Print

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

[Africa]

Winning rules are:

The initial ruleset will be numbered 1 through 7, and every new rule thenceforth will have a number that is one higher than the rule just before it. - 6 support 0 disagree.

And:

Uhh, hard to say.  A few rules had a voter score of 2, so either they all go in, or only the above rule does.

At the end of the turn, the two proposed rule changes with the greatest explicit support from all current players are implemented.

In my interpretation, there is only one rule which can fit in this, so I'm incorporating the numbering rule and leaving all others out for now.  I'll change this if enough people disagree with it.

I'd like to DISAGREE with this. I think if there's a tie for second place, all those proposals should be adopted. It helps that two of the tied proposals are mine...

PROPOSAL: As long as the system is in effect that the top two proposals are adopted, the following guidelines should govern adoption:

-If there is a tie for first place, ALL tied proposals will be adopted. Any proposals having received less votes will be discarded.
-If there is a clear winner but a tie for second place, all proposals tied for second place shall be adopted.
-This ruling, if adopted, shall be retroactive to round 1, and if approved, those proposals will go into effect along with this one at the start of round 3.

PROPOSAL: An executive triumvirate of three players, held in elections (procedure to be determined later) in which all players may participate, will be formed, and will have the right to veto any proposal which does not in some way involve elephants.

PROPOSAL: Elephants.

Proposal: There is a nice little cottage on a hillside.

SUPPORT

proposal: If you disagree with a post, you must react as if you are countering a spell with a spell.

DISAGREE

Proposal: There is a nice little cottage on a hillside.

Additional proposal: The cottage is made of delicious candy.

DISAGREE with the second quoted proposal (re: candy)

[Sheb]

I wish to propose that only up to 5 proposed rules may exist at any time to prevent confusion due to too many rules at any one point.

Oh, god yes! I *SUPPORT* this.

I *SUPPORT*.

proposal: If you disagree with a post, you must react as if you are countering a spell with a spell.

I *DISAGREE WITH* this.

I *DISAGREE* with that one.

I *PROPOSE* that any rule with a majority of players voting for it is passed, and in the event of no rule having majority, the next most-voted for is passed. If there is a tie in the previous instance, no rule is passed.

I *SUPPORT* this.

I also *SUPPORT* this.

I PROPOSE that any proposal of a rule that include candy  make you loose a point.

[Siquo]

PROPOSAL: As long as the system is in effect that the top two proposals are adopted, the following guidelines should govern adoption:

Support.

PROPOSAL: An executive triumvirate of three players, held in elections (procedure to be determined later) in which all players may participate, will be formed, and will have the right to veto any proposal which does not in some way involve elephants.

Support.

Proposal: There is a nice little cottage on a hillside.

Support.

proposal: If you disagree with a post, you must react as if you are countering a spell with a spell.

Support.

Additional proposal: The cottage is made of delicious candy.

Disagree

proposal: If you disagree with a post, you must react as if you are countering a spell with a spell.

Support.

I PROPOSE that any proposal of a rule that include candy  make you loose a point.

Support.


I PROPOSE that every proposal must have an element of sillyness, or the proposer will lose a point.

[SHAD0Wdump]

I PROPOSE that every proposal must have an element of sillyness, or the proposer will lose a point.

SUPPORT.

I PROPOSE that any proposal of a rule that include candy  make you loose a point.

DISAGREE O(

[fivex]

I *PROPOSE* that any rule with a majority of players voting for it is passed, and in the event of no rule having majority, the next most-voted for is passed. If there is a tie in the previous instance, no rule is passed.

*SUPPORT*

PROPOSAL: An executive triumvirate of three players, held in elections (procedure to be determined later) in which all players may participate, will be formed, and will have the right to veto any proposal which does not in some way involve elephants.

*SUPPORT*
PROPOSAL: The election process for the above proposal happens at the end of each turn, but before the next turn starts. People vote on who gets elected. The top three... are elected.
Another PROPOSAL relating to the above one:People can vote for an "unfortunate accident" to remove one of the executives from their position. People who where acidented can not propose, support or disagree anything until the next turn, and any of those that they had made during the turn is   rendered null and void.

[Sheb]

PROPOSAL: An executive triumvirate of three players, held in elections (procedure to be determined later) in which all players may participate, will be formed, and will have the right to veto any proposal which does not in some way involve elephants.

[/quote]

*DISAGREE*

PROPOSAL: The election process for the above proposal happens at the end of each turn, but before the next turn starts. People vote on who gets elected. The top three... are elected.
Another PROPOSAL relating to the above one:People can vote for an "unfortunate accident" to remove one of the executives from their position. People who where acidented can not propose, support or disagree anything until the next turn, and any of those that they had made during the turn is   rendered null and void.

*Disagree*

[Africa]

I wish to propose that only up to 5 proposed rules may exist at any time to prevent confusion due to too many rules at any one point.

DISAGREE. This is bad idea, as it will just mean one person can make five proposals as soon as the turn begins and then nobody else can propose anything for the entirety of the turn. Proposals aren't discarded until the turn changes, remember?

Proposal: Elephants.

[Armok]

PROPOSAL: all vote posts must quote the proposal being voted on.

Proposal: There is a nice little cottage on a hillside.

PROPOSAL: The election process for the above proposal happens at the end of each turn, but before the next turn starts. People vote on who gets elected. The top three... are elected.

I SUPPORT these proposals.


I DISAGREE with all other proposals.

[Sheb]

Proposal: Elephants.

