Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: What's in a Name.
From: "Kieron Jarvis" <[email-masked]>
To: "'business'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 15:49:55 +1000

[[Well, I was underwhelmed with responses (is it vacation time in the US ?).
But the votes are in and the provisional winner is.....

With 2 votes in favour - 'Aphasia'.

I will accept late votes during the week, but if no more votes are received
then this proposal will go to the vote.]]

Here is the proposal entitled "What's in a Name":

I propose that Rule 1/0 : The Game be amended to read

"Aphasia shall refer to the specific instance of Nomic game which possesses
the body of rules containing this definition, unless it is made clear,
whether explicitly or via the context, that Aphasia refers to something
else. To this end, all permutations of letter case of Aphasia shall be
considered equivalent."

[[Regardless of what name we have, I think we should have a name so that we
can be referred to unambiguously on the Nomic web site and related database
(at least).

XnJester]]

From: "Kieron Jarvis" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-business: Proposal: What's in a Name.
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 14:00:06 +1000
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<sigh>

I hereby withdraw my Proposal titled "What's in a name".

XnJester.

[[I don't know if you guys are trying to drive off anyone who wasn't in
Berserker but you're doing a good job of it. So far, I haven't heard
anything about any of my posts which looked particularly positive. Now, I
didn't think I was doing anything wrong. I tried to follow the rules, to
make some corrections to the rules, and just generally to participate. But
now I've had enough. I'm going to send this whinge letter then sit in the
corner of the game and sulk. I will participate only minimally for now, but
don't expect anything progressive from me until I work out what it is you
guys really want. Oh, and Joel, when you get around to adding this nomic to
the net nomic database what name will you use ?  Or do you think this
particular nomic is above listing there ?  I don't always like every name I
see or even have some involvement with, but to assume that a name is
unneeded is insular and arrogant.]]

Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 09:36:39 +0100
From: Zagarna <[email-masked]>
To: business nomic list <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: Players that are [Away]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

create a new rule 
named:"Players that are [Away]" 
that reads:"Any Player may gain or lose the [Away] attribute by sending
a message to this effect to a public forum. Players that have not voted
in the last three nweeks automatically gain the [Away] attribute.
Players that are [Away] may not vote, make proposals, be selected as
judges, gain or lose points. Players that are away are not required to
make any action if that action was imposed on them while they were
[Away].
The Administrator cannot become [Away]."

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 09:45:21 +0100
From: Zagarna <[email-masked]>
To: business nomic list <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: amend proposal: Players that are [Away]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

oops, i knew I had forgotten something :)
I wish to amend proposal "Players that are [Away]" by appending the
following text to the proposed rule:" Players that are [Away] do not
count when calculating the Quorum."

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 10:07:59 +0100
From: Zagarna <[email-masked]>
To: business nomic list <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: new proposal: Officers that are [Away]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

It's probably better to put this in a new rule.
I propose a new rule named "Officers that are [Away]" 
that reads:"If for any reason an Officer is [Away] e will cease to hold
the office and a random player shall be selected by the Administrator to
fulfill that office. The expiration date of the office shall be moved to
just before the start of the next voting."

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 12:48:09 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following are recognized:

P332/0, Quorum Fix, by Joel Uckelman
P333/0, What's in a Name, by XnJester (and then withdrawn)
P334/0, Players that are [Away], by Zagarna
P334/1, Players that are [Away], by Zagarna
P335/0, Officers that are [Away], by Zagarna

4T2-Supreme Ruler of Everything is recused from RFJ27/0, and The Kid is 
selected in his place.

Also, a reminder: we have a huge number of proposals up for voting soon. I 
still have the votes of everyone who voted last time. If you want those to 
count as your votes for this time as well, let me know when you vote. (NB: 
there will probably be a few more props on the ballot this time, so you'll 
still want to vote on those, even if you tell me to use your votes from 
last time.)

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 19:03:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal Revision
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is an alteration to my proposal 325

in the first line, "rule 273" shall be replaced by "rule 237".

Poulenc.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Proposal Revision 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 22:54:54 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth Dan Waldron:
> The following is an alteration to my proposal 325
> 
> in the first line, "rule 273" shall be replaced by "rule 237".
> 
> Poulenc.
> 

Recognized.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: recognition
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 09:43:02 -0000 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> From: Harrison, Andrew [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > From: Joel Uckelman [mailto:[email-masked]]
> >
> > 4T2-Supreme Ruler of Everything is recused from RFJ27/0, and 
> > The Kid is 
> > selected in his place.
> 
> Oh, err.. hang on I'll have to go and look it up, I can't 
> remember what that RFJ was.

Zagarna: "The Judicial Order made by Potter in the Judgement on RFJ26 was
invalid."

Ah, that one. I rule FALSE.

--
The Kid

Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 16:49:59 +0000
From: Antone <[email-masked]>
To: 'business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: my votes
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

here are my votes for this voting:

Proposal 306/0(l, a) :
 yes

Proposal 311/2(l, a) : Rescinding Actions
yes

Proposal 312/2(l, a) : Criminal Code
yes

Proposal 313/0(l, a) : Pedantics
no

Proposal 315/2(l, a) : Subliminal Religious Indoctrination
yes

Proposal 316/1(l, a) : make crime rule for liars
no

Proposal 317/0(l, a) : Motion Reform
yes

Proposal 318/0(l, a) : Tomjack's mom cannot be a judge
yes

Proposal 319/0(l, a) : Motion to Amend Trivially
no

Proposal 320/0(l, a) : Oversight in Roster Maintanence
yes

Proposal 321/0(l, a) : ballot fix 1
yes

Proposal 322/1(l, a) : ballot fix 2
yes

Proposal 323/0(l, a) : quorum change
no

Proposal 324/1(l, a) : Vacating Orders fix
no

Proposal 325/1(l, a) : Salary for Judges
no

Proposal 326/0(l, a) : Required Actions
no

Proposal 327/0(l, a) : append 237/judgement timing
no

Proposal 328/0(l, a) :
yes

Proposal 329/1(l, a) :
yes

Proposal 330/0(l, a) : I Shot The Sheriff
no

Proposal 331/0(l, a) : Motion to Remove Players
yes

Proposal 332/0(l, a) : Quorum Fix
yes

Proposal 334/1(l, a) : Players that are [Away]
yes

Proposal 335/0(l, a) : Officers that are [Away]
yes

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 4
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 11:57:25 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

This is the Ballot for nweek 4. Voting ends at 00:00:00 GMT, 11 November 
2000. Proposals that are new since last nweek's Ballot or have been altered 
are marked with an asterisk.

