This is a legislative order to correct the wording of rule 4.0. XnJester made a Proposal [301], 02 Oct 2000 03:51:30
The original (incorrect) text states:
" Rule 4/0 : Versions and Revision Numbers
Every modification to a revisiable object that does not eliminate it from play creates a new version of it.
Revision numbers differientiate versions of revisable objects. Each time a revisable object is altered, its revision number is incremented. The initial revision number is 0.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
It will be changed to:
" Rule 4/0 : Versions and Revision Numbers
Every modification to a revisable object that does not eliminate it from play creates a new version of it.
Revision numbers differentiate versions of revisable objects. Each time a revisable object is altered, its revision number is incremented. The initial revision number is 0.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
[[changed 'revisiable' to 'revisable' and 'differientiate' to
This is a legislative order to correct the wording of rule 5.0. XnJester made a Proposal [302], 02 Oct 2000 03:51:42
The original (incorrect) text states:
" Rule 5/0 : Serial Numbers
Every revisable object has a serial number unique for the set of objects of its type. The serial number of a revisable object of type T is defined as the intrerpolated string "n/r", where q is the sum of the base number for T and the object's number, and r is the object's revision number.
[[Example: The serial number for version 0 of Rule 101 would be 101/0, while the serial number for Rule 203, version 17 would be 203/17.]]
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
It will be changed to:
" Rule 5/0 : Serial Numbers
Every revisable object has a serial number unique for the set of objects of its type. The serial number of a revisable object of type T is defined as the interpolated string "n/r", where n is the sum of the base number for T and the object's number, and r is the object's revision number.
[[Example: The serial number for version 0 of Rule 101 would be 101/0, while the serial number for Rule 203, version 17 would be 203/17.]]
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
[[I believe that 'q' should actually be 'n'. I have changed 'intrerpolated' to 'interpolated'.]]
This is a legislative order to correct the wording of rule 5.0. XnJester made a Proposal [303], 02 Oct 2000 03:51:53
The original (incorrect) text states:
" Rule 8/0 : Comments
The following two non-whitespace characters:
[ ]
are considered "reserved characters when appearing in Official Documents in ways defined herein.
Excepting any text in the Rule prior to and including this sentence, any text appearing within doubled square brackets ("[[" and "]]") shall be considered "comment" text. Comment text shall not have the force of Rule; its purpose is solely elucidative or demonstrative.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
It will be changed to:
" Rule 8/0 : Comments
The following two non-whitespace characters:
[ ]
are considered "reserved" characters when appearing in Official Documents in ways defined herein.
Excepting any text in this Rule prior to and including this sentence, any text appearing within doubled square brackets ("[[" and "]]") shall be considered "comment" text. Comment text shall not have the force of Rule; its purpose is solely elucidative or demonstrative.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
[[Added quotes for "reserved". I have changed 'the Rule' to 'this Rule' to help prevent ambiguity.]]
This is a legislative order to correct the wording of rule 5.0. XnJester made a Proposal [304], 02 Oct 2000 03:52:14
The original (incorrect) text states:
" Rule 102/0 : Rules and The Ruleset
The Ruleset is the collective body of current Rule versions. The Ruleset may be altered only as provided therein. Rules are revisiable.
Every Rule must have a unique Rule number. The base Rule number is 300.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
It will be changed to:
" Rule 102/0 : Rules and The Ruleset
The Ruleset is the collective body of current Rule versions. The Ruleset may be altered only as provided therein. Rules are revisable.
Every Rule must have a unique Rule number. The base number for Rules is 0. Serial numbering of Rules start from 300.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
[[I have changed 'revisiable' to 'revisable'. I have corrected the last sentence and added an extra sentence to help prevent ambiguity about base numbers (as in Rule 5)]]
A legislative order to correct the wording of rule 223.0. XnJester made a Proposal [305], 02 Oct 2000 03:52:34
The original (incorrect) text states:
" Rule 223/0 : Adoption of Proposals
A Proposal is adopted iff, at the close of voting, its passage ratio exceeds one-half. Legislative Orders in the text of an adopted Proposal shall be executed in a timely fashion by the appropriate Officers.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
It will be changed to:
" Rule 223/0 : Adoption of Proposals
A Proposal is adopted if, at the close of voting, its passage ratio exceeds one-half. Legislative Orders in the text of an adopted Proposal shall be executed in a timely fashion by the appropriate Officers.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
[[The fifth word of the text 'iff' changed to 'if'.]]
I propose that the following rule be added to the ruleset:0. God made a Proposal [306], 02 Oct 2000 21:59:56
A forum not declared to be a public forum by the Administrator is not a public forum. Actions taken in a forum that is not a public forum are not recognized.