*AGREE*

[qwertyuiopas]

I'd like to DISAGREE with this. I think if there's a tie for second place, all those proposals should be adopted. It helps that two of the tied proposals are mine...

PROPOSAL: As long as the system is in effect that the top two proposals are adopted, the following guidelines should govern adoption:

-If there is a tie for first place, ALL tied proposals will be adopted. Any proposals having received less votes will be discarded.
-If there is a clear winner but a tie for second place, all proposals tied for second place shall be adopted.
-This ruling, if adopted, shall be retroactive to round 1, and if approved, those proposals will go into effect along with this one at the start of round 3.

*DISAGREE* with the third part, and thus the whole proposal, especially because it would cause the addition of a rule that would in turn require the addition of a player list and far more complexity. How do you discover a majority unless everyone votes on everything, and you know who didn't vote at all? Besides, that would turn it into a long, complex, and common nomic, rather than the quick, fun, and unique one we have now.

[iceball3]

I PROPOSE that every proposal must have an element of sillyness, or the proposer will lose a point.

I *Agree*

[Africa]

I'd like to DISAGREE with this. I think if there's a tie for second place, all those proposals should be adopted. It helps that two of the tied proposals are mine...

PROPOSAL: As long as the system is in effect that the top two proposals are adopted, the following guidelines should govern adoption:

-If there is a tie for first place, ALL tied proposals will be adopted. Any proposals having received less votes will be discarded.
-If there is a clear winner but a tie for second place, all proposals tied for second place shall be adopted.
-This ruling, if adopted, shall be retroactive to round 1, and if approved, those proposals will go into effect along with this one at the start of round 3.

*DISAGREE* with the third part, and thus the whole proposal, especially because it would cause the addition of a rule that would in turn require the addition of a player list and far more complexity. How do you discover a majority unless everyone votes on everything, and you know who didn't vote at all? Besides, that would turn it into a long, complex, and common nomic, rather than the quick, fun, and unique one we have now.

The main reason for the third provision was that I wanted some of my previous proposals that tied for second place to be adopted.

But what's so complex about the rest of it? It's totally straightforward. There's no need for a player list or for counting absentions - it's exactly the same as before where the ones with the most supporting votes get adopted, except that now if there's a tie those can also get adopted.

[Sheb]

I'd like to DISAGREE with this. I think if there's a tie for second place, all those proposals should be adopted. It helps that two of the tied proposals are mine...

PROPOSAL: As long as the system is in effect that the top two proposals are adopted, the following guidelines should govern adoption:

-If there is a tie for first place, ALL tied proposals will be adopted. Any proposals having received less votes will be discarded.
-If there is a clear winner but a tie for second place, all proposals tied for second place shall be adopted.
-This ruling, if adopted, shall be retroactive to round 1, and if approved, those proposals will go into effect along with this one at the start of round 3.

Totally *DISAGREE*. Retroactive rules are a mess, and can cause time paradox.

PROPOSAL: No Rules Shall Be Retroactive.

[Tylui]

lordcooper, I have to point out to you that Rule 6 states the following:

At the end of the turn, the two proposed rule changes with the greatest explicit support from all current players are implemented.

It says nothing of subtracting the disagree scores.

Which means that the two rules that tied were yours and Africa's. Still, there was the confusion on whether they should be adopted and so they were not. But I just wanted to point out that it's about the SUPPORT and not the disagreeance at the moment.

[Tylui]

I propose the following rule additions:

"Each Player may only submit one Proposal per Turn."

"Each Player may only vote on each Proposal up to once per Turn"

Also, I support Sheb's proposal "No Rules Shall Be Retroactive."


Proposals this Turn(so far):

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Stany - I wish to propose that only up to 5 proposed rules may exist at any time to prevent confusion due to too many rules at any one point.

iceball3 - If you disagree with a post, you must react as if you are countering a spell with a spell.

breadbocks - I *PROPOSE* that any rule with a majority of players voting for it is passed, and in the event of no rule having majority, the next most-voted for is passed. If there is a tie in the previous instance, no rule is passed.

lordcooper - There is a nice little cottage on a hillside.

SHARD0Wdump - The cottage is made of delicious candy.

Africa - As long as the system is in effect that the top two proposals are adopted, the following guidelines should govern adoption:

-If there is a tie for first place, ALL tied proposals will be adopted. Any proposals having received less votes will be discarded.
-If there is a clear winner but a tie for second place, all proposals tied for second place shall be adopted.
-This ruling, if adopted, shall be retroactive to round 1, and if approved, those proposals will go into effect along with this one at the start of round 3.

Africa - An executive triumvirate of three players, held in elections (procedure to be determined later) in which all players may participate, will be formed, and will have the right to veto any proposal which does not in some way involve elephants.

Africa - Elephants.

Sheb - I PROPOSE that any proposal of a rule that include candy  make you loose a point.

Siquo - I PROPOSE that every proposal must have an element of sillyness, or the proposer will lose a point.

fivex - The election process for the above proposal happens at the end of each turn, but before the next turn starts. People vote on who gets elected. The top three... are elected.

fivex - People can vote for an "unfortunate accident" to remove one of the executives from their position. People who where acidented can not propose, support or disagree anything until the next turn, and any of those that they had made during the turn is rendered null and void.

Africa - Elephants. Again.

Sheb - No Rules Shall Be Retroactive.

Tylui - Each Player may only submit one Proposal per Turn.

Tylui - Each Player may only vote on each Proposal up to once per Turn