P311/2, Rescinding Actions, by Joel Uckelman
P312/2, Criminal Code, by Poulenc
P315/2, Subliminal Religious Indoctrination, by The Kid
P316/1, make crime rule for liars, by Benjamin
P317/0, Motion Reform, by Joel Uckelman
P318/0, Tomjack's mom cannot be a judge, by Remo
P319/0, Motion to Amend Trivially, by Joel Uckelman
P320/0, Oversight in Roster Maintanence, by Poulenc
P321/0, ballot fix 1, by Poulenc
P322/1, ballot fix 2, by Poulenc
P323/0, quorum change, by Poulenc
P324/1, Vacating Orders fix, by Poulenc
*P325/1, Salary for Judges, by Poulenc
P326/0, Required Actions, by Poulenc
P327/0, append 237/judgment timing, by Benjamin
P328/0, no title [[integer points]], by Joel Uckelman
P329/1, 100 initial points, by Benjamin
P330/0, I Shot the Sheriff, by The Kid
P331/1, Motion to Remove Players, by Zagarna
*P332/0, Quorum Fix, by Joel Uckelman
*P334/1, Players that are [Away], Zagarna
*P335/0, Officers that are [Away], Zagarna

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: ballot correction
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 19:46:42 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I just noticed that I incorrectly listed P331/0 as P331/1. If you have 
already voted, please indicate whether you want your P331/1 votes to count 
for P331/0. If you have not yet voted, please use this Ballot:

P311/2, Rescinding Actions, by Joel Uckelman
P312/2, Criminal Code, by Poulenc
P315/2, Subliminal Religious Indoctrination, by The Kid
P316/1, make crime rule for liars, by Benjamin
P317/0, Motion Reform, by Joel Uckelman
P318/0, Tomjack's mom cannot be a judge, by Remo
P319/0, Motion to Amend Trivially, by Joel Uckelman
P320/0, Oversight in Roster Maintanence, by Poulenc
P321/0, ballot fix 1, by Poulenc
P322/1, ballot fix 2, by Poulenc
P323/0, quorum change, by Poulenc
P324/1, Vacating Orders fix, by Poulenc
*P325/1, Salary for Judges, by Poulenc
P326/0, Required Actions, by Poulenc
P327/0, append 237/judgment timing, by Benjamin
P328/0, no title [[integer points]], by Joel Uckelman
P329/1, 100 initial points, by Benjamin
P330/0, I Shot the Sheriff, by The Kid
P331/0, Motion to Remove Players, by Zagarna
*P332/0, Quorum Fix, by Joel Uckelman
*P334/1, Players that are [Away], Zagarna
*P335/0, Officers that are [Away], Zagarna

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2000 13:27:03 -0600
To: [email-masked]
From: Matthew G Potter <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: voting
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

P311/2
no

P312/2
no

P315/2
yes

P316/1
no

P317/0
yes

P318/0
yes

P319/0
yes

P320/0
yes

p321/0
yes

p322/0
yes

P323/0
no

P324/1
yes

P325/1
yes

P326/0
no

P327/0
yes

P328/0
yes

P329/1
no

P330/0
no

P331/0
yes

P332/0
yes

P334/1
yes

P335/0
yes

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: voting results, finally
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 12:59:13 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Here are the results of the voting:

P311/2, Rescinding Actions, passed (8-3-0-2)
P312/2, Criminal Code, failed (5-6-0-2)
P315/2, Subliminal Religious Indoctrination, passed (6-5-0-2)
P316/1, make crime rule for liars, failed (3-8-0-2)
P317/0, Motion Reform, passed (8-2-1-2)
P318/0, Tomjack's mom cannot be a judge, passed (10-1-0-2)
P319/0, Motion to Amend Trivially, passed (6-5-0-2)
P320/0, Oversight in Roster Maintanence, passed (11-0-0-2)
P321/0, ballot fix 1, passed (7-3-1-2)
P322/1, ballot fix 2, passed (9-1-1-2)
P323/0, quorum change, failed (5-6-0-2)
P324/1, Vacating Orders fix, passed (6-5-0-2)
P325/1, Salary for Judges, passed (6-5-0-2)
P326/0, Required Actions, passed (9-2-0-2)
P327/0, append 237/judgment timing, passed (7-4-0-2)
P328/0, [indivisible points], passed (9-2-0-2)
P329/1, [100 points], failed (4-7-0-2)
P330/0, I Shot the Sheriff, passed (6-5-0-2)
P331/0, Motion to Remove Players, held (0-5-0-8)
P332/0, Quorum Fix, failed (5-5-0-3)
P334/1, Players that are [Away], passed (8-2-0-3)
P335/0, Officers that are [Away], passed (6-4-0-3)

Voting resulted in the following score changes:

+94, Poulenc
+66, Joel Uckelman
+43, Zagarna
+39, Josh Kortbein
+30, The Kid
+26, Remo
+9, Potter
+8, Jeff Schroeder
+5, Ed
+5, XnJester
+4, Benjamin

More to come...

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: unanimous consent fix
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 14:16:07 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The combination of proposals that passed broke the connection between the 
definition of unanimous consent and places in the rules where it is 
mentioned. This proposal will fix that:

1. Add as the last sentence of the first paragraph of R210:

"Motions to Add Players may be subject to three-day unanimous consent." 