A legislative order to correct the wording of rule 223.0. XnJester made a Proposal [307], 02 Oct 2000 02:59:39
The original (incorrect) text states:
" Rule 223/0 : Adoption of Proposals
A Proposal is adopted iff, at the close of voting, its passage ratio exceeds one-half. Legislative Orders in the text of an adopted Proposal shall be executed in a timely fashion by the appropriate Officers.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
It will be changed to:
" Rule 223/0 : Adoption of Proposals
A Proposal is adopted if, at the close of voting, its passage ratio exceeds one-half. Legislative Orders in the text of an adopted Proposal shall be executed in a timely fashion by the appropriate Officers.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
[[The fifth word of the text 'iff' changed to 'if'.]]
This is a legislative order to correct the wording of rule 114.0. XnJester made a Proposal [308], 02 Oct 2000 03:02:10
The original (incorrect) text states:
" Rule 114/0 : Orders
An Order is a command directed to some Agent, known a the recipient, requiring em to perform exactly one action, or to refrain from performing one or more actions. Any Order that does not unambiguously specify what action is to be taken in its execution may be declared invalid by the
Courts.
An Order must be either Legislative, Motive, Administrative, Judicial, or
Private.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
It will be changed to:
" Rule 114/0 : Orders
An Order is a command directed to some Agent, known as the recipient, requiring em to perform exactly one action, or to refrain from performing one or more actions. Any Order that does not unambiguously specify what action is to be taken in its execution may be declared invalid by the
Courts.
An Order must be either Legislative, Motive, Administrative, Judicial, or
Private.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
[[The word 'a' changed to 'as'.]]
This is a legislative order to correct the wording of rule 4.
The original (incorrect) text states:
" Rule 4/0 : Versions and Revision Numbers
Every modification to a revisiable object that does not eliminate it from play creates a new version of it.
Revision numbers differientiate versions of revisable objects. Each time a revisable object is altered, its revision number is incremented. The initial revision number is 0.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
It will be changed to:
" Rule 4/0 : Versions and Revision Numbers
Every modification to a revisable object that does not eliminate it from play creates a new version of it.
Revision numbers differentiate versions of revisable objects. Each time a revisable object is altered, its revision number is incremented. The initial revision number is 0.
0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000"
[[changed 'revisable' to 'revisable' and 'differentiate' to
'differentiate'.]]
Proposal 309/1 : Fix Rule 4 typo
The original (incorrect) text states: " Rule 4/0 : Versions and Revision Numbers 0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000" It will be changed to: " Rule 4/0 : Versions and Revision Numbers 0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000" [[changed 'revisiable' to 'revisable' and 'differientiate' to The original (incorrect) text states: " Rule 5/0 : Serial Numbers 0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000" It will be changed to: " Rule 5/0 : Serial Numbers 0. Initial Rule, 2 October 2000" [[I believe that 'q' should actually be 'n'. I have changed 'intrerpolated' to 'interpolated'.]]
Proposal 311/1 : Rescinding Actions
"A Agent may rescind any unrecognized action e has taken at any time by publicly indicating that e is doing so. The recognition of a rescinded action by any Officer is prohibited."
Proposal 311/2 : Rescinding Actions
"An Agent may rescind any unrecognized action e has taken at any time by publicly indicating that e is doing so. The recognition of a rescinded action by any Officer is prohibited."
Enact a new rule titled "Criminal Code" with the first available rule number and text as follows: It is recognized that while certain actions technically allowed to a Player may not be in the best intrests of this game. If a player believes that any agent has been guilty of such a crime then e should submit an RFJ accusing that suspect of the crime. The arguments portion of the RFJ should contain documentation of whatever evidence has been found to support the accusation. An RJF submitted for this purpose is handled in the normal manner for an RJF except for the following points of difference: 1. The accused is entitled to submit to the Judge a statement explaining their position and arguing for their own defense. If they do not submit such a statement within a reasonable length of time then they lose this right. 2. If the judge rules true e does not issue orders to change the game state directly but instead issues an order to the accused to make whatever reparations or punishments e decides upon, within the guidelines of the criminal code. 3. Neither the submittor nor the accused may be assigned to judge such an RFJ. Here follows the guidelines for judging RFJs on the criminal code. To be found guilty of game delay through excessive RFJs, proposals, or other means, the accused agent must have submitted at least fifteen RFJs or proposals within one nweek, which was found to hinder game play, or must have taken other simmilar actions which prevented participation by the Players. Punishment for this should be a suspension of the ability to submit RFJs or proposals of not more than five times the amount of the delay in game play, and may also involve a loss of points at the discresion of the judge. To be found guilty of the crime of dereliction of duty, an agent must have been an officer and must have failed to perform some official duty within the required amount of time. Punishment for this should be a loss of a number of points and possible expulsion from the office at the discresion of the judge. To be found guilty of the crime of murder, an agent must have acted in some way as to directly and permanently prevent a player from participating in the game. Punishment for this should include loss of any official privilidges, loss of points, loss of player status, or permanent expulsion from the game at the discresion of the judge. To be found guilty of the crime of abuse of office, an agent must have been an officer and must have used the power granted to eir office to directly and unfairly hinder the play of another player, outside the realm of what would normally be expected of that office, at the discresion of the judge. Punishment for this should be reparations to the hindered player of whatever game advantage e lost due to the actions of the accused, made directly by the accused, at the discresion of the judge. Proposal 312/1 : Criminal Code
