Rules Lawyer

Fixed.

Lowell · Post Post #246 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 7:18 am

I assumed that MY vote counted, but yes, I agree it's not necessary for people to specifically decline censure.

dizardin · Post Post #247 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 8:33 am

Yay to P60, P68, P64, P68, P69
Nay to P61, P62, P65, P66, P67

Like the P64 'commodity', which I assume it is. Nicely done.

As for P65-P67, I don't like the idea of someone stealin my stuff.

P68 -- good catch.

animorpherv1 · Post Post #248 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 9:50 am

vote yes 9, 21,22,23, 29,32,34,37,38,48,49,50,53,54,55,56,57,58,60,65,66,67,68,69
vote no 35,46,47,51,59,61,62,63,64

holy shit that's a lot of yes votes.

Juls · Post Post #249 (ISO) » Sat May 02, 2009 9:52 am

I wrote a program that helps me keep up with this game and now I added a feature to tell me who is not voting on things so the second post of the rules proposals thread has your name and what you are not voting on. Note, you aren't required to vote on everything, this is for your convienance only.

(this post does not include ani's last post...I will update now).