Messages

26

Forum Games / Re: Nomic: TROTLR: Turn 1 (Excal!)

« on: September 06, 2010, 02:36:07 PM »

it's more a case of "everyone else has stated what i wish to", at this point. with revision i believe myself likely to vote for this, as it stands I'm not so considering.

basically, i would rather see points awarded instead of doublevote, as Bard has alluded; otherwise the rule is somewhat pointless as it stands due to what he has pointed out. i do think that as it stands granting the effective doublevote makes it change two rules, which i do not believe is a legit tactic.

i also think there should be some cost for a dud proposal (one that no one besides the proposer votes for), but am not seeing a good way to implement it at current strides. am willing to overlook for the time present.

so basically, revise doublevote to pointget and i think i am accepting of this.

27

Forum Games / Re: Nomic: TROTLR: Turn 1 (Excal!)

« on: September 05, 2010, 03:12:49 PM »

i am stonewalling self-further comment until a new version of the amendment is presented, as enough discussion has gone on that i wish to see how Excal replies to issues presented.

feel free to continue discussion, but that is the reason for my quiet.

28

Forum Games / Re: Nomic: TROTLR: Turn 1 (Excal!)

« on: September 04, 2010, 02:11:21 AM »

ninja: Excal is correct.

however, I posit concern re: this current rule. does not factor in draw votes.

...actually, rules in general fail to govern draw votes. hm.

one final note: is intent for doubled vote to count solely for voting, for scoring, or both?

ninja Bardiche: what? if a proposal fails, the proposer gains 3, 6, or (potential) 9 as it stands. if it passes, proposer gains -none-, others gain 4, 5 or 6 depending. all proposer gains is doublevote. unless misinterpret occurs, a potential but. it is a somewhat intriguing system, but your concerns are valid I think. unsure how to address.

re: voting/discussion phase,

212. There are two Phases, or Parts, to each round of the game of Nomic: the Proposal phase, to last no more than 72 hours, and the Voting phase, to last no more than 24 hours.

if he gets the votes beforehand or if people choose to end discussion beforehand, then I would conclude the proposal phase ends, voting begins, is tallied, ends, and then the turn moves on. of note is that this is editable, which may be fodder for later.

29

Forum Games / Re: Nomic: TROTLR: Second Iteration - SIGNUPS OPEN

« on: May 23, 2010, 01:44:25 AM »

why the hell not

n! rides again

30

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Eight (tai sez: omnomnom)

« on: August 05, 2009, 04:04:23 AM »

so, i've not seen a cookie. has anyone seen cookies?

or did andrew eat his forty-two cookies via a bizarre read of his own proposal and then forget to make any more?

31

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Eight (tai sez: omnomnom)

« on: February 16, 2009, 11:29:40 AM »

Now is a good time to remind everyone of this rule.

312. The non-player votes cannot overwhelm an 80% or higher player majority.

MAJORITY clearly requires a judgement. Does it mean a majority of players voting at all, or a majority of player *votes*? I say the former.

Anyone disagree? If so, invoking JUDGEMENT, VSM DECIDES

Also

##Declaring War with:: Excal

Also, to the mob: Andrew would still be the winner even if he failed to send out cookies because his points would have already been 200+ (and furthermore, there is no end-date specified for their arrival.) Everyone else, however, would remain losers (and there`s no such thing as a `losing value` of points.)

does this mean we send votes to you or laggy?

32

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Eight (tai sez: omnomnom)

« on: February 14, 2009, 06:17:58 PM »

will support on two conditions:

1) it is amended to "everyone who votes for AndrewRogue gets a cookie"

and

2) a clause is inserted saying that everyone but Andrew retroactively wins and Andrew retroactively loses if said cookies are not sent out.


why will I do this?

well, the mob can't win anyway, so what reason do I have to not support this, really. well, aside from the above.

33

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Seven (tai sez: nomnomnom)

« on: February 10, 2009, 10:23:28 PM »

oooh, good point, forgot to account for that in revision.



1) Players cannot score n points, where n is the current number of points needed to achieve victory. A player may score no higher than n-1 points under normal circumstances.

2) At any time a player may challenge the mob to name a competition and a representative. The first suggestion for competition that has support of three members of the mob is considered the official challenge, and the first mob member to receive the support of three other members of the mob is declared their champion.

