Print

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

[Frelock]

I, Frelock, hereby submit the following proposition, dubbed 327 Amendments, to the court to judge:

This proposition amends rule 327, the "Screw you guys, I'm going home" rule.
A.  The following subsections of 327 will be stricken:
     B. This proposition applies to players who leave because they are bored or have commitments as    
         well, and treats them as if they have lost.
     C. If no player is above 100 points they may choose people to lose points in the order of:
         100-90 existing points
         90-80 existing points
         80-70 existing points
         And so on in that pattern.
     D. If no player is below 100 points they may choose people to gain points in the order of:
         100-110 existing points
         110-120 existing points
         120-130 existing points
         And so on in that pattern.

B. A new subsection shall be added which has the following text:
         If a player chooses to use the provisions set forth by rule 327, they may not re-enter or
         participate in the game, even if another rule would otherwise allow them to do so.

I respectfully ask all members of the court to carefully consider its merits and cast their vote accordingly.

[Fualkner]

I'd like to join. Is that still possible?

[qwertyuiopas]

A. A Player is anyone who actively participates in one of the Phases of the game.
B. In order to participate, a Player must always abide by all the Rules currently in effect.

Apparently, you can, all you need to do is participate.
And follow the rules.

[Fenrir]

I, Fenrir, hereby submit the following proposition, dubbed Rectification of Repetition of Prepositions, to the court to judge:

This proposition modifys rule 304.
 A. The rule will be changed to the following:
   All future propositions shall follow this standard form:
    I, <Name>, hereby submit the following proposition, dubbed <Proposition Name>, for the court to judge:                             
    <Proposition>                             
    I respectfully ask all members of the court to carefully consider its merits and cast their vote accordingly.

I respectfully ask all members of the court to carefully consider its merits and cast their vote accordingly.

[Cheeetar]

I leave, activating my trap card! Qwertyuiopas gains 50 points!

[webadict]

I leave, activating my trap card! Qwertyuiopas gains 50 points!

Sucker, I use my counter trap!

... Um... Fine you win.

[Frelock]

Fenrir, you did not follow rule 304.  You need to add "I respectfully ask all members of the court to carefully consider its merits and cast their vote accordingly." to the end of your rule, else your current statement of the phrase will not be counted as part of your proposition, thereby striking it from the rule (or did you know this and do that to fool us?).

[Fenrir]

Fenrir, you did not follow rule 304.  You need to add "I respectfully ask all members of the court to carefully consider its merits and cast their vote accordingly."

My apologies, I had forgotten. I shall correct my proposition immediately.

[n9103]

*Points a BIG OBVIOUS Finger at Rule 201, and all the recent score-centric rules that have been passed as of late*

...
...
*crickets*
...
Or in other words, the goal is 200, and rules have been made based on reaching 100.

[Tylui]

Fenrir, I'm confused.  The only thing I noticed that's different is "for" instead of "to"...?  Is that what you wanted?

Also, the title of your proposition has "Preposition" in it.  I don't think that's intentional?

And yeah, to answer your question, new blood is always appreciated.  I was actually going to suggest extra points for people who brought new ones in.

Also, qwertyuiopas, I love the proposition.


I, Tylui, hereby submit the following proposition, dubbed Mentors, to the court to judge:
   A. Any Player without a Mentor may select one current Player as their Mentor.
   B. Once a Mentor is established for a Player, it can never be changed.
   C. For every Phase of Participation by a Player, their Mentor(if any) shall receive 2 points.

I respectfully ask all members of the court to carefully consider its merits and cast their vote accordingly.

[Tylui]

Phase II - Discussion

Remember, this Phase is NOT for voting anymore.  This Phase is to discuss these Propositions, and determine whether or not they need to altered or replaced, and for every Player to get a fair chance at understanding what it will and will not do to the game.

Status

--Score--

Player Name	Score	Bonus Votes	First Participation	Most Recent Participation	Total Participation
qwertyuiopas	75 points	3 BV	Turn 1, Phase I	Turn 5, Phase I	9 Phases
webadict	45 points	3 BV	Turn 1, Phase I	Turn 5, Phase I	9 Phases
Pandarsenic	50 points	3 BV	Turn 1, Phase I	Turn 4, Phase II	8 Phases
Tylui(Judge)	30 points	3 BV	Turn 1, Phase II	Turn 5, Phase I	8 Phases
Cheeetar	10 points	1 BV	Turn 1, Phase II	Turn 4, Phase II	7 Phases
Frelock	25 points	3 BV	Turn 1, Phase I	Turn 5, Phase I	7 Phases
Boksi	40 points	3 BV	Turn 1, Phase I	Turn 3, Phase II	6 Phases
Servant Corp	55 points	3 BV	Turn 1, Phase I	Turn 5, Phase I	6 Phases
Armok	0 points	3 BV	Turn 1, Phase II	Turn 3, Phase II	5 Phases
Fenrir	0 points	0 BV	Turn 5, Phase I	Turn 5, Phase I	1 Phase
sonerohi	5 points	3 BV	Turn 1, Phase I	Turn 1, Phase I	1 Phase

Status Changes This Phase:

Tylui, +5, First Participant of Phase II(R202)
Tylui, Participation(R330)
Frelock, Participation(R330)
webadict, Participation(R330)
Fenrir, Participation(R330)




--Propositions--

Servant Corps
331. "HAPPY FUN CANDY PARTY PROPOSITION 2.0"
   A. Prop. 329's sentence: "with the exception of the powers of appointing a replacement judge and reclaiming judgeship." is be struken out and held void.
   B. If the judge is inactive for at least a week, and there is no replacement judge, a person may make a motion to have an election to appoint someone as "People's Replacement Judge".
   C. An election will be held for who will be the People's Replacement Judge. No Bonus Votes may be used in this election. Whomever have the most votes win. In the case of a tie, whomever have the highest score at the end of Phase II will win the election. If there is still a tie, then a runoff election will be held.
   D. A judge reclaims his position by a post consisting solely of "The judge is returned to claim the powers of the judgeship!"
   E. After an appointment and before a reclamation, the powers and responsibilities of the judge belong solely to the People's Replacement Judge.

webadict
332. "Almost Unanimous" If a proposition fails with only the person who initially proposed voting for it, then that player loses twice the points they normally would.

qwertyuiopas
333. "‼cats‼" Cats are used as a penalty for frequent inactivity:
   A. Every turn a player is inactive:
      I. Any kittens they have become cats.
      II. They gain (((# of cats)*0.6) rounded up) kittens.
      III. they gain a cat.
   B. Every turn a player with cats is active:
      I. They butcher one cat, the cat being replaced by 5(five) units of kitten bones, and 2(two) units of unprocessed kitten meat.
      II. Kittens are not affected.
   C. If a player has more than 10(ten) cats, they are unable to use bonus votes.
   D. The number of cats a player has is "marked" according to rule 328, and it's default value is 0.

Frelock
334. "327 Amendments" This proposition amends rule 327, the "Screw you guys, I'm going home" rule.
   A.  The following subsections of 327 will be stricken:
   

B. This proposition applies to players who leave because they are bored or have commitments as well, and treats them as if they have lost.
   C. If no player is above 100 points they may choose people to lose points in the order of:
      I. 100-90 existing points
      II. 90-80 existing points
      III. 80-70 existing points
      IV. And so on in that pattern.
   D. If no player is below 100 points they may choose people to gain points in the order of:
      I. 100-110 existing points
      II. 110-120 existing points
      III. 120-130 existing points
      IV. And so on in that pattern.

    B. A new subsection shall be added which has the following text:
       

If a player chooses to use the provisions set forth by rule 327, they may not re-enter or participate in the game, even if another rule would otherwise allow them to do so.

Fenrir
335. "Rectification of Repetition of Prepositions" This proposition modifys rule 304.
   A. The rule will be changed to the following:
      

All future propositions shall follow this standard form:
      I, <Name>, hereby submit the following proposition, dubbed <Proposition Name>, for the court to judge:                             
      <Proposition>                             
      I respectfully ask all members of the court to carefully consider its merits and cast their vote accordingly.

Tylui
336. "Mentors"
   A. Any Player without a Mentor may select one current Player as their Mentor.
   B. Once a Mentor is established for a Player, it can never be changed.
   C. For every Phase of Participation by a Player, their Mentor(if any) shall receive 2 points.






Remember, this Phase is NOT for voting anymore.  This Phase is to discuss these Propositions, and determine whether or not they need to altered or replaced, and for every Player to get a fair chance at understanding what it will and will not do to the game.

[Fenrir]

My proposition, as it currently stands, is named and worded exactly as I intended.

[Tylui]

331 I'm not sure if these amendments to a brand new rule are needed.  We haven't even had time enough to determine if the new rule works or not.

332 This seems like a simple enough rule; buy may it could be reworded to say "If a proposition fails with only the person who initially proposed voting for it, then that proposition is treated as if it were unanimously failed."

That way, it will simply refer back to all the rules that address unanimously failed Propositions instead of creating new rules for them specifically.

333 Very good rule, in my opinion.  It offers negatives for inactivity, AND it's Dwarf Fortress themed which is entirely fitting considering where we are.

334 I agree with Frelock on all points. The two subsections listing the point values seems redundant, messy, and overly complicated.  Also, we need to limit peoples' losing somehow; such as never being able to come back.  As it is, Cheeetar has nothing saying that he can't just come back, leave again and give someone else 50 points, then come back and do it all over again.

335 I'm not even sure what's going on with this Proposition.

336 I think this Proposition is pretty neat, but I'm biased.  It's a good way to get people to search for new potential Players.

[Frelock]

Servant Corp: I must say I'm in favor of your idea and can't say anything against it.

webadict: Thank you for noticing that loophole

qwertyuiopas: Why does your proposition have to be so complicated?  Can't we use a simpler penalty system?  Also, what do we do with meat and bones?  And why can't we butcher kittens?  Finally, I would like to point out that if a person does not participate in the first phase, they cannot participate in any other phase (rule 310).  So therefore, if they miss the first phase alone, they miss the turn, and are therefore penalized.  Perhaps we should allow for players to become active in some way other than participation in a phase?

Fenrir: are you just trying to get free points by proposing that we do almost nothing?

Tylui: You might want to add that a player cannot be their own mentor.

[webadict]

@Qwerty's proposition:
   B. Every turn a player with cats is active:
      I. They butcher one cat, the cat being replaced by 5(five) units of kitten bones, and 2(two) units of unprocessed kitten meat.
      II. Kittens are not affected.
First problem is what do the five units of kittens bones and kitten meat have to do with it?
Second problem is that it's a cat. Shouldn't it have cat bones?

332 This seems like a simple enough rule; buy may it could be reworded to say "If a proposition fails with only the person who initially proposed voting for it, then that proposition is treated as if it were unanimously failed."

That way, it will simply refer back to all the rules that address unanimously failed Propositions instead of creating new rules for them specifically.

Good point. I hereby amend my proposition:
332. "Almost Unanimous" If a proposition fails with only the person who initially proposed voting for it, then that proposition is treated as failing unanimously.