Many (relatively) simple changes I agree with

If the two oldest pending proposals are both Crises, they can be processed out of order, which could cause weirdness with “if other thing passes” clauses. Obscure enough of a problem that I’m absolutely fine with patching it later.

I don’t understand why Crises can’t happen while the lights are out.  In fact, the lights being out sounds exactly like the sort of physical problem that we’d want to be able to solve with such a Proposal.

Mostly for theme - I’m imagining that most Crises will be along the lines of “tie this person up” or “make everyone empty their pockets”. An unlucky power cut could make a dramatic difference, which seems like a useful and theatrical threat to hang over any discussion.

I suppose we could add an explicit exception for a Crisis being processed in the dark if it has no gamestate effect beyond turning the lights on.

Crises are Proposals. The inability to enact a Proposal while the lights are out + the inability to turn the lights on without a Proposal = complete deadlock, due to the queue (you’d have to enact the crisis before you enacted the proposal to turn the lights on before you turned the lights on before you enacted the crisis…). There are currently two ways to avoid this problem, vetoing/selfkilling/failing the crisis, and a CFJ, but it leaves the nomic in a much more precarious state than it would be otherwise; leaving us with only a few possible methods of escaping a deadlock is the sort of thing that fits B, not BlogNomic.

That’s why “If the oldest pending Proposal is a Crisis, the second-oldest pending Proposal may be enacted or failed as if it were the oldest pending Proposal.” is in there. (Although I realise this should really be “the oldest pending non-Crisis Proposal may be enacted”, in case there are two Crises at the bottom of the queue. I’ll patch it when I’ve got more than two minutes spare, and use the veto to kill any deliberate Crisis abuse before then.)