Nomic
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
301. If a player finds they posted the first post on a new page, he or she shall immediately post the concurrent numbered rule set. If the player does this before anyone else posts, he or she shall recieve 5 points. If the player does not do this before anyone else posts, he or she shall lose 10 points.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
By concorrent, I just mean the rules that are currently in affect. No where is it indicated that we will keep track of the rules anywhere, so I think it's a good idea to have a rule mandating we do so. I find all the information being in the opening post to be slightly inconvient. Also, it places a burden on Polarboy with little gain. This rule trys to address both of those issues. I am willing to amend it so that we only post the 3xx rules that pass.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
I don't see anything in the rules that would preclude that. In fact, there really is nothing about how votes are counted.
How's this for clearing up the confusion: Instead of reading "the concurrent numbered rule set," proposal 301 reads "the numbered and currently active rules"
I believe I can make this ammendment by rule 111, since the word concurrent was unclear.
If no one objects by 1:00 PM EST Friday, I'm going to go ahead and make this change.111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Stewie, shdayforce already invoked judgement.
On the issue of chaging votes, I'd invoke judgement, except it seems immaterial now. Since Stewie judged everyone would have to revote in the case of an ammendment, there's plenty of chance to change votes.shadyforce wrote:I invoke judgement on your interpretation of rule 111.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
I like it, mathcam. Though I'd add a part about a mandatory discussion period before the first vote is cast. Not too long, maybe a day or two. As it is now, anyone can end discussion (and clarification) by casting a vote.
Anyway, here's the amended proposal:
301. If a player finds they posted the first post on a new page, he or she shall immediately post the numbered and currently active rules. If the player does this before anyone else posts, he or she shall recieve 5 points. If the player does not do this before anyone else posts, he or she shall lose 10 points.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Yes. Unfortunatly I didn't think about the length of the posts in the later stages of the game. Still, we can amend it later if it becomes a problem.shadyforce wrote:do you mean all of the rules currently in effect which is all the 1**, 2** and 3** rules?
And just to make my implicit vote explicit,vote: Yes
Oh, and please note that even if massive, shadyforce or Stewie votes no, the other two still have to vote as well so I can caculate how many points I receive.
Current Votes
CoolBot - Yes
FishBulb - Yes
massive - Unreported
Mathcam - Yes
PolarBoy - Yes
Scalebane - Yes
Shadyforce - Unreported
Stewie - Unreported-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
So that's ten points for me, if I got the math right: (301 - 291) * 8/8 = 10
fishbulb's next
PolarBoy, I was referring to the points you get when you vote against a successfully passed proposal, as outlined in Rule 204. So, hypothetically, someone could get ((P - 291) * y/8 + 10) points, where P is the proposal number and y is the number of yes votes by voting against their own proposal.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
I hate to throw a monkey wrench in the proceedings, but the current rules don't allow such a drastic amendmant. The only rule that addresses amendments is quite clear they are only for clarification and the like.
Well I sympathize with fishbulb's change, I don't see how the current rules allows it.111. If a rule-change as proposed isunclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
I still say the amended proposal is illegal. We are only allowed to change proposals for the reasons I bolded above. Fishbulb's' original proposal:
Is it unclear or ambigous? No.Fishbulb wrote: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
Paradoxical? No.
Would this rule hurt the playing of the game? No, in fact, it protects it.
Does it consist of multiple rule changes? No.
Does it make no difference? No.
Is it of questionable value? No, clearly there is value to dissuading players from skipping their turns.
shadyforce, Prop 302 originally did not have several parts. It dealt with players be absent during their proposal turns. A proposal certainly can have multiple parts, but Prop 302 didn't.
To be clear, I'm in favor of regulating missed votes as well as missed proposals, but the current rules don't allow us to do so with prop 302. We can accomplish both in the following ways.- 1. Fail 302. In some later proposal, we address both the issues of missed proposals and missed votes.
2. Pass 302. In some later proposal, we amend 302 to include the issue of missed votes.
3. Pass 302. In some later proposal, we pass a seperate rule to address missed votes.
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
The original proposition:
which I will refer to as P.302a.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
The amended proposition:
which I will refer to as P.302b.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.
P.302a is not unclear, paradoxical, or questionable. R.111 only allows proposals to be amended for these reasons. Further, P.302b doesn't address anything like these reasons; instead, it adds a whole new dimension to the proposal. Thus, in my estimation, P.302b is an illegal proposal, and unless it is judged (as outlined by R.212) otherwise, I will vote against it or any variants of it. I will, however, vote for P.302a.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Immutable Rules
101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable).
102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers.
103. A rule-change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule; (2) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of an amendment of a mutable rule; or (3) the transmutation of an immutable rule into a mutable rule or vice versa.
(Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.)
104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes.
105. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule-changes.
106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are voted on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they were voted on.
107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application.
108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted.
If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment.
109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect.
110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not "conflict" with that immutable rule.
111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote.
112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed.
113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed.
114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule-changes must never become completely impermissible.
115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule.
116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it.
Mutable Rules
201. Players shall alternate turns in alphabetical order by screenname.
202. One turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on, and (2) throwing one die once and adding the number of points on its face to one's score.
In mail and computer games, instead of throwing a die, players subtract 291 from the ordinal number of their proposal and multiply 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. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a simple majority.
204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each.
205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it.
206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it loses 10 points.
207. Each player always has exactly one vote.
208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points.
In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve 200 (positive) points.
209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules.
210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule-changes unless they are team-mates.
The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or computer.
211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence.
If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence.
If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs.
212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment.
When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players.
The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate.
Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge.
New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards.
213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner.
This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner.
301. If a player finds they posted the first post on a new page, he or she shall immediately post the numbered and currently active rules. If the player does this before anyone else posts, he or she shall recieve 5 points. If the player does not do this before anyone else posts, he or she shall lose 10 points-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Sounds good to me. If I understand the second half of R.108. this proposal implies that R.105 will be renumberd R.303. Do we need a specific clause in the proposition? Just to clear things up, maybe we should word it something like this:
Proposal 303: Rule 105 shall be mutable and be renumbered 303.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Well, the whole purpose of having immutable rules is to keep them from easily being changed. Since the immutable rules are those that form the bedrock of the game, it makes sense to make them harder to change. I would vote against any proposal to make all the immutable rules mutable.
Rule 103 disallows it.mathcam wrote:Why couldn't your proposal just change it from immutable to mutableand[/u] "mutate" it.
The use of the word "or" indicates a rule can only do 1 of the 3 options, not some combination of them.103. A rule-change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule; (2) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of an amendment of a mutable rule;or(3) the transmutation of an immutable rule into a mutable rule or vice versa.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
This was after the final form of 302 was declared, of course, so that counted as your vote. We're on 303 now.PolarBoy wrote:alright, we'll have to deal with absenteeism during voting some other way. I can deal with that.Vote: Yes on 302.
Also, I have 15 points (10 for passing R.301 & 5 for posting the ruleset on page 5)and shadyforce has -5 (5 for posting the ruleset on page 4 & -10 for incorrectly posting the ruleset on page 6)-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
PolarBoy, your early vote was legal, so R.302 was an active rule at the beginning of this page. Thus, shadyforce posted an incorrect rule set.
Oh, and I understand you're not the mod; in fact, I'd like this to be game as independent from a mod as possible; hence, R.301. I just wanted everyone to be aware of the point tally and didn't mean to imply you should've been on top of it.
As for the proposed rule, I'm not so sure anymore we need an amendment. R.108 clearly mandates a renumbering and R.110 clearly gives R.108 the authority to do that.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable).
102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers.
103. A rule-change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule; (2) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of an amendment of a mutable rule; or (3) the transmutation of an immutable rule into a mutable rule or vice versa.
(Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.)
104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes.
106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are voted on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they were voted on.
107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application.
108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted.
If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment.
109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect.
110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not "conflict" with that immutable rule.
111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote.
112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed.
113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed.
114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule-changes must never become completely impermissible.
115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule.
116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it.
Mutable Rules
201. Players shall alternate turns in alphabetical order by screenname.
202. One turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on, and (2) throwing one die once and adding the number of points on its face to one's score.
In mail and computer games, instead of throwing a die, players subtract 291 from the ordinal number of their proposal and multiply 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. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a simple majority.
