Re: [s-d] [s-b] Fwd: Initial Rules Set / Meta-Game - An Experiment in Thought Gaming

[Rainbow Wolfe <rainbowdreamwolf@xxxxxxxxx>]

Okay, so we want to stick with the convention of super legalistic then"? :)

Anyone else have anything else to add before I start to smooth this initial
set over? Revision numbers? Clock on / off (even though it will continue to
run from wherever is currently is)? fora? unique naming conventions?
Justice/CFI? Or can we add versions of these as we go?

- Rainbow Wolfe

On 28 August 2011 18:19, Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Rainbow Wolfe wrote:
>
> > {
> > *Meta-Rules*
> >
> > Meta-Rule #1
> > All players have the right to propose, change or amend rules [[via emails
> > sent to spoon-business]], and to discuss proposed rules and rule changes
> > [[though emails sent to spoon-discuss]].
>
> "All players have the right to propose rules and rule changes"
>
> > Meta-Rule #2
> > All players have the right to vote on proposed rules.
>
> "and rule changes"
>
> > Meta-Rule #3
> > A proposal becomes a Law when 1/2 or more of the voting players agree
> that
> > it should. LAWs must be followed by whomever is required by Law to follow
> > them.
>
> "more than 1/2 of".  And what's a "voting player"?  If the first vote is
> FOR, is it immediately adopted?
>
> > Meta-Rule #4
> > Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and
> > unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is
> > permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly
> permits
> > it.
> > *[[reference: The Paradox of Self-Amendment, Appendix 3, Nomic Immutable
> > Rule 116]]*
>
> Are laws rules?  Are meta-rules rules?
>
> > Meta-Rule #5
> > If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the
> > legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or a move appears
> > equally legal and illegal, then the Meta-Rules may take precedence.
> > *[[reference: The Paradox of Self-Amendment, Appendix 3, Nomic Mutable
> Rule
> > 213]]*
> > **
>
> Do they definitely take precedence?  What if the laws claim otherwise?
> (reference: http://students.imsa.edu/~dwarf/agora/theses/andre-an.html)
>
> > **Meta-Rule #6
> > Meta-Rules may only be created, deleted, or amended when *all* of the
> active
> > players agree to it.
> > **
> > *Game Conventions*
>
> Does "game conventions" include all laws, or just the initial set of
> laws?  Does it have any further importance?
>
> >  Law #01 - LAW
> > The oldest pending proposal may become Law if any of the following are
> > true:-
> >
> >    - It has a number of FOR votes that exceed or equal Quorum
> >    - It has been open for voting for at least 1nweek and more than half
> of
> >    its votes are FOR
> >
> > The oldest pending proposal may fail to become Law if any of the
> following
> > are true:-
> >
> >    - It has a number of AGAINST votes that exceed or equal Quorum.
> >    - It has been open for voting for at least 1nweek and half or fewer of
> >    its votes are FOR.
> >    - The player who proposed it has voted AGAINST it.
>
> There's some overlap here, most obviously if the author votes AGAINST
> and everyone else votes FOR.
>
> Can a player vote ABSTAIN?  What about "FOR, unless <other proposal>
> fails, in which case AGAINST"?
>
> > Any active player may update the gamestate by posting an email to
> > spoon-business declaring that a proposal has either passed or failed.
>
> What's an "active player"?  How does someone even become a player?
>
> "correctly declaring whether a proposal has passed or failed".  Or, if
> the overlap noted above is intentional, then "correctly declaring that
> a proposal has either passed or failed, specifying exactly one proposal
> and exactly one result".
>
> > Law #02
> > A Quorum is defined by any number greater than half the number of active
> > players.
>
> "A Quorum is defined as half the number of active players (rounded down
> to the nearest integer) plus one."
>
> > Law #04 - ORDER
> > With the exception of this paragraph, comment text will be delimited
> between
> > double square brackets as shown: “[[this is a comment]]”. Comment Text
> has
> > no direct effect on the state of the game, although it can be read and
> may
> > aid in the interpretation of the LAW it refers to.
> > Comment text in italics is known as ‘flavor text’ and can be used to add
> > suggestions or story to the end of rules and sections.
>
> How is flavor text indicated in plaintext?  [[/Like this?/]]
>
> > Law #05 - NTIME
> > nTime consists of the following values: A positive number known as the
> > nWeek; a positive number known as the nDay.
>
> How are they initialized?
>
> > Law #06 - ERA'S
> > The First Era of B Nomic is the time starting with the time creation of
> the
> > game (approx.5 Dec 2001, prompted by a five-month lull in A Nomic) and
> > ending immediately before the Second Era of B Nomic.
> >
> > The Second Era of B Nomic is from nWeek 85, nDay 1 (approx.4 April 2005,
> > prompted by data loss when the bnomic.org server crashed) and ending
> > immediately before the Third Era of B Nomic.
> >
> > The Third Era of B Nomic is from nWeek 112, nDay 1 (approx.14 Nov 2006,
> > prompted by another 5 month lull) and ending immediately before the
> Fourth
> > Era of B Nomic.
> >
> > The Fourth Era of B Nomic is from nWeek 135, nDay 1 (approx.10 Dec 2007,
> > prompted by a second state of emergency in 2 nWeeks) and ending
> immediately
> > before the Fifth Era of B Nomic.
> >
> > The Fifth Era of B Nomic is from nWeek 135, nDay 1 (approx.2 Dec 2008,
> when
> > http://b.nomic.net/index.php/User:Ehird/Make_it_Better passed), and
> ending
> > immediately before the Sixth Era of B Nomic.
> > The Sixth Era of B Nomic is from nWeek 156, nDay 1 (approx.2 March 2009,
> > when a Fourth Era ruleset was restored as we discovered a broken comment
> > rule had messed up the game, and ending immediately before the Seventh
> Era
> > of B Nomic.
>
> "The Seventh Era of B Nomic is from nWeek <whatever>, nDay 1 (approx.
> <date>), when we discovered a broken emergency rule had messed up the
> game from <whatever> onward, and is currently in progress."
>
> If we stick with "Gamma Nomic", then change each "Seventh Era of B" to
> "First Era of Gamma".
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>



-- 
Hobbes: Why are you digging a hole?

Calvin: I'm looking for buried treasure.

Hobbes: What have you found?

Calvin: A few dirty rocks, a weird root, and some disgusting grubs.

Hobbes: On your first try?

Calvin: There's treasure everywhere!
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss