NomicScum, Game 2

[Packbat]

Also, your rule seems to

only

skip the turn on the first missed proposal - the second time they're prodded but not skipped. Is that right?

[Packbat]

(Hey, we're making your rule

better!

)

[animorpherv1]

Proposal 1: Each player has twenty-four (24) hours from the start of their turn to propose a new rule. In the event that a player does not propose a rule in his/her turn, his/her turn is skipped the first time. The second time, he/she is prodded and has an extra twenty-four (24) hours, and is skipped at the end of the time. The third time, he/she is eliminated. This rule takes precedence over Rule 201.

[Packbat]

Is now a good time to suggest using singular-they instead of his/her?

[animorpherv1]

Considering I like his/her better than they, not really.

[Packbat]

What if someone joins the game who professes a gender identity which is neither "him" or "her"? Singular-they avoids that minefield.

[animorpherv1]

Proposal 1: Each player has twenty-four (24) hours from the start of their turn to propose a new rule. In the event that a player does not propose a rule in their turn, their turn is skipped the first time. The second time, they are prodded and have an extra twenty-four (24) hours, and is skipped at the end of the time. The third time, they are eliminated. This rule takes precedence over Rule 201.

[MonkeyMan576]

Isn't there a limit to the number of rules that can be established?

[malthusis]

I accept the law.

[Xalxe]

Proposal 1: Each player has twenty-four (24) hours from the start of their turn to propose a new rule. In the event that a player does not propose a rule in their turn, their turn is skipped the first time. The second time, they are prodded and have an extra twenty-four (24) hours, and is skipped at the end of the time. The third time, they are eliminated. This rule takes precedence over Rule 201.

VOTE: YAY

[JDGA]

VOTE: Nay
Giving them an extra 24 hours only the second time is really silly, IMO. This also would have done better as an amendment of 203, as we currently have no way of penalising those that break 203.

[Packbat]

I don't think animorpherv1 has declared that it is up for voting yet.

[animorpherv1]

I'm done with it. It's up for voting as of when I posted it...

[Packbat]

In that case:

301: Each player has twenty-four (24) hours from the start of their turn to propose a new rule. In the event that a player does not propose a rule in their turn, their turn is skipped the first time. The second time, they are prodded and have an extra twenty-four (24) hours, and is skipped at the end of the time. The third time, they are eliminated. This rule takes precedence over Rule 201.

I'll hold my vote, pending correction a la JDGA #60.

Votes so far:

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

[Cybele]

Nay.

I would have preferred if the prod was for the first infringement instead of the second one. Additionally, a means to reset or wind back the counter would be nice, as well.

[Robotnick2]

Nay

. 24 hours is, in my mind, too restrictive; 48 to me is a much nicer number. Skipping to me is a larger punishment than prodding, so as Cybele said, I would have liked to have seen the prod as a punishment for a first infraction. Furthermore, some people, such as myself, would have a hard time coming up with new rules in such a short space of time - some of us are unimaginative. Thus, even if we had declared we were here and active, we would still be punished, in direct opposition to the bill's spirit (as I see it) of punishing those that are inactive.

[animorpherv1]

Yay

I guess people don't like making amendments.

[Cybele]

So instead of taking this time to adjust your proposition as has been recommended, you're going to let it fall?

[animorpherv1]

I fully believe that this proposition should work as is. You shouldn't need more than 24 hours to come in here with a proposal anyways. At first, we need to get some stuff set up. That's plenty to do for the first bit. Then, we can come up with some other fun things. Now, I understand that there are circumstances like V/LA. That's the only thing I'd potentially amend into the rule.

[Cybele]

What about the requests to change the order of penalties? You don't think there's merit to that?

[Packbat]

301: Each player has twenty-four (24) hours from the start of their turn to propose a new rule. In the event that a player does not propose a rule in their turn, their turn is skipped the first time. The second time, they are prodded and have an extra twenty-four (24) hours, and is skipped at the end of the time. The third time, they are eliminated. This rule takes precedence over Rule 201.

Votes so far:

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

[Lord Mhork]

VOTE: Nay as is.

Apparently, though, people don't want to make amendments? Is it just a simply "I propose X Amendment" kind of deal? Correct me if I'm wrong...

I propose Amendment 301A:
The deadline of twenty-four (24) hours assigned in Bill 301 is extended to fourty-eight (48) hours.

Thus, we give a reasonable amount of time for people to brainstorm, get on, and we generally account for real life.

I propose Amendment 301B:
The penalty assigned for failure to comply with rule 301 (stated below)

In the event that a player does not propose a rule in their turn, their turn is skipped the first time. The second time, they are prodded and have an extra twenty-four (24) hours, and is skipped at the end of the time. The third time, they are eliminated.

is rewritten as "In the event that a player does not propose a rule within the first forty-eight (48) hours of their turn [hereafter referred to as THIS], for the first time, they are prodded and receive an additional twenty-four (24) hours to propose a rule. The second time THIS occurs, that player's turn is skipped and goes to the next player on the list. The third time THIS occurs, the player is eliminated."

That way, the penalties are sensible, and it is clear exactly what the rule entails.

Edit:
There was a missing quotation mark at the end of Amendment 301B....

[Chevre]

I was scared to post this in here because I didn't want to disappoint ani but

Nay

.

I agree that 48 hours would be a better amount of time.

PEDIT:

Yay

to Amendment 301A

Yay

to Amendment 301B

If these pass I will switch to Yay on the actual proposition.

[animorpherv1]

I don't get why 48 hours. 24 hours should be perfectly fine, barring real life circumstances.

[Robotnick2]

Some people have lives, dear.