2. Replace all instances of "unanimous consent" in R303 with "two-day 
unanimous consent".

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: unanimous consent fix
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 14:20:52 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I rescind the unrecognized proposal on fixing unanimous consent, and make 
the following proposal instead:

1. Add as the last sentence of the first paragraph of R210:

"Motions to Add Players may be subject to three-day unanimous consent." 

2. Replace all instances of "unanimous consent" in R303 with "two-day 
unanimous consent".

3. Replace the first instance of "Motion" in R230 with "Approvable Motion". 

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: trivial amendments
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 14:24:24 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I move for the following trivial amendments to the Rules, as per R303:

1. Change the word "proscribed" to "prescribed" in R106/0.
2. Change the word "es" to "eir" in R306/0.

There are probably more typos and things in the Rules needing correcting; 
these are ones I noticed just now.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: Market Economy
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:01:42 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I submit the following proposal entitled 'Market Economy'

Create a rule entitled 'Market Economy' with the following text:

"Agents within the game may have Objects associated with them such that the
Agent is said to own that Object. Agents may only own Objects that are
defined within the Ruleset. Agents may only gain ownership or lose ownership
of objects in the manner defined in the Ruleset. Agents may own more than
one of a specific type of object, unless prohibited elsewhere in the
Ruleset. Agents may not own a negative or non-integral number of a specific
type of object, unless allowed elsewhere in the Ruleset.

Agents may freely trade in Objects by mutual agreement, unless prohibited
elsewhere in the Ruleset. Objects that are not defined in the Ruleset may
not be traded. Agents may not trade Objects in return for a Game Action or
in return for the promise of a Game Action. [[eg. You can't offer a player
some Object in return for them voting 'yes' on your proposal.]]

All Players involved in a trade must submit the terms of the trade, or an
agreement to previously submitted terms, to a public forum. The trade is
deemed to occur when the Administrator (or other relevant Officer) publicly
Recognises the trade. A trade must not occur if the resulting ownership of
Objects produces an illegal or invalid game state, or if one of the Players
involved in the trade would win the game as a result of the trade. 

Non-Player Agents may only participate in trades if it is specifically
allowed elsewhere in the Ruleset."

--
The Kid

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: The Officer of Supreme Justice
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 16:46:31 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I submit the following proposal entitled 'The Officer of Supreme Justice'

Create a new rule entitled 'The Officer of Supreme Justice' with the
following text: 
"The Officer of Supreme Justice (OSJ) is an elected position. The OSJ is
responsible for recognising RFJ's, selecting Judges and recusing Judges."

Alter Rule 235 so that the words "the Administrator shall" are replaced with
"the Officer of Supreme Justice shall".

Alter Rule 238 so that the words "The Administrator shall" are replaced with
"The Officer of Supreme Justice shall".

Append the following text to the end of Rule 205:
"During the first seven days of the fifth nweek of an Officer's Term [[ie.
before the voting starts]] Players may put themselves forward for election
to Office. The current Officer is automatically put up for election unless e
publicly specifies otherwise. If no Player other than the current Officer
puts themselves forward then the current Officer is automatically elected
for another five nweeks and no election is required. In the event that the
election is tied, the Administrator shall select one of the tied players to
hold the Office, but the Term of Office is reduced to one nweek."

In Rule 227 replace the line "3. all Ballot Item Elections are held again in
the next nweek" with the following text:
"3. Ballot Item Elections for non-vacant Offices are held again in the next
nweek. The current Officer keeps their Office for another nweek. Candidates
must put themselves forward for election again.
4. Ballot Item Elections for vacant Offices shall carry on the majority of
votes cast."

--
The Kid

Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:31:34 -0600
To: [email-masked]
From: Matthew G Potter <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: proposal: modification of 302/0, Subliminal Religious
  Indoctrination
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I propose modifying the second paragraph of Rule 302/0 to read:

"Anytime before the close of voting on proposals, a Player may make an RFJ 
accusing a another Player of Heresy by accusing em of being a Humble 
Disciple, and present the evidence.  If the Player is found by the Judge to 
be Guilty of Heresy, then the Judge shall award the accuser with 30 points. "

[[ As I saw it, the original rule had no provisions for deciding whether a 
Player had committed Heresy.  This proposal should treat Accusations as 
traditional RFJs; if someone thinks they'd be better handled by some other 
method, let me know and I'll adjust the proposal accordingly ]]

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: elective offices proposal
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 21:29:45 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

So, it looks like people are starting to talk about elective offices, and 
it occurred to me that we have no defined procedure for actually electing 
anyone to anything. Thus, a proposal to create such a mechanism:

---Begin Proposal---

1. Create a Rule entitled "Elective Offices" with the following text:

"An Office filled through election is an Elective Office. An Office is 
Elective iff the Rules specify it to be so."

2. Create a Rule entitled "Elections" with the following text:

"At any time prior to the start of voting during a nweek that is either a) 
the last nweek of an Elective Officer's Term of Office, or b) in which an 
Elective Office is vacant, any Player may nominate any Player, including 
emself, as a candidate for that Elective Office.

The list of all candidates for an Office who did not decline nomination 
become the Ballot Issue for that Office at the start of that nweek's 
voting. Voters may cast a vote for only one candidate on each list for such 
Ballot Issues.

Whichever candidate receives a plurality of the votes cast for an Elective 
Office shall assume that Office upon the expiration of the erstwhile 
Officeholder's Term."

3. Capitalize every instance of "elected" in R202.

---End Proposal---

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: proposal recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 22:10:32 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Proposals are recognized:

P336/0, unanimous consent fix, by Joel Uckelman
P337/0, Market Economy, by The Kid
P338/0, The Officer of Supreme Justice, by The Kid
P339/0, modification of 302/0, Subliminal Religious Indoctrination, by 
Potter
P340/0, elective offices, by Joel Uckelman

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: event ordering proposal
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 22:56:26 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

When I was updating the rules to reflect the results of voting, I noticed 
that at least one rule was amended by two separate proposals, which might 
have caused a problem if the changes weren't compatible. It seems to me 
that the order in which the effects of adopted Proposals are implemented 
should be made explicit:

---Begin Proposal---

Create a new rule entitled "Sequence of Legislative Effects" with the 
following text:

"Legislative Orders are to be executed in a sequence corresponding to the 
Proposals which created them. Specifically, for any given Legislative 
Order, if there exists an outstanding Legislative Order issued by the 
adoption of a lower-numbered Proposal than the Proposal which caused the 
issuance of the Legislative Order in question, said Legislative Order must 
not be executed."

