New Rishonnomic Proposal Archive, P500-599

Proposal 500
Proposed by Benj
votes cast for: Benj
votes cast against: Dan, Kolja, Thad
abstained: all others
Result: Rejected Wed, 9 Dec 1998 09:12:48 -0500 (EST)
create a rule with the following text:

A period of seven days shall be designated as a "turn."
Each player can, unless specified differently under the rules, perform any action only one time each turn.
At the end of each turn, a new turn shall begin instantly.
This first turn shall begin the Monday following the passing of this proposal.

Proposal 501
Proposed by Andrew
votes cast for: Andrew, Dan, Thad, Benj, Kolja
votes cast against: none
abstained: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 9 Dec 1998 11:53:00 -0500 (EST)

--Transmute RC104 to mutable.

--Amend RC104 by replacing it with the following text:

"The Speaker is an officer of New Rishonnomic.

On the 1st of October and the 2nd of April, the process to elect another speaker begins. Also, if the Speaker is ever missing or resigns, the next valid officer takes over the role of Speaker, and the process to elect another speaker begins immediately.

The order of choosing a valid officer is:

1) Internomic Liaison
2) Treasurer
3) Pointer
4) Cartographer
5) any other officer not listed here

When the process to elect another Speaker begins, the Speaker must declare that nominations for the new Speaker are being accepted. This must be done within 4 days of the beginning of the election process. When nominations are opened, there is a period of one week for any voter interested to submit eir interest in running for Speaker to the current Speaker.

To become a candidate, a voter must:

1) have been a voter in New Rishonnomic for the past 6 months.
2) not currently be missing or suspended.

The Speaker will announce when the nomination period has ended, and list all of the valid candidates for Speaker. The voting period begins immediately, and lasts for 2 weeks from the time and date of announcement.

To be able to vote for a new Speaker, a voter must have been a member of New Rishonnomic for the past 3 months. A voter may not cast more than one vote - only the first vote is accepted. All votes must be for a candidate for the office of the Speaker.

The following procedures are used in case of a tie for the new Speaker:

1) If one of the tied candidates is the current Speaker, e keeps the office.
2) If one of the tied candidates is a former Speaker, the candidate who was the most recent speaker is elected.
3) If neither player is a former Speaker, the one who has been a member of New Rishonnomic the longest is elected.

At the end of the 2 week voting period, the results of the election are announced by the current Speaker.

The new Speaker takes over the office of Speaker on November 1st, May 2nd, or two weeks from the finish of the election, whichever occurs first.

This rule takes precedence over any other rules involving voting or the Speaker."

--Transmute RC104 to immutable.

[I think we're all aware that the speaker election rule currently in the ruleset has a few problems. I hope this takes care of all of them before we run into any more.]

Proposal 502
Proposed by Andrew
votes cast for: Andrew, Dan, Kolja
votes cast against: none
abstained: all others
Result: Accepted Fri 11, 1998 09:57:02 -0500 (EST)

--Amend RC489 by replacing the text:
"previous proposal that was rejected"
with the text:
"previous proposal that failed"

--Amend RC317 by replacing the text:
"player's proposal is rejected"
with the text:
"player's proposal fails"
and replacing the text:
"If it is rejected"
with the text:
"If it fails"

--Amend RC463 by replacing the text:
"Whenever a proposal is rejected"
with the text:
"Whenever a proposal fails"

--Amend RC487A by adding the text:
"Accepted Proposal - One that has received enough votes to reach quorum, and be accepted as a rule change."

Failed Proposal - One that either did not receive enough votes to reach quorum, or did not receive enough votes to be accepted."

[Just realized that there could be a terminology problem, since the rules were using 'rejected proposal' for one that failed the vote, and I was using it for proposals that the speaker did not accept due to problems. I wasn't paying enough attention to the rules to catch this before. So I've decided to use the term 'failed proposal' and 'fails' for proposals that don't get voted in.]

