If a player's vote is in any way misrepresented by the proposal's
author,
the player may, within two days of the publication of the votes,
call upon
the Judge for correction. The Judge, using whatever evidence
and testimony
he or she may acquire, must determine whether or not the vote as
published
stands. If the vote is overturned, the proposal will be rejected
and the
author will suffer whatever punishment the rules dictate.
If the vote
stands, the player calling for judgement will loose 10 points.
Submitted for consideration on March16, 1998, by Harry W. Culpan
Voting from 3/20 - 3/23. Defeated
In accordance to this rule all prior rules keep their numbering but
must
go through a timely titling prosess which can be done on a volunteer
basis within the span of one week after this rule is duly enacted.
Lastly, when a rule is transmuted then its title should also incur
some
sort of change. The proposed change should be to insert a
version
number for the original rule which would be numbered with "." and
a
second number set of three digits beginning with "001" and running
consectutively each new revision.
Submitted for consideration on March 16, 1998, by Don Corcoran
Voting from 3/21 - 3/24. Defeated
The points awarded to participants as stipulated by all point-related
rules
(eg: rules 203, 205, and 206) shall be awarded to the player as
compensation
from the Central Bank. The reverse is likewise true of any
player point
penalizations--points removed from players by penalty are returned
to the
Central Bank. Upon adoption, it will be as though the Central
Bank began
the game with a fixed number of 500 points in the sense that any
point
transactions which occurred prior to this rule's adoption will be
used to
adjust the Central Bank's deposit by the appropriate amount (NOTE:
This
is not in violation to rule 107 because it only affects the Central
Bank's
amount, which is a new addition to the system).
A player may purchase Potential Votes (PV) from the bank at a rate
of 10
points per PV. PVs may be stockpiled, or traded with other
players for
points at whatever rate they agree upon, but can never be directly
reverse-traded with the bank to gain points from PVs.
Comprising an exception to rule 207, this rule also allows a player
to use
PVs as additional voting leverage during a vote on a proposal.
Players
may use any number of PVs that they possess on a particular proposal
as
votes in addition to their Natural Vote (NV). Once PVs are
used, they are
spent and removed from the spending player's PV count. In
keeping with
the spirit of rule 207, each player always has exactly one NV for
each
proposal.
The total number of points in the system (those awarded to players
or in
the Central Bank) can never be greater or less than 500 points,
but must be
exactly 500 points at all times. Should the system become
unbalanced,
judgement may be invoked and the judge has the power to adjust the
system
subject to the normal judgement constraints.
The Central Bank cannot be in debt. Therefore if the Central
Bank is
depleted of all funds, then the normal scoring is forgone.
The Central Bank
will not honor debts in scoring. If there are not enough points
in the bank to
award all points for a given proposal/voting result, then no points
will be
awarded to any of the involved scoring players. (NOTE:
An exception is if
the bank receives enough in penalties in the same prop/vote result
to afford
the total payoff.) Any disputes in point scoring at this level
should be settled
by the judge.
Likewise a player who is penalized by the judge or rules cannot become
indebted to the bank. A player must settle such penalties
with whatever
points they currently have, but are not responsible for repaying
the bank for
that which they do not have. (NOTE: This has the side-effect
of preventing
player scores from becoming negative based on penalties, a subtle
change in
current rule interpretation). If a judgement is invoked which
may result in a
penalty, the player is forbidden to exchange points for PVs until
that
judgement is settled.
Submitted for consideration on March 17, 1998, by Paul Wiegand
Voting from 3/22 - 3/25. Defeated
An Active Player may become Inactive in one of two ways. First,
the
player may so declare himself by informing the group of his intention.
Second, if an Active player abstains from three consecutive votes,
he
may be ruled by the Judge to be Inactive.
An Inactive Player may become Active by informing the group to this
effect. Until he informs the group of his change in status,
he may not
vote, debate, or propose new rule-changes.
Submitted for consideration on March 24, 1998, by Harry Culpan.
Voting Period from 3/25/98 to 3/28/98. Passed.
Submitted for consideration on March 26, 1998, by Paul Wiegand
Voting Period from 3/27-3/29. Defeated
For the purposes of this ruleset, a Proposal is defined as a request
for some action to occur that will alter the current state of the
Ruleset. The Ruleset is defined as the rules currently in
effect. If
adopted, a Proposal will effect an alteration in the Ruleset as
stated
in the text of the Proposal, but will not itself become part of
the
Ruleset. The term "rule-change" will be considered to be synonymous
with Proposal.
All Proposals will be in accordance with the Ruleset as it exists
at
the time of the Proposal's introduction. Proposals should
explicitly
state what change in the Ruleset will result if the measure is
adopted. Upon adoption of a proposal, the Ruleset will be
immediately
altered in accordance with the Proposal.
Submitted for consideration on March 27, 1998, by Harry Culpan.
Voting Period from 4/2/98 to 4/4/98. Passed.
A new rule shall be added to the rule set, as follows:
Henceforth there will be an additional type of proposal, termed here
a
"Disinterested Proposal", which follows all the guidelines and rules
set
forth for proposals in general save that no points can be scored
based on
such a proposal. This includes points both gained and lost
for the
proposals final acceptance or rejection on the part of the player,
and also
includes points scored by players voting against a winning proposal.
Should there exist, in the ruleset, additional point scoring means
(again,
both for and against a player), such would also be suspended in
the cases
of disinterested proposals.
When submitting a disinterested proposal, a player must explicitly
state in
the proposal itself that the proposal is disinterested, otherwise
the
proposal will be considered a general proposal, with full scoring
potential. Such a statement may be made in the heading of
the proposal.
For instance, rather than heading a proposal "Proposal ###", a player
could
state "Disinterested Proposal ###".
NOTE: This currently comprises an exception to rules 203, 205, and 206.
Submitted for consideration on April 2, 1998, by Paul Wiegand.
Voting Period from 4/6/98 to 4/8/98. Passed.
Rule 104, currently immutable, shall be transmuted to mutable.
Submitted for consideration on April 1, 1998, by John Lombardi
Voting Period 4/12 - 4/14. Passed
A rule will be added to the ruleset as follows:
Henceforth, the term Voting Period will apply to the specific time
for
which voting is tallied for the purposes of accepting or rejecting
a
proposal. The Voting Period begins at such time that the player
who
initiated the proposal "Calls for Vote" and lasts for the duration
stipulated elsewhere in the rules. Such a call must be explicit
and
possess the final form of the proposal. If accepted, the potential
rule
change, addition, or deletion will take the form as stipulated from
this
final form.
The proposing player may offer suggestive or potential future voting
period
dates when a proposal is first stated (or, indeed, at any time during
debate), but the official voting period is not bound, committed,
or
otherwise regulated by such statements.
Prior to the "Call for Vote", a proposal may be altered in any way,
or even
withdrawn entirely. After the call has been made, no modifications
to the
proposal are allowed, and it may not be withdrawn.
This rule applies to all forms of official proposals, including
disinterested proposals.
Submitted for consideration on April 9, 1998, by Paul Wiegand.
Voting Period 4/12 - 4/14. Passed
A player may propose a rule-change at any time.
No player may submit multiple proposals such that more
than one proposal will go through its period of voting
concurrently.
Disinterested Proposals do not abide by the above rule,
however. A player may submit any number of Disinterested
Proposals, as long as the manner in which these are
submitted do not cause more than three such proposals
to go through their periods of voting concurrently. Note
that this limitation of three such proposals is
applicable to the entire group of players, not to a single
individual.
Submitted for consideration on April 9, 1998, by Harry Culpan.
Voting Period 4/12 - 4/14. Passed
A rule shall be added to the ruleset as follows:
Adding New Players:
Henceforth, the term Player will apply to any individuals allowed
to participate in CharNomic in any capacity other than observation and/or
discussion. All current individuals participating are considered
players, and retain the activity status that they had immediately prior
to this rule's adoption.
New players must be added in the following way: individuals wishing to join the game must explicitly announce to the entire group of players their request to join. There will follow a 1 waiting day period. When this period has elapsed, the new person will be considered an inactive player. The new player may, at any point afterward, announce himself/herself to be active, as is stipulated in the current ruleset.
Any member of the mailing list who is not considered a player, is
considered to be a lurker, and may not participate in the game in any way
other than observation and/or discussion, with the following exception:
A lurker can communicate a desire to join the game as stipulated in the
above paragraph.
Submitted for consideration on April 15, 1998, by Paul Wiegand
Voting from 4/16 - 4/18. Passed.
Rule 307 must be changed to read as follows:
All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes. This vote will be completed within seven days of the termination of debate.
Submitted for consideration on April 15, 1998, by Paul Wiegand
Withdrawn on 4/16 by Paul Wiegand
The following changes will be made to Rule 211:
1) The second paragraph will be altered to read as follows:
An alphabetical list of all Active Players will be maintained, called
the Player Roster. The Judge will be selected from this list, beginning
with
the first Player on the list. Thereafter, before each decision,
the next Player on this list will act as Judge. In such cases where
the Judge is
involved in the dispute, this person will be skipped in favor of
the next Player on the roster, until a non-involved player is selected.
Under no
circumstances may an Inactive Player be called upon to serve as
Judge.
2) The third paragraph will be altered to read as follows:
The Judge will have twenty-four hours from the time the decision
is called for to publish a ruling. If the Judge fails to do so, responsibility
for
judgement will fall to the next player on the roster, as specified
above. If the Judge becomes Inactive before giving Judgement or before
the
twenty-four hour period expires, responsibility for Judgement falls
upon the first Player who immediately followed the now Inactive Player
in the
alphabetical list of Active Players.
Submitted for consideration on April 20, 1998, by Harry Culpan.
Withdrawn on April 23, 1998, by Harry Culpan.
At the end of a Proposal's Voting Period, a Proposal
immediately goes through a process known as its Resolution,
which is as follows:
1) The value of the following terms are calculated:
a) Y, which is equal to the number of votes in favor
of
the Proposal that were cast by currently
Active players.
b) E, which is the current number of eligible voters
who
are not Inactive.
c) R, which is the number of votes required for adoption
of
the Proposal. Unless otherwise
stated in the Rules, the
value of R for a given Resolution
is equal to (E/2) + 0.5
2) If Y >= R, then the Proposal is adopted, and takes effect
immediately.
3) If Y < R, then the Proposal is defeated.
In the event that multiple Proposals are to enter Resolution
simultaneously, these Proposals will instead be resolved one
at a time, from the lowest-numbered to the highest-numbered.
Submitted for consideration on April 21, 1998, by Mark Nau.
Voting from 3/26 - 3/28. Failed.
A rule will added to the ruleset as follows:
A Motion is defined as an action taken by the Players to alter the
game
state. A Motion may be introduced by any Active Player.
A Motion may
not alter the ruleset. It may be used, however, to take any
other
action that alters the game state. The Player may permit as
little or
as much time for debate on the Motion as he desires and may alter
the
wording of the Motion in whatever way he sees fit, until such time
as a
vote is called for by the author of the Motion. Upon terminating
the
debate and calling for a vote, he must circulate the final form
of the
Motion which is to be voted on.
A Motion will be adopted if and only if it receives no negative votes.
Note that, for purposes of this rule, an abstention is not considered
to
be a negative vote. Further, note that no affirmative votes
are
actually required for passage of a Motion. Voting will terminate
at
midnight of the third day following the call for the vote.
If the
Motion is adopted, as prescribed above, then it goes into effect
immediately.
No points will be awarded for a Motion's adoption or failure to any
Player.
Submitted for consideration on April 27, 1998, by Harry Culpan
Voting from 5/7 - 5/9. Passed.
Amend rule 204 so that it reads, in full:
At the end of a Proposal's Voting Period, a Proposal
immediately goes through a process known as its Resolution,
which is as follows:
1) The value of the following terms are calculated:
a) Y, which is equal to the number of votes in favor
of
the Proposal that were cast by currently
Active players.
b) E, which is the current number of eligible voters
who
are not Inactive.
c) R, which is the number of votes required for adoption
of
the Proposal. Unless otherwise
stated in the Rules, the
value of R for a given Resolution
is equal to (E/2) + 0.5
2) If Y >= R, then the Proposal is adopted, and takes effect
immediately.
3) If Y < R, then the Proposal is defeated.
When multiple Proposals are scheduled to enter the Resolution
process at exactly the same time, the Proposals in question
will instead undergo the Resolution process in sequential
order, from lowest-numbered to highest-numbered, with each
subsequent Proposal entering Resolution immediately upon
completion of the previous Proposal's Resolution.
Submitted for consideration on April 29, 1998, by Mark Nau.
Voting from 4/30 - 5/2. Passed
The following changes will be made to Rule 211:
1) The second paragraph will be altered to read as follows:
An alphabetical list of all Active Players will be maintained, called
the Player Roster. The Judge will be selected from this list,
beginning
with the first Player on the list. Thereafter, before each decision,
the
next Player on this list will act as Judge. In such cases
where the
Judge is involved in the dispute, this person will be skipped in
favor
of the next Player on the roster, until a non-involved player is
selected. Under no circumstances may an Inactive Player be
called upon
to serve as Judge.
2) The third paragraph will be altered to read as follows:
The Judge must publish a ruling before midnight EST of the day following
the call for judgement. If the Judge fails to do so, responsibility
for
judgement will fall to the next player on the roster, as specified
above. Each subsequent Judge will have until midnight EST
of the next
day. If the Judge becomes Inactive before giving Judgement
or before
the twenty-four hour period expires, responsibility for Judgement
falls
upon the first Player who immediately follows the now Inactive Player
in
the alphabetical list of Active Players.
Submitted for consideration on May 11, 1998, by Harry Culpan
Voting from 5/12 - 5/14. Passed
Submitted for consideration on May 12, 1998, by Harry Culpan
Voting from 5/12 - 5/14. Passed
The game known as CharNomic will be immediately terminated
with all players being declared non-winners.
Submitted for consideration on June 19, 1998, by Harry Culpan.
Voting from 6/19 - 6/22. Passed
This page last updated June 23, 1998.