|
This pages is a list of the FutureNomic proposals currently up
for consideration.
NOTE: This page is provided as a service to my fellow players in my spare time. I have included the "as of" dates for each proposal. If today is later than that "as of" date I don't gaurantee the accuracy of the proposal's wording. If you are a FutureNomic player and you desire to submit a proposal, you can send it to the Traffic Manager. |
Proposal 325
Proposed by Riemer Brouer
as of Jan. 23
Amend Rule 202 to read:
"One turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on, and (2) calculating the score. The score is calculated by multiplying 20 by the fraction of favorable votes the proposal received, rounded to the nearest integer, and adding that final amount to the proposing players current score."
Voting Deadline: January 27, midnight (time zone???)
CAST YOUR VOTE on this proposal. Be sure to include the proposal number in your message; it is not automatically included.
Proposal 326
Proposed by Mike McNamara
as of Jan. 23
Create a new rule that reads:
"All individuals voting "yes" to any of Mike McNamara's future proposals are to receive 15 points for their efforts. In the event that those 15 points provide an individual with the points necessary to "win" the Nomic game, that persons score will only be advanced to 1 point less than the number of points needed to win. Also, Mike McNamara will at no time receive 15 points for voting "yes" on his own proposal."
Voting Deadline: January 29 (time???)
CAST YOUR VOTE on this proposal. Be sure to include the proposal number in your message; it is not automatically included.
Proposal 327
Proposed by JP May
as of Jan. 24
Create a new rule that reads:
"Anyone who actually voted (either yes or no) for proposal 327, will recieve a one-time bonus of 30 points at the completion of proposal 327.
Anyone who actually voted yes, will, recieve an additional one-time bonus of an additional 30 points at the completion of proposal 327.
Anyone who actually voted, either yes OR no, within exactly 72 hours (3 full days) of the Traffic Manager posting proposal 327 to the attention of the list, will, additionally, recieve an additional 30 points one-time bonus at the completion of proposal 327."
Voting Deadline: January 31, (time???)
CAST YOUR VOTE on this proposal. Be sure to include the proposal number in your message; it is not automatically included.
Proposal 328
Proposed by Michael New
as of Jan. 24
Create a new rule that reads:
"For the purposes of Nomic, Saturday and Sunday do not exist. Any date occurring on a Saturday or a Sunday is automatically moved to the following Monday, while the time-of-day remains the same. Furthermore, a week is defined as five days, from Monday through Friday, thus one week from a Monday is still the following Monday."
Voting Deadline: January 29, 5:00 pm EST (22:00 GMT)
CAST YOUR VOTE on this proposal. Be sure to include the proposal number in your message; it is not automatically included.
Proposal 329
Proposed by Michael New
as of Jan. 24
Repeal Rule 307.
Voting Deadline: January 28, noon EST (17:00 GMT)
CAST YOUR VOTE on this proposal. Be sure to include the proposal number in your message; it is not automatically included.
Proposal 330
Proposed by Greg Ritter
as of Jan. 27
Create a new rule that reads:
"At any time three or more players may choose to form a Political Party. The formation of a Political Party will not be valid until a public statement is made that includes (1) the name of the party (2) the names of the members of the Party (3) a statement of the Grand Philosophy of the Party. How a Party conducts business within itself (accepting new members, etc.) is its own business, unless otherwise mandated by Nomic rules.
No player is required to join a Party and any player can leave a Party at any time by publicly stating they are doing so. If at any time, a Party's membership drops below three players, it ceases to be a Party until such time as it can meet the membership quota again.
When a member of a Political Party proposes a rule-change, each other member of the proponent's Party shall also score or lose 20% of whatever points the proponent scores or loses off that proposed rule-change (not including points awarded for casting a vote, voting in the minority, or other rewards for participating in the process). The points scored by Party members are in addition to the proponent's score, and does not decrease the total points earned or lost by the proponent in any way."
Voting Deadline: Feb 4, midnight EST (Feb 5, 05:00 GMT)
CAST YOUR VOTE on this proposal. Be sure to include the proposal number in your message; it is not automatically included.
Proposal 331
Proposed by Greg Ritter
as of Jan. 24
Create a new rule that reads:
"There shall exist an entity known as the Ghost Man. The Ghost Man will choose the Nomic player with the lowest score to be its Ghostmaster. At the direction of the Ghostmaster the Ghost Man can cast one vote per proposal. The Ghostmaster shall receive all point benefits or penalties from the Ghost Man's vote. For purposing of determing numbers of eligible voters (for scoring, quorum, etc.), the Ghost Man shall be counted as a single eligible voter. After each proposal, the Ghost Man may choose a new Ghostmaster based upon any changes in score; the Ghostmaster is always the player with the lowest score. If two players are tied for the lowest score the Ghost Man shall remain in Purgatory where he will not cast votes nor count as an eligible voter until such time as only one player has the lowest score."
Voting Deadline: Feb 4, midnight EST (Feb 5, 05:00 GMT)
CAST YOUR VOTE on this proposal. Be sure to include the proposal number in your message; it is not automatically included.
Proposal 332
Proposed by Streator Johnson
as of Jan. 28
Create a new rule that reads:
"No proposal with an ordinal number larger than this proposal may have, as part of its proposal, the ability to award or subtract points based on a participant either voting for or against the proposal in question."
Voting Deadline: Feb 5, midnight PST (Feb 6, 08:00 GMT, I think)
CAST YOUR VOTE on this proposal. Be sure to include the proposal number in your message; it is not automatically included.
Proposal 333
Proposed by Michael New
as of Jan. 29
Amend rule 321 to read:
"If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player who's family name alphabetically precedes the family name of the player who is making the move in question is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment. When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players.
The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is overruled, then the player whose family name alphabetically precedes the Judge becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate.
Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge.
New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards."
Deadline for discussion and voting is Friday, January 31, 1997 at 11:59 pm GMT (6:59 pm EST, 3:59 pm Pacific).
CAST YOUR VOTE on this proposal. Be sure to include the proposal number in your message; it is not automatically included.