Nomic 2020/Proposals - Revision history

Inky: /* Pending Proposals */

2020-05-16T18:35:12Z

Pending Proposals

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:35, 16 May 2020
Line 105:		Line 105:
	** YEA: inky		** YEA: inky
	** NAY: lpsmith (blocking the knight seems a little too easy?)		** NAY: lpsmith (blocking the knight seems a little too easy?)
	*** I haven't actually gamed it out, but it seems like you need at least two well-positioned queens and more likely three or four plus a fair amount of setup, don't you? If it is easy then I agree this isn't a good rule.		*** ''I haven't actually gamed it out, but it seems like you need at least two well-positioned queens and more likely three or four plus a fair amount of setup, don't you? If it is easy then I agree this isn't a good rule. -inky''
	*** ''If the Knight's in A1 (for example), can't you do it with a single queen at any one of B2, B3, C2 or C3? --Jota''		*** ''If the Knight's in A1 (for example), can't you do it with a single queen at any one of B2, B3, C2 or C3? --Jota''
			*** ''Hmm, that's true, but it seems like this is mostly a problem for corners - if I deal with that (eg, say that the knight is removed from the board in that case), is this an ok rule? Or is it not salvageable? -inky''
	** ABSTAIN: Matthew		** ABSTAIN: Matthew

Jota: /* Pending Proposals */

2020-05-16T16:12:42Z

Pending Proposals

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:12, 16 May 2020
Line 106:		Line 106:
	** NAY: lpsmith (blocking the knight seems a little too easy?)		** NAY: lpsmith (blocking the knight seems a little too easy?)
	*** I haven't actually gamed it out, but it seems like you need at least two well-positioned queens and more likely three or four plus a fair amount of setup, don't you? If it is easy then I agree this isn't a good rule.		*** I haven't actually gamed it out, but it seems like you need at least two well-positioned queens and more likely three or four plus a fair amount of setup, don't you? If it is easy then I agree this isn't a good rule.
			*** ''If the Knight's in A1 (for example), can't you do it with a single queen at any one of B2, B3, C2 or C3? --Jota''
	** ABSTAIN: Matthew		** ABSTAIN: Matthew

Inky: /* Pending Proposals */

2020-05-16T15:39:48Z

Pending Proposals

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:39, 16 May 2020
Line 97:		Line 97:
	** QUESTION: How does this change things? I'm confused -lpsmith		** QUESTION: How does this change things? I'm confused -lpsmith
	** ANSWER: I think he's mainly just condensing and cleaning up things that already exist, rather than making lots of major changes --Matthew		** ANSWER: I think he's mainly just condensing and cleaning up things that already exist, rather than making lots of major changes --Matthew
			** Yeah, this is intended to clean things up so I can do stuff like the knight rule.


Line 104:		Line 105:
	** YEA: inky		** YEA: inky
	** NAY: lpsmith (blocking the knight seems a little too easy?)		** NAY: lpsmith (blocking the knight seems a little too easy?)
			*** I haven't actually gamed it out, but it seems like you need at least two well-positioned queens and more likely three or four plus a fair amount of setup, don't you? If it is easy then I agree this isn't a good rule.
	** ABSTAIN: Matthew		** ABSTAIN: Matthew

WesternActor: /* Pending Proposals */

2020-05-16T08:45:38Z

Pending Proposals

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:45, 16 May 2020
Line 104:		Line 104:
	** YEA: inky		** YEA: inky
	** NAY: lpsmith (blocking the knight seems a little too easy?)		** NAY: lpsmith (blocking the knight seems a little too easy?)
			** ABSTAIN: Matthew

	=Approved Proposals=		=Approved Proposals=

WesternActor: /* Pending Proposals */

2020-05-16T08:44:58Z

Pending Proposals

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:44, 16 May 2020
Line 94:		Line 94:
	*** Any player who has accumulated 1 or more points and violates a rule established by another player will lose 1 point. Any player who has accumulated 1 or more points and violates rule he or she established himself will lose 3 points. No loss of points may take the player's score below zero.		*** Any player who has accumulated 1 or more points and violates a rule established by another player will lose 1 point. Any player who has accumulated 1 or more points and violates rule he or she established himself will lose 3 points. No loss of points may take the player's score below zero.
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 22:26, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 22:26, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky		** YEA: inky, Matthew
	** QUESTION: How does this change things? I'm confused -lpsmith		** QUESTION: How does this change things? I'm confused -lpsmith
			** ANSWER: I think he's mainly just condensing and cleaning up things that already exist, rather than making lots of major changes --Matthew


	* '''Rule Proposal''' No Knight is Alright		* '''Rule Proposal''' No Knight is Alright