Enact a new rule titled "Criminal Code" with the first available rule number and text as follows: It is recognized that while certain actions technically allowed to a Player may not be in the best intrests of this game. If a player believes that any agent has been guilty of such a crime then e should submit an RFJ accusing that suspect of the crime. The arguments portion of the RFJ should contain documentation of whatever evidence has been found to support the accusation. An RJF submitted for this purpose is handled in the normal manner for an RJF except for the following points of difference: 1. The accused is entitled to submit to the Judge a statement explaining their position and arguing for their own defense. If they do not submit such a statement within a reasonable length of time then they lose this right. 2. If the judge rules true e does not issue orders to change the game state directly but instead issues an order to the accused to make whatever reparations or punishments e decides upon, within the guidelines of the criminal code. 3. Neither the submittor nor the accused may be assigned to judge such an RFJ. Here follows the guidelines for judging RFJs on the criminal code. To be found guilty of game delay through excessive RFJs, proposals, or other means, the accused agent must have submitted at least fifteen RFJs or proposals within one nweek, which was found to hinder game play, or must have taken other simmilar actions which prevented participation by the Players. Punishment for this should be a suspension of the ability to submit RFJs or proposals of not more than five times the amount of the delay in game play, and may also involve a loss of points at the discresion of the judge. To be found guilty of the crime of dereliction of duty, an agent must have been an officer and must have failed to perform some official duty within the required amount of time. Punishment for this should be a loss of a number of points and possible expulsion from the office at the discresion of the judge. To be found guilty of the crime of murder, an agent must have acted in some way as to directly and permanently prevent a player from participating in the game. Punishment for this should include loss of any official privilidges, loss of points, loss of player status, or permanent expulsion from the game at the discresion of the judge. To be found guilty of the crime of abuse of office, an agent must have been an officer and must have used the power granted to eir office to directly and unfairly hinder the play of another player, outside the realm of what would normally be expected of that office, at the discresion of the judge. Punishment for this should be reparations to the hindered player of whatever game advantage e lost due to the actions of the accused, made directly by the accused, at the discresion of the judge. Proposal 312/2 : Criminal Code
[[Revision 2: separated the crimes into individual rules, and corrected them to properly deal with corrupt judges and officers.]]
Enact a new rule titled "Criminal Code" with the first available rule number and text as follows: It is recognized that while certain actions technically allowed to a Player may not be in the best intrests of this game. If a player believes that any agent has been guilty of such a crime then e should submit an RFJ accusing that suspect of the crime. The arguments portion of the RFJ should contain documentation of whatever evidence has been found to support the accusation. Judges should take into account the precedent of judgements on simmilar crimes as well as the evidence presented to come to eir decision. The RFJ must be submitted within two nweeks of the date of the alleged crime. An RJF submitted for this purpose is handled in the normal manner for an RJF except for the following points of difference: 1. The accused is entitled to submit to the Judge a statement explaining their position and arguing for their own defense. If they do not submit such a statement within a reasonable length of time then they lose this right. 2. If the judge rules True then e shall issue Judicial orders to restore the game to the state it would be in without the crime, and also may order the Agent found guilty to make reparations or punishment within the bounds of the guidelines for various types of crimes specified in the rules. 3. Neither the submittor nor the accused may be assigned to judge such an RFJ. 4. The ruling on this kind of RFJ must be either True or False. If it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the agent did commit the crime then the ruling shall be true, otherwise the ruling must be false. Here ends the new rule entitled "Criminal Code" Enact a new rule entitled "General Misconduct", with text as follows: The crime of General Misconduct is a crime punishable under the Criminal Code. To be found guilty of General Misconduct, an agent must have used devious means to attempt some action not normally allowed or possible. Punishment for this crime is a fine of up to 100 points. The Judge will also issue orders to correct the game state. Here ends the rule "General Misconduct. Enact a new rule entitled "Game Delay", with text as follows: The crime of Game Delay is a crime punishable under the Criminal Code. To be found guilty of game delay through excessive RFJs, proposals, or other means, the accused agent must have submitted at least fifteen RFJs or proposals within one nweek, which was found to hinder game play, or must have taken other simmilar actions which prevented participation by the Players. Punishment for this should be a suspension of the ability to submit RFJs or proposals of not more than five times the duration of the delay in game play, and may also involve a loss of points at the discresion of the judge Here ends the rule titled "The Crime of Game Delay" Enact a new rule entitled "The Crime of Dereliction of Duty" The crime of Dereliction of Duty is a crime punishable under the criminal code. To be found guilty of the crime of dereliction of duty, an agent must have been an officer and must have failed to perform some official duty within the time allowed. Punishment for this should be a loss of up to 100 points and possible expulsion from the office if the crime is particularly severe, at the discresion of the Judge. The Judge shall also take such steps as are nescessarry to correct the game state. Here ends the rule entitled "The Crime of Dereliction of Duty"
Enact a new rule entitled "The Crime of Murder" Murder is a crime punishable under the criminal code. To be found guilty of the crime of murder, an agent must have acted in some way as to directly and permanently prevent a player from participating in the game. Punishment for this should include loss of any official privilidges, loss of points, loss of player status, or permanent expulsion from the game at the discresion of the judge. Here ends the new rule.
Enact a new rule entitled "Abuse of Office" To be found guilty of the crime of abuse of office, an agent must have been an officer and must have unfairly used the power granted to eir office outside the capacity of that office for either the benefit or the detriment of emself or another Agent or Agents. Punishment for this crime should be a fine of up to 100 points and an immediate expiration of eir Official term. The Judge shall also take such steps as are nescessarry to correct the game state. Here ends the new rule
"The Pedant is the Officer responsible for minor corrections to the rules. The Pedant may make changes to the rules consisting of the insertion, deletion, or change of no more than three words or alphanumeric characters per Rule per nweek. The Pedant makes a rule change by making a Pedantic Order ordering the rule change. The Pedantic Order is an Administrative Order. The Pedantic Order will take effect at the end of the voting period following the making of that Pedantic Order. The Pedantic Order is automatically cancelled if a public objection is received before it takes effect. At the end of a nweek Pedantic Orders will take effect prior to any other Orders. The Pedant will be paid a stipend of 3 points per nweek. The Pedant will be paid 1 point per Pedantic Order which takes effect. The first Pedant is the Player whose real name is Kieron Jarvis. "
The Motive Order corresponding to an adopted Motion to Amend Trivially directs the Administrator to make appropriate changes to the Rules.
Proposal 314/1 : Motion to Amend Trivially
"Motions to Amend Trivially are Secondary Approvable Motions adoptable only through unanimous consent, and fail if unanimous consent is not given. A Rule may be unsubstantially amended if a Motion to Amend Trivially naming that Rule is adopted. Motions to Amend Trivially may never become Ballot Issues. The Motive Order corresponding to an adopted Motion to Amend Trivially directs the Administrator to make appropriate changes to the Rules."
Anytime before the close of voting on proposals, a Player may make an Accusation of Heresy by accusing any other Player of being a Humble Disciple, and present the evidence. If the Player is found to be Guilty of Heresy then the accuser receives a payment of 30 points. If the proposal of a Humble Disciple is passed without the Humble Disciple being Accused of Heresy, then the Humble Disciple shall claim to have Preached to the Unbelievers and offer the proof. If their claim is accepted then they have Achieved Enlightenment and are blessed with 30 points. If a player is wrongly Accused of Heresy, or a Humble Disciple's Proposal fails, then no further action is taken. A Player who is Accused of Heresy may not then claim to have Preached to the Unbelievers and Achieved Enlightenment if their Proposal subsequently passes. (*)In the case that the Recognised Religious Text is not normally divided into verses, then one or more complete sentences totaling fifteen or more words shall be understood to constitute a verse. (**)Recognised Religious Texts at this time are: Proposal 315/1 : Motion Reform
Anytime before the close of voting on proposals, a Player may make an Accusation of Heresy by accusing any other Player of being a Humble Disciple, and present the evidence. If the Player is found to be Guilty of Heresy then the accuser receives a payment of 30 points. If the proposal of a Humble Disciple is passed without the Humble Disciple being Accused of Heresy, then the Humble Disciple may, within one week, claim to have Preached to the Unbelievers and offer the proof. If their claim is accepted then they have Achieved Enlightenment and are blessed with 30 points. If a player is wrongly Accused of Heresy, or a Humble Disciple's Proposal fails, then no further action is taken. A Player who is Accused of Heresy may not then claim to have Preached to the Unbelievers and Achieved Enlightenment if their Proposal subsequently passes. (*)In the case that the Recognised Religious Text is not normally divided into verses, then one or more complete sentences totaling fifteen or more words shall be understood to constitute a verse. (**)Recognised Religious Texts at this time are: Proposal 315/2 : Subliminal Religious Indoctrination
If at any time a Player submits a proposal which will cause the creation or alteration of a rule so that the rule would subsequently contain the text of one or more verses(*) from a Recognised Religious Text(**), then that Player shall secretly become a Humble Disciple. Anytime before the close of voting on proposals, a Player may make an Accusation of Heresy by accusing any other Player of being a Humble Disciple, and present the evidence. If the Player is found to be Guilty of Heresy then the accuser receives a payment of 30 points. If the proposal of a Humble Disciple is passed without the Humble Disciple being Accused of Heresy, then the Humble Disciple may, within one week, claim to have Preached to the Unbelievers and offer the proof. If their claim is accepted then they have Achieved Enlightenment and are blessed with 30 points. If a player is wrongly Accused of Heresy, or a Humble Disciple's Proposal fails, then no further action is taken. A Player who is Accused of Heresy may not then claim to have Preached to the Unbelievers and Achieved Enlightenment if their Proposal subsequently passes. (*)In the case that the Recognised Religious Text is not normally divided into verses, then one or more complete sentences totaling fifteen or more words shall be understood to constitute a verse. (**)Recognised Religious Texts at this time are: Proposal 316/1 : make crime rule for liars