HR>

Proposal 503
Proposed by Andrew
votes cast for: Andrew, Dan
votes cast against: Kolja
abstained: all others
Result: Rejected (contains a transmutation) Fri 11, 1998 09:57:02 -0500 (EST)

--Transmute RC106.

--Repeal RC106.

[It doesn't appear to prevent things from working like I originally thought, but it also doesn't seem to say anything particularly useful. I'd also like to remove it just in case some minor conflict is waiting to peek out.]

Proposal 504
Proposed by Kolja
votes cast for: Kolja
votes cast against: Dan
abstained: all others
Result: Rejected Tue, 15 Dec 1998 08:59:40 -0500 (EST)

--Create a new rule with the title "Spelling and Grammar Errors" and the following text:

Differences in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the substitution of a word or phrase by a synonym or abbreviation, are inconsequential in all forms of Nomic communication, as long as there is no ambiguity in meaning. In other words, the meaning or validity of such communication is not altered in any way by such discrepancies.

This includes referring to a Player by a method other than eir name or nickname, as long as it is unambiguous. However, in the context of Rule Changes, text in an existing Rule must be quoted exactly in order to be unambiguous.

Proposal 505: Title cleanups (cosmetic)
Proposed by Kolja
votes cast for: Kolja, Dan
votes cast against: none
abstained: all others
Result: Accepted Tue, 15 Dec 1998 08:59:40 -0500 (EST)

Change the title of RC412C to 'Cartographor's Salary', and give RC412A the title 'Buying Squares'.

Proposal 506: 'Automatic' Pointer replacement
Proposed by Kolja
votes cast for: Kolja
votes cast against: Dan
abstained: all others
Result: Rejected Tue, 15 Dec 1998 08:59:40 -0500 (EST)

Create a new rule with the title 'Pointer replacement' and the text:

Every month, no later then the seventh day of that month, the Pointer must submit a proposal to make a new player Pointer. The candidate for Pointer in this proposal must be the player who had the largest score at noon GMT on the first day of that month (current Pointer's choice in case of a tie). If the candidate is the same player as the current Pointer, the Pointer can refrain from submitting this proposal.

[I won't be around to do the Pointer's job in January/February, so I have to start looking for a replacement. Instead of naming a particular person, I thought of this mechanism. A large score usually shows that someone is well involved in the game, and thus a good candidate for Pointer. I didn't make this change automatic, but just require a proposal to be made because this way there is no danger of game state uncertainties, and bad or unwilling candidates have a chance to avoid the job.]

Proposal 507
Proposed by Andrew
votes cast for: Andrew Dan
votes cast against: none
abstained: all others
Result: Accepted Tue, 22 Dec 1998 10:51:04 -0500 (EST)

--Amend RC489 by adding this paragraph on the end:

"A voter may declare one of their old proposals to be 'Public Domain'. Once a proposal has been declared as 'Public Domain', it must stay that way. A proposal that is 'Public Domain' can freely be copied from when creating a proposal. A 'Public Domain' proposal can never be used as the copied from proposal for purposes of a 'stolen proposal'."

Proposal 508
Proposed by Andrew
votes cast for: Andrew Dan
votes cast against: none
abstained: all others
Result: Accepted Tue, 22 Dec 1998 10:51:04 -0500 (EST)

--Create a rule with the title "Official Jugde" and the following text:

"Any voter may declare themselves to be an Official Judge. A voter who is an Official Judge may declare themselves to no longer be an Official Judge.

If an Official Judge fails to deliver judgement on a CFJ within the alloted time period, the voter is no longer considered an Official Judge, and loses 15 points in addition to any other penalties imposed by other rules.

The pointer will record the number of CFJs each Official Judge rules on, while they are an Official Judge. Should a voter stop being an Official Judge, the number of CFJ's recorded does not change, but does not increase until the voter becomes an Official Judge again. Should an Official Judge fail to deliver judgement on a CFJ within the alloted time, the number of CFJ's they have judged as an Official Judge is set back to zero."

