NomicScum, Game 2

[Packbat]

Another note: you better make clear that non-votes are counted as nay votes, otherwise I'll propose something, set it to vote, vote for it, and immediately table it. One out of one = 100% = maximum possible number of points.

[Cybele]

Sell me, Cybele. Why do we need this Rule?

Well, what do I need to say? I think it's probably going to be useful to have a new way to process propositions other than a straight 'pass' or 'fail'. With this new mechanic rules can be proposed, tabled and refined before eventually passing as best as they can be. In the meantime, other fully-formed proposals can be passed, and less time is wasted deciding whether we're going to fail a current proposal because we can't alter in once voting's started.
I think it's cool. Why wouldn't it be?

*gonna try and write out a more final draft for the proposal. Definitely taking Packbat's comments to heart with this.*

[Packbat]

Clarification:

In regards to Untabling, and scoring an Untabled proposal: Any player may Untable a Tabled proposal in lieu of proposing their own rule change. Discussion continues as per a normal proposal, but when voting begins, votes that were held along with the tabled proposal shall be treated as if still in effect.

Votes on record shall not be scored with the passage of a tabled proposal, regardless of whether they are changed during the voting process.

All other means of scoring persist for a tabled proposal.

Is this supposed to mean "the player doesn't get points based on the votes cast"?

[Cybele]

oh, no. It's meant to mean that Yea votes that were scored when the prop was tabled will not be scored again, even if they changed (like from 'Yea' to 'Nay' and back to 'Yea'.
Example:
Player a makes proposal1
Players b, c, and d vote Yea, as does Player a. Other players either vote nay, or don't vote.
Player a tables proposal1.
Another player untables that proposal. The previous votes are standing, but when the proposal is scored, any 'Yeah' votes from players a, b, c or d are not counted.

[Packbat]

Understood - I think that wording could be clearer.

That actually doesn't change my prior point, though: what advantage is there to untabling a proposal over simply

proposing

an identical proposal (which could then itself be tabled)?

[Cybele]

:\
Not sure. I guess that'd be the flaw.
Maybe a rule could be passed that disallows the proposal of rules that are identical in purpose to existing rules, or tabled proposals. Seems like something that might be a good idea, anyways.

[Packbat]

I think that would be unenforceable.

[Robotnick2]

Bump?

[Packbat]

A simpler way would be to allow infinite retabling.

[Packbat]

Being as the deadline is in less than twenty-seven hours, my suggestion:

303. At any time after discussion of a rule change proposal has ended but voting has not, the proponent may

table

the proposal. A tabled proposal shall not be treated as having been passed or defeated. Upon tabling the proposal, voting ends without the proposal's passage, the proponent receives points as if all those who have not yet voted voted against the proposal, and the proponent's turn ends.

On their turn, any player may

untable

a tabled proposal in lieu of proposing their own rule change. When a proposal is untabled, it does not retain its old proposal number. Discussion continues as per a normal proposal, but when voting begins, all votes that had been placed on the proposal before its tabling shall be treated as if still in effect. Scoring on an untabled proposal shall occur as normal, save that on passage each player who had tabled or untabled the proposal shall receive 3 points per tabling or untabling, and on defeat each each player who had tabled or untabled the proposal shall lose 6 points per tabling or untabling.

Feel free to pitch me out on my ear if this does not meet your approval, of course.

[Packbat]

All right, we have just reached an interesting situation. The relevant rules:

201.

Players shall alternate in alphabetical order by username, taking one whole turn apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, nor parts of turns be omitted, except where the player of the turn shall be removed from the playerlist prior to that turn's completion. In the event of such a player's removal, the turn of the next player alphabetically shall begin immediately. All players begin with zero points.

202.

A player's turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on, and (2) adding a number of points to their score. The number of points added shall be calculated by subtracting 291 from the ordinal number of their proposal and multiplying the result by the fraction of favorable votes it received, rounded to the nearest integer.

(This yields a number between 0 and 10 for the first player, with the upper limit increasing by one each turn; more points are awarded for more popular proposals.)

203.

Each player shall be given one game week from the beginning of their turn to propose a rule-change and bring it to vote. When a rule-change has been brought to vote, each player shall be given one game week to vote on that rule change.

Each game week shall last at least 6 days, 23 hours, and 59 minutes, ending at the first occurrence of 11:59 p.m UTC on a Saturday after that length of time is complete.

And here is my interpretation: By 203, the time permitted for Cybele to bring his proposal to vote expired three hours ago. By 201, he was not permitted to

not

bring it to a vote by the expiration of that time period. Therefore, as he has proposed a rule-change, to wit:

303. In which a new action is created to be performed on a rule change proposal in-discussion, by the proponent of said rule change proposal.
At any time after a rule change proposal has been made, and discussion has ended, but voting has not, the proponent may TABLE the proposal. Upon Tabling the proposal, voting ends. All current votes will be tallied and scored and the proposal+current votes will be placed in a hold, to be UNTABLED at a later date. The proponent's turn then ends.
In regards to scoring a tabled proposal: A tabled proposal shall not be treated as having failed or succeeded. Scoring shall be otherwise applied as if voting had ended, as described in Mutable Rule 202.
In regards to Untabling, and scoring an Untabled proposal: Any player may Untable a Tabled proposal in lieu of proposing their own rule change. Discussion continues as per a normal proposal, but when voting begins, votes that were held along with the tabled proposal shall be treated as if still in effect. Votes on record shall not be scored with the passage of a tabled proposal, regardless of whether they are changed during the voting process. All other means of scoring persist for a tabled proposal.
A proposal may only be tabled once. When a proposal is untabled, it does not retain its old proposal number.

...he must by default have sent this rule-change in this form to vote at 11:59 p.m. UTC Saturday, yesterday.

If anyone disagrees, they may invoke Judgement.

If no-one disagrees, we'll just vote on it as it stands and the voting ends next Saturday.

I VOTE: Nay for the reasons previously recorded.

[T-Bone]

vote: yay

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: Nay

I have an upcoming rule proposal that would pretty much make this proposal moot.

[JDGA]

VOTE: Nay
Free points are bad.

[animorpherv1]

Vote:Nay

[Xalxe]

VOTE: Nay due to not seeing the point.

[Feirei]

Vote: Nay

[Lord Mhork]

VOTE: Nay

[Packbat]

• animorpherv1 - Nay
  
• Chevre
  
• Cybele
  
• Feirei - Nay
  
• JDGA - Nay
  
• Lord Mhork - Nay
  
• malthusis
  
• MonkeyMan576 - Nay
  
• Packbat - Nay
  
• Robotnick2
  
• T-Bone - Yea
  
• Xalxe - Nay

[Packbat]

Wiki updated.

[Chevre]

Vote: Nay

[Robotnick2]

VOTE: Nay - I really just don't see the point.

[Packbat]

Cybele and malthusis to go.

[Packbat]

Bump.

[Packbat]

Sending prods.