---End Proposal---

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: individual voting
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 23:30:52 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Individual voting for last nweek may now be found on the page at: 

http://www.nomic.net/~g1/voting

Note that this is a temporary (and labor intensive) solution, which will 
persist only until I add this feature to the html generator.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: voting results change
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 09:59:35 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Since I forgot to count some of Benjamin's votes, the actual results are 
slightly different:

P332/0 passed 6-5-0-2.

and the point awards are slightly different for P332/0, P334/0, and P335/0.

Kudos to Benjamin for pointing that out.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 10:17:48 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I rescind my Proposal entitled "Sequence of Legislative Effects", and 
replace it with the following proposal:

---Begin Proposal---

Create a new rule entitled "Conflicting Legislative Orders" with the 
following text:

"Whenever two outstanding Legislative Orders are in conflict, the 
Legislative Order the issuance of which was caused by the lower numbered 
Proposal must be executed first. Legislative Orders are in conflict if 
their execution would modify the same Rule or other game element."

---End Proposal---

I think this better addresses the problem of conflicting Legislative 
Orders. The rescinded proposal would have required that all Legislative 
Orders be performed in numerical order by Proposal number, not just the 
conflicting ones. This would have caused a problem if such a Rule had been 
in effect when I corrected the count of Benjamin's votes, as the Order from 
P332 would have been required to be executed prior to those of P334 and 
P335, which I executed on Sunday. Also, I think this is a less confusing 
way to convey the idea than the previous version.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 12:54:02 -0600
To: [email-masked]
From: Matthew G Potter <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: P339/0
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I withdraw proposal 339/0.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Re: spoon-discuss: vote miscount..? 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 15:24:07 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth "Harrison, Andrew":
> Just noticed that the voting page shows that neither Zagarna or Potter voted
> on P331, yet they both voted publicly and voted 'yes'. This might have been
> missed cos the ballot was first published as P331/1 and then corrected to
> P331/0, but both players correctly voted on the correct revision. This
> doesn't actually affect the outcome, but I'm sure the they are keen that
> they aren't 'disenfranchised of their constitutional right to vote'.
> 
> --
> The Kid

Hmmm. I'm not sure how I missed that. It actually does affect the outcome 
for P331, since those two votes are enough for quorum, so P331 fails.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 13:45:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: correcting: Proposal 331: Motion to Remove Players 
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I sent this to the list some 3 hous ago, if it's a double posting
please
disregard.

I wish to correct my proposal 331 to read in full:
cerate a new rule named:"Motion to remove players" that reads:"Any
Agent
qualified as a Player may cease to be one if a Motion to Remove naming
em is adopted. Motions to Remove are Secondary Approvable Motions. A
Motion to Remove is subject to 10days-unanimous consent.
[[this way no player can be removed if e checks the mailing list at
least once per nweek]]

The Motive Order corresponding to an adopted Motion to Remove directs
the Officer in charge of Roaster maintainance to remove the named Agent
from theRoster.

zagarna

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays!
http://calendar.yahoo.com/

Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 14:04:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Re: vote miscount..? |--> new proposal:motion to remove players II
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Joel Uckelman wrote:
> 
> Hmmm. I'm not sure how I missed that. It actually does affect the
outcome
> for P331, since those two votes are enough for quorum, so P331 fails.
> 
> --
> J.

ok, so make that a new proposal:

create a new rule named:"Motion to remove players II" that reads:"Any
Agent qualified as a Player may cease to be one if a Motion to Remove
naming em is adopted. Motions to Remove are Secondary Approvable
Motions. A Motion to Remove is subject to 10days-unanimous consent.
[[this way no player can be removed if e checks the mailing list at
least once per nweek]]

The Motive Order corresponding to an adopted Motion to Remove directs
the Officer in charge of Roaster maintainance to remove the named Agent
from the Roster."

zagarna

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays!
http://calendar.yahoo.com/

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal Revison: P337
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:24:16 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Revise P337/0, Market Economy as follows:

Replace the second paragraph ("Agents may freely trade...") with the
following text:

"Agents may freely trade in Objects by mutual agreement, unless prohibited
elsewhere in the Ruleset. Objects that are not defined in the Ruleset may
not be traded. Trades involving a Game Action or the promise of a Game
Action are not legally enforcable. [[eg. If you offer a player some Object
in return for them voting 'yes' on your proposal and they then vote 'no',
then you cannot stop them.]]"

At the end of the third paragraph replace the words "win the game as a
result of the trade." with the words "win the game as a direct result of the
trade."

--
The Kid

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal Revision: P338
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:53:35 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Revise P338/0, The Officer of Supreme Justice to:

Create a new rule entitled 'The Officer of Supreme Justice' with the
following text: 
"The Officer of Supreme Justice (OSJ) is an Elected Officer. The OSJ is
responsible for recognising RFJ's, selecting Judges and recusing Judges."

Alter Rule 235 so that the words "the Administrator shall" are replaced with
"the Officer of Supreme Justice shall".

Alter Rule 238 so that the words "The Administrator shall" are replaced with
"The Officer of Supreme Justice shall".

--
The Kid

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal Submission: Officers and Gentlemen
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 10:02:18 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[This is essentially the same as what used to be tacked on the end of the
OSJ prop, but revised to be compatable with Joels prop.]]

I submit the following proposal entitled 'Officers and Gentlemen':

Create a new Rule entitled 'Officers and Gentlemen' with the following text:
"If a player is dissatisfied with the conduct of an Elected Officer e may
propose a Motion of No Confidence naming that Officer. A Motion of No
Confidence is a Secondary Approvable Motion requiring a two-thirds
passage-ratio to be adopted.

If a Motion of No Confidence is adopted then the Officer who is named in
that Motion is removed from es Office and the Office becomes vacant. An
election for the Office is held the nweek following the adopted Motion of No
Confidence.

Motions of No Confidence may not be proposed in the last nweek of an
Officer's Term."

Append the following text to the end of Rule 205:
"At the end of the Term of Office the current Officer is automatically
nominated for election unless e publicly specifies otherwise. If no Player
other than the current Officer is nominated for election then the current
Officer is automatically elected for another Term and no election is
required. In the event that the election is tied, the Administrator shall
select one of the tied players to hold the Office, but the Term of Office is
reduced to one nweek."

In Rule 227 replace the line "3. all Ballot Item Elections are held again in
the next nweek" with the following text:
"3. Ballot Item Elections for non-vacant Offices are held again in the next
nweek. The current Officer keeps their Office for another nweek. Candidates
must put themselves forward for election again.
4. Ballot Item Elections for vacant Offices shall carry on the majority of
votes cast."

--
The Kid

Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 12:07:06 +0100
From: zagarna <[email-masked]>
To: 'business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: modification of  proposal 331/0:Motion to remove players
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I wish to amend proposal 331/0 to read in full:
create a new rule titled:"Motion to Remove Players" that reads:"Any
Agent qualified as a Player may cease to be one if a Motion to Remove
naming em is adopted. Motions to Remove are Secondary Approvable
Motions. A Motion to Remove is subject to 10-day unanimous consent.
[[so nobody can be removed if he checks the list at least once per
nweek]]

The Motive Order corresponding to an adopted Motion to Remove directs
the officer responsible for the maintainance of the roster to remove the
named Agent from the Roster. 

zagarna

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: proposal recognition 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 10:59:31 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following proposals are recognized:

P337/1, Market Economy, by The Kid
P338/1, The Officer of Supreme Justice, by The Kid
P341/0, Conflicting Legislative Orders, by Joel Uckelman
P342/0, Motion to Remove Players II, by Zagarna
P343/0, Officers and Gentlemen, by The Kid

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: P340 revision
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 11:36:30 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Add as the final sentence of section 2: "In the event of a tie for the most 
votes among two or more candidates for an Elective Office, the 
Administrator shall select one of those candidates to hold the Office."

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: recognition and quorum vote
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 11:38:57 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following proposal is recognized:

P340/1, elective offices, by Joel Uckelman

Also, this voting period will be a Quorum Vote, as per 309/0.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 5
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:12:06 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Voting for nweek 5 ends at 21 November 2000, 00:00:00. The following 
Proposals are up for voting:

P336/0, unanimous consent fix, Joel Uckelman
P337/1, Market Economy, The Kid
P338/1, The Officer of Supreme Justice, The Kid
P340/1, elective offices, Joel Uckelman
P341/0, Conflicting Legislative Orders, Joel Uckelman
P342/0, Motion to Remove Players II, Zagarna
P343/0, Officers and Gentlemen, The Kid

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Motion to Add
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 15:16:33 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I move that M'cachessilnath ([email-masked]) be added as a Player.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: voting results, nweek 5
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 20:28:12 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Rather light turnout this time, but quorum was met since this was a quorum 
vote.

Proposal 336/0 passed (4-1-0-8).
Proposal 337/1 failed (2-3-0-8).
Proposal 338/1 passed (3-2-0-8).
Proposal 340/1 passed (4-1-0-8).
Proposal 341/0 passed (4-1-0-8).
Proposal 342/0 passed (3-2-0-8).
Proposal 343/0 passed (3-2-0-8).

Scoring:
  +48	Joel Uckelman
  +21	Josh Kortbein
  +19	The Kid
  +18	Zagarna
   +3	Remo

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: motion recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 21:25:35 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Now that unanimous consent is fixed again, it seems ok to recognize the 
following motions, for which unanimous consent is requested:

Trivial Amendments:

1: Change the word "proscribed" to "prescribed" in R106/0.
2: Change the word "es" to "eir" in R306/0.

Player Addition:

1: I move that M'cachessilnath ([email-masked]) be added as a Player.

Also, two more Trivial Amendments, which are also recognized:

3: Replace "Roaster" with "Roster" in R313/0.

(Heh heh. I didn't know there was a Player in charge of the Roaster. I 
didn't even know our game had a Roaster.)

4: Replace the first instance of the word "a" with "an" in R230/3.

If there are no objections, the Trivial Amendments will pass in two days, 
and the Player Addition in three days.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: OSJ Nomination
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 13:30:19 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I nominate myself to be OSJ.

--
The Kid

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: spoon-business: motion recognition
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 13:41:28 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Trivial Amendments:
> 3: Replace "Roaster" with "Roster" in R313/0.

I object to this on the grounds that the word "Roaster" does not appear in
R313/0.

I submit the following two Trivial Amendments:

Replace "Roaster" with "Roster" in R314/0.
Change the word "es" to "eir" in R315/0.

--
The Kid

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal Submission: R227/2 Amendment
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 13:49:50 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I submit a proposal entitled 'R227/2 Amendment' with the following text:

Amend R227/2 as follows:

Replace the text "Candidates must put themselves forward for election
again." with the text "Candidates must be nominated for election again."

Replace the text "shall carry on the majority of votes cast." with the text
"shall be determined as if quorum was met."

--
The Kid

--
Andy Harrison - Software Engineer, Anite Telecoms Ltd
[email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Anite Telecoms Limited - Registered in England No. 1721900
Registered Office: 100 Longwater Avenue, Greenpark, Reading, Berks

Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:45:41 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal:  For consistancy
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal titled "This game is an agent"
______
Enact a new rule titled "This game is an agent" with text as follows:

This game is an agent.
______

Poulenc

Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:12:18 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: Mine.
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal titled "Property ownership"

1. Enact a new rule with the title "Property Ownership" and text as
follows:

Agents may own entities.  Unless otherwise specified in the rules, the
initial owner of any entity is this game.

