Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Person]

I think in retrospect I'd prefer to amend that proposal.

Amendment: Every 24 hours, a player can spend up to 5 of their money in order to reduce the money of another player by the amount spent + 1.

Once per day would have caused a massive mess, with time zones and such.

[a1s]

You are in violation of rule 201. Any player may propose one rule-change per two days by posting their proposal in this thread.

But there is no penalty, so why not?
[/quote]
It's not about penalties (I think all this talk of accusing confused you), the stuff written in the first post is the literal reality of the game. The same way there is no penalty for moving a knight like a rook in chess or moving twice in a row, because it's impossible within the "reality" of a chess board for that to happen.

[Sensei]

Per rule 116, you may engage freely in action which is not regulated. However, the proposal of rules is regulated, and therefore, to make a proposal you must follow all relevant rules.

[quinnr]

Doing the tally in just a bit. I'll probably do it every other day from now on to coincide with different "two day" rules easier.

[Sensei]

Bumpin'!

[quinnr]

All crimes carry a Standard Penalty of three (3) Money. Crimes which specify their own penalty override the standard penalty.

321.

Amend rule 201 to additionally include rule amendment 201b: Any player with less than or equal to five money may propose one additional rule-change per two days by posting their proposal in this thread.

322.

Proposal: Any player may "give" money to another player in the following format: give [AMOUNT] to [PLAYER]. The word "give" must be bolded. The effects of this action are as follows:
(1) the giving player loses [AMOUNT] money,
(2) [PLAYER] gains [AMOUNT] money.
It is a "crime" to give more money than you have, and the money thus given must immediately be returned, in addition to any other penalties that "crimes" incur.
Additionally, for convenience, the amount of money a player has will be reflected in the opening post of the thread. This is purely for informational purposes, and having the incorrect amount of money listed in the OP does not allow you to give more money than you have.

323.

I'm in

Quorum is now 7.

New players can not vote on rules proposed before they are "In".

324.

To become an Accuser, a player must state the name of the Suspect and explicitly describe the Crime committed by the Suspect. If an Accuser accuses a Suspect and the Crime is true, then the Suspect must transfer 10 money to the Accuser. If the Crime is false, the Accuser must transfer 10 money to the Suspect. No more than one player can accuse a Suspect for the same Crime. The trueness of a Crime will be decided by vote of all the players.

325.

I'm in

Quorum remains at 7.

Once per day, a player can spend up to 5 of their money in order to reduce the money of another player by the amount spent + 1.

326.


Rule changes:
315 fails.

A violation of any rule is defined as a Crime. Any player who is accused of committing a Crime will be referred to as the Suspect of that case. Any player who accuses another player of committing a Crime will be referred to as the Accuser of that case.

316 passes.

At the beginning of every two-day period, every member who participated in voting or creating propositions in the last two-day period receives 5 money.

317 passes.

Each player must spend (and does, unless they explicitly opt out) 1 money for each 24 hours they are in the game or die of hunger. A dead player may not vote, but may rejoin after 3 days as a new player (with all their stats reset)

318 passes.

Any player may spend 25 Money to place a second Proposal per 2 day period, on top of the 1 provided by Rule 201.

319 passes.

Any player may transfer money to another player in the following format: Transfer [AMOUNT] to [PLAYER]. The word transfer must be bolded. There is a 1 money charge for each 5 money transferred, it comes out of the pocket of the player who initiated the transfer. Minimum charge is 1 money.

320 passes.


PLAYER TRIMMING:
kj1225 is removed. Fniff is removed. Quorum drops to 6.

[Person]

321. For.

322. Against.

323. For.

324. For. Seems a bit redundant but I don't see the harm.

325. For.

326. For. (We should probably make a rule against voting for our own rules soon. Unless we already did and I missed it somehow, in which case ignore that vote.)

[Sensei]

For- 321, 323, 324, 325
Against-322

[a1s]

322:against
323:for
324:against
325:against, there are more things wrong with this proposal than I care to name.
326:against
321:for, to round out the numbers a bit.

[a1s]

Anti-corruption bill 1
proposal: it is a "light" "crime" to propose rules aimed at benefiting specific people,  such as proposal 312 (even if they are not explicitly named, but are still self-evident, like in proposal 303). Unless otherwise specified by "light crime" legislation, doing so carries a penalty of only 1 money. Unless otherwise specified by criminal legislation, guiltiness of this crime is decided by the judge defined by rule 117.

[andy_t_roo]

how would rules 321 and 325 work together? - if guilty the accused loses 13, and the accuser gains 9?


For 321 penalties for crimes should exist, however it should be noted that general breaking of the rules is not a crime, just actions that should be ignored (re: attempts to propose things in violation of rule 201)


Against 322: we should be providing incentives to gain money, not lose it - i don't believe there should be an advantage to being broke, given that there is passive income of 3 per 2 days.



For 323: up the confusion, transferring money as a result of breaking crimes carries a transaction fee of 1, giving money is free


For 324: for the reasons stated when i proposed it. (Changing the quorum after the vote starts could lead to confusion)


For 325: this'll make the game interesting, eg: "I accuse Sensei of committing a crime by violating rule 309", which upon reflection would be a false accusation.


Against 326: why should spending x money decrease someone else's money by More than that?

[andy_t_roo]

a1s: rather than just saying "there's something wrong here" explain your thinking, or some of it; perhaps you could convince me to pay 1 money to edit my post and change my vote ...

[a1s]

how would rules 321 and 325 work together? - if guilty the accused loses 13, and the accuser gains 9?

did you meant 321 (in whihc case it's 13 and 10) or 213 (in which case it's 12 and 10)? In any case, yes, money will be lost in the shuffle.

For 321 penalties for crimes should exist, however it should be noted that general breaking of the rules is not a crime, just actions that should be ignored (re: attempts to propose things in violation of rule 201)

actually, as per  209, "A violation of any rule is defined as a Crime", so it seems you have to actually violate a rule (accidentaly?) to come under the effect of this.

For 323: up the confusion, transferring money as a result of breaking crimes carries a transaction fee of 1, giving money is free

1 per each 5 transfered, 2 total. So, yeah...

[henrib736]

Against 321
For 322
Against 323 We already have a money transfer rule. 213
For 324
For 325
For 326

[a1s]

a1s: rather than just saying "there's something wrong here" explain your thinking, or some of it; perhaps you could convince me to pay 1 money to edit my post and change my vote ...

First of all, justice isn't a toy democracy- lawmaking is, but once we pass a law it should stand on it's own.
Then there's the fact that we redefined (albeit quite similarly) several terms defined in a previous rule.
Which crimes are "the same"? Suppose I violated the dame rule twice, but on clearly distinct occasions, can I be accused twice?
Finally there is no defined procedure as to what a "vote of all the players" is. Is it unanimous or majority (those aren't even the only options)? How long does it last? What happens if people abstain?