From rsholmes@m... Mon Apr 08 09:44:58 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 8 Apr 2002 16:44:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 16657 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2002 16:44:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 8 Apr 2002 16:44:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 8 Apr 2002 16:44:53 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0082F57A@m...>; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 12:44:53 -0400 Received: (from rsholmes@localhost) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id MAA27191; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 12:44:52 -0400 (EDT) To: n_omic@yahoogroups.com, thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: Ruleset comments (was Re: [n_omic] SPAM: ThermodyNomic) References: Date: 08 Apr 2002 12:44:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: "Craig"'s message of "Fri, 5 Apr 2002 16:51:40 -0500" Message-ID: Lines: 199 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=38226324 X-Yahoo-Profile: rsholmes Interesting ruleset, to say the least. I have no idea how playable it will turn out to be! I have a number of quibbles and questions (and one compliment) though: "Craig" writes: > 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to > kill it. Hah! I like this rule. Unenforceable, but... > 4.1 Every rule shall have a number which uniquely identifies it. How does it acquire this number? Is the number part of the rule, and therefore specified when the rule is proposed? What happens if someone proposes a new rule but fails to specify a unique number for it? Is "4.1" a number, or two numbers? That is, does "number" refer to a non-integer number expressed in decimal form, or to a pair of integers separated by a dot? Can a rule number be negative, zero, irrational, transcendental, imaginary? See also question about 3.2. > 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, > followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. How does a new rule acquire its position in the ruleset? Must the part of the rule number before the dot be the same as that of the other rules in the same group and different from that of rules in any other group? Must rules occur in numerical order? No, obviously not, since they don't. Must rules in any particular group occur in numerical order? Does it matter? > 4.6 The Official Mailing List is > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail > at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Why's this in the Rules group? > 4.8 The version of the ruleset archived at > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/files/ruleset shall be the only > official version. Is this taken to mean no rule change takes effect until it is administered into this file? > 5.0 A proposal consists of a suggested change to the game. Exactly one change? If so, then see 1.1 for a possible problem. If not, then see 6.6 for a possible problem. "Change to the game" is ambiguous at best -- in some Nomics it's hard to do better, but in this one, what about something like A proposal consists of a suggested creation or destruction of a Thing. (This, if adopted without further refinement, would probably have effects different from what your version intended. For instance, groups and commentaries would not be able to be changed.) > 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has > been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. I see no prohibition of putting multiple proposals in one submission. Is this intended? If a submission contains multiple suggested changes is it a proposal, multiple proposals, or neither? > 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. What happens to them if they do? > 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one of the Three Sacred Laws > passes if and only if... > 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one of the Three Sacred Laws passes > if and only if, What about a proposal which suggests altering two or more of the Three Sacred Laws? Or is that not possible? Is destruction "altering"? > 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. Which seems to suggest, no, you do NOT have to wait until the archived ruleset is changed before a rule change takes effect. If so, in what sense is the archived ruleset an "official version"? > 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or > removing it. If a proposal may make multiple changes, then modifying a rule can be accomplished by removing it and adding the modified version. > 9.0 Any in-game item is a Thing, with the exception of Therms. > > 9.1 Currently, the types of Things are as follows: Rules, players, > proposals, offices, and points. This seems redundant and/or contradictory. For example: what about rule commentaries? They are items specified by the ruleset, hence would seem to be Things according to 9.0, but according to 9.1 they are not. How about something like: 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. > 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. Again: immediately, or when the official ruleset is edited? > 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. What if that player is destroyed? What happens to eir Things? How is the quality of being possessed acquired or lost? Is it legal to propose a rule which creates new Things (other than a player or a Rule) without proposing a rule to specify how those Things acquire possessors? Or would such a rule simply be regarded as contradicting 9.7? > 9.8 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the > group headed OFFICES > > 9.9 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. Why not put these as the first two rules of the OFFICES group? > 10.1 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any > random decisions necessary. What happens if e fails to? Who tallies and keeps track of the Things? Who administers the ruleset? > 10.2 The Speaker may not deregister. What if e does? Note that the deregistration rules, which have higher priority than this rule, specify means by which any player can deregister. > 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would increase the number of > Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group > headed FIRST SACRED LAW. Does this mean no rule change may add a new rule, unless some other Thing also is destroyed (or it's submitted as a registration proposal)? But wouldn't that be two changes, hence prohibited by 5.0? Therefore there can be no new rules except those proposed in registration proposals. Unless the new rule itself mandates immediate destruction of a Thing, but if that's allowable, it's an ugly loophole in the "a proposal is a single suggested change" idea. Suppose rule 1.2 were destroyed, and someone proposed a "new rule" with the same text as the destroyed rule 1.2. Its passage would create a new rule, and a new player (if, as argued above, this could happen only in a registration proposal). So far so good. But now another registration proposal comes along, it passes, and at least one new Thing is created. Indirectly, the first proposal (to restore rule 1.2) made this possible, so one could say that proposal has increased the number of Things by 3. I assume that's not the sort of thing you meant. Perhaps the word "directly" before "increase" would clarify this. But what does "directly" mean? > 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number > of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and all Therms are > destroyed. I see no effect defined in the present rules of the creation, existence, or destruction of Therms. Is this intended? > 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule, > the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. By what means is it determined that such conflicts exist? And in general, by what means are actions of disputed legality handled? If a rule in one of the TSLs conflicts with another rule in one of the TSLs, then what does "the rule in the Sacred Law" refer to? Probably what was intended that 3.2 would apply in this case, but it would reduce ambiguity to replace "another rule" with "a rule not in one of the TSLs". > 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number > takes precedence. Is, e.g., 4.10 lower or higher than 4.9? -- - Rich Holmes Syracuse, NY From rsholmes@m... Mon Apr 08 10:13:08 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 8 Apr 2002 17:13:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 78342 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2002 17:13:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 8 Apr 2002 17:13:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 8 Apr 2002 17:13:06 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0082F87F@m...>; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:13:05 -0400 Received: (from rsholmes@localhost) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA03172; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:13:05 -0400 (EDT) To: n_omic@yahoogroups.com, thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: Ruleset comments (was Re: [n_omic] SPAM: ThermodyNomic) References: Date: 08 Apr 2002 13:13:05 -0400 Message-ID: Lines: 9 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=38226324 X-Yahoo-Profile: rsholmes > 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number > of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and all Therms are > destroyed. Also... here and elsewhere, "receive" is misspelled. -- - Rich Holmes Syracuse, NY From ragnarok@p... Mon Apr 08 14:56:07 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: raganok@i... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 8 Apr 2002 21:56:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 98547 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2002 21:56:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 8 Apr 2002 21:56:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO intrex.net) (209.42.192.250) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 8 Apr 2002 21:56:05 -0000 Received: from Craig [209.42.200.90] by intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id A20517820132; Mon, 08 Apr 2002 17:56:21 -0400 To: Subject: RE: [Thermo] Ruleset comments (was Re: [n_omic] SPAM: ThermodyNomic) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 17:56:03 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: X-eGroups-From: "Craig" From: "Craig" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl >> 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to >> kill it. >Hah! I like this rule. Unenforceable, but... Of course. This is just a gentle reminder to all who are contemplating anything. >> 4.1 Every rule shall have a number which uniquely identifies it. >How does it acquire this number? Is the number part of the rule, and >therefore specified when the rule is proposed? What happens if >someone proposes a new rule but fails to specify a unique number for ?it? The number is part of a rule. Perhaps we should add a stipulation about that. >Is "4.1" a number, or two numbers? That is, does "number" refer to a >non-integer number expressed in decimal form, or to a pair of integers >separated by a dot? Can a rule number be negative, zero, irrational, >transcendental, imaginary? See also question about 3.2. 4.1 is meant to be a single number, which happens not to be an integer. 4.0 is also a single number, but it is an integer. I'll put something in about making the numbers have to be real. >> 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, >> followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. >How does a new rule acquire its position in the ruleset? Must the >part of the rule number before the dot be the same as that of the >other rules in the same group and different from that of rules in any >other group? Must rules occur in numerical order? No, obviously not, >since they don't. Must rules in any particular group occur in >numerical order? Does it matter? I don't think it matters what position they are in, though I would assume that the group they are in is specified by the proposal - though not necessarily, so if you have any ideas about what to do then, say so. >> 4.6 The Official Mailing List is >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail >> at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com >Why's this in the Rules group? Oopsie. >> 4.8 The version of the ruleset archived at >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/files/ruleset shall be the only >> official version. >Is this taken to mean no rule change takes effect until it is >administered into this file? Oopsie again. I'll just delete that rule. >> 5.0 A proposal consists of a suggested change to the game. >Exactly one change? If so, then see 1.1 for a possible problem. If >not, then see 6.6 for a possible problem. I meant it to be 'one change' in that it happens all at once, but you could change five rules and ten commentaries in one fell swoop. >>"Change to the game" is ambiguous at best -- in some Nomics it's hard >>to do better, but in this one, what about something like > A proposal consists of a suggested creation or destruction of a > Thing. >(This, if adopted without further refinement, would probably have >effects different from what your version intended. For instance, >groups and commentaries would not be able to be changed.) Hmm... how about: A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. >> 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has >> been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. >I see no prohibition of putting multiple proposals in one submission. >Is this intended? If a submission contains multiple suggested changes >is it a proposal, multiple proposals, or neither? See my answer to 5.0. It is a proposal. >> 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. >What happens to them if they do? That's a good question. Ideas, anyone? >> 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one of the Three Sacred Laws >> passes if and only if... >> 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one of the Three Sacred Laws passes >> if and only if, >What about a proposal which suggests altering two or more of the Three >Sacred Laws? Or is that not possible? I'll change those to one or more. >Is destruction "altering"? Yes. >> 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. >Which seems to suggest, no, you do NOT have to wait until the archived >ruleset is changed before a rule change takes effect. If so, in what >sense is the archived ruleset an "official version"? I agree, and will strike the 'official version' rule. >> 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or >> removing it. >If a proposal may make multiple changes, then modifying a rule can be >accomplished by removing it and adding the modified version. Is that bad? If that is what you have to do to modify a rule, it will be less common than simple addition and deletion, but I for one would not want to rule it out entirely. Do you? >> 9.0 Any in-game item is a Thing, with the exception of Therms. >> >> 9.1 Currently, the types of Things are as follows: Rules, players, >> proposals, offices, and points. >This seems redundant and/or contradictory. For example: what about >rule commentaries? They are items specified by the ruleset, hence >would seem to be Things according to 9.0, but according to 9.1 they >are not. >How about something like: > 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. > 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. Wow. Much better. >> 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. >Again: immediately, or when the official ruleset is edited? Immediately. >> 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. >What if that player is destroyed? What happens to eir Things? Hmm. I suggest that they be randomly redistributed, but I bet that would be unpopular. I will propose that as soon as we begin the game. >How is the quality of being possessed acquired or lost? Is it legal >to propose a rule which creates new Things (other than a player or a >Rule) without proposing a rule to specify how those Things acquire >possessors? Or would such a rule simply be regarded as contradicting >9.7? Very good questions. Any ideas? >> 9.8 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the >> group headed OFFICES >> >> 9.9 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. >Why not put these as the first two rules of the OFFICES group? Good idea, I will. >> 10.1 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any >> random decisions necessary. >What happens if e fails to? All rules which require or forbid things need penalties. I don't have any clue what to do for those myself; if anyone else does then speak up. >>Who tallies and keeps track of the Things? The speaker probably should, I'll add that. >>Who administers the ruleset? Well, if we delete the official version rule, anyone who feels like it. >> 10.2 The Speaker may not deregister. >What if e does? Note that the deregistration rules, which have higher >priority than this rule, specify means by which any player can >deregister. Ick. How about if we get rid of this? >> 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would increase the number of >> Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group >> headed FIRST SACRED LAW. >Does this mean no rule change may add a new rule, unless some other >Thing also is destroyed (or it's submitted as a registration >proposal)? But wouldn't that be two changes, hence prohibited by 5.0? Yes, but the way 5.0 was meant and the way I'm phrasing it for the next draft, it would be permitted. >Therefore there can be no new rules except those proposed in >registration proposals. Unless the new rule itself mandates immediate >destruction of a Thing, but if that's allowable, it's an ugly >loophole in the "a proposal is a single suggested change" idea. >Suppose rule 1.2 were destroyed, and someone proposed a "new rule" >with the same text as the destroyed rule 1.2. Its passage would >create a new rule, and a new player (if, as argued above, this could >happen only in a registration proposal). So far so good. But now >another registration proposal comes along, it passes, and at least one >new Thing is created. Indirectly, the first proposal (to restore rule >1.2) made this possible, so one could say that proposal has increased >the number of Things by 3. >I assume that's not the sort of thing you meant. Perhaps the word >"directly" before "increase" would clarify this. But what does >"directly" mean? Yeah, you're right. I'll include a directly. >> 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number >> of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and all Therms are >> destroyed. >I see no effect defined in the present rules of the creation, >existence, or destruction of Therms. Is this intended? Hmm... I thought I included a bit about how they appear, and I will rephrase that as 'the number of Therms is set to zero.' at the end. >> 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule, >> the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. >By what means is it determined that such conflicts exist? And in >general, by what means are actions of disputed legality handled? I don't see a need to put a judiciary in the initial ruleset, though I would encourage proposals of them when we begin, and I will support any decent ones. >If a rule in one of the TSLs conflicts with another rule in one of the >TSLs, then what does "the rule in the Sacred Law" refer to? >Probably what was intended that 3.2 would apply in this case, but it >would reduce ambiguity to replace "another rule" with "a rule not in >one of the TSLs". I will do so. > 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number > takes precedence. Is, e.g., 4.10 lower or higher than 4.9? Since 4.10 = 4.1, it is a lower number. From rsholmes@m... Mon Apr 08 19:13:14 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 9 Apr 2002 02:13:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 2893 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2002 02:13:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 9 Apr 2002 02:13:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Apr 2002 02:13:08 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00833413@m...>; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 22:13:08 -0400 Received: (from rsholmes@localhost) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id WAA10147; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 22:13:07 -0400 (EDT) To: Subject: Re: [Thermo] Ruleset comments (was Re: [n_omic] SPAM: ThermodyNomic) References: Date: 08 Apr 2002 22:13:07 -0400 In-Reply-To: "Craig"'s message of "Mon, 8 Apr 2002 17:56:03 -0400" Message-ID: Lines: 14 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=38226324 X-Yahoo-Profile: rsholmes Most of my comments and questions, of course, addressed fairly minor things. But this ruleset is missing two things which, I believe, ought to be present in at least rudimentary form in any ruleset: a graceful way to transfer responsibilities when necessary (with or without the cooperation of the person whose responsibilities are being transferred), and a judicial system. Neither needs to be very elaborate at the start, but I absolutely believe it's a mistake to omit them and hope they'll be defined once the game gets going. All too many Nomics have died in infancy due to a lack of one or the other. -- - Rich Holmes Syracuse, NY From ragnarok@p... Tue Apr 09 17:37:15 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: raganok@i... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 10 Apr 2002 00:37:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 31179 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2002 00:37:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Apr 2002 00:37:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO intrex.net) (209.42.192.250) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Apr 2002 00:37:12 -0000 Received: from Craig [209.42.200.90] by intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id A9553232013C; Tue, 09 Apr 2002 20:37:41 -0400 To: Subject: RE: [Thermo] Ruleset comments (was Re: [n_omic] SPAM: ThermodyNomic) Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:37:19 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: X-eGroups-From: "Craig" From: "Craig" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl I meant to post this to the group, but have gotten unused to sensible reply policies in Nomic and hit the wrong reply button. -----Original Message----- From: Craig [mailto:raganok@i...] Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 6:19 PM To: rsholmes@m... Subject: RE: [Thermo] Ruleset comments (was Re: [n_omic] SPAM: ThermodyNomic) >Most of my comments and questions, of course, addressed fairly minor >things. But this ruleset is missing two things which, I believe, >ought to be present in at least rudimentary form in any ruleset: a >graceful way to transfer responsibilities when necessary (with or >without the cooperation of the person whose responsibilities are being >transferred), and a judicial system. Neither needs to be very >elaborate at the start, but I absolutely believe it's a mistake to >omit them and hope they'll be defined once the game gets going. All >too many Nomics have died in infancy due to a lack of one or the >other. I will modify the initial rules to allow proposals to change the possessor of Things. I currently have no ideas for a judiciary, and at the point where we start suggesting ideas and voting on which one to use, we have already begun the game. If all three of us want to start now, I don't mind doing so, but until we do start I will not add a judiciary to the initial rules unless you two can agree on its best form, and I will then add it in the form you agree on. From rsholmes@m... Wed Apr 10 07:08:07 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 10 Apr 2002 14:08:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 5719 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2002 14:07:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Apr 2002 14:07:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Apr 2002 14:07:32 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0083EE80@m...>; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:07:32 -0400 Received: (from rsholmes@localhost) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA19983; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:07:31 -0400 (EDT) To: Subject: Re: [Thermo] Ruleset comments (was Re: [n_omic] SPAM: ThermodyNomic) References: Date: 10 Apr 2002 10:07:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: "Craig"'s message of "Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:37:19 -0400" Message-ID: Lines: 15 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=38226324 X-Yahoo-Profile: rsholmes "Craig" writes: > I will modify the initial rules to allow proposals to change the possessor > of Things. By "transfer of responsibility" I mean procedures to continue the game if the Speaker wants to resign, or disappears, or fails to execute eir duties. Lack of such has killed numerous Nomics early. I would not advise starting with any fewer than five or so players, preferably more. -- - Rich Holmes Syracuse, NY From ragnarok@p... Wed Apr 10 07:53:24 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: raganok@i... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 10 Apr 2002 14:53:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 45260 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2002 14:40:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 10 Apr 2002 14:40:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO intrex.net) (209.42.192.250) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Apr 2002 14:40:27 -0000 Received: from Craig [209.42.200.90] by intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id AEFE1DE9012C; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:41:02 -0400 To: Subject: RE: [Thermo] Ruleset comments (was Re: [n_omic] SPAM: ThermodyNomic) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:40:37 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: X-eGroups-From: "Craig" From: "Craig" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl >> I will modify the initial rules to allow proposals to change the possessor >> of Things. >By "transfer of responsibility" I mean procedures to continue the game >if the Speaker wants to resign, or disappears, or fails to execute eir >duties. Lack of such has killed numerous Nomics early. And is there a better way to do that than to have the Speaker change, which means changing the posessor of the Office? >I would not advise starting with any fewer than five or so players, >preferably more. Neither would I, but it would be unnomical for me to refuse to start if everybody else wanted to. I'm glad to see they don't. From thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Sun Apr 14 23:46:02 2002 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13028 invoked by uid 7800); 15 Apr 2002 06:46:02 -0000 Date: 15 Apr 2002 06:46:02 -0000 Message-ID: <1018853162.84661721.31249.m12@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files X-Yahoo-Group-Post: system From: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - ruleset MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit T h e r m o d y N o m i c R u l e s e t Please note that this is a draft, and is not necessarily the exact ruleset text we will use when we begin the game. THERMODYNOMIC 0.0 The full name of this game of Nomic shall be 'ThermodyNomic'. 0.1 Those who need a shorter name for this Nomic may refer to it by the nickname 'Thermo'. 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to kill it. 0.3 To ensure that random selections really are random, HotBits (accessible at http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/) shall be used whenever anything random is called for. 0.4 The Official Mailing List is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com THE RULESET 4.0 A rule is a single sentence. 4.1 Every rule shall include a real number which uniquely identifies it. 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. 4.3 The commentary within a group of rules shall not affect what is and is not legal. 4.4 Anything not prohibited by the rules is permitted. 4.5 The Ruleset shall consist of all groups of rules. 4.6 A group of rules is not a Thing, it is a collection of Things. Comment: Groups of rules serve as a coherent whole, acting as a single rule would in most Nomics. However, individual rules are not ammendable, but groups are, so it is helpful to have short individual rules. PROPOSALS 5.0 A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. 5.1 A proposal belongs to the person who submits it. 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. 5.3 A proposal may expire in only as directed in the rules within the group headed by the word PROPOSALS. 5.4 A proposal expires if all players vote on it. 5.5 A legal vote consists of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. 5.6 To vote on a proposal, a player must announce what pending proposal they are voting on and how they choose to vote. 5.7 A proposal expires if one week has passed since it was submitted. 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. Comment: This defines the process of submitting proposals, and voting on them. CHANGING THE GAMESTATE 6.0 The Three Sacred Laws are the groups of rules headed FIRST SACRED LAW, SECOND SACRED LAW, and THIRD SACRED LAW. 6.1 A proposal may pass only as defined in the rules within the group headed by the phrase CHANGING THE GAMESTATE. 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. 6.5 No changes to the gamestate may occur except as defined in the ruleset. 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or removing it. 6.7 Destruction of a Thing shall be considered to alter that thing, but not modify it. Comment: This defines what a proposal is and what is needed for a proposal to pass. 6.7 clarifies why you can destroy a rule but not rewrite the TSLs with a single dissenting vote despite 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. DEREGISTRATION 7.0 A player is someone who has registered more recently than ey has deregistered. 7.1 A player may deregister by announcing that ey wishes to do so. 7.2 A player deregisters if ey fails to post a message to the official mailing list in a week. 7.3 Whenever a player deregisters, one of eir points is destroyed, while the rest are distributed randomly among all players. Comment: This defines how to not be a player. REGISTRATION 8.0 A proposal submitted by a non-player is called a registration proposal. 8.1 Nobody may submit a registration proposal if a registration propsal ey submitted is currently a pending proposal. 8.2 A person who submits a registration proposal which subsequently passes is considered to have registered. Comment: This group of rules prevents a player who does not have any good ideas from joining. THINGS 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. 9.2 No new type of Thing may be created without adding it to the list of Things. 9.3 Whenever a Thing is destroyed, the number of Therms is increased by one. 9.4 A player who deregisters is considered to have been destroyed. 9.5 A player who is destroyed automatically deregisters. 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. Comment: This defines Things. OFFICES 10.0 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the group headed OFFICES 10.1 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. 10.2 An office exists known as the Office of the Speaker, whose possessor shall be called the Speaker. 10.3 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any random decisions necessary. 10.4 The Speaker shall also be in charge of keeping track of Things. Comment: This group lists offices, of which the initial ruleset only has one. FIRST SACRED LAW 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would directly increase the number of Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group headed FIRST SACRED LAW. 1.2 A Registration Proposal may, if passed, increase the number of Things in the game by up to two, one of which is of course the player who submits that proposal. 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the removed Things of that type are destroyed. Comment: The number of things can only increase when the game is influenced by external people. SECOND SACRED LAW 2.1 Any player who submits a proposal that would destroy at least three Things recieves a point if that proposal passes. 2.2 If two weeks have gone by without a proposal passing, a Thing is chosen at random and destroyed. Comment: Without external influence, the number of Things may slowly decrease as they are replaced by Therms. THIRD SACRED LAW 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule which is not in one of the Three Sacred Laws, the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number takes precedence. 3.3 No proposal to alter one of the Three Sacred Laws may pass if any player votes against the proposal. Comment: This makes sure the Three Sacred Laws remain inviolate. It has some redundancies, but they are a safety net in case parts of the Second Sacred Law destroy the other locations of them. From ragnarok@p... Fri Apr 19 05:25:32 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: raganok@i... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 19 Apr 2002 12:25:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 50842 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2002 12:25:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Apr 2002 12:25:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO intrex.net) (209.42.192.250) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Apr 2002 12:25:30 -0000 Received: from Craig [209.42.200.90] by intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id ACC3536A0124; Fri, 19 Apr 2002 08:25:39 -0400 To: Subject: Suggested Judicial System Rules Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 08:25:39 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-eGroups-From: "Craig" From: "Craig" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl If y'all don't mind, I will add this to the starting rules of Thermo: JUDGEMENT 11.0 Any player may post a message containing a clearly labelled Call For Judgement. 11.1 A Call For Judgement must be a statement which does not concern any other Call For Judgement. 11.2 When a Call For Judgement is issued, the Speaker shall randomly choose a player, who shall be known as the Judge. 11.3 The Judge of a Call For Judgement must be a player other than the one who posted the Call For Judgement. 11.4 The Judge of a Call For Judgement shall post a message indicating whether ey judges it to be true or false. 11.5 The statement of a Judge shall be binding, unless it is appealed. 11.6 Calls For Judgement shall be appealed only as defined by the rules in the group headed APPEALS. Comment: This group lays the groundwork for Calls For Judgement. APPEALS 12.0 When a player feels that a Call For Judgement ey has issued has been judged unfairly, ey may post a message announcing eir intent to appeal it. 12.1 When a player appeals a Call For Judgement, three players, to be known as Appelate Justices, shall be randomly chosen, who shall not include the Judge or the player who called the Call For Judgement. 12.2 All Appelate Justices shall announce whether they consider the Call For Judgement in question to be true or false. (4 pi) The decision of the majority of Appelate Justices shall be binding, and not subject to appeal. Comment: This allows for Calls For Judgement to be appealed. PAST JUDGEMENTS 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not appealed within two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the sentences of the Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset in the group headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for said group. 13.1 When a rule is added to PAST JUDGEMENTS, its number must be higher than any previously existing rule. Comment: From thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Sun Apr 28 03:10:33 2002 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 58137 invoked by uid 7800); 28 Apr 2002 10:10:33 -0000 Date: 28 Apr 2002 10:10:33 -0000 Message-ID: <1019988633.10533004.90288.m12@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files X-Yahoo-Group-Post: system From: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - ruleset MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit T h e r m o d y N o m i c R u l e s e t Please note that this is a draft, and is not necessarily the exact ruleset text we will use when we begin the game. THERMODYNOMIC 0.0 The full name of this game of Nomic shall be 'ThermodyNomic'. 0.1 Those who need a shorter name for this Nomic may refer to it by the nickname 'Thermo'. 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to kill it. 0.3 To ensure that random selections really are random, HotBits (accessible at http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/) shall be used whenever anything random is called for. 0.4 The Official Mailing List is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com THE RULESET 4.0 A rule is a single sentence. 4.1 Every rule shall include a real number which uniquely identifies it. 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. 4.3 The commentary within a group of rules shall not affect what is and is not legal. 4.4 Anything not prohibited by the rules is permitted. 4.5 The Ruleset shall consist of all groups of rules. 4.6 A group of rules is not a Thing, it is a collection of Things. Comment: Groups of rules serve as a coherent whole, acting as a single rule would in most Nomics. However, individual rules are not ammendable, but groups are, so it is helpful to have short individual rules. PROPOSALS 5.0 A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. 5.1 A proposal belongs to the person who submits it. 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. 5.3 A proposal may expire in only as directed in the rules within the group headed by the word PROPOSALS. 5.4 A proposal expires if all players vote on it. 5.5 A legal vote consists of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. 5.6 To vote on a proposal, a player must announce what pending proposal they are voting on and how they choose to vote. 5.7 A proposal expires if one week has passed since it was submitted. 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. Comment: This defines the process of submitting proposals, and voting on them. CHANGING THE GAMESTATE 6.0 The Three Sacred Laws are the groups of rules headed FIRST SACRED LAW, SECOND SACRED LAW, and THIRD SACRED LAW. 6.1 A proposal may pass only as defined in the rules within the group headed by the phrase CHANGING THE GAMESTATE. 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. 6.5 No changes to the gamestate may occur except as defined in the ruleset. 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or removing it. 6.7 Destruction of a Thing shall be considered to alter that thing, but not modify it. Comment: This defines what a proposal is and what is needed for a proposal to pass. 6.7 clarifies why you can destroy a rule but not rewrite the TSLs with a single dissenting vote despite 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. DEREGISTRATION 7.0 A player is someone who has registered more recently than ey has deregistered. 7.1 A player may deregister by announcing that ey wishes to do so. 7.2 A player deregisters if ey fails to post a message to the official mailing list in a week. 7.3 Whenever a player deregisters, one of eir points is destroyed, while the rest are distributed randomly among all players. Comment: This defines how to not be a player. REGISTRATION 8.0 A proposal submitted by a non-player is called a registration proposal. 8.1 Nobody may submit a registration proposal if a registration propsal ey submitted is currently a pending proposal. 8.2 A person who submits a registration proposal which subsequently passes is considered to have registered. Comment: This group of rules prevents a player who does not have any good ideas from joining. THINGS 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. 9.2 No new type of Thing may be created without adding it to the list of Things. 9.3 Whenever a Thing is destroyed, the number of Therms is increased by one. 9.4 A player who deregisters is considered to have been destroyed. 9.5 A player who is destroyed automatically deregisters. 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. Comment: This defines Things. OFFICES 10.0 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the group headed OFFICES 10.1 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. 10.2 An office exists known as the Office of the Speaker, whose possessor shall be called the Speaker. 10.3 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any random decisions necessary. 10.4 The Speaker shall also be in charge of keeping track of Things. Comment: This group lists offices, of which the initial ruleset only has one. JUDGEMENT 11.0 Any player may post a message containing a clearly labelled Call For Judgement. 11.1 A Call For Judgement must be a statement which does not concern any other Call For Judgement. 11.2 When a Call For Judgement is issued, the Speaker shall randomly choose a player, who shall be known as the Judge. 11.3 The Judge of a Call For Judgement must be a player other than the one who posted the Call For Judgement. 11.4 The Judge of a Call For Judgement shall post a message indicating whether ey judges it to be true or false. 11.5 The statement of a Judge shall be binding, unless it is appealed. 11.6 Calls For Judgement shall be appealed only as defined by the rules in the group headed APPEALS. Comment: This group lays the groundwork for Calls For Judgement. APPEALS 12.0 When a player feels that a Call For Judgement ey has issued has been judged unfairly, ey may post a message announcing eir intent to appeal it. 12.1 When a player appeals a Call For Judgement, three players, to be known as Appelate Justices, shall be randomly chosen, who shall not include the Judge or the player who called the Call For Judgement. 12.2 All Appelate Justices shall announce whether they consider the Call For Judgement in question to be true or false. (4 pi) The decision of the majority of Appelate Justices shall be binding, and not subject to appeal. Comment: This allows for Calls For Judgement to be appealed. PAST JUDGEMENTS 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not appealed within two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the sentences of the Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset in the group headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for said group. 13.1 When a rule is added to PAST JUDGEMENTS, its number must be higher than any previously existing rule. Comment: FIRST SACRED LAW 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would directly increase the number of Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group headed FIRST SACRED LAW. 1.2 A Registration Proposal may, if passed, increase the number of Things in the game by up to two, one of which is of course the player who submits that proposal. 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the removed Things of that type are destroyed. Comment: The number of things can only increase when the game is influenced by external people. SECOND SACRED LAW 2.1 Any player who submits a proposal that would destroy at least three Things recieves a point if that proposal passes. 2.2 If two weeks have gone by without a proposal passing, a Thing is chosen at random and destroyed. Comment: Without external influence, the number of Things may slowly decrease as they are replaced by Therms. THIRD SACRED LAW 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule which is not in one of the Three Sacred Laws, the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number takes precedence. 3.3 No proposal to alter one of the Three Sacred Laws may pass if any player votes against the proposal. Comment: This makes sure the Three Sacred Laws remain inviolate. It has some redundancies, but they are a safety net in case parts of the Second Sacred Law destroy the other locations of them. From thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Wed May 15 01:18:32 2002 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 79442 invoked by uid 7800); 15 May 2002 08:18:32 -0000 Date: 15 May 2002 08:18:32 -0000 Message-ID: <1021450712.263011668.17481.m12@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files X-Yahoo-Group-Post: system From: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - ruleset MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit T h e r m o d y N o m i c R u l e s e t Please note that this is a draft, and is not necessarily the exact ruleset text we will use when we begin the game. THERMODYNOMIC 0.0 The full name of this game of Nomic shall be 'ThermodyNomic'. 0.1 Those who need a shorter name for this Nomic may refer to it by the nickname 'Thermo'. 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to kill it. 0.3 To ensure that random selections really are random, HotBits (accessible at http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/) shall be used whenever anything random is called for. 0.4 The Official Mailing List is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com THE RULESET 4.0 A rule is a single sentence. 4.1 Every rule shall include a real number which uniquely identifies it. 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. 4.3 The commentary within a group of rules shall not affect what is and is not legal. 4.4 Anything not prohibited by the rules is permitted. 4.5 The Ruleset shall consist of all groups of rules. 4.6 A group of rules is not a Thing, it is a collection of Things. Comment: Groups of rules serve as a coherent whole, acting as a single rule would in most Nomics. However, individual rules are not ammendable, but groups are, so it is helpful to have short individual rules. PROPOSALS 5.0 A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. 5.1 A proposal belongs to the person who submits it. 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. 5.3 A proposal may expire in only as directed in the rules within the group headed by the word PROPOSALS. 5.4 A proposal expires if all players vote on it. 5.5 A legal vote consists of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. 5.6 To vote on a proposal, a player must announce what pending proposal they are voting on and how they choose to vote. 5.7 A proposal expires if one week has passed since it was submitted. 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. Comment: This defines the process of submitting proposals, and voting on them. CHANGING THE GAMESTATE 6.0 The Three Sacred Laws are the groups of rules headed FIRST SACRED LAW, SECOND SACRED LAW, and THIRD SACRED LAW. 6.1 A proposal may pass only as defined in the rules within the group headed by the phrase CHANGING THE GAMESTATE. 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. 6.5 No changes to the gamestate may occur except as defined in the ruleset. 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or removing it. 6.7 Destruction of a Thing shall be considered to alter that thing, but not modify it. Comment: This defines what a proposal is and what is needed for a proposal to pass. 6.7 clarifies why you can destroy a rule but not rewrite the TSLs with a single dissenting vote despite 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. DEREGISTRATION 7.0 A player is someone who has registered more recently than ey has deregistered. 7.1 A player may deregister by announcing that ey wishes to do so. 7.2 A player deregisters if ey fails to post a message to the official mailing list in a week. 7.3 Whenever a player deregisters, one of eir points is destroyed, while the rest are distributed randomly among all players. Comment: This defines how to not be a player. REGISTRATION 8.0 A proposal submitted by a non-player is called a registration proposal. 8.1 Nobody may submit a registration proposal if a registration propsal ey submitted is currently a pending proposal. 8.2 A person who submits a registration proposal which subsequently passes is considered to have registered. Comment: This group of rules prevents a player who does not have any good ideas from joining. THINGS 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. 9.2 No new type of Thing may be created without adding it to the list of Things. 9.3 Whenever a Thing is destroyed, the number of Therms is increased by one. 9.4 A player who deregisters is considered to have been destroyed. 9.5 A player who is destroyed automatically deregisters. 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. Comment: This defines Things. OFFICES 10.0 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the group headed OFFICES 10.1 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. 10.2 An office exists known as the Office of the Speaker, whose possessor shall be called the Speaker. 10.3 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any random decisions necessary. 10.4 The Speaker shall also be in charge of keeping track of Things. Comment: This group lists offices, of which the initial ruleset only has one. JUDGEMENT 11.0 Any player may post a message containing a clearly labelled Call For Judgement. 11.1 A Call For Judgement must be a statement which does not concern any other Call For Judgement. 11.2 When a Call For Judgement is issued, the Speaker shall randomly choose a player, who shall be known as the Judge. 11.3 The Judge of a Call For Judgement must be a player other than the one who posted the Call For Judgement. 11.4 The Judge of a Call For Judgement shall post a message indicating whether ey judges it to be true or false. 11.5 The statement of a Judge shall be binding, unless it is appealed. 11.6 Calls For Judgement shall be appealed only as defined by the rules in the group headed APPEALS. Comment: This group lays the groundwork for Calls For Judgement. APPEALS 12.0 When a player feels that a Call For Judgement ey has issued has been judged unfairly, ey may post a message announcing eir intent to appeal it. 12.1 When a player appeals a Call For Judgement, three players, to be known as Appelate Justices, shall be randomly chosen, who shall not include the Judge or the player who called the Call For Judgement. 12.2 All Appelate Justices shall announce whether they consider the Call For Judgement in question to be true or false. (4 pi) The decision of the majority of Appelate Justices shall be binding, and not subject to appeal. Comment: This allows for Calls For Judgement to be appealed. PAST JUDGEMENTS 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not appealed within two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the sentences of the Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset in the group headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for said group. 13.1 When a rule is added to PAST JUDGEMENTS, its number must be higher than any previously existing rule. Comment: FIRST SACRED LAW 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would directly increase the number of Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group headed FIRST SACRED LAW. 1.2 A Registration Proposal may, if passed, increase the number of Things in the game by up to two, one of which is of course the player who submits that proposal. 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the removed Things of that type are destroyed. Comment: The number of things can only increase when the game is influenced by external people. SECOND SACRED LAW 2.1 Any player who submits a proposal that would destroy at least three Things recieves a point if that proposal passes. 2.2 If two weeks have gone by without a proposal passing, a Thing is chosen at random and destroyed. Comment: Without external influence, the number of Things may slowly decrease as they are replaced by Therms. THIRD SACRED LAW 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule which is not in one of the Three Sacred Laws, the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number takes precedence. 3.3 No proposal to alter one of the Three Sacred Laws may pass if any player votes against the proposal. Comment: This makes sure the Three Sacred Laws remain inviolate. It has some redundancies, but they are a safety net in case parts of the Second Sacred Law destroy the other locations of them. From thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Tue May 28 23:38:10 2002 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23336 invoked by uid 7800); 29 May 2002 06:38:10 -0000 Date: 29 May 2002 06:38:10 -0000 Message-ID: <1022654290.256989229.87150.m12@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files X-Yahoo-Group-Post: system From: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - ruleset MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit T h e r m o d y N o m i c R u l e s e t Please note that this is a draft, and is not necessarily the exact ruleset text we will use when we begin the game. THERMODYNOMIC 0.0 The full name of this game of Nomic shall be 'ThermodyNomic'. 0.1 Those who need a shorter name for this Nomic may refer to it by the nickname 'Thermo'. 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to kill it. 0.3 To ensure that random selections really are random, HotBits (accessible at http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/) shall be used whenever anything random is called for. 0.4 The Official Mailing List is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com THE RULESET 4.0 A rule is a single sentence. 4.1 Every rule shall include a real number which uniquely identifies it. 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. 4.3 The commentary within a group of rules shall not affect what is and is not legal. 4.4 Anything not prohibited by the rules is permitted. 4.5 The Ruleset shall consist of all groups of rules. 4.6 A group of rules is not a Thing, it is a collection of Things. Comment: Groups of rules serve as a coherent whole, acting as a single rule would in most Nomics. However, individual rules are not ammendable, but groups are, so it is helpful to have short individual rules. PROPOSALS 5.0 A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. 5.1 A proposal belongs to the person who submits it. 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. 5.3 A proposal may expire in only as directed in the rules within the group headed by the word PROPOSALS. 5.4 A proposal expires if all players vote on it. 5.5 A legal vote consists of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. 5.6 To vote on a proposal, a player must announce what pending proposal they are voting on and how they choose to vote. 5.7 A proposal expires if one week has passed since it was submitted. 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. Comment: This defines the process of submitting proposals, and voting on them. CHANGING THE GAMESTATE 6.0 The Three Sacred Laws are the groups of rules headed FIRST SACRED LAW, SECOND SACRED LAW, and THIRD SACRED LAW. 6.1 A proposal may pass only as defined in the rules within the group headed by the phrase CHANGING THE GAMESTATE. 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. 6.5 No changes to the gamestate may occur except as defined in the ruleset. 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or removing it. 6.7 Destruction of a Thing shall be considered to alter that thing, but not modify it. Comment: This defines what a proposal is and what is needed for a proposal to pass. 6.7 clarifies why you can destroy a rule but not rewrite the TSLs with a single dissenting vote despite 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. DEREGISTRATION 7.0 A player is someone who has registered more recently than ey has deregistered. 7.1 A player may deregister by announcing that ey wishes to do so. 7.2 A player deregisters if ey fails to post a message to the official mailing list in a week. 7.3 Whenever a player deregisters, one of eir points is destroyed, while the rest are distributed randomly among all players. Comment: This defines how to not be a player. REGISTRATION 8.0 A proposal submitted by a non-player is called a registration proposal. 8.1 Nobody may submit a registration proposal if a registration propsal ey submitted is currently a pending proposal. 8.2 A person who submits a registration proposal which subsequently passes is considered to have registered. Comment: This group of rules prevents a player who does not have any good ideas from joining. THINGS 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. 9.2 No new type of Thing may be created without adding it to the list of Things. 9.3 Whenever a Thing is destroyed, the number of Therms is increased by one. 9.4 A player who deregisters is considered to have been destroyed. 9.5 A player who is destroyed automatically deregisters. 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. Comment: This defines Things. OFFICES 10.0 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the group headed OFFICES 10.1 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. 