--Amend the rule RC214 to contain the following text:
"Whenever a judge is to be selected for a CFJ, e shall first be chosen randomly from all Official Judges who are not currently judging a CFJ. If none exist, then a judge will be chosen randomly from all voters. In no case can the judge be either the voter who invoked judgement, or have been previously selected as judge for the judgement.

Should no suitable judge be found by this point, then one shall be chosen randomly from all Official Judges. If there are still none available, then a random player will be chosen.

Players that are considered missing are at no point available to be chosen as judges.

If the judgement is to decide correctness of a PO, the officer who is responsible for the errors presented in the PO may not be chosen to judge this PO."

--Create a rule with the title "CFJ Scoring" and the following text:

"When judgement is issued on a CFJ, the voter who was judge for the CFJ receives 2 points and |100|."

--Repeal RC360C.

Proposal 509
Proposed by Andrew
votes cast for: Andrew Dan
votes cast against: none
abstained: all others
Result: Accepted Tue, 22 Dec 1998 10:51:04 -0500 (EST)

--Create a rule with the title "Proposal Queue" and the text:

"The proposal queue determines how many proposals a voter may have in the submitted and/or active state. Any proposal that is currently in the submitted and/or active state is considered to be 'in the proposal queue'.

If a player has zero proposals in the proposal queue, e is considered to have an 'empty queue'.

If a player has a number of proposals in the proposal queue that is equal to or greater than the size of the queue, e is considered to have a 'full queue'.

The Speaker is responsible for keeping track of the size of the proposal queue. E must make this information available to all voters in the same method e makes the current proposal information available.

The Speaker may change the size of the proposal queue. E may not make it a value smaller than 5. There is no upper limit on the size of the queue. E may not change it if e has changed it in the past 7 days. The Speaker may not change the size of the proposal queue while there are proposals in the submitted state.

The size of the proposal queue is set to 5, and this sentence is deleted from the rule."

--Amend RC487E.

Replace the text
"If the voter has 5 proposals that are currently active, and submits a new proposal, e loses 5 points.

If the voter has less than 5 proposals active, but a total of 5 proposals that are either submitted or active, then the oldest submitted proposal will be rejected."

with the text
"If a voter submits a proposal when e has a full queue, the following happens:

1)If all proposals in the queue are active, e loses 5 points.
2)If not all proposals in the queue are active, the oldest submitted proposal in the queue is immediately rejected."

[Now the speaker can choose how many proposals each player can submit at a time. So if e has a lot of free time, or finds a easy method to handle proposals, e can increase it as much as e likes. Also, if we need to do some serious rule changing and do it quickly, but already have our maximum number of proposals, e can increase it there. I made it so the speaker has to move all submitted proposals to active first to avoid some complicated cases of the rules, such as submitting a proposal when you have multiple submitted and active proposals that are larger than the new size of the queue. Also added the time restriction on changing the size to avoid possible abuse by the Speaker.]

Proposal 510
Proposed by Andrew
votes cast for: Dan Kolja Andrew
votes cast against: none
abstained: all others
Result: Accepted Tue, 22 Dec 1998

Create a rule with the title "Vacation Time" and the following text:

"A player may declare themselves to be 'On Vacation'. When they make this declaration, they must specify a length of time that they will be on vacation. This amount of time must be greater than one week, and less than two months.

When a player declares themselves to be On Vacation, for the duration of that time they will be treated as if they have left the game. They cannot submit proposals, vote, be the judge of a CFJ, or any other activity that a person must be a voter to do. However, they do keep all possessions such as R$. Their scores are also modified by any player winning.

When the end of the On Vacataion period arrives, or if the player announces before the end of the period to end the On Vacation period, they return to normal player status."

Proposal 511
Proposed by Andrew
votes cast for: Dan Kolja Andrew
votes cast against: none
abstained: all others
Result: Accepted Tue, 22 Dec 1998

--Amend RC373C by deleting the last sentence.

--The Treasurer of New Rishonnomic is Andrew Stefanski

[Michal wanted someone else to take over as Treasurer, and I'm willing to. I'm also going to remove the listing of who's Treasurer from the rule, since we can now modify the game state directly.]