204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each.
205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it.
206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it loses 10 points.
207. Each player always has exactly one vote.
208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points.
In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve 200 (positive) points.
209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules.
210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule-changes unless they are team-mates.
The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or computer.
211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence.
If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence.
If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs.
212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment.
When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players.
The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate.
Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge.
New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards.
213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner.
This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner.
301. If a player finds they posted the first post on a new page, he or she shall immediately post the numbered and currently active rules. If the player does this before anyone else posts, he or she shall recieve 5 points. If the player does not do this before anyone else posts, he or she shall lose 10 points.
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.
303. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule-changes-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
I actually like the Rock-Paper-Scissors idea. It'd be hard as hell to verify anything like a coin flip. RPS is (sort of) a randomness that can verified.
Scalebane, unaminous votes are worth more. The second half of R.202:Code: Select all
In mail and computer games, instead of throwing a die, players subtract 291 from the ordinal number of their proposal and multiply 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.)
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
A judge can be overruled, however, in the case of an egregious ruling. There's nothing similiar in the case of P.304. Even if there was, no one would ever disagree with a judge ruling in favor of passing the proposal since the only player voting against a proposal would Player B.
I like the idea of this rule, but unless we can figure out a way to minimize the judge misreporting the results, I don't think we should pass the proposal.
Here's an idea:
Player A sends his choice to the judge and another player, Player Y. Player B sends his choice to the judge and another player, Player Z. The judge posts he received both choices. Next, Z reports B's choice. Then, Y reports A's choice. Finally, the judge certifies they reported the choices correctly.
The key part is Z reports before Y does. This prevents both the judge and Z from tailoring their reports without outside help. Still, A, Y, and the judge can still conspire to pass the proposal. It is less likely three would conspire than two, though.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
I like the NasDaq idea the best. Mathcam, do you know of a web site that posts the closing price reliably?
Instead of requiring one less vote than unamity, maybe the rule should require one less vote than passage. If the purpose is to help get rules passed rathe than to help a player get points, this change makes sense.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Well, R.101 specifically bounds us to act according to the rules. Still, there is a problem with making rules which are only enforcable through the honor system. In a way, unenforcable rules aren't really rules at all since they cannot constrain our actions. Since, in this prop's orignal form, there is no way to distinguish between a judge & a proponent from conspiring and a judge accuratly reporteing the proponents choice, the propositon is unenforcable. I think by using the NasDaq coin flip method would be much better.
Mathcam, what were you trying to say by posting R.203? I know that proposals need unamity right now, but that doesn't mean it will be so in the future. R.203 itself allows for non-unanimous passage eventually and I think it would be short sighted not to take that into account.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Actually, the conspiring rule doesn't apply to this game. I'm not quite sure why, but that's what it says:
Of course, it can be enforced if you're playing around a table since players conspiring often can be seen. Over the computer or through mail, it's just to hard to enforce.R.210 wrote:Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule-changes unless they are team-mates.
The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or computer.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
I think the NASDAQ idea is a sound one. If I understand it, this is how it would work: Player A challenges Player B. Then, we wait until the next time NASDAQ closes. We take a look at the final digit. If it's 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, then A wins; if it's 6, 7, 8, 9, or 0, B wins (or vice versa). Since everyone knows what day we're looking at, it's easily verifiable (assuming we can find a web site that keeps a record of these things).-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Hmm, I just realized mathcam had made an official proposition. Forget everything I said about the NASDAQ, then. If we find it's a problem, we can always change it later. I certainly don't have any reason not to trust any of the players in this game.
As for amending P.304, I don't see any way we can. The only rule regulating amendments, R.111, doesn't mention anything about allowing an amendment if it maintains intent. R.111 only allows non-substantive amendments, and changing the unanimity requirement would, IMO, be substantive.
I do believe this would be a good amendment, though, so I'm torn. Right now, we don't have to worry about the unanimity requirement, so I don't think it's that critical we do it right now.
BTW, I like the idea of naming rules as well. Consider R.301 to be named "The Rule Report" if I may be so bold.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Alright, here's the arguement against:
R.111 is the only rule regulating amendments; thus, a proposal can only be amended if it is "unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value." Examing the allowed reasons as related to P.304:- P.304 is not unclear, ambiguous, or paradoxical.
P.304 is not distructive of play.
P.304 does not consist of mulitiple rules.
The amendment does make a difference in play; namely, it alters the conditions needed to invoke the proposal.
P.304 is not of questionable value. Since the amendment doesn't change the operation of the rule, only the conditions to invoke the rule, this should be obvious.
For reference:mathcam wrote:Proposition 304 (Trial by Combat): After any vote (proposed, say, by Player A) in which all but one of the eligible voters votes yes (say, Player B), Player A may challenge Player B to a game of Paper-Rock-Scissors (conducted via PM to the current Judge, or the next player up that is not Player A or B). If Player A wins, Player B must change his vote to yes and the proposition pases. If Player B wins, Player A must give Player B one tenth (rounded up) of his current points, with a minimum of five points (this can make Player A go negative). The only bond preventing the game's judge from cheating is his honor at mafiascum.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
I see, since x is unclear, you, with our input, want to amend it to a number using R.111. That looks like a valid amendment.
I'm a little torn on this rule. Gaining points is a little slow right now, but I'm not sure it won't be faster in the future. I guess I'd like a new game mechinism rather than automatic free points.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
There are other way of getting points than passing amendments:- Vote against a successful proposal (R.204)
Post the rule set at the beginning of a page (R.301)
Win a Trial by Combat as Player B (R.304)
somethingthat affects the game. If P.305 passes with any value of x, players don't have to do anything but finish turns, which is going to happen anyway.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
The Rule Set
101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable).
102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers.
103. A rule-change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule; (2) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of an amendment of a mutable rule; or (3) the transmutation of an immutable rule into a mutable rule or vice versa.
(Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.)
104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes.
106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are voted on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they were voted on.
107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application.
108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted.
If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment.
109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect.
110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not "conflict" with that immutable rule.
111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote.
112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed.
113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed.
114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule-changes must never become completely impermissible.
115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule.
116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it.
Mutable Rules
201. Players shall alternate turns in alphabetical order by screenname.
202. One turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on, and (2) throwing one die once and adding the number of points on its face to one's score.
In mail and computer games, instead of throwing a die, players subtract 291 from the ordinal number of their proposal and multiply 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. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a simple majority.
204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each.
205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it.
206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it loses 10 points.
207. Each player always has exactly one vote.
208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points.
In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve 200 (positive) points.
209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules.
210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule-changes unless they are team-mates.
The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or computer.
211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence.
If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence.
If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs.
212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment.
When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players.
The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate.
Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge.
New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards.
213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner.
This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner.
301. If a player finds they posted the first post on a new page, he or she shall immediately post the numbered and currently active rules. If the player does this before anyone else posts, he or she shall recieve 5 points. If the player does not do this before anyone else posts, he or she shall lose 10 points.
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.
303. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule-changes.
304. (Trial by Combat) After any vote (proposed, say, by Player A) in which all but one of the eligible voters votes yes (say, Player B), Player A may challenge Player B to a game of Paper-Rock-Scissors (conducted via PM to the current Judge, or the next player up that is not Player A or B). If Player A wins, Player B must change his vote to yes and the proposition pases. If Player B wins, Player A must give Player B one tenth (rounded up) of his current points, with a minimum of five points (this can make Player A go negative). The only bond preventing the game's judge from cheating is his honor at mafiascum.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Polarboy, I think you may of calculated your points for the last round wrong.
Polarboy Points Turn 5- +12 - R.202 - (305-291)(7/8) = 12.125
-10 - R.206
-5 - R.304
And he was successful with me.shadyforce wrote:Yeah, as I recall correctly, Mathcam tried to catch me out within seconds.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
There are 15 immutable rules & 15 mutable rules. By making the immutable rules mutable, that gives us 30 mutable rules. This exceeds the limit set by R.209.
That aside, I think by making all the rules mutable will make the game too unstable. While I wouldn't mind making any individual rule mutable, I'm hesitant to make all mutable.R.209 wrote:At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules.-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
-
-
CoolBot Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: February 24, 2003
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI