Thursday, October 31, 2013

Registration

I hereby register as player of Blognomic.

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Proposal: Kicking the Can 1

Times out and fails 4-4. -Bucky

Adminned at 01 Nov 2013 16:38:45 UTC

If the gamestate is not Polarized, delay the time at which it becomes Polarized by 48 hours and update the dynastic rule “The Sequester” to reflect this fact.

Then create a proposal whose body is the same as this proposal’s.

Monday, October 28, 2013

Proposal: Inaction Injunction

Passes 5-0 and is enacted.
-Spitemaster

Adminned at 30 Oct 2013 07:08:10 UTC

If the proposal “Definition for Guidance” fails, this proposal does nothing.
Append to “The Sequester”:

MUST: As a Weekly Action, an MN may make a Repeal Request, a story post that contains only the name of exactly one rule on the Sequester wiki page (The commentary need not be blank).  The title of this post must contain the word “REPEAL”.  If, after exactly 24 hours, a committee that the posting MN is a part of has all voted FOR and there are fewer total AGAINST votes than FOR votes, the Repeal Request passes.  Otherwise it fails.  If a Repeal Request passes, any MN may remove the rule in the Sequester named in that Repeal Request.

Only the MN who posted a passing Repeal Request may remove the rule in the Sequester named in that Repeal Request.

Note that Ignoring the second paragraph here allows anyone to do it.  This is mediated by 3.3.6 “Prioritization”, so the second part applies as long as it is not Ignored.

Proposal: More Nomic, Less Calvinball

Reaches Quorum 7-1 and Passes. -RaichuKFM

Adminned at 29 Oct 2013 11:22:18 UTC

In the Rule “The Sequester”, replace the phrase “The Sequester page of the wiki may be edited once per day by each MN.” with “If the gamestate is not Polarized, The Sequester page of the wiki may be edited once per day by each MN.”

Being able to put rules into the Ruleset at will is kind of a terrible idea. Like defining a new type of Post that auto-succeeds, and making one that hands you an instant-win, or somesuch.

Monday, October 28, 2013

Proposing Ignorance

In the rule “Disorder in the House.”, replace:

Also, an Admin enacting a Proposal or Call for Judgment shall carry out any modifications it makes to their Ignored paragraph.

with

When an Admin is enacting a Proposal, they apply gamestate modifications as if they were Ignoring the same paragraph as the Proposal’s author, except that the Proposal can amend or remove that paragraph. When an Admin is enacting a Call for Judgment, they shall apply gamestate modifications as if they were ignoring no paragraph.

Better proposals through creativity.

Proposal: Definition for Guidance

Reaches Quorum and Passes 9-0. -RaichuKFM

Adminned at 29 Oct 2013 11:20:13 UTC

Add the following text as a new paragraph to the end of the rule “Circular Representation”:

MUST: A Committee is a group of at least three MNs who each endorse another MN in the group.

Notice

I intend to render myself idle.

Friday, October 25, 2013

Proposal: I am ignoring the victory condition (AGAINST)

Passes 9-0 -Larrytheturtle

Adminned at 26 Oct 2013 23:01:46 UTC

Add the following text to the rule “Disorder in the House” as a new paragraph after the second paragraph:

MUST: However, voters on a Declaration of Victory shall base their votes on the perspective of the author of that Declaration of Victory with respect to ignored paragraphs.  Also, an Admin enacting a Proposal or Call for Judgment shall carry out any modifications it makes to their Ignored paragraph.  This paragraph takes precedence over the other parts of this rule.

Proposal: Boycott Bandwagon

Passes 7-0 -Larrytheturtle

Adminned at 26 Oct 2013 23:00:19 UTC

Add a new subrule to “Circular Representation” called “Boycott” with the following text:

If a MN (the Follower) has Endorsed the same MN (the Leader) for at least 24 hours, the Follower may change the paragraph they Ignore to match the paragraph the Leader is Ignoring.

Giving the Endorsement a basic use to encourage us to pay attention to it.  It also means we can get a large group of MNs to ignore the same rule-piece quicker than with normal switching.

Proposal: O Captain! My Captain!

Times out and fails 2-4 -Larrytheturtle

Adminned at 26 Oct 2013 22:57:35 UTC

Amend to the rule “Ain’t No Party” the following text:

MUST: The member of an Orientation with the most endorsements is consider that Orientation’s Representative. If there is a tie for the most endorsements in an Orientation, then there is no Representative for that Orientation.

If a Representative has cast a valid voting icon on a proposal then any MN that has the same Orientation as that Representative is considered to have cast the same voting icon as the Representative if they have not cast a valid voting icon themselves.