3) Defeating the mob champion in an official competition awards exactly one point, and this point overrides the limitation on being able to score n points.

4) If the mob fails to decide on the challenge and the mob champion within 48 hours of any challenge being made, the player so mentioned is considered to have defeated the mob champion in the official contest for all purposes as regarding section 3.

34

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Seven (tai sez: nomnomnom)

« on: February 10, 2009, 12:14:44 PM »

it's not a case of mob inactivity so much as mob disagreement/disconsensus.

as such, pushing forth suggested revision to vsm proposal:



1) Players cannot earn 200 points. A player may score no higher than 199 points under normal circumstances.

2) At any time a player may challenge the mob to name a competition and a representative. The first suggestion for competition that has support of three members of the mob is considered the official challenge, and the first mob member to receive the support of three other members of the mob is declared their champion.

3) Defeating the mob champion in an official competition awards exactly one point, and this point overrides the limitation on being able to score 200 points.

4) If the mob fails to decide on the challenge and the mob champion within 48 hours of any challenge being made, the player so mentioned is considered to have defeated the mob champion in the official contest for all purposes as regarding section 3.



also good to know that transmuting 111 would garner appeal. other people, chime in?

i was actually considering a version of vsm's proposal, but allowing for mob victory. so this works out okay.

35

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Seven (tai sez: nomnomnom)

« on: February 09, 2009, 11:37:22 PM »

Laggy: well, it prevent switching the game to a lot of other systems without a ton of looparound rulechanges,

36

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Seven (tai sez: nomnomnom)

« on: February 09, 2009, 11:26:11 PM »

wow, it's almost as if the proposal in my previous page was timed to match with vsm's.

on a side note, though, victory condition is still "achieve n votes" under VSM's rule, it's just "acheive n votes (and...)". this comes down to a literal vs loose interpretation of the constitu nomiconstitution; is an extension of a concept allowed so long as the base is still present?

37

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Seven (tai sez: nomnomnom)

« on: February 09, 2009, 11:02:04 PM »

uhwatewat

shit, hold on. gonna need to think on this for a bit. i'm not the creative sort.


okay, temporary proposal. this is -not- likely to be my final suggestion, but i'm curious as to the support it would get.

Proposal 331: Transmute rule 111 to a mutable rule.


rule 111 is:

111. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed.

38

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Five

« on: February 03, 2009, 01:42:40 AM »

Right. had they been, neither amending nor repealing a rule would have been permissible.

your statement is implicitly supported by rule 108, so that checks out. okay.

39

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Five

« on: February 03, 2009, 01:32:21 AM »

so amended rules do not count as mutable rules? okay, that rules out the main issue I saw.

and looking at the rules, the other issue I saw that would make this relevant doesn't matter.

fin: n-factorial being doomsday prophet (even when rules cap, because amended/repealed rules don't count, actions are still feasible)


EDIT: granted, you still need to repeal rules so that amendments can be applied.

guess sopko has obv. points.


EDIT 2: also, if they did count as mutable rules despite having been amended, VSM would have been the winner (first person to not be able to complete a legal action). just a fyi. (rule 320 I think this was? may have miscounted.)

40

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Five

« on: February 03, 2009, 01:25:38 AM »

quick calculation shows that depending on rule interpretations, we are either safe until next round (in which case the next player to propose a rule wins) or we already should have a winner, based on the rules. attempting to determine who that winner would be. hold on.

41

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Five

« on: February 03, 2009, 01:17:26 AM »

re: n-factorial

This game is 32 pages right now. I'm fine with having it accelerate a bit faster to potential victory. You know people are just going to start throwing up proposals to stall players in lead from winning anyway, so let's just see how it goes with it.

Though 25 was a totally arbitrary number, I would really not care what it was. Has to be enough to make people humiliate themselves though. >_>

fair enough

on reflection my main worry with the close-to-victory thing isn't an issue, and if it is i just break carthrat's knees in or something (since it isn't relevant until after the game ends), so i'll just bring it up once the game's over.

this being said, looking through the rules, i'm wondering if most the entire game thus far has been in violation of them.

the reason why shall be left as an exercise to the reader.