_____

2. Enact a new rule with the title "Agents and Property Ownership" and
text as follows:

Agents are non-transferrable.  Unless specified otherwise in the rules,
each agent is owned by this game.

Each player is owned by emself.
_____

4. Enact a new rule with the title "Transferrable objects" and text as
follows:

If the rules specify an entity to be a transferrable object then the owner
of that entity may transfer ownership of that object to any other agent at
will by posting to the public forum.  The ownership of non-transferrable
objects may not be changed by this method. 
_____

Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:16:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal:  Points are transferrable objects
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal titled "Points are transferrable objects"

Amend rule 121/1 to read as follows:
_____
Associated with each Agent is a scalar quantity known as eir score, the
unit of which is the Point.  No player may voluntarily reduce eir score to
less than zero points, nor may a player arbitrarily increase eir score.
All scores are initially zero points.

Points are indivisible, and may not be posessed or transferred in
fractional quantities.  All point awards shall be rounded to the nearest
integer prior to any transactions involving them.  Points are
transferrable objects.
_____

Poulenc.

Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:39:13 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal:  Transferrable votes
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal entitled "Transferable Voting!":

Enact a new rule titled "New Transferable Votes" to read as follows:

With the nweekly distribution of the ballot, the Administrator shall
create for each ballot item one New Transferable Vote for each player, and
distribte these to each player so that every player recieves one New
Transferable Vote on each ballot item.

New Transferable Votes are entities that may be created by the
administrator only when required by the rules, they may be destroyed by
their owner at any time, and they are transferable objects. New Each
Transferable Vote is marked with the serial number of the ballot item it
represents, and can be used by its owner to cast a vote on that item; this
may be done either by posting in the public forum or by privately
notifying the Administrator. This use destroys that New Transferable Vote.  
At the end of the voting period, the Administrator shall order any
remaining New Transferable Votes to be destroyed.
_____

Repeal rule 224

_____

Poulenc.

Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 14:37:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Recinded Proposal and Replacement 1.
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I recind my submit to create a proposal titled "Property Ownership" and
instead submit this new version with some error corrections.

The following is a new proposal titled "Property ownership"

1. Enact a new rule with the title "Property Ownership" and text as
follows:

Agents may own entities.  Unless otherwise specified in the rules, the
initial owner of any entity is this game.

_____

2. Enact a new rule with the title "Agents and Property Ownership" and
text as follows:

Agents are non-transferrable.  Unless specified otherwise in the rules,
each agent is owned by this game.

Each player is owned by emself.
_____

4. Enact a new rule with the title "Transferrable objects" and text as
follows:

If the rules specify an entity to be a transferrable object then the owner
of that entity may transfer ownership of that object to any other agent at
will by posting to the public forum.  The ownership of non-transferrable
objects may not be changed by this method.
_____

5. Enact a new rule with the title "Ownership may change by the rules
only."

Entities may not be created, destroyed except as specified by the rules.
The ownership of entities may not change excpet as specified by the
rules.
_____

Poulenc.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Object proposal
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 22:01:09 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Here's a proposal that covers some things that people have been touching 
on, but in a way I think is more extensible than what has already been 
proposed. With such a definition of Object, we could simply change Points, 
and whatever else as needs be, into Objects. That would prevent us from 
having to specify every time what characteristics those things have. So, 
here goes:

----

Create a rule entitled "Objects":

Objects are indivisible and may be possessed only in nonnegative 
quantities. Agents may own Objects. No entity may be both an Object and an 
Agent. Objects may not be created, destroyed, or otherwise altered, 
transferred, or adulterated except as allowed by the Rules.

----

Thus, we might consider defining Points as "transferable Objects".

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: It's my Object and I'll cry if I want to
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 14:35:32 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I submit the following proposal entitled "It's my Object and I'll cry if I
want to":

Create a Rule entitled 'Object Orientation' with the following text:
"An Object is an entity that is owned by an Agent. Agents may gain ownership
or lose ownership of Objects only in he manner defined in the Ruleset.
Agents may only own a positive integral number of a specific type of Object,
unless it is otherwise specified elsewhere in the Ruleset."

Create a Rule entitled 'The Officer of Bean Counting' with the following
text:
"The Officer of Bean Counting (OBC) is an Elected Officer. The OBC is
responsible for keeping track of the number of each Object currently owned
by each Agent."

Create a Rule entitled 'Trade Descriptions Act' with the following text:
"An Agent may Trade a number of Objects with another Agent by posting the
details of their Trade to a public forum. All Agents involved in the Trade
must publicly agree to the Trade. The OBC shall within reasonable time
recognise the result of the Trade."

--
The Kid

Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 20:50:58 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Proposal:  For consistancy
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I rescind the following attempt to create a new proposal.

On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, Dan Waldron wrote:

> The following is a new proposal titled "This game is an agent"
> ______
> Enact a new rule titled "This game is an agent" with text as follows:
> 
> This game is an agent.
> ______
> 
> Poulenc
> 
> 
> 

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: motion recognition 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 23:06:23 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth "Harrison, Andrew":
> > Trivial Amendments:
> > 3: Replace "Roaster" with "Roster" in R313/0.
> 
> I object to this on the grounds that the word "Roaster" does not appear in
> R313/0.

Ok. So TA3 fails.

> I submit the following two Trivial Amendments:
> 
> Replace "Roaster" with "Roster" in R314/0.
> Change the word "es" to "eir" in R315/0.
> 
> --
> The Kid
> 

These are recognized as 4 and 5, respectively.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: motion recognition 
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 23:22:44 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quoth Joel Uckelman:
> Quoth "Harrison, Andrew":
> > > Trivial Amendments:
> > > 3: Replace "Roaster" with "Roster" in R313/0.
> > 
> > I object to this on the grounds that the word "Roaster" does not appear in
> > R313/0.
> 
> Ok. So TA3 fails.
> 
> > I submit the following two Trivial Amendments:
> > 
> > Replace "Roaster" with "Roster" in R314/0.
> > Change the word "es" to "eir" in R315/0.
> > 
> > --
> > The Kid
> > 
> 
> These are recognized as 4 and 5, respectively.

Scratch that. They should be 5 and 6.

And Trivial Amendments 1, 2, and 4 have all received unanimous consent as of two hours ago, so their corresponding changes will be applied.

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 10:28:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Recinded Proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I recind my second attempt to create a new proposal titled "Property
ownership"

Poulenc.

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 10:35:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: New Transferrable Votes rescinded and reproposed.
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I rescind my attempt to create a new proposal entitled "Transferable
Voting!"

_____

The following is a new proposal entitled "Transferable Voting!":

Enact a new rule titled "New Transferable Votes" to read as follows:

With the nweekly distribution of the ballot, the Administrator shall
create for each ballot item one New Transferable Vote for each player, and
recind these to each player so that every player recieves one New
Transferable Vote on each ballot item.

New Transferable Votes are entities that may be created by the
administrator only when required by the rules, they may be destroyed by
their owner at any time.  They may be transferred by their owner to any
other legal owner by posting to the public forum.  Eacn New Transferable
Vote is marked with the serial number of the ballot item it represents,
and can be used by its owner to cast a vote on that item; this may be done
either by posting in the public forum or by privately notifying the
Administrator. This use destroys that New Transferable Vote.  At the end
of the voting period, the Administrator shall order any remaining New
Transferable Votes to be destroyed.

_____

Repeal rule 224

_____

Poulenc.

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 10:54:53 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal:  The Bank
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal entitled "The Bank"

Enact a rule entitled "The Bank" with text as follows:

The Bank is an agent, but it is not a legal voter.  The Bank may create
Points.  The Bank acts only to comply with legally-issued Administrative
or Judicial orders.

The Bank may create points by posting to the public forum.  These created
points are owned by the Bank.
_____

Enact a rule entitled "The Banker" with text as follows:

The Office of The Banker is an elective office.  It is the responsibility
of the Banker to post actions to the public forum for the Bank.

If the Bank is required to transfer more points than it owns, the Banker
may order it to create more points before the transfer.

____

Poulenc.

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 10:55:28 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Recinded proposal and replacement 2
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I rescind my attempt to create a new proposal titled "Points are
transferrable objects"

The following is a new proposal titled "Points are transferrable objects"

Amend rule 121/1 to read as follows: 
_____ 

Associated with each agent is a scalar quantity known as eir score.  An
agent's score is a representation of the number of point objects owned by 
em.

The owner of one or more points may transfer any or all points in eir
posession to another legal owner by posting to the public forum.

If the rules call for the Administrator to credit a player with a certain
number of points then e shall order the transfer of those points from the
Bank to that player.

If the rules call for the Administrator to debit a player a certain number
of points then e shall order that player to transfer the required points
to the Bank.
_____

Poulenc.

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 11:09:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal:  Extra Votes
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal entitled "Extra Votes"

Enact a new rule with the titled "Extra Votes" and text as follows:

Extra Votes are objects.  The owner of one or more Extra Votes may
transfer any or all of those Extra Votes to another legal owner by posting
to the public Forum.

The Owner of an Extra Vote may use the Extra Vote to cast one vote on any
ballot item, provided that e is a legal voter, by posting to the public
forum.  This use also transfers ownership of that Extra Vote to the Bank.
A voter may not use more than one Extra Vote on a single ballot item.

There are five extra votes.  Initially, all Extra Votes are owned by the
Bank.

An agent having a score of greater than or equal to 100 points may
purchase an Extra Vote by posting to the Public Forum.  This transfers 100
points from that player to the Bank, and the Administrator shall then,
within a reasonable amount of time, order the transfer of one Extra Vote
from the Bank to that player, provided that the Bank owns at least one
Extra Vote.
_____

Poulenc

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal 
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 16:47:09 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

In the interest of keeping everything fairly sane and try to keep the
proposals compatible:
______________

I recind my proposal entitled "It's my Object and I'll cry if I want to"
______________

I propose the following proposal entitled 'The Officer of Bean Counting':

Create a Rule entitled 'The Officer of Bean Counting' with the following
text:
"The Officer of Bean Counting (OBC) is an Elected Officer. The OBC is
responsible for keeping track of the number of each Object currently owned
by each Agent."
______________

[[Suggestions to Poulenc for his proposals:
Make Transferable Votes to be Objects rather than entities.
Remove the Administrator from the equation as far as points go. If the rules
specify that a Player should be awarded points then the Bank should go ahead
and do it rather than wait for the Administrator to say so.
Do the same for buying the extra votes from the bank, why does the
Administrator need to get involved?]]

--
The Kid

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 12:25:25 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: AWAY
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new Proposal entitled "AWAY players - slight change"

Change the second sentence of rule 307 to read as follows:

If at any time a player has not voted in the last three nweeks the
Administrator shall, within a reasonable amount of time, grant them the
[Away] attribute by posting a message to that effect to the public forum.

_____

[[I know this is but a slight modification, but it fixes the
retroactive problem when we only notice the "Away" afterwards, and it also
means that we will be warned when we are declared Away.]]

Poulenc.

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 12:40:40 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal:  Salaries for Officers and Judges
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new proposal with the title "Salaries for Officers and
Judges"

_____
Enact a new rule with the title "Salaries for Officers and Judges" and
with text as follows:

The Offical Salary and the Judicial Salary are values associated with this
game.  They may be changed only as specified by the rules.  Initially, the
value of each is zero.

At the end of each nweek the Banker shall, within a reasonable length of
time, transfer a number of points equal to the Official Salary from the
Bank to the holder each elective office and the Administrator.  E shall
not transfer more points than one Official Salary to any agent, even if
that agent holds more than one office.

When a judge returns a judgement, the Banker shall transfer a number of
points equal to the Judicial Salary from the Bank to that judge.

Once per nweek, with a post to the public forum the Banker may set the
values of the Official Salary and the Judicial Salary such that the value
of each is neither less than zero nor greater than twenty.