I’m not sure about the wording of this. I couldn’t seem to find a better way of stating it.

I wish to be an NM (borring but bASIC)

I wish to be an NM

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Proposal: Golden Handkerchief

Times Out and Fails 3-5. -RaichuKFM

Adminned at 25 Oct 2013 11:20:40 UTC

In Rule 1.2.1, replace “Admins may render themselves Idle at any time provided they’ve made a post or comment declaring their intent to do so in the past four days.” with:-

Admins may render themselves Idle at any time.

If an MN has the name Bucky, Clucky, Josh, Larrytheturtle, Murphy, Purplebeard, quirck, RaichuKFM, scshunt, Spitemaster or turtlemoon they are considered Present. Any MN who joined the game or ceased being Idle after this Proposal was posted is also considered Present. Upon enactment of this proposal, if an MN is Present and also Idle, they shall no longer be Idle; if an MN is neither Present nor Idle, they shall be made Idle.

Under Rule 1.2.1 I am required to declare my intention to idle myself before idling myself. Hello everyone! I intend to idle myself, and may as well drop this amendment in on my way out. The “admins must idle loudly” clause was added in May 2013, when a dynasty had an automagical gamestate trigger whenever anyone became idle. No other dynasty needs this, and by saying “if an admin idles silently or using the wrong words, they remain unidle even if nobody notices” we’re just giving ourselves another way for the visible gamestate to drift out of sync with the platonic one.

Here’s my previous attempt to remove this. I’ve added an “everyone who should be idle is idle” clause in case any mistakes have been made by self-idling admins since May.

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Proposal: Formalized Relationships

Reaches Quorum and Passes 6-0. -RaichuKFM

Adminned at 24 Oct 2013 11:28:32 UTC

Add a new Rule to the Ruleset.  Call it “Circular Representation” and give it the following text:

There is a GNDT column called “Endorsement” whose legal values are the names of all MNs. A MN is said to Endorse the MN named in that column. This represents the other MN whom that MN trusts most to uphold their interests. A MN may change their Endorsement to any valid MN as a weekly action. A MN who Endorses an invalid target (such as a MN who is ignoring this paragraph) may change their Endorsement to any other MN at any time. A MN’s Endorsement defaults to the MN immediately above them in the GNDT, with the top MN defaulting to the bottom MN.

An MN may not Endorse himself.

If a MN becomes Idle, all MNs who Endorse them have their Endorsement changed to the that of the MN who became Idle. If this would cause a MN to have an illegal Endosement value, their Endorsement is instead reset to its default value.

Bringing back my favorite political rule, the Social Graph from the Reality TV dynasty.  If we want politics, reviving rules from a dynasty that led to them is a good start.

Heck with it

I request to be un-idled.

Monday, October 21, 2013

Proposal: Filibuster

Quorums 6-0. — Quirck
Eh, again gotta count manually. It’s 7-0, same consequences though — Quirck

Adminned at 23 Oct 2013 13:53:04 UTC

Append to the third paragraph of “The Sequester”:

If an MN edits the Sequester page of the wiki and adds content, that MN may also delay when the gamestate becomes Polarised by 6 hours, updating the previous paragraph as necessary.  If an MN edits the Sequester page of the wiki and removes content, that MN may also accelerate when the gamestate becomes Polarised by 6 hours, updating the previous paragraph as necessary.

Proposal: Kinda Thought the Speaker Should Have Powers

Quorums 8-0. — Quirck
Kevan got me. It’s 9-0 — Quirck

Adminned at 23 Oct 2013 13:53:21 UTC

Make me an admin.

I did think that it was automatic when winning, but I see it’s not and I’d like to be one.

Proposal: Shards

Self-killed. — Quirck

Adminned at 23 Oct 2013 13:20:11 UTC

Add a new Rule to the Ruleset entitled Herding Cats:

Once - and only once - per day, any NM may declare the existence of a new Orientation, provided the announcement contains a list of members of that Orientation and a name for that Orientation that is distinctly different from all current Orientations. The number of NMs in the list shall number (the number of unidled NMs)/(the current number of Orientations + 1) or greater.

The announcement shall become effective when all the NMs listed in the announcement vote FOR the announcement. The announcement shall fail after 24 hours, if all listed NMs have not cast a positive vote for the announcement within that 24 hours.

If and when the announcement becomes effective, those NMs listed in the announcement become affiliated with that new Orientation and are no longer affiliated with any other Orientation. The new Orientation then gains the identical status, restrictions, and abilities as any other existing Orientation. It may also share with those Orientations the shame and/or glory visited upon them for ultimate failure to restart the Government.


Edit the Rule entitled Ain’t No Party to read as follows:

Each MN is a member of a block of like-minded MNs. Political affiliations are defined by physical orientation from the Speaker in the Chamber; MNs can, for example, be Sunwards (SW) or Widdershins (WS). Each MN’s Orientation is tracked in the GNDT.

An MN with no Orientation may set their Orientation at any time.

Whichever Orientation has the most MNs is the Majority. Any other Orientation is the Minority.


If the Proposal titled “Ain’t No Party” failed, this Proposal does nothing.

In some realms, two parties has been proven to be unmanageable. Sometimes, neither Orientation represents an MN a “like minded” block.

Proposal: Orienteering

Passes 9-0. — Quirck
Oops, 10-0. — Quirck

Adminned at 23 Oct 2013 13:54:03 UTC

Add a new rule to the ruleset, entitled Ain’t No Party:

Each MN is a member of a block of like-minded MNs. Political affiliations are defined by physical orientation from the Speaker in the Chamber; MNs can therefore be either Sunwards (SW) or Widdershins (WS). Each MN’s Orientation is tracked in the GNDT.

An MN with no Orientation may set their Orientation at any time.

Whichever Orientation has the most MNs is the Majority. The other Orientation is the Minority.

Add the following to the rule entitled “Shutdown”:

This rule may only be amended or repealed by a Proposal if that Proposal was made by a member of the Majority, AND if over 60% of the votes cast on it were FOR it.

Proposal: Disorderly Shutdown 2

Passes 9-1. — Quirck
10-1. — Quirck

Adminned at 23 Oct 2013 13:54:44 UTC

Enact a new rule “Disorder in the House”:-

MUST: Each MN may Ignore one paragraph of some dynastic rule. Which paragraph they are Ignoring is tracked in the GNDT column “Ignoring” by recording the number of the rule, then a dash, followed by the number of the paragraph in that rule which they are Ignoring.  By default, no paragraph is Ignored, and it’s tracked as “-”.  A MN may only change which rule they are Ignoring if they have Ignored the same rule continuously for the last 96 hours.

MUST: If an MN is Ignoring a paragraph of a dynastic rule, they treat the ruleset as if it did not contain that paragraph, except for any definitions that paragraph contains.  Any other MN who is not Ignoring that paragraph does not treat the ruleset as if it did not contain that paragraph, unless they take an action which is affected by a paragraph and affects an MN who is Ignoring that paragraph.  In that case, treat that paragraph as not existing for the purposes of affecting MNs which Ignore it only.

MUST: Any paragraph of any dynastic rule may be headed by a “MUST:” header. If a paragraph is headed with “MUST:”, it may not be Ignored.

 

Let me take a crack at this interesting idea.. Though I change the meaning a bit..

Saturday, October 19, 2013

Have you tried shutting it off and turning it on again?

I unidle / wish to unidle / etc.

Proposal: The Fiscal Cliff

Reached quorum and passes, 6-1, with 1 unresolved DEF. Josh

Adminned at 21 Oct 2013 09:28:50 UTC

If there is any content in the wiki page “Sequester”, remove it.

Add a new rule to the ruleset, entitled The Sequester:

MUST: There exists, on the wiki page titled Sequester, a ruleset. Its contents have no effect on the gamestate unless the gamestate has become Polarised. If the gamestate is Polarised, then all rules in the Sequester are treated as being part of the Ruleset, with the same status as Dynastic Rules.

MUST: Unless specifically otherwise stated by another rule or enacted proposal, the gamestate becomes Polarised at 9am on November 1st 2013. If the gamestate is Polarised then any player may update this rule at any time to reflect this fact. The gamestate is not currently Polarised.

MUST: The Sequester page of the wiki may be edited once per day by each MN. An edit made to the Sequester page by an MN may add content but never remove it, unless it violates a clause of this rule or the change is an effect of the passage of a Voteable Matter.

MUST: No rule on the Sequester page may directly award Victory to any MN, nor may they directly edit or repeal any Core Rule of the Ruleset.

Surely an incentive for us to compromise will make it easier for us to do so?

Not Idle Any More

I unidle. Quorum is 6.

Proposal: Powering down…

Quorums 9-0. — Quirck
Sorry, it’s 10-0. — Quirck

Adminned at 21 Oct 2013 08:47:09 UTC

Enact a new rule, “Shutdown”, with the text “MUST: The Government of Blognomic is shut down.  No MN can win.”

Shutdown in Effect

Enact a new rule, “Shutdown”, with the text “MUST: The Government of Blognomic is shut down.  No MN can win.”

Proposal: Disorderly Shutdown

Fails 3-4. — Quirck
Sorry, it’s 4-4. Automatic vote counter didn’t count turtlemoon’s vote since his nick was capitalized on the sidebar — Quirck

Adminned at 21 Oct 2013 08:46:51 UTC

Enact a new rule, “Disorder in the House”

Each paragraph of each dynastic rule other than this one shall have at the start one of two headers: MAY, or MUST.  If a paragraph is headed with MAY, it is an optional rule that can be followed, such as a rule defining a voluntary action.  If one part of a MAY paragraph is followed by an MN, the entire paragraph must be followed.  If an MN uses a rule contained in a MAY paragraph that affects another MN, the second MN cannot chose to ignore its effects.  If a paragraph is headed with MUST, the text of the paragraph is to be heeded at all times by all MNs.  If a paragraph is not headed by MAY or MUST, add a MUST header to that paragraph.

Each MN may Ignore one MUST paragraph.  Which MUST paragraph they are ignoring is tracked in the GNDT by recording the number of the rule, then a dash, followed by the number of the paragraph in that rule which they are ignoring.  For instance, if they were to ignore this paragraph (were it possible), a MN would write “2.1-2”.  This defaults to “”.  A MN may only change which rule they are Ignoring if they have Ignored the same rule continuously for the last 96 hours.

If an MN is Ignoring a paragraph of a rule, they treat the ruleset as if it did not contain that paragraph, except for any definitions that paragraph contains.  Any other MN who is not Ignoring that paragraph does not treat the ruleset as if it did not contain that paragraph, unless they take an action which is affected by a paragraph and affects an MN who is Ignoring that paragraph.  In that case, treat that paragraph as not existing for the purposes of affecting MNs which Ignore it only.

Ascension Address: Let’s have some Tea

Honourable Members of the Nomic,

We, the Government of Blognomic, have entered a Shutdown.  Democracy has been suspended!  Until this government can come together in agreement, we cannot proceed with the regular operations of Blognomic.  Only if you work together can we end this shutdown. 

Repeal all dynastic rules.  Replace “Apprentice” with “MN” (that is, Member of the Nomic) and “Wizard” with “Speaker”.

Enact the rule, “Shutdown”, with the following text: “The Government of Blognomic is shut down.”

Friday, October 18, 2013

Proposed theme

I don’t know if it would be considered to be extremely poor taste, but I’d like to run a “Government Shutdown” dynasty.  Would you be okay with that, or should I go with a different idea?

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Request to Join

This is my formal request for status as a player.


turtlemoon

Declaration of Victory: Flipping: Heads

Quorums 6-0. — Quirck

Adminned at 18 Oct 2013 03:51:21 UTC

Per the proposal “Magic Coin Flip”, I have achieved victory!

Thursday, October 17, 2013

SpiteMaster is the Victor

Upon rolling DICE 2 in the GNDT I received a result of 1. This means that Spitemaster has achieved victory and may post a DOV when he pleases.

Proposal: Magic Coin Flip

Passes 7-0 -Larrytheturtle

Adminned at 16 Oct 2013 17:25:11 UTC

If the Proposal “Final Practical Exam” passes, this Proposal does nothing. Otherwise, roll DICE2 in the GNDT. On a result of 1, Spitemaster achieves victory. On a result of 2, Kevan achieves victory.

There. Is there any issue with this?

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Proposal: Final Practical Exam

Self-killed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 16 Oct 2013 10:56:50 UTC

Enact a new rule, “Matriculation”:-

An Apprentice is Clever if they would have been able to achieve victory at 00:01 UTC on Monday the 14th of October 2013, in a hypothetical situation where the game was not in Hiatus and no other Apprentice had taken any game actions that day.

The Wizard may, at any time, make a private list of any Apprentices who he believes to be Clever. Having done so, he may then choose an Apprentice at random from that list, and make a blog post announcing that Apprentice’s identity. Upon doing so, the announced Apprentice achieves victory.

I tried making a list of Apprentices and whether or not I thought they could have won, but it’s possible someone was planning a trick that I’d missed. Asking people to state their plans so that we can vote on their validity would drag things out - the quickest and cleanest solution is perhaps just to have our unbiased Emperor make the call. We can argue out our victory mechanisms in comments to this proposal.

Unidle please

I’m not at a convenient time/device to deidle myself from, but it now matters how quickly I get deidled, thanks to Kevan’s proposal. Can someone please deidle me? Thanks.

