Print

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

[FallacyofUrist]

I purchase as many plots of land as I can. The remainder of my money goes into the lottery.

I support Proposal 48a and Proposal 45.

I oppose Proposal 47 and all variants of it. My master plan would be disrupted by it, to say the least.

Proposal 49 - Alliances: At any time while this game is still in progress, a player may state "I wish to form an alliance with [PLAYERNAME].", replacing [PLAYERNAME] in said statement with the name of the player he/she wishes to form an Alliance with. If the player whose name was put in place of [PLAYERNAME] in that statement says, in this thread, "I accept your alliance proposal, [PLAYERNAME2].", where [PLAYERNAME2] in that statement should be replaced with the name of the player who stated "I wish to form an alliance with [PLAYERNAME].". After doing this, an Alliance will be created with those two players as members.
The highest number of players an alliance may have as members is 5, the lowest, 2.
Whenever a player in an alliance wins, all other players in that alliance also win, at exactly the same time.
A player may leave an Alliance at any time by stating his intent to do so at any time in this game thread, and having that statement witnessed by the Judge.
A player may be added to an Alliance by all the players currently in said Alliance stating their desire to have said player added to the Alliance in question, and then said player stating their desire to become a member of said Alliance. They will then become a member of said alliance.
If a majority of players in an Alliance state their desire to have a player removed from an Alliance they are in, it will be done, causing said player to no longer be a member of said alliance.
A given player cannot be a member of more than one Alliance.
Alliances will be individually referred to with different names. A given Alliance's name shall be determined by a majority of that Alliance's members stating their desire for said Alliance to have a given name.
An Alliance's name may be changed after it is set by a majority of that Alliance's members, in the same manner as choosing an Alliance's name for the first time.
Whenever a player in an Alliance earns money(also referred to as $) by means of start-of-turn income, an amount of $ equal to 10% of the amount earned, rounded down, will be added to that player's Alliance's Alliance Account. All Alliances have Alliance Accounts by default, and when an Alliance Account is created(which will happen when an Alliance is created), it will start with 0$.
If at any time a majority of the players that are members of a given alliance state their desire for the money/$ in their Alliance's Alliance Account to be relocated to a given player's own bank account, it will be done immediately.
If the Holy Emperor is a member of an Alliance, the maximum number of members allowed for that Alliance increases by two. If the Holy Emperor leaves an alliance, the maximum number of members allowed for that Alliance will decrease by two, and if the maximum number of members for said Alliance is less than the allowed number, the players in the Alliance will be required to remove players from that Alliance in standard fashion until the number of players in that Alliance reaches the standard maximum number of members for an Alliance.
Amendments, otherwise known as modifications, to the rule created by this proposal cannot be done without a supermajority(two thirds) of the players in this game wishing said amendments to be made.

[Elephant Parade]

Oppose 49.

Proposal 49a - Alliances, Modified: At any time while this game is still in progress, a player may state that they wish to form an alliance with another player; no exact phrasing is required, but the name of the other player must be in bold. If the other player responds, within the same turn, with acceptance—again, there is no exact phrasing, but the offering player's name must be in bold—an alliance between the players is formed at the end of the turn, along with an .

The highest number of players an alliance may have as members is 5, the lowest, 2.

Whenever a player in an alliance wins, all other players in that alliance also win, at exactly the same time.

A player may leave an Alliance at any time by stating his intent to do so at any time in this game thread, and having that statement witnessed by the Judge.
A player may be added to an Alliance by, after they have asked to be added in a post that includes the Alliance's name in bold, being accepted by the entirety of the Alliance, who must include the player's name in bold. The judge should post in the thread to confirm the player's acceptance as quickly as reasonably possible.
If a majority of players in an Alliance state their desire to have a player removed from an Alliance they are in, it will be done, scheduling the player to be removed from the Alliance at the end of the turn.
Being removed or added to an alliance happens at the end of the turn, before Alliance Account-related steps happen.
A given player cannot be a member of more than one Alliance.

Alliances will be individually referred to with different names. A given Alliance's name shall be determined by a majority of that Alliance's members stating their desire for said Alliance to have a given name. By default, an alliance is named "The [player]-[player] Alliance," for two-player alliances, or "Alliance of [player], [player], [more players, if necessary] and [player]" for alliances of more than three. Samples are displayed in Figure 1.
An Alliance's name may be changed after it is set by a majority of that Alliance's members, in the same manner as choosing an Alliance's name for the first time.

