Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
33 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Nomic» Forums » Play By Forum

Subject: Proposed Amendment 307: Bonus Points rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
David Vaughan
United States
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mb
Who likes rule 204? (resounding silence) While repealing it outright may not be the thing to do, we have the technology; we can rebuild it.




Proposal 307
May Rule 204 be amended to read as follows:

1. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 3 points each.

2. If a rule-change could be adopted without unanimity but is passed unanimously (with no abstains), the player(s) who proposed it shall recieve 3 points each.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew Spencer
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Rule 204 is a seriously bad idea. It creates a game of chicken. In a traditional game of chicken, two drivers head toward each other at high speed until one veers off; the only guaranteed way to win is to remove your steering wheel, show it to your opponent, and then throw it out your window. The corresponding move in Nomic is to promise in advance to vote No on every proposal. This rule would not substantively alter that.

I therefore promise the following: I will vote No on every proposal, including this one, until Rule 204 is repealed.

I suggest you change your proposal to outright repeal Rule 204.

As a side note, after giving it some thought, I have serious doubts as to the legality of holding Rule 204 (or any other rule) in abeyance for the purposes of a single proposal. It seems to me that a "rule change" is limited to the purposes enumerated in Rule 103 and holding a rule in abeyance has nothing to do with any of those.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Malachi Brown
United States
Hermitage
TN
flag msg tools
It's turtles all the way down.
badge
“Questions are a burden to others; answers a prison for oneself.”
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
banyan wrote:
As a side note, after giving it some thought, I have serious doubts as to the legality of holding Rule 204 (or any other rule) in abeyance for the purposes of a single proposal. It seems to me that a "rule change" is limited to the purposes enumerated in Rule 103 and holding a rule in abeyance has nothing to do with any of those.

An easy workaround would be to give negative points to anyone who votes against the rule in the same quantity that 204 will be awarding, no?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kieron Mitchell
United States
Indianapolis
IN
flag msg tools
Http:\\www.kieronmitchell.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like the idea of someone who legitimately loses out in a situation to be partially compensated in some way. I'm also wondering if the point of 204 was to slow down changes...hmm...

Unfortunately, for Rule 204 to work well, we need secret ballots. What we all want to avoid, I think, is for someone to feel like they should vote "no" for a proposal they agree with, simply to gain points.

I dislike the idea of saying something like "I will always do X, until Y happens." The problem is that it creates polarization if someone disagrees with banyan.

I suggest you add the following to your rule,

"banyan cannot receive any points due to voting "no"."

After all, he's going to vote against this rule, and all future rules until this rule is repealed, so 1. it isn't an unfair amendment, and 2. the amendment will automatically go away as part of his condition being met!

I humbly suggest we switch to secret ballots! CIVS or BGG Mail to the proposer...we can make either work.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kayl
United States
Seal Beach
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
1) What Malachi said is just one way around that concept. I can think of a couple of others that assuage 103. It's just that "204 abeyance" is so much more terse.

2) Why is an out-right repeal of 204 not a good idea?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew Spencer
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Malachi wrote:
banyan wrote:
As a side note, after giving it some thought, I have serious doubts as to the legality of holding Rule 204 (or any other rule) in abeyance for the purposes of a single proposal. It seems to me that a "rule change" is limited to the purposes enumerated in Rule 103 and holding a rule in abeyance has nothing to do with any of those.

An easy workaround would be to give negative points to anyone who votes against the rule in the same quantity that 204 will be awarding, no?


Yes, that sounds legal. In fact, you could probably just hold 204 in abeyance and it would be fair to say that was just short hand for the above.

If you simply repeal 204 (which I think everyone or nearly everyone would support) and hold 204 in abeyance for this round, then I rescind my earlier promise and vote Yes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken H.
United States
Amherst
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Like Kieron said, 204 only works if we use secret ballots.

What about amending it to say it doesn't apply UNLESS secret ballot is used? I might vote for that. I think you should also include the reduction to 3 points as well. 10 is too much even with secret ballots.

At any rate, as others have said, I would also vote for an outright repeal of 204.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Vaughan
United States
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mb
I reconsider:


Proposal 307: wrote:

May Rule 204 be amended to read as follows:

1. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 3 points each.