Proposal 512
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew, Dan, Thad, Kolja
AGAINST: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:53:07 -0500 (EST)

--Amend RC487H:

Replace the text:
"If a voter does not vote on a proposal, e is considered to have submitted an ABSTAIN vote."
with the text:
"A voter may choose to not vote on a proposal. If e does not vote, no vote is assigned. The voting results will note that e did not submit a vote."

Replace the text:
"Only FOR and AGAINST votes count towards Quorum."
with the text:
"All votes count toward Quorum."

[Now there is a difference between not voting, and abstaining. You can now help make sure we reach quorum even if you don't want to vote for or against a proposal.]

Proposal 513
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew Dan Thad
AGAINST: Kolja
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:53:07 -0500 (EST)

--Amend RC408 by giving it the following text:

"Each local in Rishinnia has a map.

Each local in Rishinnia has a map. The map of a local must be one of the following types:

1)A blank map
2)A grid map"

--Create a rule with the title "Map Type Definitions" and the following text:

"Blank Map---

A blank map is essentially a null map. The Cartographer is not required to make available a map survey of this map type.

Grid Map---

A grid map consists of squares. The size of the map is an integer value (i) which defines the map to consist of the squares (-i, -i) through (i, i).

Each square on the map can be individually identified by the coordinates (x, y), where both -i<=x<=i and -i<=y<=i.

Squares are:

- equal if both have the same (x,y) placement.
- directly adjacent if one has the placement (x,y) while the other has one of the following placements: (x-1,y), (x+1,y), (x,y-1) or (x,y+1).
- diagonally adjacent if one has the placement (x,y) while the other has one of the following placements: (x-1,y-1), (x-1,y+1), (x+1,y-1), (x+1,y+1).
- adjacent if they are either directly or diagonally adjacent.

The squares A and B are connected if they are either directly adjacent or both connected to a square C. (This is recursive, of course).

The expression "squares (a,b) through (p,q)", with a and p replaced by legal x and b and q replaced by legal y coordinates, means all squares with an x coordinate between a and p, inclusive, and a y coordinate between b and q, inclusive."

--Create a law in the local of Koljiana with the following text:

"The map of Koljiana is a grid map of size 7."

[Abstracting the definition of the map a little bit to allow other locals to more easily use the same rules. It also places a little bit more control of the map in the hands of the Koljiana government.]

Proposal 514
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew Dan Kolja
AGAINST: Thad
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Up for voting until Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:53:07 -0500 (EST)

--Amend RC412B by giving it the following text:

"The Cartographer is an officer of New Rishonnomic.

The Cartographer is responsible for keeping all maps and the entity location list up to date.

Every two weeks, e must send a map survey to all players. Alternatively, e may make the map survey accessible to all players by other means.

The survey must contain the map of each local. Each map must contain the name of the local it is for, all changes that have occured since the last survey (or should the map be made available by other means, a list of changes for at least the past two weeks), and any other information that the laws of a local state must be in a map survey.

On the first day of each month, the Cartographer receives a salary of three points."

--Repeal rule RC412C.

--Create a law in the local of Koljiana with the text:

"A map survey of Koljiana must contain the following information:

- the current square price
- information about future price changes (as available)
- all information necessary to reconstruct the map in
a form considered appropriate by the Cartographer
- the ownership of the squares on the maps
- the status (open or closed) of every player-owned square
- the locations of all entities which have one"

[Removed the listing who the Cartographer is, since it's part of the game state. And now that we can modify the game state directly in a proposal, we can change the cartographer that way.

Also, once again trying to abstract things a little bit, to give flexibility in how each local does things without affecting the current way things are done.]

Proposal 515
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew Dan
AGAINST: Thad Kolja
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Rejected Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:53:07 -0500 (EST)

-- Create a rule with the title "Penalty Definitions" and the following text:

"A rule may, instead of specifying a penalty in the rule itself, may just specify a penalty type. The penalty type must be listed in this rule to be valid - a non-listed penalty type is invalid and causes no penalty.