Whenever a player in an Alliance earns money(also referred to as $) by means of start-of-turn income, an amount of $ equal to 10% of the amount earned, rounded down, will be added to Alliance Account of that player's Alliance, instead of that player's account. An Alliance's Alliance Account is created, with a balance of $0, when that Alliance is created
If at any time a majority of the players that are members of a given alliance state their desire for some or all of the money/$ in their Alliance's Alliance Account to be relocated to a given player's own bank account, it will be done immediately.
Amendments, otherwise known as modifications, to the rule created by this proposal cannot be done without a supermajority(two thirds) of the players in this game wishing said amendments to be made.

Bob-Bill Alliance
Alliance of Bob, Bill, and Alfred
Alliance of Bob, Bill, Alfred, and James
Alliance of Bob, Bill, Alfred, James, and Fred

I put my changes in red. I removed the supermajority clause, as this is a pretty huge proposal—it could have exploits or errors, which we want to be easy to fix; after we have the bugs ironed out, solidifying it might be okay. I removed the special benefits granted to the emperor, as the election system is currently broken—you can buy votes, which will become increasingly cheap as profits increase exponentially. The original version is just +10% money, which is kind of silly. Also, I clarified/changed withdrawal rules; as written, it could be interpreted as forcing the Alliance to give the entire balance at once, which would be a step toward balancing +10% but is unnecessary for +0%. Ideally, a way for Alliances to spend money will be added, since a no-bonus account is, on its own, just a way to share some small funds. It could still be useful, though—maybe you just need $10 more to buy that vital extra proposal! I also addressed something that jumped out at me—alliance names-pre-naming. Finally, I changed some structure and wording around; "Player's Alliance's Alliance Account" is an abomination unto English, and I am too much of a nitpicker to stop there.

After writing this, I changed more phrasing around and clarified the rules for adding people to/removing people from Alliances.

Possible remaining issues:

• Going by rules-as-written, the judge doesn't need to witness people. I can feel this leading to a hilarious endgame play, but I don't think it's a big deal—if we have a way to replace the judge, if we don't.
• Do we capitalize "Alliance"?

(Side note: for the sake of readability, use bullet points if you're going to have lots of separate lines. If you don't want to use lots of separate lines, use paragraphs.)

Support 49a.

[Person]

Well, those sure are proposals. Shame I can't really think of a first for the wordiness, but such is Nomic. As a side note, the first post now takes a notable amount of time for edits to go through. I've never had a game warrant that before, and it kinda feels good that it takes awhile.

[Elephant Parade]

Well, those sure are proposals. Shame I can't really think of a first for the wordiness, but such is Nomic. As a side note, the first post now takes a notable amount of time for edits to go through. I've never had a game warrant that before, and it kinda feels good that it takes awhile.

There's a character limit—it's 15,000, I think, though I could be wrong—so you'll probably need to start storing the information somewhere else. You could use a google document, or just start a new thread with reserved posts.

[Person]

I actually reserved a second post. In retrospect that might not be enough. I've also done a lot of editing into how I store stuff. Iirc the limit is 40,000, which is a fairly large amount honestly. I've already moved all the passed/not passed proposals into the second post, and they accounting for most of the space honestly.

[FallacyofUrist]

Hm.
I agree with your modifications. Support Proposal 49a.

[TopHat]

I Oppose Proposal 49 and all Variants of it.
It will merely result in an alliance forming & then using their voting power to ensure they win (probably directly by altering the win conditions) as the expected hammering recieved by Proposal 47 (when it threatened the power of an alliance-sized group) shows.

[Person]

Proposal 45 - Defining "Active Player" for Future Legislation: An "active player" is a player who has posted within the last three turns and/or the last week. If a proposal includes the phrase "active player", it is using this definition, unless another is supplied within it. For clarity, it is strongly recommended that proposals with an alternate definition use a different phrase—"current player" and "recent player" are both workable, if slightly awkward.

Proposer: Elephant Parade
Supporting: Elephant Parade, "Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth", MonkeyMarkMario, TopHat, FallacyofUrist
Opposing:
Total: Passes 5 to 0

Elephant Parade Gains $500 and 1 Holy Imperial Elector Vote.

