Nomic

[Fishbulb]

Alright, I might just stumble through, but I'd like to try this out.

/in

[Fishbulb]

Well, if he just wants 5, I have no problem with sitting out.

[Fishbulb]

I'm kinda stuck here, too. I think it is too much to lose, and not very beneficial. As long as the front post is current, why do we need it repeated every page?

[Fishbulb]

Well, I don't have anything against it, so

Vote: Yes

on 301.

[Fishbulb]

Proposal 302

: Each player has 72 hours from the time their turn begins to submit a new proposal for voting. If he/she does not submit a proposal on time, the turn will move to the next player. If any player forfeits their turn three times during the course of the game, they shall be removed from the game

[Fishbulb]

Well, you do get two harmless skips. But I guess if someone has to take a long leave of absence, we could have a future proposal to allow a vote on recesses... Christmas through New Year's, for example.

[Fishbulb]

If you ask me the players are suggesting rather insignifigant rule-changes for this early in the game.

*shrug* I thought it would be a good idea to have something to deal with possible slow people in case it happens. Sorry.

[Fishbulb]

Well, discussion is already open. I just decide when to end it, correct?

[Fishbulb]

Yeah, I think we could add a proposal to allow for recess, but I don't like the idea of the game being held up any time someone is out. That's what the two grace skips are for.

I see your point about extending it to voting. But I don't want to have anyone lose points for being skipped. Just make sure it doesn't happen three times.

Alright, a current version of

Proposal 302

:
Each player has 72 hours from the time their turn begins to submit a new proposal for voting and 72 hours from the start of a voting period to submit their vote. If he/she does not submit a proposal on time, the turn will move to the next player. If he/she does not submit a vote on time, they do not have a vote and the proposal will need one less vote for "unanimity". If any player forfeits their turn or misses a vote ten times during the course of the game, they shall be removed from the game. The number of skips will be kept on a seperate tally on the first post.

I think ten vote skips is pretty reasonable. So if someone does one or the other, their out. Their might be a better way to handle the voting part, so make sure and let me know what you think. And the last part about it being on the first post is, of course, up to PolarBoy. If he declines, I will change the last sentence to read: The number of skips will be kept on a seperate tally on Fishbulb's first post.

Alright, discuss.

(Discussion to end Monday 5:00 PM GMT)

[Fishbulb]

Well, it is three for proposals. The ten is for votes. That's because a turn only comes after a week or two, but voting would be more frequent. Someone might miss several votes in a row.

[Fishbulb]

And I'll reiterate the 3 and 10 part again...

The numbers are not related. You can miss 2 proposals and 9 votes and still be in the game. But even if you have 0 missed proposals, when you hit 10 votes you're out, and vice versa. And the main reason is, if you have to be gone so much, even with forewarning, this game would take forever. Sure we could give unlimited skips, but then you'd be a tag-along, not even participating. I don't want the game to slow to boring level, and all of us are on enough to make these deadlines, so the graces are for any necessary absences, just don't make it commonplace.

[Fishbulb]

I would like to point out, though, that fishbulbs most recent version of the rule is ambiguous on the point of whether missed turns and missed votes are counted seperately or together, and that it also does not mention the number 3 at all. This should be amended before we proceed.

Oops, somehow I mistyped that part. "If any player forfeits their turn

three times

or misses a vote ten times during the course of the game, they shall be removed from the game." That's what I meant to type.

And the "seperate tally" was meant to cover that they were seperate tallies, but I guess it could be misunderstood to just mean seperate as in a seperate place. Sorry, the more I try to keep it simple concise, the more complicated it becomes.

[Fishbulb]

Well, if we can all be happy with the original proposition (which I fail to see any problems with) I'd much rather use it. The changed proposition was just to please everyone telling me it was ambiguous and whatnot. I think the first one is fine, just we will need something in the future to handle absenteeism during voting.

[Fishbulb]

Alright. Just like it was in my original proposition .

Proposal 302

:Each player has 72 hours from the time their turn begins to submit a new proposal for voting. If he/she does not submit a proposal on time, the turn will move to the next player. If any player forfeits their turn three times during the course of the game, they shall be removed from the game.

[Fishbulb]

Actually, discussion doesn't end until 5:00 PM GMT. So we weren't supposed to vote yet, correct?

[Fishbulb]

Alright, guess it is time to vote.

Vote: Yes

[Fishbulb]

I guess that's it then. We move on to massive now, right?

[Fishbulb]

Ah, good point.

[Fishbulb]

and[/u]

Make up your mind, cam. Italics or underlined?

[Fishbulb]

Well

excuse[/u] me, then!

[Fishbulb]

Vote: Yes

[Fishbulb]

Yes

[Fishbulb]

Vote: Nay

[Fishbulb]

I don't see anything wrong with it. But I guess I fail to see the point in it as well. Couldn't we just lower the amount of points needed?

*shrug*

Vote: Yes

[Fishbulb]

Here's what you need, CoolBot.

World RPS Society

[Fishbulb]

Ahem.

[Fishbulb]

I dunno. It was six minutes between those. I'm betting he quit before realizing it. But I thought I should do that just in case. It certainly wasn't a real "sniper" post, that's for sure.

[Fishbulb]

Vote: No

[Fishbulb]

Sounds good to me.

[Fishbulb]

Vote: Yes

[Fishbulb]

Good point, Norinel.

Proposal 308 (?):

Only users with their name on the roster in the first post may post in this thread. If someone does post, for the sake of the rules their post does not exist and all rules are ignored for that post.

[Fishbulb]

Ooh! I could entitle it the "Random Hobo Protection Plan"... Or the "Gated Community Act".

[Fishbulb]

Yeah, I see what you mean, CoolBot. I actually was going to add a little more with rules on allowing new players to enter, but it bogged the proposal down too much and I figure we can get to that later. I'm not sure what to do about the PolarBoy factor... Any ideas?

[Fishbulb]

I see what you mean. *hangs head* Bye-bye 10 pts...

[Fishbulb]

By the way, none of those quotes with my name were really from me, Norinel.

[Fishbulb]

Vote: No

[Fishbulb]

Eh, I'll vote

Yes

on whichever it is.

[Fishbulb]

Vote: Yes

[Fishbulb]

Sorry, folks. I'm going to have to withdrawl from this game. I kept thinking I'd have time to catch up and get back into the game, but unfortunately I never did.