If an Agent makes a statement in a public forum implying the truth of a statement X, when e already (at time of statement) knows statement X to be false, then e is a Liar. Punishment for this crime should be a fine of between 10 and 100 points, to be decided by the Judge based upon the severity of the lie. If Liar makes a public apology (apologizes in a public forum) before the Judgement is made, then e will be docked only half as many points. {{Here ends the new rule}}
"The Agent who submits a Motion is its owner. An Agent may never own more than ten live Motions of any one type, and may never submit more than ten Motions of any one type in a single day; otherwise an Agent may make a new Motion of any type at any time. New Motions are live and active by default. Motions are revisable. Unless the Rules allow other Agents to do so, only the owner of a live Motion may alter its parts, or activate, deactivate, or withdraw it. Withdrawn Motions are dead. Only live Motions may be altered or be Under Consideration. No Motion may be altered while Under Consideration. Each Motion is either Approvable or Unilateral, and Primary or Secondary. Approvable Motions are subject to voting or unanimous consent, as per the Rules. Unilateral Motions need no such approval to take effect. Primary Motions are assigned serial numbers by type, while Secondary Motions are assigned serial numbers as a group. 2. Add as the first sentence of R117/0: "Proposals are Primary Approvable Motions which are not subject to unanimous consent." 3. Repeal R221/0. 4. Delete the second paragraph of R222/0. 5. Amend the first sentence of R225/0 to read: 'Only votes equivalent to "yes" or "no" are counted toward adoption of Approvable Motions.' 6. Amend R228/0 to read: "The Administrator shall, within a reasonable time after receiving a new Motion, assign it a serial number in the sequence appropriate to its type. A new Motion is not officially recognized until it is assigned a serial number." 7. Amend R229/0 to read: "An Approvable Motion is adopted iff it is subject to and receives unanimous consent, or at the close of voting on it, its passage ratio exceeds one-half. If the Rules regarding a motion establish a different passage ratio, it takes precedence over the passage ratio herein. Orders, Motive or Legislative, in an adopted Motion shall be executed in a timely fashion by the appropriate Officers. Only Motions defined in the Rules have effect if adopted." 8. Repeal R223/0. 9. Insert "Approvable" before every instance of "Motion" in R230/0. 10. Amend the first sentence of R234/0 to read: "A Request for Judgment is a Primary Unilateral Motion." and replace the last sentence with: "A Request for Judgment is dead once a Judgment has been issued on it." "Motions to Add are Secondary Approvable Motions."
Within a reasonable time after receipt of a Request for Judgment, the Administrator shall assign the Request the next Judgment number, and shall select a Player to serve as Judge as per the Rules on Judge selection.
"Motions to Amend Trivially are Secondary Approvable Motions adoptable only through unanimous consent, and fail if unanimous consent is not given. A Rule may be unsubstantially amended if a Motion to Amend Trivially naming that Rule is adopted. Motions to Amend Trivially may never become Ballot Issues. The Motive Order corresponding to an adopted Motion to Amend Trivially directs the Administrator to make appropriate changes to the Rules." 2. Amend the second sentence of R230/0 to read: 3. Wherever the phrase "unanimous consent" appears in R210, replace it with the phrase "one day unanimous consent".
Amend rule 203 by changing its text to the following: The Roster is a list of all Players. Whenever a new Player is added, a Player forfeits, or the name of a Player is changed, the Administrator shall update the Roster to reflect that change.
Amend the text of rule 201 to read as follows: The Administrator shall, at least 48 hours prior to the close of voting each nweek, distribute to all Players the Ballot for that nweek. Each nweek's Ballot shall list all Ballot Issues for the nweek.
Enact a new rule entitled "Revisions of Ballot Issues" and with text as follows: Ballot issues may be revised if and only if the revision was submitted before the start of that nweek's voting, and the issue is otherwise a revisable item. The ballot may not be distributed until all outstanding revisions to ballot items have been recognized. Here ends the new rule entitled "Revisions of Ballot Issues".
Proposal 322/1 : ballot fix 2
[[rev. 1 Expanded to deal with withdrawals and other types of proposal change covered in rule 221.]] Enact a new rule entitled "Revisions of Ballot Issues" and with text as follows: An otherwise reviseable item which is a ballot issue may be altered, withdrawn, or deactivated if and only if the revision was submitted before the start of that nweek's voting; this special case is otherwise subject to the restrictions for whatever type of item that may be. [[For proposals, this is rule 221, "Proposal Submission and Alteration"]]. All outstanding changes to ballot items must be recognized by the Administrator before the ballot is published. Here ends the new rule entitled "Revisions of Ballot Issues".
Enact a new rule, entitled "Quorum Scoring", and text as follows: The Administrator shall, for each ballot item that fails to meet Quorum, transfer one point to the owner of that ballot item from each eligible voter that abstained or did not vote on that item. Here ends the new rule entitled "Quorum Scoring"
An Order later found to be invalid may be vacated by a Judicial Order. In the event that an Order is vacated, the Agent who executed it shall, if possible, take such actions as to reverse the effects of the Order. These actions should be specified as part of the Judicial Order. If the Agent who executed the order cannot reverse the effects of the order, then the Judicial order shall specify some other Agent who is able to reverse the effects to do so.
Proposal 324/1 : Vacating Orders fix
An Order later found to be invalid may be vacated by a Judicial Order. In the event that an Order is vacated, the Agent who executed it shall, if possible, take such actions as to reverse the effects of the Order. These actions should be specified as part of the Judicial Order. If the Agent who executed the order cannot reverse the effects of the order, then the Judicial order shall specify some other Agent who is able to reverse the effects to do so.
Upon the issuing of judgement, the Administrator shall credit the Judge with 5 points.
Proposal 325/1 : Salary for Judges
Upon the issuing of judgement, the Administrator shall credit the Judge with 5 points.
This is a legislative order to correct the wording of rule 4.
0. XnJester made a Proposal [309], 02 Oct 2000 03:08:51
Every modification to a revisiable object that does not eliminate it from play creates a new version of it.
Revision numbers differientiate versions of revisable objects. Each time a revisable object is altered, its revision number is incremented. The initial revision number is 0.
Every modification to a revisable object that does not eliminate it from play creates a new version of it.
Revision numbers differentiate versions of revisable objects. Each time a revisable object is altered, its revision number is incremented. The initial revision number is 0.
'differentiate'.]]
1. XnJester revised Proposal 309/0, 02 Oct 2000 03:10:02
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 309/0, 04 Oct 2000 04:38:08
1. Administrator recognized Proposal 309/1, 04 Oct 2000 04:38:08
1. XnJester withdrew Proposal 309/1, 05 Oct 2000 04:49:39
Proposal 310/0 : Fix Rule 5 typo
This is a legislative order to correct the wording of rule 5.
0. XnJester made a Proposal [310], 02 Oct 2000 03:18:54
Every revisable object has a serial number unique for the set of objects of its type. The serial number of a revisable object of type T is defined as the intrerpolated string "n/r", where q is the sum of the base number for T and the object's number, and r is the object's revision number.
[[Example: The serial number for version 0 of Rule 101 would be 101/0, while the serial number for Rule 203, version 17 would be 203/17.]]
Every revisable object has a serial number unique for the set of objects of its type. The serial number of a revisable object of type T is defined as the interpolated string "n/r", where n is the sum of the base number for T and the object's number, and r is the object's revision number.
[[Example: The serial number for version 0 of Rule 101 would be 101/0, while the serial number for Rule 203, version 17 would be 203/17.]]
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 310/0, 04 Oct 2000 04:38:08
0. XnJester withdrew Proposal 310/0, 05 Oct 2000 04:49:39
Proposal 311/0 : Rescinding Actions
A Agent may rescind any unrecognized action e has taken at any time by publicly indicating that e is doing so. The recognition of a rescinded action by any Officer is prohibited.
Create a Rule entitled "Rescinding Actions" with the following text:
Create a Rule entitled "Rescinding Actions" with the following text:
0. Joel Uckelman made a Proposal [311], 04 Oct 2000 22:22:56
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 311/0, 06 Oct 2000 16:29:08
1. Joel Uckelman revised Proposal 311, 09 Oct 2000 04:14:38
1. Administrator recognized Proposal 311/1, 10 Oct 2000 03:44:38
0. Proposal 311/0 held (0-1-0-12), 12 Oct 2000 00:00:00
1. Proposal 311/1 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
2. Joel Uckelman revised Proposal 311, 24 Oct 2000 19:32:35
2. Administrator recognized Proposal 311/2, 24 Oct 2000 19:32:35
2. Proposal 311/2 held (5-1-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
2. Proposal 311/2 passed (8-3-0-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 312/0 : Criminal Code
[Proposal Summary: This proposal will enact a criminal code which gives us the ability to punish people for various actions that disrupt game play. Included are laws for dealing with players who try to destroy the game and officers who abuse their power.]
Judgement and punisment on other crimes are possible at the discresion of the judge. However, for crimes not listed here the punishment shall not exceed one hundred points, plus reparations for damages directly caused to other agents.
[[Proposal Summary: This proposal will enact a criminal code which gives us the ability to punish people for various actions that disrupt game play. Included are laws for dealing with players who try to destroy the game and officers who abuse their power.]]
Judgement and punisment on other crimes are possible at the discresion of the judge. However, for crimes not listed here the punishment shall not exceed one hundred points, plus reparations for damages directly caused to other agents.
[[Proposal Summary: This proposal will enact a criminal code which gives us the ability to punish people for various actions that disrupt game play. Included are laws for dealing with players who try to destroy the game and officers who abuse their power.]]
0. Poulenc made a Proposal [312], 04 Oct 2000 23:27:14
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 312/0, 06 Oct 2000 16:29:08
1. Poulenc revised Proposal 312, 06 Oct 2000 17:04:40
1. Administrator recognized Proposal 312/1, 10 Oct 2000 03:44:38
0. Proposal 312/0 held (0-1-0-12), 12 Oct 2000 00:00:00
2. Poulenc revised Proposal 312, 15 Oct 2000 00:14:15
2. Administrator recognized Proposal 312/2, 20 Oct 2000 23:53:02
2. Proposal 312/2 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
2. Proposal 312/2 held (2-4-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
2. Proposal 312/2 failed (5-6-0-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 313/0 : Pedantics
That a rule be created titled "Pedantics" with this text.
0. XnJester made a Proposal [313], 05 Oct 2000 04:49:42
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 313/0, 06 Oct 2000 16:29:08
0. Proposal 313/0 failed (2-8-0-3), 12 Oct 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 314/0 : Motion to Amend Trivially
A Rule may be unsubstantially amended if a Motion to Amend Trivially naming that Rule is adopted. Motions to Amend Trivially are Privileged Motions. Motions to Amend Trivially are automatically subject to unanimous consent, and fail if unanimous consent is not given.
Create a Rule entitled "Motion to Amend Trivially" with the following text:
0. Joel Uckelman made a Proposal [314], 05 Oct 2000 05:13:51
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 314/0, 06 Oct 2000 16:29:08
1. Joel Uckelman revised Proposal 314, 09 Oct 2000 04:52:30
1. Administrator recognized Proposal 314/1, 10 Oct 2000 03:44:38
0. Proposal 314/0 held (0-1-0-12), 12 Oct 2000 00:00:00
1. Proposal 314/1 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
1. Joel Uckelman withdrew Proposal 314/1, 28 Oct 2000 23:57:20
Proposal 315/0 : Subliminal Religious Indoctrination
If at any time a Player submits a proposal which will cause the creation or alteration of a rule so that the rule would subsequently contain the text of one or more verses(*) from a Recognised Religious Text(**), then that Player shall secretly become a Humble Disciple.
Christian Bible, New International Version.
Christian Bible, King James Version.
ISO/IEC 14882, Standard for the C++ Programming Language.
If at any time a Player submits a proposal which will cause the creation or alteration of a rule so that the rule would subsequently contain the text of one or more verses(*) from a Recognised Religious Text(**), then that Player shall secretly become a Humble Disciple.
Christian Bible, New International Version.
Christian Bible, King James Version.
ISO/IEC 14882, Standard for the C++ Programming Language.
Create a rule entitled 'Subliminal Religious Indoctrination' with the following text:"
0. The Kid made a Proposal [315], 05 Oct 2000 13:03:23
Christian Bible, New International Version.
Christian Bible, King James Version.
ISO/IEC 14882, Standard for the C++ Programming Language.
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 315/0, 06 Oct 2000 16:29:08
1. The Kid revised Proposal 315, 09 Oct 2000 13:33:36
1. Administrator recognized Proposal 315/1, 10 Oct 2000 03:46:14
0. Proposal 315/0 held (0-1-0-12), 12 Oct 2000 00:00:00
1. Proposal 315/1 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
2. The Kid revised Proposal 315, 24 Oct 2000 13:13:37
2. Administrator recognized Proposal 315/2, 24 Oct 2000 19:32:35
2. Proposal 315/2 held (2-4-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
2. Proposal 315/2 passed (6-5-0-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 316/0 : Liars, and how to deal with them
If an Agent makes a statement in a public forum implying the truth of a statment X, when e already knows statement X to be false, then e is a Liar. If an RFJ is submitted, and said Agent is found to be a Liar, then e shall be docked 5 points.
If said Agent makes a public apology (apologizes in a public
forum) before the Judgement is made, then e will be docked only 3 points instead of 5.