10.2 An office exists known as the Office of the Speaker, whose possessor shall be called the Speaker. 10.3 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any random decisions necessary. 10.4 The Speaker shall also be in charge of keeping track of Things. Comment: This group lists offices, of which the initial ruleset only has one. JUDGEMENT 11.0 Any player may post a message containing a clearly labelled Call For Judgement. 11.1 A Call For Judgement must be a statement which does not concern any other Call For Judgement. 11.2 When a Call For Judgement is issued, the Speaker shall randomly choose a player, who shall be known as the Judge. 11.3 The Judge of a Call For Judgement must be a player other than the one who posted the Call For Judgement. 11.4 The Judge of a Call For Judgement shall post a message indicating whether ey judges it to be true or false. 11.5 The statement of a Judge shall be binding, unless it is appealed. 11.6 Calls For Judgement shall be appealed only as defined by the rules in the group headed APPEALS. Comment: This group lays the groundwork for Calls For Judgement. APPEALS 12.0 When a player feels that a Call For Judgement ey has issued has been judged unfairly, ey may post a message announcing eir intent to appeal it. 12.1 When a player appeals a Call For Judgement, three players, to be known as Appelate Justices, shall be randomly chosen, who shall not include the Judge or the player who called the Call For Judgement. 12.2 All Appelate Justices shall announce whether they consider the Call For Judgement in question to be true or false. (4 pi) The decision of the majority of Appelate Justices shall be binding, and not subject to appeal. Comment: This allows for Calls For Judgement to be appealed. PAST JUDGEMENTS 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not appealed within two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the sentences of the Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset in the group headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for said group. 13.1 When a rule is added to PAST JUDGEMENTS, its number must be higher than any previously existing rule. Comment: FIRST SACRED LAW 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would directly increase the number of Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group headed FIRST SACRED LAW. 1.2 A Registration Proposal may, if passed, increase the number of Things in the game by up to two, one of which is of course the player who submits that proposal. 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the removed Things of that type are destroyed. Comment: The number of things can only increase when the game is influenced by external people. SECOND SACRED LAW 2.1 Any player who submits a proposal that would destroy at least three Things recieves a point if that proposal passes. 2.2 If two weeks have gone by without a proposal passing, a Thing is chosen at random and destroyed. Comment: Without external influence, the number of Things may slowly decrease as they are replaced by Therms. THIRD SACRED LAW 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule which is not in one of the Three Sacred Laws, the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number takes precedence. 3.3 No proposal to alter one of the Three Sacred Laws may pass if any player votes against the proposal. Comment: This makes sure the Three Sacred Laws remain inviolate. It has some redundancies, but they are a safety net in case parts of the Second Sacred Law destroy the other locations of them. From kellyia@e... Tue Jun 04 15:40:32 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: kellyia@e... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_2); 4 Jun 2002 22:40:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 81300 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2002 22:40:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 Jun 2002 22:40:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n15.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.70) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Jun 2002 22:40:31 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.183] by n15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jun 2002 22:40:31 -0000 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 22:40:31 -0000 To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: File - ruleset Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1022654290.256989229.87150.m12@yahoogroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1540 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "peristarkawan" X-Originating-IP: 159.28.32.35 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=100035622 X-Yahoo-Profile: peristarkawan > 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. > > 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. If the number of votes cast FOR a proposal exceed the number of AGAINST / ABSTAIN votes at any given time before it expires, does the proposal pass? Perhaps these would be clearer if they read, "at the time it expires". > 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not appealed within > two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the sentences of the > Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset in the group > headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for said group. What about Judgements which are appealed and found true? Shouldn't these be added to the ruleset as well? > 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. What is the number of Therms initially? > 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the removed Things of that type are destroyed. I don't understand what this rule is supposed to do. The removed Things of what type? Ian Kelly kellyia@e... From ragnarok@p... Tue Jun 04 18:52:43 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: raganok@i... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_2); 5 Jun 2002 01:52:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 81726 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2002 01:52:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Jun 2002 01:52:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO intrex.net) (209.42.192.250) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Jun 2002 01:52:42 -0000 Received: from Craig [209.42.200.182] by intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id AEE91F7C01BC; Tue, 04 Jun 2002 21:52:41 -0400 To: Subject: RE: [Thermo] Re: File - ruleset Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 21:52:42 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-eGroups-From: "Craig" From: "Craig" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=48763382 X-Yahoo-Profile: kreig_daniyl >> 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of >the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it >expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of >votes cast AGAINST it. >> >> 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the >Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, by the time it expires, >the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN >votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. >If the number of votes cast FOR a proposal exceed the number >of AGAINST / ABSTAIN votes at any given time before it expires, >does the proposal pass? Perhaps these would be clearer if they >read, "at the time it expires". I agree. I will make this change. >> 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not >appealed within >> two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the >sentences of the >> Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset >in the group >> headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for >said group. >What about Judgements which are appealed and found true? >Shouldn't these be added to the ruleset as well? My thinking is that they are not seen as already true by everyone. I will go with whatever the group thinks, though, as I do not feel particularly dictatorial about my draft ruleset. >> 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms >exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve >a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. >What is the number of Therms initially? I had been assuming it would be zero. But this is definitely negotiable. >> 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the >removed Things of that type are destroyed. >I don't understand what this rule is supposed to do. The >removed Things of what type? Hmm, that is a bit unclear. Any ideas for rephrasing? Amazingly, this is legal. --Craig Daniel 'If it takes all the future, well live through the past If the phone doesn't ring, it's me.' -Jimmy Buffett pgp public key ID: 0x5C3A1E74 (old), 0x22C68020 (new) From thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Wed Jun 12 15:12:11 2002 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 91198 invoked by uid 7800); 12 Jun 2002 22:12:11 -0000 Date: 12 Jun 2002 22:12:10 -0000 Message-ID: <1023919931.313030349.47038.m12@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files X-Yahoo-Group-Post: system From: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - ruleset MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit T h e r m o d y N o m i c R u l e s e t Please note that this is a draft, and is not necessarily the exact ruleset text we will use when we begin the game. THERMODYNOMIC 0.0 The full name of this game of Nomic shall be 'ThermodyNomic'. 0.1 Those who need a shorter name for this Nomic may refer to it by the nickname 'Thermo'. 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to kill it. 0.3 To ensure that random selections really are random, HotBits (accessible at http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/) shall be used whenever anything random is called for. 0.4 The Official Mailing List is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com THE RULESET 4.0 A rule is a single sentence. 4.1 Every rule shall include a real number which uniquely identifies it. 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. 4.3 The commentary within a group of rules shall not affect what is and is not legal. 4.4 Anything not prohibited by the rules is permitted. 4.5 The Ruleset shall consist of all groups of rules. 4.6 A group of rules is not a Thing, it is a collection of Things. Comment: Groups of rules serve as a coherent whole, acting as a single rule would in most Nomics. However, individual rules are not ammendable, but groups are, so it is helpful to have short individual rules. PROPOSALS 5.0 A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. 5.1 A proposal belongs to the person who submits it. 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. 5.3 A proposal may expire in only as directed in the rules within the group headed by the word PROPOSALS. 5.4 A proposal expires if all players vote on it. 5.5 A legal vote consists of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. 5.6 To vote on a proposal, a player must announce what pending proposal they are voting on and how they choose to vote. 5.7 A proposal expires if one week has passed since it was submitted. 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. Comment: This defines the process of submitting proposals, and voting on them. CHANGING THE GAMESTATE 6.0 The Three Sacred Laws are the groups of rules headed FIRST SACRED LAW, SECOND SACRED LAW, and THIRD SACRED LAW. 6.1 A proposal may pass only as defined in the rules within the group headed by the phrase CHANGING THE GAMESTATE. 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. 6.5 No changes to the gamestate may occur except as defined in the ruleset. 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or removing it. 6.7 Destruction of a Thing shall be considered to alter that thing, but not modify it. Comment: This defines what a proposal is and what is needed for a proposal to pass. 6.7 clarifies why you can destroy a rule but not rewrite the TSLs with a single dissenting vote despite 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. DEREGISTRATION 7.0 A player is someone who has registered more recently than ey has deregistered. 7.1 A player may deregister by announcing that ey wishes to do so. 7.2 A player deregisters if ey fails to post a message to the official mailing list in a week. 7.3 Whenever a player deregisters, one of eir points is destroyed, while the rest are distributed randomly among all players. Comment: This defines how to not be a player. REGISTRATION 8.0 A proposal submitted by a non-player is called a registration proposal. 8.1 Nobody may submit a registration proposal if a registration propsal ey submitted is currently a pending proposal. 8.2 A person who submits a registration proposal which subsequently passes is considered to have registered. Comment: This group of rules prevents a player who does not have any good ideas from joining. THINGS 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. 9.2 No new type of Thing may be created without adding it to the list of Things. 9.3 Whenever a Thing is destroyed, the number of Therms is increased by one. 9.4 A player who deregisters is considered to have been destroyed. 9.5 A player who is destroyed automatically deregisters. 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. Comment: This defines Things. OFFICES 10.0 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the group headed OFFICES 10.1 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. 10.2 An office exists known as the Office of the Speaker, whose possessor shall be called the Speaker. 10.3 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any random decisions necessary. 10.4 The Speaker shall also be in charge of keeping track of Things. Comment: This group lists offices, of which the initial ruleset only has one. JUDGEMENT 11.0 Any player may post a message containing a clearly labelled Call For Judgement. 11.1 A Call For Judgement must be a statement which does not concern any other Call For Judgement. 11.2 When a Call For Judgement is issued, the Speaker shall randomly choose a player, who shall be known as the Judge. 11.3 The Judge of a Call For Judgement must be a player other than the one who posted the Call For Judgement. 11.4 The Judge of a Call For Judgement shall post a message indicating whether ey judges it to be true or false. 