This rule contains a listing of all penalty types, and their associated penalties. The penalty may contain point values, R$ amounts, and bonus vote amounts. These amounts are subtracted from the penalized player. Penalties may not cause bonus votes or R$ to go below zero.

Any rule that states a penalty is incurred but does not list a specific penalty type is treated as a minor penalty.

When a player performs an action that causes a penalty, that penalty is assessed once for each time the action is performed. If a condition is met such that a player is constantly incurring a penalty (such as the speaker taking longer than the allowed time to distrubute proposal results), the penalty is assessed once per day.

-- General Penalties --

Token Penalty - 2 points
Minor Penalty - 5 points, |50|
Medium Penalty - 10 points, |150|
Major Penalty - 25 points, |300|, 1 bonus vote
Extreme Penalty - 50 points, |1000|, 5 bonus votes

-- Proposal Penalties --

Replacement Vote Penalty - 1/2 point
Retraction Penalty - 2 points
Rejected Proposal Penalty - 3 points"

--Amend RC464 by replacing the text:
"e shall lose 5 points"
with the text:
"e shall receive a minor penalty"

[Well, I remember Dan asking for clarification on what happens when rules are broken. I hope this takes care of it - we can keep ALL penalties in one place, and adjust them to where they seem to work best. And we've got a default case to cover all the rules that don't have penalties for when they are broken.]

Proposal 516 (cosmetic)
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew Dan Thad
AGAINST: none
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:53:07 -0500 (EST)

--Amend RC489 by replacing the text:
"appears to be partially or completely copied from a previous proposal that was rejected, or a proposal that is currently active. "
with the text:
"appears to be partially or completely copied from a previous proposal or proposals that were rejected, or a proposal or proposals that are currently active."

Replace the text:
"list which proposal e feels it was copied from."
with the text:
"list which proposal or proposals e feels it was copied from."

Replace the text:
"The voter who authored the original proposal will be given any rewards for the proposal being adopted."
with the text:
"The voter or voters who authored any original proposals will be given any rewards for the proposal being adopted. In the case multiple proposals were stolen from, the author of each original proposal will recieve the full amount of the reward."

Replace the text:
"difference from whatever proposal it was originally declared to be a copy of."
with the text:
"difference from whatever proposal or proposals it was originally declared to be a copy of."

[This way if someone steals from multiple proposals, all the original authors will get the rewards, instead of having the speaker just choose one.]

Proposal 517
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew Dan
AGAINST: Thad
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:53:07 -0500 (EST)

--Create a rule with the title "Removal From Office" and the following text:

"A player may, at any time, declare a 'Removal From Office Hearing' by publicly declaring they desire a hearing, and which officer they wish removed from Office. A player may not declare a hearing for an Officer if they have declared a hearing for that Officer in the past month.

When a hearing is declared, a judge must be selected to moderate the hearing. The judge will be selected by an officer who is neither the target of the hearing, or the player who called the hearing, to be chosen in this order: Speaker, Pointer, Treasurer, Cartographer. The judge will be selected randomly, according to the rules of selecting a judge for judgement. Neither the Officer that is the target of the hearing, nor the player who called the hearing, may be selected as the judge.

When the judge is appointed, e must, as soon as possible, publicly declare the hearing to be open for discussion. All players other than the judge may participate in the discussion. After either 2 weeks, or when the judge feels that no further progress is being made in the discussion, e will declare the discussion closed, and that voting is to begin.

All votes will be made by sending them privately to the judge. All players other than the Officer that is the target of the hearing, and the judge of the hearing may vote. There will be a voting period of one week. At the end of the period, the judge will reveal the votes. If a 2/3 majority of the votes are in favor, the Officer is removed from office.

Proposal 518
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew, Thad, Dan
AGAINST: Kolja
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Rejected Wed, 3 Feb 1999 09:11:21 -0500 (EST)

--Transmute RC102.

--Repeal RC102.

[It now serves no purpose. There is some information there that was relevant at the beginning of the game, but isn't any longer. And the little bits that still have some relevance are covered elsewhere.]

Proposal 519
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew, Thad, Dan
AGAINST: none
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 3 Feb 1999 09:11:21 -0500 (EST)

--Repeal RC414.

[The ownership was set, becoming part of the game state, upon adoption of the rule. Repealing the rule isn't going to prevent ownership of the squares.]

Proposal 520
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew, Thad, Dan
AGAINST: none
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 3 Feb 1999 09:11:21 -0500 (EST)

-- Transmute RC104 to mutable.

-- Amend RC104 by replacing the text:

"Also, if the Speaker is ever missing or resigns, the next valid officer takes over the role of Speaker, and the process to elect another speaker begins immediately."

with the text:

"Also, if the Speaker is ever missing, suspended, unable to perform eir duties, or there is no speaker, the next valid officer takes over the role of Speaker, and the process to elect another speaker begins immediately."

-- Transmute RC104 to immutable.

[There, Kolja. This should solve the problems you had with Prop 517 which you accidentally send to everyone. :) Instead of fixing 517, I fixed where the real problem was - RC104. Now it should cover all situations, making sure we never are without a speaker. Regardless of what happens with 517, this should be changed.]

Proposal 521
Proposed by Dan
FOR: Dan, Andrew
AGAINST: none
ABSTAIN: Thad
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 3 Feb 1999 09:11:21 -0500 (EST)

--Amend RC463 (The Gnome) to read as follows:

Whenever a proposal fails although at least one vote was cast for it, a new gnome is created on a random forest square (each forest square having an equal probability of being chosen), at the time the voting results on that proposal are published. The Cartographer must name each gnome when it first appears. E may not give a gnome a name which is identical to the name of another existing gnome, of a player, or of any other existing NRn entity.

At noon (GMT) every Monday each gnome tries to make exactly one move. This move is chosen by the Cartographer according to a complex algorithm specified in another rule (RC521A). A valid move for a gnome is to move from its current location to any square directly adjacent to it, provided that the destination square is not closed or in the Arcades.

If there are no valid moves for the gnome, it explodes from rage, leaving its posessions on the square it was on, and a new gnome enters the map on a random forest square. If there are, then the gnome makes the move which the Cartographer selected.

Whenever a gnome enters a player-owned square, it steals |100| from that player, or half eir R$ holdings, whichever is less. The stolen R$ are the property of the gnome. The gnome then immediately runs away to the closest woods square - the one which it can reach by the shortest path.

If a gnome enters an unowned square on which two or more players are located, the gnome explodes from fright and the R$ owned by the Gnome are evenly divided among those players.

When a player and a gnome are both located in the same non-woods square, the player can kill the gnome. When the gnome is killed, it vanishes in a cloud of black smoke and ceases to exist, and all of its posessions are dropped onto its location.

The Cartographer must report all R$ transfers required by this rule to the Treasurer.

--Retitle RC463 to "The Gnomes".

--Create a rule titled "Gnome Brains", with the following text:

The gnome goes through several steps in deciding where to move. First it considers squares which it would like to move to, then it decides whether it likes each of these moves, then it moves. The cartographer only needs to record its ultimate decision, not its thought process; the former yields the latter anyway.

If there are any moves which the gnome likes, the Cartographer randomly selects one of them and the gnome makes it. If there are no squares which the gnome likes, but there are valid moves for it, the Cartographer randomly selects one and the gnome makes it. If there are no valid moves for the gnome, it explodes from rage, as described in RC463

All of the Cartographer's selections are made with the probabilities of all possibilities as equal as possible to each other.

[As they are, gnomes are fatally flawed - aside from behaving too randomly. As soon as they steal money, players can kill them to get it back. Further, since players can move at any speed, they could easily catch the gnomes. This proposal fixes that and also makes them a bit more intelligent.]

