Nomic 3

[manored]

You are both invalid, as you forgot this:

104 - Any proposal may be nominated by any player who did not make said proposal.

211 only lets you nominate 2, it doesnt says that the second can be one you made...

[manored]

Nutty trails and chicken races
can take you to different places
A flame can help a shakey hand
and a pious folk may understand

I propose that only manored, he who nominates this motion and those who vote in favor of it may vote for motions, propose for motions or nominate motions.

[aegis]

211 only lets you nominate 2, it doesnt says that the second can be one you made...

If there is no rule against it, there is no rule against it.

211 - When a proposal is nominated for vote, A second existing proposal of the nominating parties choosing may be included as part of the motion (such that the motion, should it be accepted, will bring two new rules or two separate addendum to a current rule or any combination thereof into play)

You are including the other proposal in the nominated one, not nominating another proposal for synchronous voting. It only requires the second proposal to already exist - you could post twice quickly, once with a proposal and a second time with the nomination including it.

[manored]

LOL

104 - Any proposal may be nominated by any player who did not make said proposal.

Buy new glasses :)

[aegis]

Buy new glasses :)

You are too confident in yourself.

[SinbadEV]

211 - When a proposal is nominated for vote, A second existing proposal of the nominating parties choosing may be included as part of the motion.

The second part is being included in the motion, not directly nominated... at least that was my intention... I guess we can wait for the judge. The addendum you are adding is not however an existing proposal because your post contains only a nomination... you could have simply double-posted to get the effect you were looking for based on my understanding of the rules.

[Saktoth]

As i understand it, a proposal and nomination do not need to be separate posts and... 103 - Any post containing a suggestion for a motion is a proposal.

[manored]

Buy new glasses :)

You are too confident in yourself.

That post was made before you edited, so I was under the impression your eyes had run over rule 104 winhout seeing it :)

[aegis]

Buy new glasses :)

You are too confident in yourself.

That post was made before you edited, so I was under the impression your eyes had run over rule 104 winhout seeing it :)

Doesn't change the fact rule 104 doesn't apply... neither my edit or original post mentioned rule 104.

[Felix the Cat]

You are both invalid, as you forgot this:

104 - Any proposal may be nominated by any player who did not make said proposal.

211 only lets you nominate 2, it doesnt says that the second can be one you made...

No, 211 allows you to nominate one and select another.

You can only nominate a proposal that you did not make.

However, in the absence of a rule defining "select" in the context of the game, the meaning of the word defaults to its ordinary English definition, which means "to make a choice; pick" at dictionary.com. There's nothing there to prevent you from selecting a proposal that you made, because selecting is not nominating.

[SwiftSpear]

Felix is correct

A vote is in action. All proposals are now dead.

Motion 312: The player currently leading in victorious votes shall be given the title of "numpty", and to liven the game, this title must be always used in reference to the player and at the end of his post, so he is abused. ALSO: In the interest of charity, whenever a player casts one of the (up to 7) valid votes for or against a motion, they must specify another active player to nominate for promotion. Each of these nominations must contain a title and can be enacted by a different player seconding the nomination during the period between a proposals acceptance and the opening of the next round of voting. To avoid confusion the titles will be granted in an additional post by the judge following the start of a vote for a motion. Valid Titles must be chosen from This Article. An active player is a player who has posted in the thread at least once.

Proposed by: Felix the Cat

Any poster may vote either for or against the current motion. If the motion passes it will become a rule. A player voting for a passed motion will

receive 10 points, a player voting against a failed motion will receive 10 points. The first side to reach 4 votes wins.

Sinbad... would you mind rewording your rule? As it stands I don't really understand the point of the "title", is it supposed to be a title that is applied to the other player. For example, if I voted and proposed to title you, sir SinbadEV, and someone else nominated it, then that becomes what we refer to you as? It doesn't seem to state any purpose for the nominations or titles. Just that every player must propose another player for promotion with each vote, and assign the proposal a title.

The wording will stay exactly as it is here, so loopholes can be exploited... I just don't understand what this rule is going to make us do right now.

[SinbadEV]

First of all I votey Yay.
To clarify

When a player votes they must also specify a player and a title along with their vote. This is referred to as a "Nomination for Promotion".
During the next proposal period another player may second this "Nomination for Promotion" at which time the player specified along with the vote will be granted the specified title.

For example if SinbadEV wishes to vote yay on a motion, he specifies, along with his vote, that he is Nominating Felix the Cat to the title of Viscountess. When the next proposal period opens, SwiftSpear seconds this Nomination and henceforth Felix the Cat is referred to as "Viscountess Felix the Cat".

[aegis]

I vote yes; you already know who I am anyway.

[Saktoth]

I vote nay out of spite. Why was my nomination rejected anyway, just in the interest of the clarity of the rules? The objections raised applied to both Sinbads post and mine, unless it is on the technicality of 'existing' as interpreted to mean 'pre-existing'.

[lurker]

The strongest reason is that yes, existing means pre-existing. It's basic English that when you say select an existing item you can't go: my item is [created here]. The word 'existing' was not just thrown in for effect, as it otherwise has exactly 0 meaning (by basic logic you can't attach a nonexistant proposal). Existing means that it existed when you were making the post, not as of making your post.

103 - Any post containing a suggestion for a motion is a proposal
I could also argue that it's not a valid proposal as you weren't suggesting it for a motion.

I vote yes.


Edit: Looked at the title page, and it's stupidly tiny and restrictive. I assumed you would have chosen something more encompassing. There is an entire category of titles, and you restrict us to one page? Oh well, at least I can edit it to have other titles from the category.

[KDR_11k]

I vote yes.

did he specify a revision of the titles page or are we permitted to deface it and use the defaced version as our source?

[lurker]

Just read it, there are no restrictions to revision, though I myself won't add any title that is not already on wikipedia in the titles category.

[manored]

I vote yes, tough I dont think that will work for anything...

[nemppu]

I vote yes

[SwiftSpear]

I vote nay out of spite. Why was my nomination rejected anyway, just in the interest of the clarity of the rules? The objections raised applied to both Sinbads post and mine, unless it is on the technicality of 'existing' as interpreted to mean 'pre-existing'.

Because the proposal didn't contain rhyme. I suppose I could have issued the nomination without the proposal attatched... but I wasn't sure what I was supposed to do in that regard, so I just judged the post as invalid and moved on to the next nomination since it was the same anyways.