2. If a rule-change could be adopted without unanimity but is passed unanimously (with no abstains), the player(s) who proposed it shall recieve 3 points each.

3. The above two clauses apply only when voting is done by some form of secret ballot.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shanya Almafeta
United States
Kansas City
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Speaking of rule 204, since it was in effect last round, shouldn't the two players who voted against the proposal (Malachi and I) have earned 10 points? They weren't awarded at the conclusion of the vote...

EDIT: Ah, I didn't see the last two proposals declared they had the power to override rules. We might as well just obliterate rule 204 entirely, we're not playing by it anyways.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew Spencer
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ChippyYYZ wrote:
May Rule 204 be amended to read as follows:

1. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 3 points each.

2. If a rule-change could be adopted without unanimity but is passed unanimously (with no abstains), the player(s) who proposed it shall recieve 3 points each.

3. The above two clauses apply only when voting is done by some form of secret ballot.


I would prefer simply repealing 204, but I would be in favor of this rule passing. I would still vote No on it, though, just to get 10 points. I'm just horribly unscrupulous like that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kieron Mitchell
United States
Indianapolis
IN
flag msg tools
Http:\\www.kieronmitchell.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
banyan wrote:
ChippyYYZ wrote:
May Rule 204 be amended to read as follows:

1. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 3 points each.

2. If a rule-change could be adopted without unanimity but is passed unanimously (with no abstains), the player(s) who proposed it shall recieve 3 points each.

3. The above two clauses apply only when voting is done by some form of secret ballot.


I would prefer simply repealing 204, but I would be in favor of this rule passing. I would still vote No on it, though, just to get 10 points. I'm just horribly unscrupulous like that.


1. You wouldn't get 10 points, since the amendment would go into effect immediately. You would, on the other hand, keep Chippy from getting a 3 point unanimity bonus (which should play to your unscrupulous nature!) ;-).

2. Chippy: can you clear up what you mean by "the player(s) who proposed it"? That might imply something you don't want to. Maybe just change it to the singular?

3. Since the points we are receiving are increasing each turn, three points are going to be worth less and less, relatively speaking. I recommend we make it 50% of the amount of points the proposer receives.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Vaughan
United States
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mb
kieron wrote:

1. You wouldn't get 10 points, since the amendment would go into effect immediately. You would, on the other hand, keep Chippy from getting a 3 point unanimity bonus (which should play to your unscrupulous nature!) ;-).

2. Chippy: can you clear up what you mean by "the player(s) who proposed it"? That might imply something you don't want to. Maybe just change it to the singular?

3. Since the points we are receiving are increasing each turn, three points are going to be worth less and less, relatively speaking. I recommend we make it 50% of the amount of points the proposer receives.


1. I hope we don't have to have another judgement call.

2. I put that there in case a rule gets passed making teams or joint proposals or something. I suppose if such a rule is correctly worded, the (s) in this rule would be unnecessary, so never mind the (s).

3. I don't want the score to rise too fast, but I see your point. How 'bout 25% of the points the proposal earns rounded up to the nearest whole number?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kieron Mitchell
United States
Indianapolis
IN
flag msg tools
Http:\\www.kieronmitchell.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ChippyYYZ wrote:
[snip]

3. I don't want the score to rise too fast, but I see your point. How 'bout 25% of the points the proposal earns rounded up to the nearest whole number?


Sounds reasonable...but you can leave off the rounding thing, since it's addressed in a previous rule.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andon Zebal
United States
Virginia
flag msg tools
Hey everyone,

Still trying to get into the game, I haven't been added yet but will vote on this proposal if I am allowed to. Interestingly, I was just looking over the rules, noticing that everyone is nullifying 204, and coming up with an idea for my first turn. Maybe it can get incorporated into this proposal:

"204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each, the players who vote for winning proposals shall lose 5 points each. The players who vote for losing proposals shall receive 10 points each, and the players who vote against losing proposals shall lose 5 points each. This rule cannot be temporarily suspended by another mutable rule."

My goal here was to make 204 more interesting by creating a density dependent situation that docks you slightly for being in the majority and rewards you for being in the minority. This is a common situation in biology when birds are attracted to a rare colored mate but become less attracted to it as it becomes the most common color. They then switch to the previously common color until it becomes too common and they switch back. It also happens with baby names: the more Ashleys there are the fewer people will name their kids Ashley.

