[Nomic02] Some rule suggestions (fwd)

[nomic02@wurb.com]

--On 15 January 2003 07:12 -0500 Admiral Jota <jota@shelltown.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 amgb2@cam.ac.uk wrote:
>
> For one, if we wanted to demerit people for not taking part. For two, if
> we wanted to propose rules for the formatting of rules or votes. For
> three, you can't make a rule saying that someone has to post 'This rule
> has been ratified' to the list unless the list exists as an entity you can
> act on.

Hm, I've been looking too hard at the current Rule 8 and ignoring Rule 5. 
According to Rule 5, we do need to acknowledge that the list is part of the 
game, but this is different from it being part of the state of the game 
(which I don't think makes sense, since the game state consists of 
information, not things).

So: "The mailing list at nomic02@wurb.com will be considered a part of the 
game, and will be refered to as The List. To "post" something is to send it 
to the list. Any player who does not post for a week (that is, a seven-day 
period of non-posting following their latest post, counted from the time of 
day the last post was made) will incur one demerit. Further week-long 
delays, counted from the latest invocation of this rule, will each incur 
one additional demerit." (The only changes from your original rule here are 
the removal of the word 'state' and the change of 'penalty point' to 
'demerit'.

> Feel free to posit an alternative phrasing that you're comfortable with.

Here we go: "Any player may post a proposal for a change which requires the 
unanimous agreement of all players. All other players may vote "aye" or 
"nay" in response to the proposal by posting this vote to the list. Any 
player may change his or her vote on a proposal until such time as the 
voting is complete. The proposer is assumed to cast an initial "aye" (but 
may change it, like any other vote). Any player who hasn't voted on a 
particular proposal within the first 72 hours is assumed to have voted 
"aye", but may change that vote up until the proposal is officially 
ratified. If at any point all players have voted in favour of a particular 
proposal (either by voting "aye" or failing to vote within the alloted 72 
hours), the proposal is ratified. The issue under consideration is 
considered to have been unanimously agreed by all players after a period of 
one hour from the time of ratification has elapsed."

And, to get this down in writing: "Once a proposal has been ratified, the 
original proposer should post to the list saying that the proposal has been 
ratified and giving the time at which it came or will come into force."

My only concern at the moment is that if a proposal receives any "nay" 
votes, it currently remains as a proposal forever. I'm against this since 
it means I can vote "nay" to a proposal everyone else has ratified and then 
change my vote weeks later and have the proposal come into effect an hour 
later before everyone else has even remembered what it is.



jw