{{Enact a new rule entitled "The crime of lying" with the following text:}}
0. Benjamin made a Proposal [316], 09 Oct 2000 05:14:17
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 316/0, 12 Oct 2000 16:42:33
1. Benjamin revised Proposal 316, 15 Oct 2000 23:39:46
1. Administrator recognized Proposal 316/1, 20 Oct 2000 23:53:02
1. Proposal 316/1 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
1. Proposal 316/1 held (2-4-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
1. Proposal 316/1 failed (3-8-0-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 317/0 : Motion Reform
1. Amend R120/0 to read:
0. Joel Uckelman made a Proposal [317], 09 Oct 2000 04:14:38
11. Amend the second sentence of R210/0 to read:
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 317/0, 12 Oct 2000 16:42:33
0. Proposal 317/0 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 317/0 held (5-1-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 317/0 passed (8-2-1-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 318/0 : Tomjack's mom cannot be a judge
Amend Rule 235 to read:
0. Remo made a Proposal [318], 09 Oct 2000 16:06:05
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 318/0, 12 Oct 2000 16:42:33
0. Proposal 318/0 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 318/0 held (4-2-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 318/0 passed (10-1-0-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 319/0 : Motion to Amend Trivially
1. Create a rule entitled "Motion to Amend Trivially" with the following text:
0. Joel Uckelman made a Proposal [319], 12 Oct 2000 01:19:45
"N-unanimous consent on a Motion is granted if no eligible voters object to the Motion within time N after it is recognized."
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 319/0, 12 Oct 2000 16:42:33
0. Proposal 319/0 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 319/0 held (3-3-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 319/0 passed (6-5-0-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 320/0 : Oversight in Roster Maintanence
[[summary: Rule 203/0 requires the administrator to update the roster whenever a player joins or forfeits, but not when a player changes eir name. In order to avoid potential problems down the road, we should fix this now]]
0. Poulenc made a Proposal [320], 13 Oct 2000 00:30:58
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 320/0, 13 Oct 2000 16:53:14
0. Proposal 320/0 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 320/0 held (5-1-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 320/0 passed (11-0-0-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 321/0 : ballot fix 1
[[summary: Essentially place some time constraints on what is allowed by the administrator. This will have more force when we finally get the criminal code working.]]
0. Poulenc made a Proposal [321], 14 Oct 2000 01:13:07
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 321/0, 20 Oct 2000 22:19:33
0. Proposal 321/0 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 321/0 held (3-3-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 321/0 passed (7-3-1-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 322/0 : Ballot fix 2
[[summarry: Currently, if the admin does not recognize a revision to a proposal by the beginning of voting (not the ballot distribution), the old version is the one voted on. It seems to me that this has the potential to create embarrasing problems for us later on. This proposal will address that problem.]]
[[summarry: Currently, if the admin does not recognize a revision to a proposal by the beginning of voting (not the ballot distribution), the old version is the one voted on. It seems to me that this has the potential to create embarrasing problems for us later on. This proposal will address that problem.]]
0. Poulenc made a Proposal [322], 14 Oct 2000 01:34:31
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 322/0, 20 Oct 2000 22:19:33
0. Proposal 322/0 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
1. Poulenc revised Proposal 322, 27 Oct 2000 05:26:56
1. Administrator recognized Proposal 322/1, 27 Oct 2000 19:24:26
1. Proposal 322/1 held (5-1-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
1. Proposal 322/1 passed (9-1-1-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 323/0 : quorum change
[[Summary: If a ballot item fails to meet quorum, then lets reward its owner with points from eligible voters who did not vote on that item. This should encourage everyone to vote]]
0. Poulenc made a Proposal [323], 14 Oct 2000 01:45:18
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 323/0, 20 Oct 2000 22:19:33
0. Proposal 323/0 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 323/0 held (3-3-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 323/0 failed (5-6-0-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 324/0 : Vacating Orders fix
Amend rule 270 to read as follows:
Amend rule 217 to read as follows:
0. Poulenc made a Proposal [324], 14 Oct 2000 04:55:12
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 324/0, 20 Oct 2000 22:19:33
0. Proposal 324/0 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
1. Poulenc revised Proposal 324, 28 Oct 2000 03:27:48
1. Administrator recognized Proposal 324/1, 28 Oct 2000 05:35:55
1. Proposal 324/1 held (4-2-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
1. Proposal 324/1 passed (6-5-0-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00
Proposal 325/0 : Salary for Judges
Amend rule 273 by appending the following paragraph:
Amend rule 237 by appending the following paragraph:
0. Poulenc made a Proposal [325], 14 Oct 2000 05:00:14
0. Administrator recognized Proposal 325/0, 20 Oct 2000 22:19:33
0. Proposal 325/0 held (0-0-0-13), 22 Oct 2000 00:00:00
0. Proposal 325/0 held (3-3-0-7), 01 Nov 2000 00:00:00
1. Poulenc revised Proposal 325, 07 Nov 2000 00:01:25
1. Administrator recognized Proposal 325/1, 07 Nov 2000 04:50:27
1. Proposal 325/1 passed (6-5-0-2), 11 Nov 2000 00:00:00