Re: [s-d] Why no mutable/immutable?

["Andy Jones" <shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx>]

"The current initial ruleset"?  "The reset ruleset"?  I figured we
would know what I meant.  Probably dangerous in this game!

On 11/21/06, Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Optional!
>
> I think the answer to your question even predates me. B Nomic's
> predecessor, A Nomic, had no immutable rules. A Nomic's predecessor,
> Berserker Nomic, did have immutable rules. I'm not sure what changed
> between games.
>
> As for why we never added them in B Nomic, I think it has to do with
> the more flexible nature of our proposals compared to those in
> Suber's original ruleset. Suber's proposals each contained a single
> modification to the rules. Ours allow arbitrary changes to the entire
> state of the game.
>
> There are two main differences between Immutable and Mutable rules in
> Suber's ruleset. Firstly, immutable rules require a 2/3 vote to
> change, while Mutable rules only require a majority. Secondly, an
> Immutable rule requires two rule changes, and hence two turns, to
> change, because it has to be transmuted and then modified.
>
> The first isn't an obstacle in our system. I could, for instance,
> make a proposal that created a new proposal, set each player's vote
> on the proposal to FOR, and then resolved the proposal. The new
> proposal would pass unanimously if and only if the original proposal
> passed at all.
>
> The second also isn't an obstacle, because I could put "transmute
> rule X" and "amend rule X" in the same proposal.
>
> In other words, the existence of immutable rules wouldn't affect what
> we could or could not do. It would only make the process of doing
> some things more irritating and harder to follow.
>
>
> Incidentally, you also referred to the current ruleset as "the
> initial ruleset". This is not, strictly speaking, true. B Nomic has
> been running for almost five years. Recently, however, we had a
> drastic slump in activity, followed by an even more drastic server
> failure that knocked out our website.
>
> As of a few days ago, activity began once again, with a new website
> and a complete reset of the rules. The distinction between this and
> between ending the game and starting anew is quite small.
>
> So welcome to the Third Age of B Nomic!
>
> --
> Wonko
>
> On Nov 20, 2006, at 4:07 PM, Peter Cooper Jr. wrote:
>
> > Andy Jones wrote:
> >> Can I ask why the initial ruleset doesn't contain immutable rules?
> >
> > You can ask. I'm not sure how great an answer you'll get will be,
> > though. :)
> >
> >> Was this something you just got fed up with?  Or something you'd
> >> rather see come out of the gameplay?  Or what?
> >
> > I've only been involved with the game for almost a couple of years,
> > so we
> > may need to wait for Wonko's opinion, as I think he's the one who's
> > been
> > with the game the longest (or at least, been active in the game the
> > most
> > since it started).
> >
> > But generally, while I think that some rules have had clauses that
> > made
> > them tougher to remove, they can pretty much always be worked around.
> > Anything that can make a rule can probably supercede anything in
> > another
> > rule that stops a rule removal attempt. Basically, you can make a rule
> > that says something like "All rules can be repealed. This rule
> > supercedes
> > our current precedence rule, and all other rules, even if they say
> > this
> > one can't do that." Or maybe you'd need to go through the trouble to
> > creating an entire new ruleset, and then changing the game to
> > follow that
> > ruleset instead of the old one. But adding rules to make changing some
> > rules harder just makes it harder to change them, not impossible.
> >
> > And well, if it's an important rule to keep or not to change, then
> > people
> > will just vote no on changing it.
> >
> > With rule changes via loophole (instead of proposal), it's generally
> > polite to just use the loophole to fix the loophole, claim a Win,
> > and let
> > gameplay continue. If you just irreparibly broke the game, we'd
> > just need
> > to start a new game with the rules as they were just before you
> > broke them
> > and then not let you join our new game and spoil our fun. But
> > that'd just
> > be annoying.
> >
> > --
> > Peter C.
> > _______________________________________________
> > spoon-discuss mailing list
> > spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>
> Daniel Lepage
> dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>


-- 
It's Like This

Even the Samurai
Have teddy bears
And even the teddy bears
Get drunk
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss