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.
Proposal 301 has been accepted with unanimity, earning Coolbot 10 points.
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.
: 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
Ok, let's discuss first this time. I think it would be unfair for a person that has to go on vacation for a period longer than 72hs. other than that, I'm all in for the proposal
A well thought out proposal that helps to move the game along. I would vote for it, but I think some kind of amendment needs to be made that allows a person to take a hiatus from the game for say the holidays or something, so that they don't hold the game up. In fact, forget that, I know my new rule.
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.
Actually, I was simply going for something to the tune of people are allowed to declare that they will be absent from x date to x date. Their turn is skipped and their vote is not counted in the majority. If more than 2/3 of players wish to declare the game recessed they may. If more than 50% of players are gone through the above system, the game is automatically declared recessed.
Seems reasonable to me. I'm not so sure vacations will be that big of a problem with this rule. It took about two days to get my proposal passed, and using that as a guide, it'll be about two weeks before a player's turn comes up again.
I dunno, but unless judgement is invoked, that's it for discussion. I might spite-veto this one just to send a message. For now I'm withholding my vote.
actually, you're right mathcam, it says "before the vote", not "before voting begins". One problem I see with this is that a player may cast a vote early and then ammendments would be made and the player may wish to change his vote. Do we allow vote changes? If you ask me the players are suggesting rather insignifigant rule-changes for this early in the game. There are a lot of holes in the initial set that need to be addressed.
I think basically I proposed a set of rules that governed this a few posts ago. Unless anyone disagrees, there is to be no amending of propositions unless a serious clarification is needed, in which case all votes are reset.
This way people have to make sure they unambiguously phrase their propositions the way they want them to before posting them.
I think Stewie judgement during the previous turn are a good rule of thumb until we get an actual rule to settle the issue. We're dealing gray are here, and have to muddle our way through it.
I agree with Fishbulb. Because it gives people points, I'll only be voting for things that make the game more fun (or, if possible, more advantageous for me). Prohibiting the possibility for lurkers is a good way to start in my opinion. But I haven't see other games...I could see how different instances of the same game could have had several drastically different game mechanics in place by now.
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.
Ok, so finally I can see the rule which governs this. It was up to Fishbulb to decide the length of time for discussion to take place. He hasn't yet so technically discussion has not started yet and voting has definitely not started.
[size=75][color=darkblue]I'm never wrong... well I was wrong once but that was when I thought I'd made a mistake but hadn't.[/color][/size]