Proposal 522
Proposed by Dan
FOR: Dan, Andrew
AGAINST: none
ABSTAIN: Thad
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 3 Feb 1999 09:11:21 -0500 (EST)

--Repeal RC333, RC318, RC349, RC304, and RC309.
--Create a rule with the title "Inter-Nomic Treaty Organization" and the following text:

"The Inter-Nomic Treaty Organization is an organization which provides a means for Nomics to make and track Treaties with each other outside of their own rulesets. It does not provide a means for the enforcement of these Treaties. The Inter-Nomic Treaty Organization may be referred to as the INTO.

The liaison for New Rishonnomic to the INTO is an officer of New Rishonnomic. E is responsible for making sure that the INTO considers em New Rishonnomic's delegate, for communicating the status of INTO treaties to the players of New Rishonnomic, and for communicating New Rishonnomic's actions in INTO (the making, endorsement, and signing of Treaties) to the INTO Archivist.

Players may submit INTO Treaties, and do so by sending them to the liaison. The liaison shall then, within one week, send them to the INTO mailing list. If the Treaty becomes an official INTO Treaty by the INTO rules, the player that submitted it gains eight points.

At any time any player may request that a hearing be started on whether to sign any INTO Treaty or to endorse any preliminary INTO Treaty. E does this by contacting the liaison; the liaison shall then announce the start of the hearing and collect players' votes. During an INTO hearing, any player may submit a vote for the hearing. Votes on a hearing works precisely like votes on an active proposal, as described in RC487H, except that they are sent to the liaison rather than to the speaker.

One week after the hearing starts, it ends; the liaison must then record the results of the hearing and announce them to all players. If all legally-submitted votes were FOR votes, the hearing succeeds and the liaison must announce to the INTO list that New Rishonnomic is signing the Treaty or endorsing the preliminary Treaty (as appropriate). The liaison must never do this except as a result of the success of a hearing for that action to that Treaty.

New Rishonnomic shall, in general, try to obey the conditions set for it by Treaties it has signed; this is a general statement of policy and not an absolute rule.

[InterNomic has crashed; no gameplay occurs there anymore and both Acka and Agora have repealed their InterNomic rules. The INTO is its replacement, though it's not yet up to speed so it's not clear how well it'll work. The simple and non-self-amending proposed rules of the INTO are linked off my NRn page. Note that I have heavily modeled this on the existing InterNomic rules.]

Proposal 523
Proposed by Kolja
FOR: Kolja, Andrew, Dan
AGAINST: none
ABSTAIN: Thad
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 27 Jan 1999 09:16:49 -0500 (EST)

Amend RC373A by replacing 'Klaus Herrmanns' with 'Dan Knapp'.

Proposal 524
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew
AGAINST: Thad, Dan
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Rejected Wed, 10 Feb 1999 13:11:00 -0500 (EST)

Create a rule with the title "Non-Voter Penalties" and the following text:

"When a player does not submit a vote on a proposal, e receives a Lead Token. Missing, suspended, or vacationing players do not receive Lead Tokens.

If a player's number of Lead Tokens is ten or greater, they lose 10 points and |100|, and are set to Missing.

When a player who owns one or more Lead Tokens submits a proposal, e loses one Lead Token and |10|."

[Since you can now submit an ABSTAIN vote if you don't want to vote for or against the proposal, there really isn't a reason not to vote. And should you accidentally forget to vote on a few proposals, you can easily offset the penalty by just submitting a few proposals of your own.

But a player who doesn't vote for quite a while will now be automatically set to missing.]

Proposal 525
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew, Thad, Dan
AGAINST: none
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 10 Feb 1999 13:11:00 -0500 (EST)

--Repeal rule 412A.

--Create a law in the local of Koljiana with the text:

"Players can buy squares on the map.

They can only buy squares that are not already owned by other entities, and not more than two squares per week.

The cartographer can change the purchase price of squares. E may not change the price by more than forty percent at a time, and must wait a week between changes. A square price change takes effect one week after it was publically announces by the Cartographer.