Obviously its not my turn (im not even sure if I'm playing) but I figured since I already wrote it I should share.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kieron Mitchell
United States
Indianapolis
IN
flag msg tools
Http:\\www.kieronmitchell.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Glad to see you are thinking, and joining in!

To be added officially, post a join request (repost, in your case) in this thread.

Chippy: CALL THE BALL!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kieron Mitchell
United States
Indianapolis
IN
flag msg tools
Http:\\www.kieronmitchell.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
aozeba wrote:
[SNIP]

"204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each, the players who vote for winning proposals shall lose 5 points each. The players who vote for losing proposals shall receive 10 points each, and the players who vote against losing proposals shall lose 5 points each. This rule cannot be temporarily suspended by another mutable rule."

My goal here was to make 204 more interesting [snip]


I would vote for something like this just because it is interesting, and I have no idea what its effect will be.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Malachi Brown
United States
Hermitage
TN
flag msg tools
It's turtles all the way down.
badge
“Questions are a burden to others; answers a prison for oneself.”
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think you get weird effects for outright bad proposals.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kieron Mitchell
United States
Indianapolis
IN
flag msg tools
Http:\\www.kieronmitchell.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Malachi wrote:
I think you get weird effects for outright bad proposals.


Don't you mean "I think you get bad effects for outright weird proposals."?

Outright bad proposal: "Malachi gets 200 points". No weird effect.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Vaughan
United States
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mb
Final Form:

Proposal 307 wrote:

May Rule 204 be amended to read as follows:

1. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall each receive points equal to 25% of the points earned by the proposer.

2. If a rule-change could be adopted without unanimity but is passed unanimously (with no abstains), the player who proposed it shall recieve points equal to 25% of the points the proposal earns.

3. The above two clauses apply only when voting is done by some form of secret ballot.


I vote Yes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andon Zebal
United States
Virginia
flag msg tools
ChippyYYZ wrote:
Final Form:

Proposal 307 wrote:

May Rule 204 be amended to read as follows:

1. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall each receive points equal to 25% of the points earned by the proposer.

2. If a rule-change could be adopted without unanimity but is passed unanimously (with no abstains), the player who proposed it shall recieve points equal to 25% of the points the proposal earns.

3. The above two clauses apply only when voting is done by some form of secret ballot.


I vote Yes.


Couple of questions/concerns:

1. Does "points earned by the proposer" refer to the proposers total points (score) or does it refer to the amount of points they may (or may not) have earned by making a particular proposal?

2. Does "points the proposal earns" refer to the points that get exchanged around a proposal, the points that the proposer earns by making a proposal, or can proposals themselves actually earn points?

3. The last clause means that if we never get around to doing a secret ballot, this rule is null. Thats not necessarily a problem, it just means we need to get on doing a secret ballot.

If these questions get adressed I will probably vote yes (assuming I can vote).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew Spencer
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I vote Yes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kayl
United States
Seal Beach
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
thumbsdown

As I've said elsewhere, I dislike points-for-votes. I'd prefer an outright repeal.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kieron Mitchell
United States
Indianapolis
IN
flag msg tools
Http:\\www.kieronmitchell.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
aozeba wrote:
[snip]
If these questions get adressed I will probably vote yes (assuming I can vote).


If no one objects, you will be able to vote after 3pm today (24 hours after your join request in the other thread).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Malachi Brown
United States
Hermitage
TN
flag msg tools
It's turtles all the way down.
badge
“Questions are a burden to others; answers a prison for oneself.”
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I vote no.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Vaughan
United States
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mb
aozeba wrote:


Couple of questions/concerns:

1. Does "points earned by the proposer" refer to the proposers total points (score) or does it refer to the amount of points they may (or may not) have earned by making a particular proposal?

2. Does "points the proposal earns" refer to the points that get exchanged around a proposal, the points that the proposer earns by making a proposal, or can proposals themselves actually earn points?

3. The last clause means that if we never get around to doing a secret ballot, this rule is null. Thats not necessarily a problem, it just means we need to get on doing a secret ballot.

If these questions get adressed I will probably vote yes (assuming I can vote).


1. The amount they earn by making the proposal.

2. The points the proposer earns by making a proposal.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.