Proposal 46 - New Nobility: each time a player gains (10x previous Number) of land they get a title, Starting at 10 with the currently Available title of "Land owner" these titles will be applied to the player replacing the previous title, or modifying a title if they already have it included in there name(s). the titles go in the order of: "Land owner"(10) "Lord OR Lady"(100) "Baron OR Baroness"(1000) "Viscount OR Viscountess"(10000) "Earl OR Count OR Countess"(100000) "Marquess OR Marchioness"(1000000) "Duke OR Duchess"(10000000) "Prince OR Princess"(100000000).

Proposer: "Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth"
Supporting: "Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth"
Opposing: TopHat
Total: Does not pass 1 to 1

Proposal 46a - New Nobility Modify: each time a player gains (10x previous Number) of land they get a title, Starting at 1 with the currently Available title of "Land owner" these titles will be applied to the player replacing the previous title, or modifying a title if they already have it included in there name(s). the titles go in the order of: "Land owner"(1) "Lord OR Lady"(10) "Baron OR Baroness"(100) "Viscount OR Viscountess"(1,000) "Earl OR Count OR Countess"(10,000) "Marquess OR Marchioness"(100,000) "Duke OR Duchess"(1,000,000) "Prince OR Princess"(10,000,000).

Due to variant rules, "Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth" counts as this proposals proposer.
Supporting: MonkeyMarkMario, "Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth"
Opposing: TopHat
Total: Passes 2 to 1

"Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth" gains $100 and 1 Holy Imperial Elector Vote

Proposal 47 - The Power Limitation Act:
A Player may only hold 20 plots of land. A player who tries to buy plots of land which would put them over this limit keeps the money and does not accrue more land. Any player owning more than 20 plots of land when this Proposal takes effect loses enough plots of land to bring them down to 20 but is refunded $250 per plot of land lost this way.

Proposer: TopHat
Supporting: TopHat, Elephant Parade
Opposing: "Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth", MonkeyMarkMario, FallacyofUrist
Total: Does not pass 2 to 3

Proposal 47a - The Power Limitation Act, Slightly Less Limiting Version:
A Player may only hold 40 plots of land. A player who tries to buy plots of land which would put them over this limit keeps the money and does not accrue more land. Any player owning more than 40 plots of land when this Proposal takes effect loses enough plots of land to bring them down to 40 but is refunded $250 per plot of land lost this way.

Due to variant rules, TopHat counts as this proposal's proposer.
Supporting: TopHat
Opposing: "Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth", MonkeyMarkMario, FallacyofUrist
Total: Does not pass 1 to 3

Proposal 48 - The First Great Rule Cleanup: Alter rule 5 to remove the sentence "If a player does not post in the thread for over a week, they shall be considered to have forfeited the game." Alter rule 12 by adding the following sentence. "Turns start at 12:00 PP Eastern standard time, and end at 11:59 AM Eastern standard time. Alter rule 13 to the following. "The game ends when one player has at least $100,000. In that event, the player with the most money is declared the winner. Alter the final sentence of rule 14 to the following "A majority vote on a proposal is defined as more than half the votes cast on that proposal." Alter rule 23 by adding the following sentence. "A clear majority vote means that more than half the Holy Imperial Elector Votes cast must be on a single player." Alter rule 29 to read as follows "If a player's proposal does not pass, then they lose 1 Holy Imperial Elector vote, unless that would reduce that player's amount of Holy Imperial Electors Votes below 0." Alter rule 33 to read as follows "Any player already opposing three or more proposals—and wishing to oppose another—must compose a poem insulting at least one of the following:
    1. The contents of the proposal
    2. The character of the proposer and/or the proposal's supporters
    3. A poem previously composed by the proposer"
Alter rule 37 to read as follows "Each plot of land someone has gives them an extra .1 vote. Players with 10+ plots now gain the achievement Extra vote."

Proposer: Person
Supporting: Person
Opposing: "Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth", Elephant Parade
Total: Does not pass 1 to 2

Proposal 48a - Minor Rule Cleanup: The following list of changes will take place:

• Alter rule 5 to remove the sentence "If a player does not post in the thread for over a week, they shall be considered to have forfeited the game."
• Alter the final sentence of rule 14 to the following: "A majority vote on a proposal is defined as more than half the votes cast on that proposal."
• Alter rule 23 by adding the following sentence: "A clear majority vote means that more than half the Holy Imperial Elector Votes cast must be on a single player."
  