Monday, October 14, 2013

Proposal: Wizards of Nomicly Place

Self-Killed. -RaichuKFM

Adminned at 15 Oct 2013 06:18:04 UTC

Define the candidate list to be: Kevan, Larrytheturtle, Quirck, RaichuKFM, Spitemaster

If an apprentice whose name appears in the candidate list includes the phrase “OPT OUT” (in all caps) in a comment to this post, remove that apprentice’s name from the candidate list.

If the candidate list is empty, Clucky achieves victory. Otherwise, role a DICEN where N is the length of the candidate list. Index the result into the candidate list (with 1 corresponding to the first name, N corresponding to the last name). That apprentice (i.e. the one with the selected name) achieves victory.

Fairly sure we all could win. So letting people opt out first and then rolling a dice with everyone else.

I don’t really feel like running a dynasty so I opted out, but in the off chance *everyone* else opts out I might as well take the win… right?

Call for Judgment: A Hollow Voice Says…

Quorums 5-0. — Quirck

Adminned at 14 Oct 2013 13:34:24 UTC

Throughout the ruleset, replace “they achieve victory” with “nothing happens”.

Per comments on the DoV, a quick CfJ to remove the victory condition during Hiatus so that the dynasty isn’t now won by whichever admin gets to fail the DoV.

Sunday, October 13, 2013

Declaration of Victory: Magical Overflow

Fails at 1-4. — Quirck

Adminned at 14 Oct 2013 13:36:25 UTC

Having cast the spell “Prevail”, and being the only Apprentice with nonzero Totems, I achieve victory!

Good game, all.

Saturday, October 12, 2013

Proposal: Kitchen Gun

Fails 1-3 with one unresolved def. — Quirck

Adminned at 14 Oct 2013 13:37:40 UTC

Add a new subrule to “Powers” called “DRA (Drain)” with the following text:-

Effect: [Apprentice] loses an amount of Energy equal to the Cost of this Spell.
Cost: 5
Difficulty: 1A

Wednesday, October 09, 2013

Proposal: Kid Gloves

Timed out 4 votes to 2. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 11 Oct 2013 06:16:46 UTC

Enact a new rule called “Novices”:-

If an Apprentice has joined the game or unidled within the past four days, then that Apprentice is a Novice; otherwise they are not. A Novice may not cast a Spell if it would modify a GNDT stat of another Apprentice, or the Spellbook of another Apprentice.

Further to “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice”, an attempt to pin down the only actions that it would be unfair for a stooge to perform - crafting and casting a new RAH spell which would become available to their accomplice, or casting a spell to either boost their accomplice or punish that accomplice’s rivals.

Tuesday, October 08, 2013

Schoolwork Takes Even the Best of Us

Sphinx idles by his request, dropping quorum to 4.

Monday, October 07, 2013

Idle me, please

I wish to get idled, since I am starting to study this week and I won’t have as much time for Blognomic as I would like in the next weeks, but I’m very sure that I’ll come back after that :)

Proposal: Mending Spells

Reached quorum 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 09 Oct 2013 05:19:39 UTC

In “Spells”, change “each option having a Name and a Multiplier (which may be any positive real number)” to:

each option having a Name and a Multiplier (which may be any real number)

In “Locations”, change “Each Location may occur in that list no more than once.” to:

If an Apprentice ever has more than one instance of the same Location in their list, they immediately lose all but one instance of that Location.

Allowing Multipliers to go negative, and rewording the Location restriction to ensure that it doesn’t accidentally render some actions illegal.

Idle time

I go idle. Quorum is still 5.

Proposal: The Sorcerer’s Apprentice

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 09 Oct 2013 05:18:48 UTC

Replace “New Apprentices start with Energy equal to the sum of each Apprentice’s Mastery of the Arcane Domain.” with “New Apprentices start with no Energy.”

Under the current rules, a player joining today would start with 9 Energy, which they could spend, and then belatedly Recharge themselves to get another 27 Energy. Even capping that 27 at 20 (assuming nothing happened to increase their Arcane), that’s four more Energy than even the most active player was able to get this week.

Proposal: No Pain, No Gain

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 09 Oct 2013 02:58:39 UTC

Add a new subrule to “Parameters” called “Victim” with the following text:-

  • MU - the Casting Apprentice - X-1
  • HU - (name of an Apprentice, chosen when the spell is Crafted) - X1.5
  • UL - any Apprentice - X2
  • WU - every Apprentice - X3 (Difficulty: 3A)

A parameter multiplier for negative effects, which make a spell cheaper if the caster suffers, but more expensive if an opponent does.

Sunday, October 06, 2013

Idlers

andrewStiltman, Clucky, and kikar idle out. Quorum is now 5.

-scshunt

I’m not idle, and you?

A week without a post.. It’s dangerous