42

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Five

« on: February 02, 2009, 11:07:59 PM »

...

i'm speechless. not sure if that's the worst or the best proposal thus far.

this being said, since i also have everyone, this joint laggy/super proposal earns my vote.

i am slightly concerned about the accelerateing points of certain members, but that's irrelevant as of now.

43

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Three

« on: January 24, 2009, 02:57:01 AM »

fair enough; I tender my apologies. looking back, what you say is true; i did not recognize the avatar and thus presumed that you were speaking up after a period of silence. that plus the ambiguity got my hackles quite raised. indeed, i do seem to be preaching to the quoir here.

44

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Three

« on: January 24, 2009, 02:38:37 AM »

once the players not only stop making proposals that are sloppy in thought and execution, but also put less effort toward complaining about how people don't like proposal x or y or how people are just coasting or whining or whatever, and actually put effort into suggestions and rules you'll find a lot more mobbers going along to get along.

until then in order to make this game even remotely coherent, expect us to speak up. and if you don't like how person x or y is coastign or whatever, make a proposal and counteract the punk instead of going "lawlololo hey look they're duin all the work for him". we're trying to get some enjoyment out of this too, but unlike you, we don't have anything to lose - we -can't- lose. that's why we're throwing our hats into the ring this way. don't like that? don't wanna see us helping people out? you can make a rule once your turn comes around - do something about it. complaint won't help anything.

45

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Three

« on: January 24, 2009, 01:01:23 AM »

fair enough, it's why that part was seperate from the rest of it. mainly just something that occured to me as an issue when I was typing the revision up.

46

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Three

« on: January 24, 2009, 12:50:53 AM »

323. Following each voting phase, a non-player (hereby referred to as the Mobb Proposer) that voted that phase is randomly selected via Hatbot. During the subsequent discussion phase, the Mobb Proposer is allowed the option of making a proposal (separate and independent of the one that the current player is proposing). This proposal is then voted on like any other during the next voting phase.

The voting for the Mobb Proposer's proposal works in the following manner.

a) A Players' vote or votes are as stated in the Rules, and may be applied to either, both, or neither of the standard proposal or the Mobb Proposer's proposal, so long as the Player has enough votes to act as stated.

b) Non-players get an additional vote, to be used exclusively for the Mobb Proposer's proposal, and cannot use their normal vote for said proposal (in effect, they cannot double-vote on the same proposal). Other rules associated with voting (and not voting) still apply so long as they are applicable (score-related voting rules cannot be applied to non-players, for instance).


If you also want to cover being able to vote on both if multivotes/stockpiled votes are repealed, this can also be added at the end of the proposal:

c) If ever a player's number of usable votes drops to one, they acquire a second vote during the voting phase. This vote behaves like the non-player's second vote capability; that is, double-voting is not permissible with this second vote.


this third part allows for mobb proposals having little to no chance of hiccuping up the rules, and also permits the repeal of sections of this rule far more easily by segregating it into parts, something self also find appealing in his rules.

47

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Three

« on: January 23, 2009, 12:53:15 AM »

self approves of Laggy's proposal in the newest format, will vote for it so long as it stays recognizable and in this vein.

what happens to players under this rule is not of much interest to self, so long as the voting mechanism for them is clear. self is only really concerned with mobb-based proposals under a sane system, and thus approves of this.

48

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Three

« on: January 22, 2009, 10:28:57 PM »

self would support Laggy's suggestion, but not the current proposal, self thinks; also cannot think of a rephrasing or reinspiring of the current proposal that would make it acceptable to self. self will muse on this, however.

49

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Two

« on: January 19, 2009, 11:09:42 PM »

i have no objections to a rider to be attached to the bill, but instead of something immortallizing me, just have the rider be "The game is now known as 'Om Nom Nom Nomic'." this way more rules may be added without worrying about the omnoms.

50

Forum Games / Re: Nomic - Turn Twenty Two

« on: January 19, 2009, 01:41:37 PM »

edit note: there should be two " ## in front of Accepting (Peace/Neutrality) with:: [player name]. " for the sake of easier formatting.

and now that i have managed to be awesome in a forum game on the interwobs, i shall now go and proceed to get completely sloshed. cheers.