Lpsmith: /* Pending Proposals */

2020-05-16T02:53:46Z

Pending Proposals

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:53, 15 May 2020
Line 8:		Line 8:
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 00:31, 14 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 00:31, 14 May 2020 (EDT)
	** Edited at [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 15:36, 14 May 2020 (EDT)		** Edited at [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 15:36, 14 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky, Jota		** YEA: inky, Jota, lpsmith
	** ABSTAIN: Matthew		** ABSTAIN: Matthew

Line 48:		Line 48:
	** The player who caused this card to take effect must choose a player in the game and a[n unresolved] proposal that that player has not voted in favor of. (If there is no such combination of player and proposal, this card has no effect.) If that player votes in favor of the proposal and the proposal passes with that vote in place, that player receives twenty-five points. (This only applies to players and proposals that existed before the event that triggered this card was decided on.)		** The player who caused this card to take effect must choose a player in the game and a[n unresolved] proposal that that player has not voted in favor of. (If there is no such combination of player and proposal, this card has no effect.) If that player votes in favor of the proposal and the proposal passes with that vote in place, that player receives twenty-five points. (This only applies to players and proposals that existed before the event that triggered this card was decided on.)
	** [[User:Jota\|Jota]] ([[User talk:Jota\|talk]]) 11:28, 14 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Jota\|Jota]] ([[User talk:Jota\|talk]]) 11:28, 14 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: Jota, inky		** YEA: Jota, inky, lpsmith
	** QUESTION: ''Can this include rejected proposals that are re-introduced? Or do they have to be current? -LS'' ''(If it were re-introduced, wouldn't that be a new proposal? I've edited to disambiguate, but if you think it would be better if it were different, I'm open to suggestions. --J)''		** QUESTION: ''Can this include rejected proposals that are re-introduced? Or do they have to be current? -LS'' ''(If it were re-introduced, wouldn't that be a new proposal? I've edited to disambiguate, but if you think it would be better if it were different, I'm open to suggestions. --J)''
	** ABSTAIN: Matthew		** ABSTAIN: Matthew
Line 55:		Line 55:
	* '''Rule Proposal''' Passing Cards		* '''Rule Proposal''' Passing Cards
	** New sub-rule under 17.2:		** New sub-rule under 17.2:
	*** A player can do this multiple ~~tiles~~ as part of the same action.		*** A player can do this multiple times as part of the same action.
	** New sub-rule under 17:		** New sub-rule under 17:
	*** If one piece is adjacent to another piece on the board (horizontally, vertically or diagonally), and one of those two pieces is owned by a player who has at least 1 point, that player can (as an action) transfer any one card belonging to either piece to the other piece and reduce their own score by 1.		*** If one piece is adjacent to another piece on the board (horizontally, vertically or diagonally), and one of those two pieces is owned by a player who has at least 1 point, that player can (as an action) transfer any one card belonging to either piece to the other piece and reduce their own score by 1.
	**** A player can do this multiple times as part of the same action.		**** A player can do this multiple times as part of the same action.
	** [[User:Jota\|Jota]] ([[User talk:Jota\|talk]]) 08:41, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Jota\|Jota]] ([[User talk:Jota\|talk]]) 08:41, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: Jota, inky		** YEA: Jota, inky, lpsmith
	** NOTE: The "multiple times" bits are so that you don't have to keep rolling the Knight's moves over and over again if you want to transfer multiple cards.		** NOTE: The "multiple times" bits are so that you don't have to keep rolling the Knight's moves over and over again if you want to transfer multiple cards. [Edited s/tiles/times/, above.] [Also, that is not an issue any more, since the knight now only moves in response to pieces moving on the board. -LS]
	** ABSTAIN: Matthew		** ABSTAIN: Matthew

Line 70:		Line 70:
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 12:43, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 12:43, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky, Jota		** YEA: inky, Jota
			** NAY: lpsmith (It would be easy to trap the knight into not being able to move at all in this scenario. I would propose a modification: 'If any piece moves such that the Black Knight has no other legal move, the knight instead replaces the moving piece on the board, capturing it. Queens may be captured only in this scenario.')
	** ABSTAIN: Matthew		** ABSTAIN: Matthew

Line 77:		Line 78:
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky, Matthew, Jota ''(Do we want to explicitly say "all the ''current'' players"?)'' (I think this is implied, so I'm going to edit it in)		** YEA: inky, Matthew, Jota ''(Do we want to explicitly say "all the ''current'' players"?)'' (I think this is implied, so I'm going to edit it in)
			** NAY: lpsmith (enh.)


Line 93:		Line 95:
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 22:26, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 22:26, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky		** YEA: inky
			** QUESTION: How does this change things? I'm confused -lpsmith

	* '''Rule Proposal''' No Knight is Alright		* '''Rule Proposal''' No Knight is Alright
Line 99:		Line 101:
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 22:26, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 22:26, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky		** YEA: inky
			** NAY: lpsmith (blocking the knight seems a little too easy?)

	=Approved Proposals=		=Approved Proposals=

Inky: /* Pending Proposals */

2020-05-16T02:29:08Z

Pending Proposals

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:29, 15 May 2020
Line 74:		Line 74:

	* '''Rule Amendment''' Active Voters		* '''Rule Amendment''' Active Voters
	** Modify rule 1.1 to add an additional section: For purposes of calculating majority and strict majority, the total player population is considered to consist of all the players who have been Consenters, Dissenters, or Explicit Abstainers on any proposal in the previous 7 days.		** Modify rule 1.1 to add an additional section: For purposes of calculating majority and strict majority, the total player population is considered to consist of all the [current] players who have been Consenters, Dissenters, or Explicit Abstainers on any proposal in the previous 7 days.
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky, Matthew, Jota ''(Do we want to explicitly say "all the ''current'' players"?)''		** YEA: inky, Matthew, Jota ''(Do we want to explicitly say "all the ''current'' players"?)'' (I think this is implied, so I'm going to edit it in)


Line 99:		Line 99:
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 22:26, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 22:26, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky		** YEA: inky


	=Approved Proposals=		=Approved Proposals=

Inky at 02:28, 16 May 2020

2020-05-16T02:28:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:28, 15 May 2020
Line 82:		Line 82:
	** Replace rules 5, 6, and 7 with the following two rules:		** Replace rules 5, 6, and 7 with the following two rules:
	** '''Winning and Losing the Game'''		** '''Winning and Losing the Game'''
	*** Declaring victory is a player action which may be permitted (or prevented) by certain other rules. If a player declares victory, the current players all win the game. Players may not declare victory if any rule prevents them from doing so, even if other rules currently permit them to do so.		*** Declaring victory is a player action which may be permitted (or prevented) by certain other rules. If a player declares victory, the current players all win the game. Players may not declare victory if any rule prevents them from doing so, even if other rules currently permit them to do so, except as per the Paradox rule.
	*** If any entity which is not a player wins the game, then all players lose the game and the game is over.		*** If any entity which is not a player wins the game, then all players lose the game and the game is over.
	*** Players may not declare victory unless there are at least three different Queens in play, owned by at least three different players, with at least one identified by a color, at least one identified by a letter, and at least one identified by a name.		*** Players may not declare victory unless there are at least three different Queens in play, owned by at least three different players, with at least one identified by a color, at least one identified by a letter, and at least one identified by a name.
	*** If at any point a rule requires a player to do two mutually exclusive things (such as requiring a player to both take an action and not take that action), that player may instead declare victory. All rules involved in the paradox are ignored for purposes of deciding whether the players can declare victory.		*** '''Paradox''': If at any point a rule requires a player to do two mutually exclusive things (such as requiring a player to both take an action and not take that action), that player may instead declare victory. All rules involved in the paradox are ignored for purposes of deciding whether the players can declare victory.
	** '''Scoring'''		** '''Scoring'''
	*** If at any point before the game has ended, a majority of the players have a score of 100 or greater, any player may declare victory.		*** If at any point before the game has ended, a majority of the players have a score of 100 or greater, any player may declare victory.

Inky at 02:26, 16 May 2020

2020-05-16T02:26:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:26, 15 May 2020
Line 73:		Line 73:


	* '''Rule ~~Proposal~~''' ~~No Knight is All Right~~		* '''Rule Amendment''' Active Voters
	** ~~Add a~~ section ~~to rule 16~~: ~~If at any point~~ the ~~Black Knight would move but has no valid squares to move~~ to, the players ~~win~~ the ~~game~~.		** Modify rule 1.1 to add an additional section: For purposes of calculating majority and strict majority, the total player population is considered to consist of all the players who have been Consenters, Dissenters, or Explicit Abstainers on any proposal in the previous 7 days.
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 12:43, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** ~~Commentary~~: ~~I think this bypasses~~ the ~~score requirement~~, ~~but~~ not the ~~requirement to have~~ three ~~queens~~, ~~since~~ that ~~says~~ that players can'~~t win rather~~ than ~~causing them~~ to ~~win~~.		** YEA: inky, Matthew, Jota ''(Do we want to explicitly say "all the ''current'' players"?)''


