?

Log in

Nomic Wiki's Journal
16 most recent entries

Poster:gwyndyn
Date:2005-06-19 09:50
Subject:
Security:Public

Is game 2 still being played? And if so, can I join? :)

4 comments | post a comment



Poster:bluekitsune
Date:2004-12-29 09:25
Subject:Erm
Security:Public
Mood:clueless

Since I am utterly clueless, I have not and won't be making a proposal... skip me or whatnot. I think my time is up anyway, but in any case.... yeeah.

post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-12-16 09:31
Subject:Reminder
Security:Public

Don't forget to check the website occasionally. Kit has a proposal up and there's some discussion going on about it and about my pre-proposal in the Ideas for Discussion section. See the Recent Changes page for an accounting of activity.

post a comment



Poster:schmitt
Date:2004-12-09 03:21
Subject:
Security:Public

Okay, a couple questions, then.

Proposal 302 was put into place as Rule 302, but it's an amendment of Rule 202. Does it not go under Rule 202? If not, should 202 point to 302 instead? Also, it needs to have Mutable at the bottom per Rule 301, right?

3 comments | post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-12-08 15:33
Subject:Update
Security:Public

Oh my god! So much has happened since yesterday.

First of all, the site has a new look. I tweaked the background color a little and put a little devilish lawyer icon up instead of the standard Mediawiki logo.

Lisa cast the final vote on Proposal 302, enacting the rule-change. I renamed the page and such as required by Rule 301.

Bobson posted a new idea and we discussed it a bit before he posted it as a proposal. In the end we determined it was an unnecessary rule and he decided not to propose it. Instead, he proposed Proposal 303. We're discussing that, too, and casting votes.

Beyond that, I established a page where we can post links to our ideas ... that is, pre-proposals. This way, we can get people's input on ideas before they go to the proposal stage. It's a lot easier to change your proposal around before people have started voting on it. In the meantime, we found out that Rule 111 allows for a certain amount of debate of a rule and even permits fixing the proposal, as long as no one has voted on it. Still, the process around this rule is a bit messy and I'd prefer to avoid it. There's an Ideas link on the front page now.

I posted an idea for a new voting procedure and some discussion about that issue. Check that out and comment before my turn comes around.

I also started writing a Lexicon of Nomic terms to help people understand the shades of meaning in terms like Rule, Rule-Change, and Proposal. Nothing in there is an official rule, but it may help people interpret the ruleset. Do check it out. I'm sure some of my findings and definitions will surprise you...

post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-12-07 14:46
Subject:Update
Security:Public

Cinna posted her Proposal 302, which was quickly challenged by Lisa as violating Rule 301's formatting requirements. Cinna used Rule 212 to Call for Judgment (CFJ). Adam ruled that Cinna's proposal was properly formatted and valid.

Voting on Proposal 302 continues. Bobson still needs to cast his vote on the issue for voting to be complete (we still require unanimous consent to pass a proposal).

We quickly received majority consent to continue after I ruled on 302's CFJ, so once 302's voting period has ended (either when Bobson votes, or the week deadline has passed), it will be Bobson's turn to create a Proposal. He has some experience playing Nomic, so I'm sure he has some cool ideas. Even if he doesn't, I'd be happy to see us pass a resolution to change 203's unanimous consent rule to majority consent.

Oh, and Cinna posted a picture of herself with the Motherlode!

post a comment



Poster:schmitt
Date:2004-12-07 00:45
Subject:
Security:Public

There has been a call for judgement.

http://nomic.legendary.org/index.php/Call_for_Judgement:_Proposal_302

post a comment



Poster:schmitt
Date:2004-12-06 18:59
Subject:
Security:Public

A new proposal has been added.

http://nomic.legendary.org/index.php/Proposal_302

post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-12-06 11:16
Subject:Reminder for Cinna
Security:Public

Cinna, it's your turn to make Proposal 302. You have until 7:37 AM (server time) on Wednesday, December 8 to do so. Lemme know if you need help.

1 comment | post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-12-01 07:44
Subject:301 passed
Security:Public

With 5 out of 5 players voting FOR proposal 301, it has passed into "law." I moved the proposal to Rule 301 as required and added it to the Current Ruleset page. I got 10 points for it: INT((301 - 291) * (5/5)).

It's now Cinna's turn to propose something, and she has 7 days from now to post a proposal or she loses 10 points.

post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-11-29 13:13
Subject:Proposal 301
Security:Public

I put up Proposal 301 for your consideration and vote.

1 comment | post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-11-29 12:06
Subject:Game 2
Security:Public

Hello!

Lisa, Dan, and I have decided to reset the nomic game. After speaking to Lisa, this is what I have decided to do.

The nomic game we started some weeks ago (call it "Game 1") is defunct. That is, it's not over, but I'm not supporting it on the wiki anymore, either. ;)

I have started a new nomic game (call it "Game 2") on the same wiki, but using a slightly modified version of the rules that should prevent deadlocks due to inactivity.

To play in the new game, you must register your real name and user id on the new Player List. I removed everyone else's name because the new rules specifically require you to place your own name there.

Theoretically, the game is in progress and I can begin making rule changes and ratifying them. Essentially, that's what I did to get the modified ruleset into action. As soon as I have a second player (or more), procedure gets trickier, because my vote isn't the only one. So get on it!

The game is less likely to deadlock now but it can still stall. Right now, a rule-change requires a unanimous vote to pass. The anti-deadlock rules change a missing vote to an "abstain" automatically after one week, but that won't pass a rule unanimously. After two complete cycles of players (which I'll define as "at the start of my third turn" since I was the first player, but that's up for debate), Rule 203 changes the requirement to a simple majority to pass a proposal. Still, if more than half of the players go inactive, we will have more "abstains" than "yeas" and the proposals will fail. One of our early laws ought to be a way to purge inactive voters, but I thought I'd leave that problem for the group to solve.

post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-11-16 19:02
Subject:We started last week
Security:Public

_kit asked, "When is the game supposed to start?"

The answer is that we started already. Since tittergrrl is the first player on the player list (alphabetically by surname), we have to wait for her to make the first rule. Then I go, then multiplexer.

The rules as written make no allowance for missing players or skipped turns. Of course, we can agree to remove her from the player list and say she's not playing but that sets a dangerous precedent. ;) I'm curious to see how people handle this.

3 comments | post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-11-15 22:23
Subject:Site change
Security:Public

I changed the main url for the Nomic Wiki to http://nomic.legendary.org. The old address will continue to work for a while though.

5 comments | post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-11-09 14:03
Subject:Rule Proposal examples
Security:Public

Since I've played Nomic before, I thought I'd seed the game with some examples of rule proposals. None of these are actually rule proposals, but you're welcome to borrow them or use them outright.




Rule Proposal 301
Enactment: Definition of Players
A player of the game is any person who meets all of the following criteria:

  1. He is registered with his or her real first name and surname and email address on the wiki.

  2. His or her real name and username are on the Player List.


No one may add or remove another person's real name and/or username from the Player List except that a player may give another player permission to remove his information from the Player List.


Rule Proposal 301
Amendment of Rule 202, Definition of a Turn and Scoring
Amend Rule 202 and replace all of its text with the following:

One turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on OR do nothing, and (2) determining the award for the rule and adding it to one's score.

To determine the score, players subtract 291 from the ordinal number of their proposal and multiply the result by the fraction of favorable votes it received, rounded to the nearest integer. (This yields a number between 0 and 10 for the first player, with the upper limit increasing by one each turn; more points are awarded for more popular proposals.)

A player who chooses to do nothing must announce this publicly and take an award of 0. This is not the same as passing one's turn.



Rule Proposal 301
Amendment of Rule 208, Victory Conditions
Amend Rule 208 and replace "200" with "1000".

1 comment | post a comment



Poster:adamdray
Date:2004-11-09 11:33
Subject:Welcome!
Security:Public
Mood: anxious

Heya! If you're a player in the Nomic Wiki game, use this site for discussion and read it to get updates on what's going on.

post a comment


browse
my journal