Proposal Archive: 321 to 330

Proposal 321

[submitted by Jake; status: adopted]

Any words used in the language of a proposal must be well-understood. A word is considered to be well-understood if it is found in any English language dictionary, defined in the body of the proposal, or defined in a pre-existing rule.

Proposal 322

[submitted by dave; status: adopted]

amend rule 210 to read as follows:

Each game of Paranomic has a number, which is the variable GAMENUMBER. For the first game, GAMENUMBER = 1.

The winner of a game is the first person to reach 100*(2^GAMENUMBER) points. If two or more players reach a winning score simultaneously, the player with the higher final score wins. If the winner cannot be decided this way the game is tied. The umpire shall keep a record of who has won each game. In case of any dispute, the umpire shall decide which player is the winner of a game.

When a game is won, the following things happen:

Each player that votes for this proposal (not counting default votes) shall receive 100 pounds, then this line shall be struck from the rules.

Proposal 323

[submitted by dave; status: rejected]

Transmute rule 105 into a mutable rule.

Proposal 324

[submitted by dave; status: adopted]

Enact the following as a new rule:

Each player is either Active or Dormant; the default state being Active. While a player is Dormant, their points and PHAT balance are frozen (unless the current game is won, in which case their points and PHAT balance may be affected as normal) and they are treated for all intents and purposes as a non-Player.

Any player may voluntarily change their own state from Active to Dormant, or vice versa, at any time simply by announcing that they are doing so by in a message to the forum. The umpire may also change any player's state from Active to Dormant, or vice versa, at any time and in the same way, though doing so without good reason is treasonous and may be dealt with accordingly. No player except the umpire may change the state of any other player.

Proposal 325

[submitted by Fraser; status: adopted]

Transmute rules 101 and 102 from Immutable to Mutable.

Proposal 326

[submitted by Fraser; status: rejected]

Transmute rule 106 from Immutable to Mutable.

Proposal 327

[submitted by Kevan; status: adopted]

Enact the following TREASON-delimited text as a new Rule:-

Each Player may have zero or more Treason Points, and zero or more Hero Points; various events and actions that happen in the world of Paranomic will affect these Points. If either total drops below zero, it becomes zero.

The Player with the most Treason Points is known as the Traitor. If the Traitor is a Secret Police Officer but is not the Head of the Secret Police, e immediately becomes a Prole. The Traitor does not receive a Salary.

The Player with the most Hero Points is known as the People's Hero; e may include the text "Power to the people!" in any Proposal e makes (and no other Player may do so). A Proposal containing such text automatically receives three extra votes in favour.

The Head of the Secret Police is responsible for keeping track of Treason and Hero Points; every Friday (at an hour of eir choosing) e should look back over the past week to see what has happened which will result in adjustment of these Points - the HoSP should total these changes and detail them, along with the new totals, to the mailing list.

The following acts and events will modify a Player's Treason and Hero Points accordingly. Adjustments are cumulative (if a Player voted against three of the HoSP's Proposals during the week, e gains three Treason Points), and should be applied in the sequence listed.

Being unmasked as a Secret Police Officer+3 TP-9 HP
Unmasking a Secret Police Officer+1 TP+3 HP
Unmasking a Prole+0 TP-1 HP
Unmasking a Secret Police Officer less than three days after being Unmasked yourself+9 TP+2 HP
Voting for a Proposal made by the HoSP-1 TP+0 HP
Voting against a Proposal made by the HoSP+1 TP+0 HP
Giving P100 or more to another Player+0 TP+1 HP
Giving P100 or more to the HoSP-2 TP-2 HP
Using a Treasonous Word+1 TP+0 HP
Being the Head of the Secret Police-3 TP-9 HP


In Rule 317, replace "lose five points" with "be penalised for Treason as described in Rule x", where 'x' is the Rule enacted by the previous section of this Proposal.

Proposal 328

[submitted by Kevan; voting deadline: 11pm GMT Friday 16 April 1999]

{comment: This Proposal rewords the Joker rule in light of the turnless game style - the previous mention of "phases" is a little vague, and somewhat dangerous when the Voting Phases of a dozen Proposals can overlap. The basic premise and effect of Jokering remains unchanged; this is just a rewording for simplicity and clarity.}

Amend Rule 306 to read:-

Game tokens known as "Jokers" exist; each Player may have a number of Jokers, kept track of by the Umpire. When a new Player joins the Game, e starts with one Joker. Upon completion of the voting period of every third proposal authored by a Player, that Player receives a Joker. At any time, a Player may "play" one of the Jokers they possess, by informing the Umpire (either privately or publicly) of this intention. Jokers can be played in various ways, which are described below, along with their effects. When a Joker is played, it is immediately destroyed. The same Joker cannot be played more than once.

(An "Active Proposal" is a White Paper Proposal which is currently being voted upon.)

The Jokering Player nominates a single Active Proposal; e is then permitted to cast a total of 'x' Votes for that Proposal, where 'x' is the number of Players divided by five (rounding to the nearest whole number). This takes precedence over Rule 203.
The Jokering Player nominates a single Active Proposal made by another Player; if that Proposal currently requires a majority in favour to pass, it now requires a unanimous vote, and vice versa.
The Jokering Player nominates a single Active Proposal and a single Player; any Points gained or lost by the nominated Player as a result of Voting on that Proposal are doubled.

Proposal 329

[submitted by Fraser; voting deadline: 11pm GMT Friday 16 April 1999]

{Comment: changes nomenclature a little closer to the Paranoia game.}

Title: "A Rose By Any Other Name"

Enact a rule consisting of the following ROSE delimited text:

All references to "Prole" shall be changed to "Citizen", and "Proles" to "Citizens".

All references to "Secret Police" or "the Secret Police" shall be amended to "Internal Security".

All references to "Head of Secret Police" or "Head of the Secret Police" shall be amended to "Chief of Internal Security", and "HoSP" to "CoIS".

All references to "Secret Policeman" shall be amended to "Internal Security Agent" and "Secret Policemen" to "Internal Security Agents".

All other references which require amendment, in the opinion of the Umpire, not overruled, to remain consistent with the intent of the above amendments shall also be amended.

Also, if at any time this change of terminology causes an English expression to change meaning or become grammatically or syntactically incorrect, the grammar or syntax shall be amended to retain the same meaning using the new terminology.

Any new proposals enacted while this rule is in effect shall automatically have the above amendments applied to them.

This rule overrides all other rules that it may legally override.

Proposal 330

[submitted by Kevan; voting deadline: 11pm GMT Mon 19 April 1999]

{It'd help things considerably if Rules and Proposals had names as well as numbers - it's rather awkward skimming through a load of arbitrary rule numbers in search of something, and having a summary title for each Proposal would aid reference and memory.}

Make Rule 104 a Mutable Rule.

Amend Rule 104 to read:-

"Each Proposal should be given a name by its Proposer, and is given a reference number by the Umpire. The first proposal shall be numbered 301 and each subsequent proposal shall be numbered with the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted. If a Proposal is not given a name when submitted, the Umpire may add one.

A newly enacted Rule receives the name of the Proposal (or Proposal section) which enacted it, and it is given a number one higher than the current highest Rule number.

If any existing Rules do not have names, the Umpire is free to assign names of eir choosing to them, whenever e wishes. The Umpire may remove this paragraph from the ruleset whenever e wishes."

{Bit of a tweak in the second paragraph - the current "a newly enacted rule receives the number of the proposal to enact it" doesn't really work when you've got Proposals that enact more than one Rule, and the "next lowest available integer" is a bit of a counter-intuitive and awkward way of dealing with it.}

Make Rule 104 Mutable again.