• Alter rule 33 to read as follows:

Any player already opposing three or more proposals—and wishing to oppose another—must compose a poem insulting at least one of the following:
    1. The contents of the proposal
    2. The character of the proposer and/or the proposal's supporters
    3. A poem previously composed by the proposer"

Due to variant rules, Person counts as this proposal's Proposer
Supporting: Elephant Parade, Person, "Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth", FallacyofUrist
Opposing:
Total: Passes 4 to 0

Person gains $400 and 1 Holy Imperial Elector Vote

Proposal 49 - Alliances: At any time while this game is still in progress, a player may state "I wish to form an alliance with [PLAYERNAME].", replacing [PLAYERNAME] in said statement with the name of the player he/she wishes to form an Alliance with. If the player whose name was put in place of [PLAYERNAME] in that statement says, in this thread, "I accept your alliance proposal, [PLAYERNAME2].", where [PLAYERNAME2] in that statement should be replaced with the name of the player who stated "I wish to form an alliance with [PLAYERNAME].". After doing this, an Alliance will be created with those two players as members.
The highest number of players an alliance may have as members is 5, the lowest, 2.
Whenever a player in an alliance wins, all other players in that alliance also win, at exactly the same time.
A player may leave an Alliance at any time by stating his intent to do so at any time in this game thread, and having that statement witnessed by the Judge.
A player may be added to an Alliance by all the players currently in said Alliance stating their desire to have said player added to the Alliance in question, and then said player stating their desire to become a member of said Alliance. They will then become a member of said alliance.
If a majority of players in an Alliance state their desire to have a player removed from an Alliance they are in, it will be done, causing said player to no longer be a member of said alliance.
A given player cannot be a member of more than one Alliance.
Alliances will be individually referred to with different names. A given Alliance's name shall be determined by a majority of that Alliance's members stating their desire for said Alliance to have a given name.
An Alliance's name may be changed after it is set by a majority of that Alliance's members, in the same manner as choosing an Alliance's name for the first time.
Whenever a player in an Alliance earns money(also referred to as $) by means of start-of-turn income, an amount of $ equal to 10% of the amount earned, rounded down, will be added to that player's Alliance's Alliance Account. All Alliances have Alliance Accounts by default, and when an Alliance Account is created(which will happen when an Alliance is created), it will start with 0$.
If at any time a majority of the players that are members of a given alliance state their desire for the money/$ in their Alliance's Alliance Account to be relocated to a given player's own bank account, it will be done immediately.
If the Holy Emperor is a member of an Alliance, the maximum number of members allowed for that Alliance increases by two. If the Holy Emperor leaves an alliance, the maximum number of members allowed for that Alliance will decrease by two, and if the maximum number of members for said Alliance is less than the allowed number, the players in the Alliance will be required to remove players from that Alliance in standard fashion until the number of players in that Alliance reaches the standard maximum number of members for an Alliance.
Amendments, otherwise known as modifications, to the rule created by this proposal cannot be done without a supermajority(two thirds) of the players in this game wishing said amendments to be made.

Proposer: FallacyofUrist
Supporting: FallacyofUrist
Opposing: Elephant Parade, TopHat
Total: Does not pass 1 to 2

Proposal 49a - Alliances, Modified: At any time while this game is still in progress, a player may state that they wish to form an alliance with another player; no exact phrasing is required, but the name of the other player must be in bold. If the other player responds, within the same turn, with acceptance—again, there is no exact phrasing, but the offering player's name must be in bold—an alliance between the players is formed at the end of the turn, along with an .

The highest number of players an alliance may have as members is 5, the lowest, 2.

Whenever a player in an alliance wins, all other players in that alliance also win, at exactly the same time.

A player may leave an Alliance at any time by stating his intent to do so at any time in this game thread, and having that statement witnessed by the Judge.
A player may be added to an Alliance by, after they have asked to be added in a post that includes the Alliance's name in bold, being accepted by the entirety of the Alliance, who must include the player's name in bold. The judge should post in the thread to confirm the player's acceptance as quickly as reasonably possible.
If a majority of players in an Alliance state their desire to have a player removed from an Alliance they are in, it will be done, scheduling the player to be removed from the Alliance at the end of the turn.
Being removed or added to an alliance happens at the end of the turn, before Alliance Account-related steps happen.
A given player cannot be a member of more than one Alliance.

