Hi, guest person
Transmute rule 103 to mutable.
By rho, Proposed: 2003-09-20 02:09, Last Modified: 2003-09-28 02:09 (1 week later)
Transmute rule 108 to mutable.
By rho, Proposed: 2003-09-20 02:09, Last Modified: 2003-09-28 02:09 (1 week later)
That rule 105 become a mutable rule.
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-09-22 02:09, Last Modified: 2003-10-05 10:10 (1 week, 5 days later)
Should any rule at any time contain a spelling, typographical or otherwise trivial and unambiguous error, the maintainer of the rules may correct them without the need of a proposal. Upon doing so, he should inform all other players of the changes he has made. Any player then has the right to object to any of the changes. If this is done, then the change is reversed, and can only be re-enacted through a regular proposal.
By rho, Proposed: 2003-09-24 05:09, Last Modified: 2003-10-05 10:10 (1 week, 4 days later)
In Honour of the demise of one of the earliest and, some say, greatest Nomic Players in the world, Gaius Julius Caesar, famed for his amendment of the "Rubicon" rule, Any rule proposed during a week containing 15th day of any month may only be passed if there is Unanimous approval, so that it is a fitting tribute to the memory of this great player of the game.
By Kegs, Proposed: 2003-09-30 02:09, Last Modified: 2003-10-12 07:10 (1 week, 4 days later)
Any proposal which contains an odd number of 'may's in the content may only be passed by unanimous approval. Any proposal which contains an odd number of 'can's in the content can only be passed by unånimous approval.
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-09-30 02:09, Last Modified: 2003-10-12 07:10 (1 week, 4 days later)
That rule 109 become a mutable rule.
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-10-01 03:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-12 07:10 (1 week, 3 days later)
Transmute rule 103 to mutable, modify it to read, in full:
"I am a fish"
and then transmute it to immutable.
By rho, Proposed: 2003-10-04 04:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-12 07:10 (1 week later)
There exists an entity known as Aquarion's Nemesis. This entity is able to vote on proposals, and counts as a player for this purpose and this purpose only. It will vote "yes" to any proposal which complicates the Nomic Manager, or to any proposal requiring a unaminous result. It will not vote on any other proposal.
By Jason, Proposed: 2003-10-05 02:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (2 weeks later)
At any time, exactly one player of Acronomic shall also be considered the game's administrator. Being the administrator shall offer the player no in-game benefits nor impose upon the player any in-game penalties. It is the duty of the administrator to keep the game running smoothly. At a minimum, the administrator must perform the following duties:
Provide a forum where Acronomic can be played which is accesible to all players. Provide a means for all permited players to make proposals. Provide a means for all permited players to vote. Tally votes, determine which proposals pass and which fail, and report these results to all other players. Assign judges as appropriate. Keep a copy of the current rules somewhere where it is available to all players. Provide, upon request a list of all current players or any other information about the game-state. Perform any actions which any other rule states to be an administrative duty.
The administrator is also encouraged, but not required, to keep as much information as possible about the game on a webpage, and to take suggestions from other players about potential improvements to the way the game is administered.
If at any point the adminstrator is failing to perform their duty (this can be determined by judgement if necessary) then any other player may take over as adminstrator, provide they clearly provide all required administrative functions.
Repeal rule 304, make Aquarion administrator, and then remove this sentence from the rules.
By rho, Proposed: 2003-10-05 03:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (2 weeks later)
There exist in Acronomic, such things as Nomic Points. A player may only receive Nomic Points whenever the rules state, orr when given them by another player, who has received them through legal channels. A player may use Nomic Points for whatever he deems suitable. Any player who has one thousand (1000) Nomic points at any time wins the game.
As this rule is ratified, each player receives one (1) Nomic Point.
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-10-05 04:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-26 10:10 (2 weeks, 6 days later)
Repeal rule 314.
By rho, Proposed: 2003-10-05 05:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (2 weeks later)
Rule 312 shall be, for the purposes of the game, henceforth a Hat named 'Rule 312'. It may be passed around, worn, not worn or, indeed, anything else appropriate to a hat. It begins existence in the posession of teut.
By ccooke, Proposed: 2003-10-06 03:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 6 days later)
If Nomic Points exist, each award of Nomic Points must be an integer multiple of an irrational number.
By Jason, Proposed: 2003-10-06 04:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 6 days later)
That a judge may be excused from doing the dishes while he/she is pondering a decision.
By Thomas, Proposed: 2003-10-07 12:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 5 days later)
In the Nomic Universe there exists two artificial entities, Evil Bill and Evil Ted. Both Evil Bill and Evil Ted are allowed to vote on Proposals and count as Players for this purpose and this purpose alone. For each Proposal, Evil Bill and Evil Ted will vote only when their Good counterparts vote. There is a 90% chance they will make an opposite vote to their Good counterpart. If a Bill-pair or a Ted-pair should happen to vote the same way, the Evil version will kill the Good version.
By gilmae, Proposed: 2003-10-07 01:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 5 days later)
Let rule 119 become a mutable rule, and read "Votes are ratified on a simple majority of those who voted, unless another rule states otherwise."