To buy a square the buyer sends a message to all players that states which square e wants to buy. The square enters the buyer's ownership as soon as the Cartographer has publically announced that the square was still available for sale, and the Treasurer has publically confirmed the ability of the buyer to pay for the square, and transferred the price for the square from the player to the NRn bank."

--Repeal RC480.

--Create a law in the local of Koljiana with the text:

"If so desired, a player may change the name and/or colour of any one of their owned sections of land on the map. This can be done at a maximum rate of once every 7 days.

It is the duty of the Cartographer to keep this information up to date, and it is e who must be contacted in order for the new name to be implemented."

[Just trying to move the relevant rules out of the main ruleset, and to the local, since they only apply there.]

Proposal 526
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew, Thad, Dan
AGAINST: none
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 10 Feb 1999 13:11:00 -0500 (EST)

--Repeal RC434.

--Create a law in the local of Koljiana with the following text:

"On the first and fifteenth day of each month, the player who owns the largest number of squares the map of the local of Koljiana gets one Bonus Vote. If more than one player own the same, largest number of squares, the Pointer randomly selects one of them as recipient of this Bonus Vote."

Proposal 527
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew, Thad
AGAINST: Dan
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 10 Feb 1999 13:11:00 -0500 (EST)

--Repeal RC452.

--Create a law of Koljiana with the following text:

"Players have locations. Whenever the location of a player is otherwise unspecified, e is located on eir home square, if e has one; otherwise, e is located at (0, 0). Being 'on' a square is equivalent to being 'in' or 'at' it.

If no rule forbids a player from so doing, e may at any time move from the square e is on to any square directly adjacent to it. To move between squares the player sends a message to all players that states which square e is moving to. The player's location changes immediately."

--Repeal RC457.

--Create a law of Koljiana with the following text:

"Players can have home squares, one apiece. If any player does not have a home square, e may choose any square e owns to be eir home square."

--Repeal RC458.

--Create a law of Koljiana with the following text:

"Each player-owned square is, at any time, either open or closed. Players may enter and leave open squares as normal (subject to any other applicable conditions). Players may neither enter nor leave closed squares. The owner of a square may open or close it at any time when e is in it or on a square directly adjacent to it. Any player who is in a closed square may open it."

[This will move square movement and open/closed squares to the local, putting it where it belongs.]

Proposal 528
Proposed by Andrew
FOR: Andrew, Dan
AGAINST: Thad
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 10 Feb 1999 13:11:00 -0500 (EST)

--Amend RC373C by replacing the text:
"The Treasury report contains a list of all entities' rishonnes and Bonus Votes holdings and the changes of these since the last Treasury record was published."
with the text:
"The Treasury report contains a list of all entities' rishonnes and Bonus votes holdings, and the changes of Bonus Votes since the last Treasury record was published. The Treasurer will not reveal the changes in entities' rishonnes holdings publicly. E will only reveal the changes in an entities' holdings to that specific entity, and only if requested by that entity."

[I'd like to see some privacy in spending. Perhaps now players may be willing to make secret deals, since we won't have a public record of who gave what to whom.]

Proposal 529 (cosmetic)
Proposed by Dan
FOR: Andrew, Thad, Dan
AGAINST: none
ABSTAIN: none
no vote: all others
Result: Accepted Wed, 10 Feb 1999 13:11:00 -0500 (EST)

--Amend RC494 (Call For Permanence) as follows:

Change the text
"The voters then have a one-week period from the time of the distribution of the CFP to either vote for or against it."
in the second-to-last paragraph to
"During a period from the time of the distribution of the CFP to one week thereafter, the CFP is up for voting. While it is up for voting, all voters may vote either FOR or AGAINST on it, by submitting their votes to the speaker."

Change the text
"If the CFP is unanimously accepted by the voters," in the last paragraph to
"If all votes made on the CFP are FOR,"

[With the current wording, it's not clear whether all voters must vote FOR, or the unanimity must only be among those who vote. I've chosen the latter as making more sense.]

(End.)