Thursday, August 12, 2010

Proposal: Moving Right Along

procedurally Vetoed. - lilomar

Adminned at 14 Aug 2010 05:07:58 UTC

Amend Rule 1.8 to read

BlogNomic is divided into a number of Dynasties. Most Dynasties are headed by a single Citizen, known as the High-Programmer, and are named according to the number of Dynasties they have headed (eg. “The First Dynasty of Myke”). Some Dynasties have no High-Programmer; those are Metadynasties and are named according to the number of Metadynasties (e.g. “The Third Metadynasty”).

The High-Programmer, if there is one, may Vote to VETO any Proposal.

Begin a new Metadynasty. Repeal all dynastic rules.

This is getting… tiresome. We don’t even have a victory condition yet and the entire dynastic ruleset is broken.

Comments

scshunt:

08-12-2010 20:30:34 UTC

imperial to reserve my vote.

Qwazukee:

08-12-2010 20:37:14 UTC

imperial

lilomar:

08-12-2010 20:37:26 UTC

hehe, I could s/k a proposal that I didn’t write…

Qwazukee:

08-12-2010 20:38:54 UTC

Seems fair enough… it IS your Dynasty, if you think it can still survive you are free to s/k or veto.

lilomar:

08-12-2010 20:43:16 UTC

I’m going to wait and see how the masses vote, I don’t want to force anyone to keep playing in this dynasty if they don’t want to. I do think it could be saved, the question is whether or not it is worth saving.

Of course, the answer is “It’s worth saving if everyone is still haveing fun.”

scshunt:

08-12-2010 20:44:07 UTC

Does an imperial vote of AGAINST lead to an s/k? My interpretation was that it doesn’t, but I could be wrong.

Bucky:

08-12-2010 20:46:14 UTC

against

Ienpw III:

08-12-2010 20:47:33 UTC

No, it doesn’t.

Ienpw III:

08-12-2010 20:48:17 UTC

( for )

Qwazukee:

08-12-2010 20:49:13 UTC

It does again, as of recently.

“A Vote of DEFERENTIAL is a Vote of no opinion, or of faith in the decision of the High-Programmer. The Vote will count as the same as the High-Programmer’s Vote.”

Kevan:

08-12-2010 20:50:03 UTC

against

scshunt:

08-12-2010 20:52:51 UTC

Ah, well,  for in any case.

Ienpw III:

08-12-2010 20:53:30 UTC

Oh.

Keba:

08-12-2010 21:28:32 UTC

for as I never got into this Dynasty really. Besides, it would be my first Meta Dynasty.

lilomar:

08-12-2010 21:48:58 UTC

a vote, and a test…
against  arrow

lilomar:

08-12-2010 21:49:53 UTC

against RoV

Ienpw III:

08-12-2010 21:51:45 UTC

Testing for lilomar. veto

Ienpw III:

08-12-2010 21:52:50 UTC

CoV for

Ienpw III:

08-12-2010 22:04:49 UTC

More testing for lilomar.

glopso:

08-12-2010 22:32:49 UTC

for

jmrdex:

08-13-2010 00:57:24 UTC

against
I want to see this to the end

Princerepulsive:

08-13-2010 01:19:29 UTC

This sounds like an impeachment. But the broken rules were made by us. If Lilomar wishes to resign, fine, but since he doesn’t, I will support him.  imperial

scshunt:

08-13-2010 01:28:30 UTC

I guess you could see it that way, but it should be considered no different from any win-awarding proposal, except that there is no one to award the win to.

Darknight:

08-13-2010 03:45:47 UTC

for

Purplebeard:

08-13-2010 08:16:02 UTC

imperial

Keba:

08-13-2010 12:15:08 UTC

CoV imperial per Princerepulsive.

flurie:

08-13-2010 14:09:16 UTC

imperial

Rodney:

08-13-2010 14:26:57 UTC

against Rarely have I seen a Dynasty insane as this one.

Klisz:

08-13-2010 14:53:31 UTC

for  for  for  for  for per Rodney. This dynasty is too insane for me to follow.

Josh:

08-13-2010 15:12:24 UTC

against I’m not a huge fan of our recent overreliance on reset buttons as ways out of tricky rulesets.

lilomar:

08-13-2010 17:18:49 UTC

Rodney: I’m going to take that as a complement. :-D

scshunt:

08-14-2010 05:06:29 UTC

against s/k.

lilomar:

08-14-2010 05:07:29 UTC

procedural veto for speed