Alliances will be individually referred to with different names. A given Alliance's name shall be determined by a majority of that Alliance's members stating their desire for said Alliance to have a given name. By default, an alliance is named "The [player]-[player] Alliance," for two-player alliances, or "Alliance of [player], [player], [more players, if necessary] and [player]" for alliances of more than three. Samples are displayed in Figure 1.
An Alliance's name may be changed after it is set by a majority of that Alliance's members, in the same manner as choosing an Alliance's name for the first time.

Whenever a player in an Alliance earns money(also referred to as $) by means of start-of-turn income, an amount of $ equal to 10% of the amount earned, rounded down, will be added to Alliance Account of that player's Alliance, instead of that player's account. An Alliance's Alliance Account is created, with a balance of $0, when that Alliance is created
If at any time a majority of the players that are members of a given alliance state their desire for some or all of the money/$ in their Alliance's Alliance Account to be relocated to a given player's own bank account, it will be done immediately.
Amendments, otherwise known as modifications, to the rule created by this proposal cannot be done without a supermajority(two thirds) of the players in this game wishing said amendments to be made.

Bob-Bill Alliance
Alliance of Bob, Bill, and Alfred
Alliance of Bob, Bill, Alfred, and James
Alliance of Bob, Bill, Alfred, James, and Fred

Due to variant rules, FallacyofUrist counts as this proposal's proposer.
Supporting: Elephant Parade, FallacyofUrist
Opposing: TopHat
Total: Passes 2 to 1

FallacyofUrist gains $100 and 1 Holy Imperial Elector Vote

(I'm starting to really hate that two vote minimum for some reason. It is just too low for my liking nowadays.)

The Lottery: This shows the bets of every player that uses it in one place, for much the same reason as I have the proposals in this post.

Person: $0
Iituem: $0
Sensei: $0
"Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth": $600 Rolled 2. $0 gained.
FallacyofUrist: $0
TopHat: $0
MonkeyMarkMario: $0
Elephant Parade: $0

The Bank: Each player has an account here.

Person: $202
Iituem: $0
Sensei: $0
"Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth": $1015.05 (Oh dear, I forgot to take fractions into account when I made the bank. Someone make it round to at least two decimal places.)
FallacyofUrist: $0
TopHat: $0
MonkeyMarkMario: $505
Elephant Parade: $202

Total: $1924.05
Current Multiplier: 1.01

Player Statuses:

Person: A player. The judge. Holds the title of Lord. 20 plots of land. $2100. 4 Holy Imperial Elector Votes. Extra Votes: 2.0 Achievements: Extra Vote
Iituem: A player.  $3500. 0 Holy Imperial Elector Vote.
Sensei: A player.  $3500. 1 Holy Imperial Elector Vote.
crazyabe: A player. Holds the title of "Lord Uln 'Proposes Uselessness' the eighteenth". Holds the title of landowner. 15 plots of land. $2500. 1 Holy Imperial Elector Vote. Extra Votes: 1.0 Achievements: Extra Vote
FallacyofUrist: A player. Holds the title of landowner. 14 plots of land. $3800, 1 Holy Imperial Elector Vote. Extra Votes: 1.4 Achievements: Extra Vote
TopHat: A player. Holds the title of landowner. 8 plots of land.  $1200. 3 Holy Imperial Elector Votes. Extra Votes: .8
MonkeyMarkMario: A player. Holds the title of landowner. 15 plots of land. $1450. 2 Holy Imperial Elector Votes.  Extra Votes: 1.5 Achievements: Extra Vote
Elephant Parade: A player. Holds the title of landowner. 12 plots of land. $1600. 3 Holy Imperial Elector Votes.  Extra Votes: 1.2 Achievements: Extra Vote

Now then, any player with more than 10 land must choose whether they be a lord or a lady, in relation to replacing their land owning title.

[crazyabe]

I Take the title of "Lord".
I place 1000 Into the bank.
I Spend 500 on the lotto.
I buy 4 plots of land.

Proposal 50 - 'New Markets': Players may invest any amount of cash divisible by 100 on 'Stock'. 'Stock' randomly increases and decreases the value of what has been Invested into it over 7 days. Players can remove their Investments from the 'Stock' at any time, gaining what it has changed into, but can't buy another Investment later. The 'Stock' roll on the table below to see how they change. At the end of the seven day period all investments return to the player that made them. at the end of the period the judge gets 1/100 of any remaining investments.

Code: [Select]

1:Price Drop, Divide Investments by 10.
2:Price Drop, Divide Investments by 5.
3:Price Drop, Divide Investments by 2.
4:Stock Crash, Reduce all investments to 100 or 0 if at / lower then 100.
5:Price raise, multiply Investments by 1.5.
6:Level, Investments stay the same.
7:Price raise, Multiply investments by 2.
8:Level, Investments stay the same.
9:Price raise, Multiply investments by 5.
10:Price Boom, Multiply investments by 100.

[FallacyofUrist]

HAHAHA!!!

I purchase as many plots of land as I can with my money, the remainder goes into the lottery.

I wish to form an Alliance with Person.

[Person]

I agree to an Alliance with FallacyofUrist. As a sidenote, this part of proposal 49a bothers me.

"If the other player responds, within the same turn, with acceptance—again, there is no exact phrasing, but the offering player's name must be in bold—an alliance between the players is formed at the end of the turn, along with an ." Along with what, exactly? I'd like some elaboration on that sooner rather than later, but it doesn't really mean anything as of yet. I'll just treat it as if the "along with an" text doesn't exist, and the sentence ends with the word turn.

[Elephant Parade]

I agree to an Alliance with FallacyofUrist. As a sidenote, this part of proposal 49a bothers me.

"If the other player responds, within the same turn, with acceptance—again, there is no exact phrasing, but the offering player's name must be in bold—an alliance between the players is formed at the end of the turn, along with an ." Along with what, exactly? I'd like some elaboration on that sooner rather than later, but it doesn't really mean anything as of yet. I'll just treat it as if the "along with an" text doesn't exist, and the sentence ends with the word turn.

It should say "along with an Alliance Account," oops.


Seeking interested players to form Those Who Stand Against Santa, an alliance devoted to stopping snowballing before it rolls any further! Its two tenants:

• Keep the game accessible for new players
• Cap exponential gain at a reasonable level

The alliance account will go toward funding extra anti-snowballing proposals.

Edit: Since this isn't how forming an alliance works, just say you want to form one with me, if you're interested; I'll respond. It might be good to set this up as an alternate way to form an alliance, but I'm feeling lazy right now.

[MonkeyMarkMario]

I take the Title Lord.
I buy 5 plots, put the $100 into the bank, and $50 dollars into the lottery.

Proposal 51 - Vassals: Players with a higher title(related to land) then other players can offer Vassalage to them. Each Vassal counts as: .2 votes; gives a % of their income to their Liege(No less then 1 and no more then 50) that is decided by the Liege Before the vassalage; as an alliance but is unrelated to them.
Maximum of vassals is a variable composed of: (your land/2 - number of players*10) This is to keep people from having too many vassals.

Support Proposal 50

I seek the join the FallacyofUrist and Person Alliance.

[Elephant Parade]

The land cap passed, right?

Buy plots until I hit the cap/run out of money.

Oppose 50 for potentially granting investors absurd amounts of money, though I like the risk of crashing.

Oppose 51 for giving players extra votes. If people get extra votes, the entire game will be broken. Stop trying to give people extra votes. Also, the phrasing is confusing—presumably, the votes go to the liege, but it isn't clear. Finally, there's no reason to be a vassal.

Take the title of Lord.


Proposal 52 - Defining Rules for the Removal of Old Proposals: A player (hereafter "the vote-caller") may call a vote to abolish a proposal, if they did not do so the previous turn. The vote is handled near-identically to a proposal vote; for clarity, players should use the words abolish and keep to support and oppose the removal of the proposal, respectively. If the vote passes, the proposal is removed at the end of the turn; if it fails, the vote-caller may not attempt to abolish the same proposal for three turns, though other players are free to. Abolishing a proposal does not reward the vote-caller with money or Imperial Electorate Votes. The format for calling a vote is below:

Abolish X - Proposal Name: Rationale

Including a rationale is mandatory. Abolishing is entirely separate from proposing, and does not use up your proposal for the turn, regardless of the vote's result.


Reminder: if it's impossible for new players to catch up, they probably won't join! If you want anyone new to start playing, ever, you should probably oppose snowballing. Even right now, it isn't possible, and some of this turn's proposed legislation just makes things worse. I mean, yeah, having lots of money is fun and all, but nothing's fun when you're the only one left playing.

[MonkeyMarkMario]

Elephant Parade did you read the update? Your proposal failed by a landslide, sorry.