11.5 The statement of a Judge shall be binding, unless it is appealed. 11.6 Calls For Judgement shall be appealed only as defined by the rules in the group headed APPEALS. Comment: This group lays the groundwork for Calls For Judgement. APPEALS 12.0 When a player feels that a Call For Judgement ey has issued has been judged unfairly, ey may post a message announcing eir intent to appeal it. 12.1 When a player appeals a Call For Judgement, three players, to be known as Appelate Justices, shall be randomly chosen, who shall not include the Judge or the player who called the Call For Judgement. 12.2 All Appelate Justices shall announce whether they consider the Call For Judgement in question to be true or false. (4 pi) The decision of the majority of Appelate Justices shall be binding, and not subject to appeal. Comment: This allows for Calls For Judgement to be appealed. PAST JUDGEMENTS 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not appealed within two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the sentences of the Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset in the group headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for said group. 13.1 When a rule is added to PAST JUDGEMENTS, its number must be higher than any previously existing rule. Comment: FIRST SACRED LAW 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would directly increase the number of Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group headed FIRST SACRED LAW. 1.2 A Registration Proposal may, if passed, increase the number of Things in the game by up to two, one of which is of course the player who submits that proposal. 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the removed Things of that type are destroyed. Comment: The number of things can only increase when the game is influenced by external people. SECOND SACRED LAW 2.1 Any player who submits a proposal that would destroy at least three Things recieves a point if that proposal passes. 2.2 If two weeks have gone by without a proposal passing, a Thing is chosen at random and destroyed. Comment: Without external influence, the number of Things may slowly decrease as they are replaced by Therms. THIRD SACRED LAW 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule which is not in one of the Three Sacred Laws, the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number takes precedence. 3.3 No proposal to alter one of the Three Sacred Laws may pass if any player votes against the proposal. Comment: This makes sure the Three Sacred Laws remain inviolate. It has some redundancies, but they are a safety net in case parts of the Second Sacred Law destroy the other locations of them. From thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Tue Jun 25 02:42:16 2002 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7631 invoked by uid 7800); 25 Jun 2002 09:42:15 -0000 Date: 25 Jun 2002 09:42:15 -0000 Message-ID: <1024998135.181634422.77154.m12@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files X-Yahoo-Group-Post: system From: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - ruleset MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit T h e r m o d y N o m i c R u l e s e t Please note that this is a draft, and is not necessarily the exact ruleset text we will use when we begin the game. THERMODYNOMIC 0.0 The full name of this game of Nomic shall be 'ThermodyNomic'. 0.1 Those who need a shorter name for this Nomic may refer to it by the nickname 'Thermo'. 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to kill it. 0.3 To ensure that random selections really are random, HotBits (accessible at http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/) shall be used whenever anything random is called for. 0.4 The Official Mailing List is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com THE RULESET 4.0 A rule is a single sentence. 4.1 Every rule shall include a real number which uniquely identifies it. 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. 4.3 The commentary within a group of rules shall not affect what is and is not legal. 4.4 Anything not prohibited by the rules is permitted. 4.5 The Ruleset shall consist of all groups of rules. 4.6 A group of rules is not a Thing, it is a collection of Things. Comment: Groups of rules serve as a coherent whole, acting as a single rule would in most Nomics. However, individual rules are not ammendable, but groups are, so it is helpful to have short individual rules. PROPOSALS 5.0 A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. 5.1 A proposal belongs to the person who submits it. 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. 5.3 A proposal may expire in only as directed in the rules within the group headed by the word PROPOSALS. 5.4 A proposal expires if all players vote on it. 5.5 A legal vote consists of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. 5.6 To vote on a proposal, a player must announce what pending proposal they are voting on and how they choose to vote. 5.7 A proposal expires if one week has passed since it was submitted. 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. Comment: This defines the process of submitting proposals, and voting on them. CHANGING THE GAMESTATE 6.0 The Three Sacred Laws are the groups of rules headed FIRST SACRED LAW, SECOND SACRED LAW, and THIRD SACRED LAW. 6.1 A proposal may pass only as defined in the rules within the group headed by the phrase CHANGING THE GAMESTATE. 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. 6.5 No changes to the gamestate may occur except as defined in the ruleset. 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or removing it. 6.7 Destruction of a Thing shall be considered to alter that thing, but not modify it. Comment: This defines what a proposal is and what is needed for a proposal to pass. 6.7 clarifies why you can destroy a rule but not rewrite the TSLs with a single dissenting vote despite 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. DEREGISTRATION 7.0 A player is someone who has registered more recently than ey has deregistered. 7.1 A player may deregister by announcing that ey wishes to do so. 7.2 A player deregisters if ey fails to post a message to the official mailing list in a week. 7.3 Whenever a player deregisters, one of eir points is destroyed, while the rest are distributed randomly among all players. Comment: This defines how to not be a player. REGISTRATION 8.0 A proposal submitted by a non-player is called a registration proposal. 8.1 Nobody may submit a registration proposal if a registration propsal ey submitted is currently a pending proposal. 8.2 A person who submits a registration proposal which subsequently passes is considered to have registered. Comment: This group of rules prevents a player who does not have any good ideas from joining. THINGS 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. 9.2 No new type of Thing may be created without adding it to the list of Things. 9.3 Whenever a Thing is destroyed, the number of Therms is increased by one. 9.4 A player who deregisters is considered to have been destroyed. 9.5 A player who is destroyed automatically deregisters. 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. Comment: This defines Things. OFFICES 10.0 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the group headed OFFICES 10.1 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. 10.2 An office exists known as the Office of the Speaker, whose possessor shall be called the Speaker. 10.3 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any random decisions necessary. 10.4 The Speaker shall also be in charge of keeping track of Things. Comment: This group lists offices, of which the initial ruleset only has one. JUDGEMENT 11.0 Any player may post a message containing a clearly labelled Call For Judgement. 11.1 A Call For Judgement must be a statement which does not concern any other Call For Judgement. 11.2 When a Call For Judgement is issued, the Speaker shall randomly choose a player, who shall be known as the Judge. 11.3 The Judge of a Call For Judgement must be a player other than the one who posted the Call For Judgement. 11.4 The Judge of a Call For Judgement shall post a message indicating whether ey judges it to be true or false. 11.5 The statement of a Judge shall be binding, unless it is appealed. 11.6 Calls For Judgement shall be appealed only as defined by the rules in the group headed APPEALS. Comment: This group lays the groundwork for Calls For Judgement. APPEALS 12.0 When a player feels that a Call For Judgement ey has issued has been judged unfairly, ey may post a message announcing eir intent to appeal it. 12.1 When a player appeals a Call For Judgement, three players, to be known as Appelate Justices, shall be randomly chosen, who shall not include the Judge or the player who called the Call For Judgement. 12.2 All Appelate Justices shall announce whether they consider the Call For Judgement in question to be true or false. (4 pi) The decision of the majority of Appelate Justices shall be binding, and not subject to appeal. Comment: This allows for Calls For Judgement to be appealed. PAST JUDGEMENTS 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not appealed within two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the sentences of the Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset in the group headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for said group. 13.1 When a rule is added to PAST JUDGEMENTS, its number must be higher than any previously existing rule. Comment: FIRST SACRED LAW 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would directly increase the number of Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group headed FIRST SACRED LAW. 1.2 A Registration Proposal may, if passed, increase the number of Things in the game by up to two, one of which is of course the player who submits that proposal. 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the removed Things of that type are destroyed. Comment: The number of things can only increase when the game is influenced by external people. SECOND SACRED LAW 2.1 Any player who submits a proposal that would destroy at least three Things recieves a point if that proposal passes. 2.2 If two weeks have gone by without a proposal passing, a Thing is chosen at random and destroyed. Comment: Without external influence, the number of Things may slowly decrease as they are replaced by Therms. THIRD SACRED LAW 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule which is not in one of the Three Sacred Laws, the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number takes precedence. 3.3 No proposal to alter one of the Three Sacred Laws may pass if any player votes against the proposal. Comment: This makes sure the Three Sacred Laws remain inviolate. It has some redundancies, but they are a safety net in case parts of the Second Sacred Law destroy the other locations of them. From thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Mon Jul 08 22:26:39 2002 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 69382 invoked by uid 7800); 9 Jul 2002 05:26:39 -0000 Date: 9 Jul 2002 05:26:39 -0000 Message-ID: <1026192399.166298167.18562.m12@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files X-Yahoo-Group-Post: system From: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - ruleset MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit T h e r m o d y N o m i c R u l e s e t Please note that this is a draft, and is not necessarily the exact ruleset text we will use when we begin the game. THERMODYNOMIC 0.0 The full name of this game of Nomic shall be 'ThermodyNomic'. 0.1 Those who need a shorter name for this Nomic may refer to it by the nickname 'Thermo'. 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to kill it. 0.3 To ensure that random selections really are random, HotBits (accessible at http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/) shall be used whenever anything random is called for. 0.4 The Official Mailing List is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com THE RULESET 4.0 A rule is a single sentence. 4.1 Every rule shall include a real number which uniquely identifies it. 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. 4.3 The commentary within a group of rules shall not affect what is and is not legal. 4.4 Anything not prohibited by the rules is permitted. 4.5 The Ruleset shall consist of all groups of rules. 4.6 A group of rules is not a Thing, it is a collection of Things. Comment: Groups of rules serve as a coherent whole, acting as a single rule would in most Nomics. However, individual rules are not ammendable, but groups are, so it is helpful to have short individual rules. PROPOSALS 5.0 A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. 5.1 A proposal belongs to the person who submits it. 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. 5.3 A proposal may expire in only as directed in the rules within the group headed by the word PROPOSALS. 5.4 A proposal expires if all players vote on it. 5.5 A legal vote consists of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. 5.6 To vote on a proposal, a player must announce what pending proposal they are voting on and how they choose to vote. 5.7 A proposal expires if one week has passed since it was submitted. 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. Comment: This defines the process of submitting proposals, and voting on them. CHANGING THE GAMESTATE 6.0 The Three Sacred Laws are the groups of rules headed FIRST SACRED LAW, SECOND SACRED LAW, and THIRD SACRED LAW. 6.1 A proposal may pass only as defined in the rules within the group headed by the phrase CHANGING THE GAMESTATE. 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. 6.5 No changes to the gamestate may occur except as defined in the ruleset. 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or removing it. 6.7 Destruction of a Thing shall be considered to alter that thing, but not modify it. Comment: This defines what a proposal is and what is needed for a proposal to pass. 6.7 clarifies why you can destroy a rule but not rewrite the TSLs with a single dissenting vote despite 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. DEREGISTRATION 7.0 A player is someone who has registered more recently than ey has deregistered. 7.1 A player may deregister by announcing that ey wishes to do so. 7.2 A player deregisters if ey fails to post a message to the official mailing list in a week. 7.3 Whenever a player deregisters, one of eir points is destroyed, while the rest are distributed randomly among all players. Comment: This defines how to not be a player. REGISTRATION 8.0 A proposal submitted by a non-player is called a registration proposal. 8.1 Nobody may submit a registration proposal if a registration propsal ey submitted is currently a pending proposal. 8.2 A person who submits a registration proposal which subsequently passes is considered to have registered. Comment: This group of rules prevents a player who does not have any good ideas from joining. THINGS 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. 9.2 No new type of Thing may be created without adding it to the list of Things. 9.3 Whenever a Thing is destroyed, the number of Therms is increased by one. 9.4 A player who deregisters is considered to have been destroyed. 9.5 A player who is destroyed automatically deregisters. 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. Comment: This defines Things. OFFICES 10.0 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the group headed OFFICES 10.1 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. 10.2 An office exists known as the Office of the Speaker, whose possessor shall be called the Speaker. 10.3 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any random decisions necessary. 10.4 The Speaker shall also be in charge of keeping track of Things. Comment: This group lists offices, of which the initial ruleset only has one. JUDGEMENT 11.0 Any player may post a message containing a clearly labelled Call For Judgement. 11.1 A Call For Judgement must be a statement which does not concern any other Call For Judgement. 11.2 When a Call For Judgement is issued, the Speaker shall randomly choose a player, who shall be known as the Judge. 11.3 The Judge of a Call For Judgement must be a player other than the one who posted the Call For Judgement. 11.4 The Judge of a Call For Judgement shall post a message indicating whether ey judges it to be true or false. 11.5 The statement of a Judge shall be binding, unless it is appealed. 11.6 Calls For Judgement shall be appealed only as defined by the rules in the group headed APPEALS. Comment: This group lays the groundwork for Calls For Judgement. APPEALS 12.0 When a player feels that a Call For Judgement ey has issued has been judged unfairly, ey may post a message announcing eir intent to appeal it. 12.1 When a player appeals a Call For Judgement, three players, to be known as Appelate Justices, shall be randomly chosen, who shall not include the Judge or the player who called the Call For Judgement. 12.2 All Appelate Justices shall announce whether they consider the Call For Judgement in question to be true or false. (4 pi) The decision of the majority of Appelate Justices shall be binding, and not subject to appeal. Comment: This allows for Calls For Judgement to be appealed. PAST JUDGEMENTS 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not appealed within two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the sentences of the Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset in the group headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for said group. 13.1 When a rule is added to PAST JUDGEMENTS, its number must be higher than any previously existing rule. Comment: FIRST SACRED LAW 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would directly increase the number of Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group headed FIRST SACRED LAW. 1.2 A Registration Proposal may, if passed, increase the number of Things in the game by up to two, one of which is of course the player who submits that proposal. 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the removed Things of that type are destroyed. Comment: The number of things can only increase when the game is influenced by external people. SECOND SACRED LAW 2.1 Any player who submits a proposal that would destroy at least three Things recieves a point if that proposal passes. 2.2 If two weeks have gone by without a proposal passing, a Thing is chosen at random and destroyed. Comment: Without external influence, the number of Things may slowly decrease as they are replaced by Therms. THIRD SACRED LAW 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule which is not in one of the Three Sacred Laws, the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number takes precedence. 3.3 No proposal to alter one of the Three Sacred Laws may pass if any player votes against the proposal. Comment: This makes sure the Three Sacred Laws remain inviolate. It has some redundancies, but they are a safety net in case parts of the Second Sacred Law destroy the other locations of them. From thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Tue Jul 23 05:41:40 2002 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4761 invoked by uid 7800); 23 Jul 2002 12:41:40 -0000 Date: 23 Jul 2002 12:41:40 -0000 Message-ID: <1027428100.192399009.90537.m12@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files X-Yahoo-Group-Post: system From: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - ruleset MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit T h e r m o d y N o m i c R u l e s e t Please note that this is a draft, and is not necessarily the exact ruleset text we will use when we begin the game. THERMODYNOMIC 0.0 The full name of this game of Nomic shall be 'ThermodyNomic'. 0.1 Those who need a shorter name for this Nomic may refer to it by the nickname 'Thermo'. 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to kill it. 0.3 To ensure that random selections really are random, HotBits (accessible at http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/) shall be used whenever anything random is called for. 0.4 The Official Mailing List is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com THE RULESET 4.0 A rule is a single sentence. 4.1 Every rule shall include a real number which uniquely identifies it. 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. 4.3 The commentary within a group of rules shall not affect what is and is not legal. 4.4 Anything not prohibited by the rules is permitted. 4.5 The Ruleset shall consist of all groups of rules. 4.6 A group of rules is not a Thing, it is a collection of Things. Comment: Groups of rules serve as a coherent whole, acting as a single rule would in most Nomics. However, individual rules are not ammendable, but groups are, so it is helpful to have short individual rules. PROPOSALS 5.0 A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. 5.1 A proposal belongs to the person who submits it. 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. 5.3 A proposal may expire in only as directed in the rules within the group headed by the word PROPOSALS. 5.4 A proposal expires if all players vote on it. 5.5 A legal vote consists of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. 5.6 To vote on a proposal, a player must announce what pending proposal they are voting on and how they choose to vote. 5.7 A proposal expires if one week has passed since it was submitted. 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. Comment: This defines the process of submitting proposals, and voting on them. CHANGING THE GAMESTATE 6.0 The Three Sacred Laws are the groups of rules headed FIRST SACRED LAW, SECOND SACRED LAW, and THIRD SACRED LAW. 6.1 A proposal may pass only as defined in the rules within the group headed by the phrase CHANGING THE GAMESTATE. 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. 6.5 No changes to the gamestate may occur except as defined in the ruleset. 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or removing it. 6.7 Destruction of a Thing shall be considered to alter that thing, but not modify it. Comment: This defines what a proposal is and what is needed for a proposal to pass. 6.7 clarifies why you can destroy a rule but not rewrite the TSLs with a single dissenting vote despite 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. DEREGISTRATION 7.0 A player is someone who has registered more recently than ey has deregistered. 7.1 A player may deregister by announcing that ey wishes to do so. 7.2 A player deregisters if ey fails to post a message to the official mailing list in a week. 7.3 Whenever a player deregisters, one of eir points is destroyed, while the rest are distributed randomly among all players. Comment: This defines how to not be a player. REGISTRATION 8.0 A proposal submitted by a non-player is called a registration proposal. 8.1 Nobody may submit a registration proposal if a registration propsal ey submitted is currently a pending proposal. 8.2 A person who submits a registration proposal which subsequently passes is considered to have registered. Comment: This group of rules prevents a player who does not have any good ideas from joining. THINGS 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. 9.2 No new type of Thing may be created without adding it to the list of Things. 9.3 Whenever a Thing is destroyed, the number of Therms is increased by one. 9.4 A player who deregisters is considered to have been destroyed. 9.5 A player who is destroyed automatically deregisters. 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. Comment: This defines Things. OFFICES 10.0 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the group headed OFFICES 10.1 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. 10.2 An office exists known as the Office of the Speaker, whose possessor shall be called the Speaker. 10.3 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any random decisions necessary. 10.4 The Speaker shall also be in charge of keeping track of Things. Comment: This group lists offices, of which the initial ruleset only has one. JUDGEMENT 11.0 Any player may post a message containing a clearly labelled Call For Judgement. 11.1 A Call For Judgement must be a statement which does not concern any other Call For Judgement. 11.2 When a Call For Judgement is issued, the Speaker shall randomly choose a player, who shall be known as the Judge. 11.3 The Judge of a Call For Judgement must be a player other than the one who posted the Call For Judgement. 11.4 The Judge of a Call For Judgement shall post a message indicating whether ey judges it to be true or false. 11.5 The statement of a Judge shall be binding, unless it is appealed. 11.6 Calls For Judgement shall be appealed only as defined by the rules in the group headed APPEALS. Comment: This group lays the groundwork for Calls For Judgement. APPEALS 12.0 When a player feels that a Call For Judgement ey has issued has been judged unfairly, ey may post a message announcing eir intent to appeal it. 12.1 When a player appeals a Call For Judgement, three players, to be known as Appelate Justices, shall be randomly chosen, who shall not include the Judge or the player who called the Call For Judgement. 12.2 All Appelate Justices shall announce whether they consider the Call For Judgement in question to be true or false. (4 pi) The decision of the majority of Appelate Justices shall be binding, and not subject to appeal. Comment: This allows for Calls For Judgement to be appealed. PAST JUDGEMENTS 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not appealed within two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the sentences of the Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset in the group headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for said group. 13.1 When a rule is added to PAST JUDGEMENTS, its number must be higher than any previously existing rule. Comment: FIRST SACRED LAW 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would directly increase the number of Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group headed FIRST SACRED LAW. 1.2 A Registration Proposal may, if passed, increase the number of Things in the game by up to two, one of which is of course the player who submits that proposal. 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the removed Things of that type are destroyed. Comment: The number of things can only increase when the game is influenced by external people. SECOND SACRED LAW 2.1 Any player who submits a proposal that would destroy at least three Things recieves a point if that proposal passes. 2.2 If two weeks have gone by without a proposal passing, a Thing is chosen at random and destroyed. Comment: Without external influence, the number of Things may slowly decrease as they are replaced by Therms. THIRD SACRED LAW 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule which is not in one of the Three Sacred Laws, the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number takes precedence. 3.3 No proposal to alter one of the Three Sacred Laws may pass if any player votes against the proposal. Comment: This makes sure the Three Sacred Laws remain inviolate. It has some redundancies, but they are a safety net in case parts of the Second Sacred Law destroy the other locations of them. From bdonlan@u... Wed Jul 24 11:58:10 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: bdonlan@u... X-Apparently-To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 24 Jul 2002 18:58:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 86807 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2002 18:58:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 24 Jul 2002 18:58:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n14.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.69) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Jul 2002 18:58:10 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.153] by n14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 24 Jul 2002 18:58:09 -0000 Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 18:58:09 -0000 To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: anyone here? Message-ID: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 46 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "bdonlan88" X-Originating-IP: 24.198.73.122 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=101018666 X-Yahoo-Profile: bdonlan88 Is anyone actually interested in this nomic? From thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Tue Aug 06 19:17:27 2002 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 85666 invoked by uid 7800); 7 Aug 2002 02:17:26 -0000 Date: 7 Aug 2002 02:17:26 -0000 Message-ID: <1028686646.241345521.3683.m12@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files X-Yahoo-Group-Post: system From: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - ruleset MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit T h e r m o d y N o m i c R u l e s e t Please note that this is a draft, and is not necessarily the exact ruleset text we will use when we begin the game. THERMODYNOMIC 0.0 The full name of this game of Nomic shall be 'ThermodyNomic'. 0.1 Those who need a shorter name for this Nomic may refer to it by the nickname 'Thermo'. 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to kill it. 0.3 To ensure that random selections really are random, HotBits (accessible at http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/) shall be used whenever anything random is called for. 0.4 The Official Mailing List is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com THE RULESET 4.0 A rule is a single sentence. 4.1 Every rule shall include a real number which uniquely identifies it. 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. 4.3 The commentary within a group of rules shall not affect what is and is not legal. 4.4 Anything not prohibited by the rules is permitted. 4.5 The Ruleset shall consist of all groups of rules. 4.6 A group of rules is not a Thing, it is a collection of Things. Comment: Groups of rules serve as a coherent whole, acting as a single rule would in most Nomics. However, individual rules are not ammendable, but groups are, so it is helpful to have short individual rules. PROPOSALS 5.0 A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. 5.1 A proposal belongs to the person who submits it. 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. 5.3 A proposal may expire in only as directed in the rules within the group headed by the word PROPOSALS. 5.4 A proposal expires if all players vote on it. 5.5 A legal vote consists of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. 5.6 To vote on a proposal, a player must announce what pending proposal they are voting on and how they choose to vote. 5.7 A proposal expires if one week has passed since it was submitted. 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. Comment: This defines the process of submitting proposals, and voting on them. CHANGING THE GAMESTATE 6.0 The Three Sacred Laws are the groups of rules headed FIRST SACRED LAW, SECOND SACRED LAW, and THIRD SACRED LAW. 6.1 A proposal may pass only as defined in the rules within the group headed by the phrase CHANGING THE GAMESTATE. 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. 6.5 No changes to the gamestate may occur except as defined in the ruleset. 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or removing it. 6.7 Destruction of a Thing shall be considered to alter that thing, but not modify it. Comment: This defines what a proposal is and what is needed for a proposal to pass. 6.7 clarifies why you can destroy a rule but not rewrite the TSLs with a single dissenting vote despite 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. DEREGISTRATION 7.0 A player is someone who has registered more recently than ey has deregistered. 7.1 A player may deregister by announcing that ey wishes to do so. 7.2 A player deregisters if ey fails to post a message to the official mailing list in a week. 7.3 Whenever a player deregisters, one of eir points is destroyed, while the rest are distributed randomly among all players. Comment: This defines how to not be a player. REGISTRATION 8.0 A proposal submitted by a non-player is called a registration proposal. 8.1 Nobody may submit a registration proposal if a registration propsal ey submitted is currently a pending proposal. 8.2 A person who submits a registration proposal which subsequently passes is considered to have registered. Comment: This group of rules prevents a player who does not have any good ideas from joining. THINGS 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. 9.2 No new type of Thing may be created without adding it to the list of Things. 9.3 Whenever a Thing is destroyed, the number of Therms is increased by one. 9.4 A player who deregisters is considered to have been destroyed. 9.5 A player who is destroyed automatically deregisters. 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. Comment: This defines Things. OFFICES 10.0 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the group headed OFFICES 10.1 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. 10.2 An office exists known as the Office of the Speaker, whose possessor shall be called the Speaker. 10.3 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any random decisions necessary. 10.4 The Speaker shall also be in charge of keeping track of Things. Comment: This group lists offices, of which the initial ruleset only has one. JUDGEMENT 11.0 Any player may post a message containing a clearly labelled Call For Judgement. 11.1 A Call For Judgement must be a statement which does not concern any other Call For Judgement. 11.2 When a Call For Judgement is issued, the Speaker shall randomly choose a player, who shall be known as the Judge. 11.3 The Judge of a Call For Judgement must be a player other than the one who posted the Call For Judgement. 11.4 The Judge of a Call For Judgement shall post a message indicating whether ey judges it to be true or false. 11.5 The statement of a Judge shall be binding, unless it is appealed. 11.6 Calls For Judgement shall be appealed only as defined by the rules in the group headed APPEALS. Comment: This group lays the groundwork for Calls For Judgement. APPEALS 12.0 When a player feels that a Call For Judgement ey has issued has been judged unfairly, ey may post a message announcing eir intent to appeal it. 12.1 When a player appeals a Call For Judgement, three players, to be known as Appelate Justices, shall be randomly chosen, who shall not include the Judge or the player who called the Call For Judgement. 12.2 All Appelate Justices shall announce whether they consider the Call For Judgement in question to be true or false. (4 pi) The decision of the majority of Appelate Justices shall be binding, and not subject to appeal. Comment: This allows for Calls For Judgement to be appealed. PAST JUDGEMENTS 13.0 Whenever a decision on a Call For Judgement is not appealed within two weeks, and the Call For Judgment is judged true, the sentences of the Call For Judgement shall be added, one by one, to the ruleset in the group headed PAST JUDGEMENTS and may edit the comment for said group. 13.1 When a rule is added to PAST JUDGEMENTS, its number must be higher than any previously existing rule. Comment: FIRST SACRED LAW 1.1 No proposal may be submitted whose passage would directly increase the number of Things in the game, unless it is explicitly permitted by rules in the group headed FIRST SACRED LAW. 1.2 A Registration Proposal may, if passed, increase the number of Things in the game by up to two, one of which is of course the player who submits that proposal. 1.3 Whenever a player Registers and the number of Therms exceeds the number of players by at least five, all players recieve a point and the number of Therms is set to zero. 1.4 Whenever the number of Things is decreased, the removed Things of that type are destroyed. Comment: The number of things can only increase when the game is influenced by external people. SECOND SACRED LAW 2.1 Any player who submits a proposal that would destroy at least three Things recieves a point if that proposal passes. 2.2 If two weeks have gone by without a proposal passing, a Thing is chosen at random and destroyed. Comment: Without external influence, the number of Things may slowly decrease as they are replaced by Therms. THIRD SACRED LAW 3.1 If a rule in one of the Three Sacred Laws conflicts with another rule which is not in one of the Three Sacred Laws, the rule in the Sacred Law takes precedence. 3.2 If two rules contradict one another, the rule with the lower number takes precedence. 3.3 No proposal to alter one of the Three Sacred Laws may pass if any player votes against the proposal. Comment: This makes sure the Three Sacred Laws remain inviolate. It has some redundancies, but they are a safety net in case parts of the Second Sacred Law destroy the other locations of them. From thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Wed Aug 21 10:09:18 2002 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 97720 invoked by uid 7800); 21 Aug 2002 17:09:18 -0000 Date: 21 Aug 2002 17:09:18 -0000 Message-ID: <1029949758.294857474.58098.m12@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files X-Yahoo-Group-Post: system From: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com To: thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - ruleset MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit T h e r m o d y N o m i c R u l e s e t Please note that this is a draft, and is not necessarily the exact ruleset text we will use when we begin the game. THERMODYNOMIC 0.0 The full name of this game of Nomic shall be 'ThermodyNomic'. 0.1 Those who need a shorter name for this Nomic may refer to it by the nickname 'Thermo'. 0.2 Because Thermo is a relatively new Nomic, players are not to try to kill it. 0.3 To ensure that random selections really are random, HotBits (accessible at http://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/) shall be used whenever anything random is called for. 0.4 The Official Mailing List is http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thermodynomic/ and can be accessed by e-mail at thermodynomic@yahoogroups.com THE RULESET 4.0 A rule is a single sentence. 4.1 Every rule shall include a real number which uniquely identifies it. 4.2 A group of rules is any number of rules under a common heading, followed by a short commentary on the rules of that group. 4.3 The commentary within a group of rules shall not affect what is and is not legal. 4.4 Anything not prohibited by the rules is permitted. 4.5 The Ruleset shall consist of all groups of rules. 4.6 A group of rules is not a Thing, it is a collection of Things. Comment: Groups of rules serve as a coherent whole, acting as a single rule would in most Nomics. However, individual rules are not ammendable, but groups are, so it is helpful to have short individual rules. PROPOSALS 5.0 A proposal consists of any number of suggested creations or destructions of Things, and the creation, destruction, or alteration of any number of comments and group headings in the ruleset. 5.1 A proposal belongs to the person who submits it. 5.2 A pending proposal is a proposal which obeys the Three Sacred Laws, has been submitted to the official mailing list, and has not expired. 5.3 A proposal may expire in only as directed in the rules within the group headed by the word PROPOSALS. 5.4 A proposal expires if all players vote on it. 5.5 A legal vote consists of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. 5.6 To vote on a proposal, a player must announce what pending proposal they are voting on and how they choose to vote. 5.7 A proposal expires if one week has passed since it was submitted. 5.8 No player may vote on a proposal which is not pending. Comment: This defines the process of submitting proposals, and voting on them. CHANGING THE GAMESTATE 6.0 The Three Sacred Laws are the groups of rules headed FIRST SACRED LAW, SECOND SACRED LAW, and THIRD SACRED LAW. 6.1 A proposal may pass only as defined in the rules within the group headed by the phrase CHANGING THE GAMESTATE. 6.2 A proposal which does not suggest altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of votes cast AGAINST it. 6.3 A proposal which suggests altering one or more of the Three Sacred Laws passes if and only if, at the time it expires, the number of votes cast FOR it exceeds the number of ABSTAIN votes it recieves, and it recieves no votes AGAINST it. 6.4 When a proposal passes, the changes it suggests are adopted. 6.5 No changes to the gamestate may occur except as defined in the ruleset. 6.6 No proposal may modify any individual rule, aside from adding or removing it. 6.7 Destruction of a Thing shall be considered to alter that thing, but not modify it. Comment: This defines what a proposal is and what is needed for a proposal to pass. 6.7 clarifies why you can destroy a rule but not rewrite the TSLs with a single dissenting vote despite 6.1, 6.2, and 6.6. DEREGISTRATION 7.0 A player is someone who has registered more recently than ey has deregistered. 7.1 A player may deregister by announcing that ey wishes to do so. 7.2 A player deregisters if ey fails to post a message to the official mailing list in a week. 7.3 Whenever a player deregisters, one of eir points is destroyed, while the rest are distributed randomly among all players. Comment: This defines how to not be a player. REGISTRATION 8.0 A proposal submitted by a non-player is called a registration proposal. 8.1 Nobody may submit a registration proposal if a registration propsal ey submitted is currently a pending proposal. 8.2 A person who submits a registration proposal which subsequently passes is considered to have registered. Comment: This group of rules prevents a player who does not have any good ideas from joining. THINGS 9.0 A Thing is any item declared by the rules to be a Thing. 9.1 Rules, players, proposals, offices, and points are Things. 9.2 No new type of Thing may be created without adding it to the list of Things. 9.3 Whenever a Thing is destroyed, the number of Therms is increased by one. 9.4 A player who deregisters is considered to have been destroyed. 9.5 A player who is destroyed automatically deregisters. 9.6 A rule which is destroyed is automatically removed from the ruleset. 9.7 Any Thing which is not a player or a Rule must be posessed by a player. Comment: This defines Things. OFFICES 10.0 Each individual office shall be declared to exist by the rules of the group headed OFFICES 10.1 Each individual office carries with it its own duties. 10.2 An office exists known as the Office of the Speaker, whose possessor shall be called the Speaker. 10.3 The Speaker shall be in charge of tabulating votes and making any random decisions necessary. 10.4 The Speaker shall also be in charge of keeping track of Things. Comment: T