			* '''Rule Amendment''' Revised Scoring and Winning
			** Replace rules 5, 6, and 7 with the following two rules:
			** '''Winning and Losing the Game'''
			*** Declaring victory is a player action which may be permitted (or prevented) by certain other rules. If a player declares victory, the current players all win the game. Players may not declare victory if any rule prevents them from doing so, even if other rules currently permit them to do so.
			*** If any entity which is not a player wins the game, then all players lose the game and the game is over.
			*** Players may not declare victory unless there are at least three different Queens in play, owned by at least three different players, with at least one identified by a color, at least one identified by a letter, and at least one identified by a name.
			*** If at any point a rule requires a player to do two mutually exclusive things (such as requiring a player to both take an action and not take that action), that player may instead declare victory. All rules involved in the paradox are ignored for purposes of deciding whether the players can declare victory.
			** '''Scoring'''
			*** If at any point before the game has ended, a majority of the players have a score of 100 or greater, any player may declare victory.
			*** If at any point before the game has ended, any entity other than one of the players has a score of 100 or greater, that entity immediately wins the game.
			*** At any point a player may take an action to award themselves points. They may award themselves any number of points as long as the number is greater than zero, and the total number of points awarded to a player due to this rule may not exceed the number of 24 hour periods since the game has begun.
			*** Any player who has accumulated 1 or more points and violates a rule established by another player will lose 1 point. Any player who has accumulated 1 or more points and violates rule he or she established himself will lose 3 points. No loss of points may take the player's score below zero.
			** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 22:26, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky		** YEA: inky
	** NAY: Jota ''(I'm happy with this in principal, but I'm not sure it works with the Rule 6 as written. I'd recommend incorporating this into a re-write of Rules 5 and 6 that made it all explicit.)''
	** ABSTAIN: Matthew


	* '''Rule ~~Amendment~~''' ~~Co-op Paradox~~		* '''Rule Proposal''' No Knight is Alright
	** ~~Replace~~ the ~~second sentence of rule 5 with "By doing so~~, the ~~players immediately win~~ the ~~game~~."		** Add a section to rule 16: If at any point the Black Knight would move but has no valid squares to move to, the player who was required to move the knight may instead declare victory. If they don't, the Black Knight remains in its current location.
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 22:26, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky~~, Matthew, Jota~~		** YEA: inky


	* '''Rule Amendment''' Active Voters
	** Modify rule 1.1 to add an additional section: For purposes of calculating majority and strict majority, the total player population is considered to consist of all the players who have been Consenters, Dissenters, or Explicit Abstainers on any proposal in the previous 7 days.
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky, Matthew, Jota ''(Do we want to explicitly say "all the ''current'' players"?)''

	=Approved Proposals=		=Approved Proposals=
Line 168:		Line 176:

	=Rejected Proposals=		=Rejected Proposals=


			* '''Rule Proposal''' No Knight is All Right
			** Add a section to rule 16: If at any point the Black Knight would move but has no valid squares to move to, the players win the game.
			** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 12:43, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
			** Commentary: I think this bypasses the score requirement, but not the requirement to have three queens, since that says that players can't win rather than causing them to win.
			** YEA: inky
			** NAY: Jota ''(I'm happy with this in principal, but I'm not sure it works with the Rule 6 as written. I'd recommend incorporating this into a re-write of Rules 5 and 6 that made it all explicit.)''
			** ABSTAIN: Matthew


			* '''Rule Amendment''' Co-op Paradox
			** Replace the second sentence of rule 5 with "By doing so, the players immediately win the game."
			** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
			** YEA: inky, Matthew, Jota

	* '''Monkey Arcana Proposal.''' Philanthroposit		* '''Monkey Arcana Proposal.''' Philanthroposit

Jota: /* Pending Proposals */

2020-05-15T20:20:16Z

Pending Proposals

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:20, 15 May 2020
Line 85:		Line 85:
	** Replace the second sentence of rule 5 with "By doing so, the players immediately win the game."		** Replace the second sentence of rule 5 with "By doing so, the players immediately win the game."
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky, Matthew		** YEA: inky, Matthew, Jota


Line 91:		Line 91:
	** Modify rule 1.1 to add an additional section: For purposes of calculating majority and strict majority, the total player population is considered to consist of all the players who have been Consenters, Dissenters, or Explicit Abstainers on any proposal in the previous 7 days.		** Modify rule 1.1 to add an additional section: For purposes of calculating majority and strict majority, the total player population is considered to consist of all the players who have been Consenters, Dissenters, or Explicit Abstainers on any proposal in the previous 7 days.
	** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)		** [[User:Inky\|Inky]] ([[User talk:Inky\|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
	** YEA: inky, Matthew		** YEA: inky, Matthew, Jota ''(Do we want to explicitly say "all the ''current'' players"?)''

	=Approved Proposals=		=Approved Proposals=