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-10-07 05:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-23 06:10 (2 weeks, 2 days later)
While this Rule exists, this Rule does not exist.
By ccooke, Proposed: 2003-10-07 05:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 5 days later)
There exists a Hat known as the Cap of Low Proposals. This Hat, if not owned by a player, is awarded to any player who has proposed less than 5 proposals, at a time when all other players have proposed at least 5 proposals. Any player wearing wearing this hat may declare that they will unleash its power. They must name a proposal being voted on as they do this.
If the power in the Cap of Low Proposals is unleashed, the following things will happen: The proposal naemd at the time required a 75% support, rather than a simple majority. The player who owned the Cap of Low Proposals must take it off and relinquish control of it: it is then owned by nobody. [The hat will then be immediately available to be given away again.] All numbers in the first paragraph of this rule will increase by five.
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-10-07 05:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 5 days later)
[Proposal withdrawn.]
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-10-07 05:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 5 days later)
Let there be a Hat, specifically a brown floppy hat. To be awarded to any player who manages to warp the rules of time, to make a post dated a day in advance or behind the date that it appears on the list, as defined by the majority of players.
Let this hat also imbue the pleyer owning the hat with the mystic power of jelly babies
Also let players only gain this hat if it is currently has no owner, or if at least two players have held the hat since they last owned it
By Kegs, Proposed: 2003-10-07 06:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 5 days later)
In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the mutable rule takes precedence and the immutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute a mutable rule does not "conflict" with that mutable rule.
By rho, Proposed: 2003-10-07 06:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 5 days later)
There exists a Hat known as the Dunce's Hat. It is large, pointed, yellow, and with the letter 'D' on it. After each round of voting, the Dunce's Hat is given to any player who made a proposal voted against by at least 90% of players who voted for it. If two or more such proposals are made, the hat is assigned randomly. Any player who own the Dunce's Hat must wear it, and cannot wear any other hat.
Any player wearing the Dunce's Hat can make a maximum of one proposal each week.
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-10-07 06:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 5 days later)
Change rule 313 to read: 'There exists a Judge's Hat, which must be worn at all times by the player who is the judge. It is an old fashioned wig, made of horsehair. That player must remove the hat when they are no longer the judge, and they must give it to the player who is the judge. This rule is automatically repealed if rule 312 is repealed. If a player cannot wear the Judge's Hat, then they forfeit their turn as judge, and the player who would be judge next receives it.' [Changes are: description of hat, remove clause on proposal 312, and require that they be capable of wearing it or lose turn at judging.]
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-10-07 06:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 5 days later)
Let there be a chef's hat.
Let the chef wear the hat at all times, except when he/she is acting as judge.
Let nobody harm the wearer of the chefs hat.
By Thomas, Proposed: 2003-10-09 01:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 3 days later)
The players in Acronomic are CEOs of Space Mining Companies (SMC). Each SMC mines asteroids in a belt around the star system Eta Cassiopia for the rare compound Acrodium, vital for space travel. By default, each SMC mines a random amount of Acrodium each week, between 1 and 10kg. This shall be calculated and added to the players total of Acrodium at a time of the Administrators choice, as long as it takes place once every voting cycle.
By teut@blueyonder.co.uk, Proposed: 2003-10-09 07:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-19 10:10 (1 week, 3 days later)
[Nice game board, but it's too small...]
Each square on a game board contains another game board. A player who stands alone on a square has control of all terrain contained in that square. Should another player enter the same square, the two players are assigned random positions on the outside of the board contained within the same square.While at the edge of a square, a playing piece may be moved to any adjacent square of the board containing this one. There are four levels of boards in total - the starting level with two beneath it, and a level "above" the start. When going down a level, the number of pieces under a player's control doubles.
Modify Rule/Proposal 358 to allow multiple players to enter the same square.
By ccooke, Proposed: 2003-10-14 06:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-26 10:10 (1 week, 4 days later)
Any rule may contain within it a precedence level. This shall be in the form of a statement within the rule of its precedence level. Precedence levels must be integer values from 1 to 5. Any rule that does not state a precedence is deemed to have a precedence level of 2.
When two rules of the same mutability level conflict with each other, precedence is determined as follows:
If exactly one of the rules claims or cede precedence specificly to the other rule (by number or other unambiguous reference) then that statement shall hold. Otherwise, a rule with a higher precedence level shall take precedence over a rule with a lower precedence level. Otherwise, a rule which claims general precedence over all other rules or all other rules of the same precedence will take precedence over one which doesn't. Otherwise, the rule which was created first shall take precedence. Otherwise, the rule which currently has the lower number shall take precedence.
This rule has a precedence level of 5 and takes precedence over all other rules.
By rho, Proposed: 2003-10-14 09:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-26 10:10 (1 week, 4 days later)
Every rule has a precedence. A precedence is one of the following, in order from lowest to highest - "Low", "Normal", "High", "Very High", "Immutable". Unless explicitly stated otherwise, a rule has precedence "Normal". A proposal that would create a rule with precedence "High" must be passed with at least 75% of the vote. A proposal that would create a rule with precedence "Very High" must be passed unanimously. Only an immutable rule may have precedence "Immutable", and an immutable rule must have precedence "Immutable".
If two or more rules conflict:
* Rules with a higher precedence level take precedence over rules with a lower precedence level
* For rules with the same precedence level, the rule with the lowest number shall take precedence
This rule has precedence "Very High". [It will not require unanimous approval to pass, I believe].
This rule cannot coexist with proposal 361. If both this proposal and proposal 361 are passed, one of them will be randomly selected to be repealed immediately.
By Jason, Proposed: 2003-10-15 12:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-26 10:10 (1 week, 3 days later)
Amend Rule 201 to read "Alexander, Aquarion, ccooke, Eli, gilmae, Jason, Kegs, and Martin shall have two votes on every proposal. All other players shall have one vote."
By Jason, Proposed: 2003-10-15 03:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-26 10:10 (1 week, 3 days later)
Make Rule 201 immutable.
By Jason, Proposed: 2003-10-15 03:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-26 10:10 (1 week, 3 days later)
If a player is threatening another players piece on the board, and this is that players last piece, then he has to threaten him with the "shout of danger" before harming the piece.
By Thomas, Proposed: 2003-10-18 05:10, Last Modified: 2003-10-30 04:10 (1 week, 4 days later)
If at any time the current judge suspects a player may no longer wish to play, he may send a message to the mailing list stating this suspicion. The player about whom the suspicion is held must respond within exactly seven days, or they are deemed to have permanently left the game.
By Jason, Proposed: 2003-10-20 08:10, Last Modified: 2003-11-02 05:11 (1 week, 6 days later)
If a player fails to make any in-game actions in two consecutive rounds, he will be deemed to have permanently left the game.
By Jason, Proposed: 2003-10-20 09:10, Last Modified: 2003-11-02 05:11 (1 week, 6 days later)
That rule 336, On a Game Board, be amended. Replace the phrase '(three * number of players)' with the phrase 'thirty-nine'. [This provides exactly the same board, but means the board will not alter if more players join.]
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-10-20 09:10, Last Modified: 2003-11-02 05:11 (1 week, 6 days later)
Each square of the Board may contain one item of Terrain. Squares that do *not* contain Terrain are Void and may not be entered. Each week, each player may (before or after moving) choose to create, modify or destroy the terrain of one square adjacent to any of their playing pieces.
By ccooke, Proposed: 2003-10-20 09:10, Last Modified: 2003-11-02 05:11 (1 week, 5 days later)
Rules/proposals *may* have a dependancy on *one* other rule. Should a rule's dependant be in any state other than "Done", "Immutable" or "Mutable", the rule/proposal will be marked "Obsolete"
Circular dependancies will be resolved by Judgement.
By Aquarion, Proposed: 2003-10-20 11:10, Last Modified: 2003-11-02 05:11 (1 week, 5 days later)
Any player may, at any time, expend four pieces of chocolate and an alcoholic drink to choose a square unoccupied by Playing Pieces. The chocolate and drink lures a ferocious Blatterbeast, and can never be entered, unless the player trying to enter it has the means to defeat the Blatterbeast. The Blatterbeast will stay there permanently, as they know how to cultivate chocolate trees using chocolate and alcohol.
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-10-21 03:10, Last Modified: 2003-11-02 05:11 (1 week, 5 days later)
That the following amendment be made to rule 301: On the beginning of the game.
Remove the phrase ", and adding someone to the game will require a majority vote by the current members."
Replace it with ". Any player making an appication to join The Nomic of Many Intricate Creations be given Voting and Proposal privileges at the start of the next cycle, as long as they make a proposal requesting the right to continue playing during that cycle."
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-10-23 06:10, Last Modified: 2003-11-02 05:11 (1 week, 2 days later)
That all players count as having voted in favour of proposal 397, regardless of which way they actually voted.
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-11-14 10:11, Last Modified: 2003-12-14 12:12 (1 month later)
That rule 119, On the scope of sucess, be made mutable, changed to 'Votes are ratified on a simple majority of votes cast.' and made immutable again.
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-11-14 10:11, Last Modified: 2003-12-14 12:12 (1 month later)
Amend rule 201, 'On the man with the vote', to read: "The players named in the brackets (XXX) have two votes on each proposal. Every other player has one vote on each proposal.", Replacing XXX in with the names of the players who voted during the cycle that this proposal was voted on.
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-11-22 01:11, Last Modified: 2003-12-14 12:12 (3 weeks later)
Repeal rule 323. [There should not be a reward for proposals, as each rule change should be a result of discussion.]
By Alexander, Proposed: 2003-12-14 06:12, Last Modified: 2003-12-28 12:12 (1 week, 6 days later)
Full menu: | About | Make a Proposal | Vote for stuff | Proposals | Immutable rules | Current rules | Login | All rules | Completed actions | Rejected rules | Obsolete rules | Withdrawn rules |
: /cvsroot/nomical/nomic/web/rules.php,v 1.9 2004/06/20 11:48:50 aquarion Exp $