_____

Poulenc

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 13:19:38 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Proposals are recognized:

P344/0, R227/2 Amendment, by The Kid
P345/0, Object proposal, by Joel Uckelman
P346/0, Transferable Voting!, by Poulenc
P347/0, The Bank, by Poulenc
P348/0, Extra Votes, by Poulenc
P349/0, The Officer of Bean Counting, by Poulenc
P350/0, Points are transferrable objects, by Poulenc
P351/0, AWAY players - slight change, by Poulenc
P352/0, Salaries for Officers and Judges, by Poulenc

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Tax and Spend
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 14:45:11 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I make the following proposal entitled "Tax and Spend":

1. Repeal R232.

2. Repeal R233.

3. Replace R231 with the following text, entitled "Proposal Scoring":

"Whenever a Proposal is adopted, the Bank owes:

	1. the Adopted Proposal Award to the Proposal's owner
	2. the Opposed Minority Award to each Agent who voted against the Proposal

Whenever a Proposal fails, the Bank is owed:

	1. the Failed Proposal Fine by the Proposal's owner"

4. Create a rule entitled "Proposal Disbursements" with the following text:

Once per nweek, the Banker may set the Point values of the Adopted Proposal and Opposed Minority Awards such that the value of each is neither less than zero nor greater than twenty.

Once per nweek, the Tax Collector may set the Point value of the Failed Proposal Fine such that its value is neither less than zero nor greater than twenty."

5. Create a Rule entitled "Office of the Tax Collector", with the following text:

"The Office of The Tax Collector is an Elective Office. It is the responsibility of the Tax Collector to recover from Agents debts owed the Bank."

6. Create a Rule entitled "Bankruptcy":

"If ever the Bank's Point debts exceed its Point holdings plus the total Points it is owed, the Bank has become bankrupt.

Whenever the Bank is bankrupt, the Banker and Tax Collector are fined 20 Points each, with the excpetion that the Bankruptcy Fine may be imposed no more than once per turn."

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 16:34:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Revision of Proposal 346
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is the first revision of my Proposal 346.

[[Since this proposal seems to be confusing I have added some comments as
of this revision to try to make it clear what it will do.  I have also
changed "players" to "eligible voters" to make it more inclusive, and I
have added a couple of lines to get rid of a potential loophole.]]

If proposal 345 passed then enact a new rule titled "New Transferable
Votes" to read as follows:

With the nweekly distribution of the ballot, the Administrator shall
create for each ballot item one New Transferable Vote for each eligible
voter, and transfer ownership of these to each eligible voter so that
every eligible voter recieves one New Transferable Vote on each ballot
item.

[[Each player gets one and only one NTV per ballot item.  Each NTV can
only be used to vote on the ballot item for which it was issued.]]

New Transferable Votes are entities that may be created by the
administrator only when required by the rules, they may be destroyed by
their owner at any time.  They may be transferred by their owner to any
other legal owner by posting to the public forum.  Eacn New Transferable
Vote is marked with the serial number of the ballot item it represents,
and can be used by its owner to cast a vote on that item.  This may be
done either by posting in the public forum or by privately notifying the
Administrator.  This use destroys that New Transferable Vote.  No vote may
be cast except through this use and consequent destruction of a New
Transferable Vote.  At the end of the voting period the Administrator
shall order any remaining New Transferable Votes destroyed.

[[Players may swap, sell, trade or otherwise manipulate NTVs until the end
of the voting period.  During that time they each one may be used to cast
a vote on the ballot item for which it was created.  If you can get hold
of several, you may cast several votes on that ballot item.]]

"NTV" may be used to stand for "New Transferable Vote" in official and
unofficial documents. 

_____

Repeal rule 224 [[This allows one vote and one vote only.  This is
unnescessary, even a hinderance since player will now vote through the
use of the NTVs rather than the old system.]]

Repeal rule 226 [[Rather than amend rule 226 I chose to incorporate the
same idea into the NTV rule.]]

_____

Poulenc.

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 16:55:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal:  New religious text to be added.
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a new Proposal titled "Nomic: not just a game but a way
of life!"

Append "The Rules of this game" to the list of recognized religious texts
in rule 302.
_____

Poulenc.

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 17:06:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Proposal recognition
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I revise P350/0, Points are transferrable objects, by appending the
following paragraph to the amended version of rule 121:

Upon the enactment of this rule, the previously-existing score of each
player is converted into a number of points such that the score before and
after the enactment is exactly the same.  The administrator may not
perform any scoring operations resulting from the end of voting until this
has been done.  This paragraph will then self-delete.

_____
Poulenc

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 19:29:22 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal Revision: The Bank
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is the first revision of my proposal 347

[[This is a major revision.  I have essentially rewritten the whole thing
here and added in a lot of stuff, including rules for dealing with
debtors, ways for the Banker to act on behalf of the bank, Motions
submittable by any agent that can require (and allow) the bank to take a
wide variety of actions.]]

Enact a rule entitled "The Bank" with text as follows:

The Bank is an agent, but not an eligible voter.

If a debt owed the Bank is overdue the Bank may submit a Motion for
Repayment of that debt, at the discretion of the Banker.

A Bank Motion is a motion that, once submitted, becomes a Ballot Item on
the next nweekly voting.  A Bank Motion should describe one or more
actions to be performed by the Bank.  If it passes, a Motive Order is
issued for the Bank to perform those actions.
_____

Enact a rule entitled "The Banker" with text as follows:

The Office of The Banker is an elective office.  It is the responsibility
of the Banker to post actions to the public forum for the Bank.  There are
some decisions that must be made and some actions that must be performed
by the bank.  This office acts as the decision-making and
action-performing part of the Bank.

If a CFJ finds that the Banker has not allowed the Bank to perform its
required duties within a reasonable length of time e is expelled from the
office and fined fifty points.

It is up to the Banker to decide what actions the Bank will take, and post
those actions to the public forum.  Eir nweekly report should include a
summary of all actions taken by the Bank in that nweek, and also a list of
the scores of each player and all debts owed by or owed to the bank.

The Banker may always cause the Bank to perform an action in an
Administrative, Motive, or Legistative Order, provided that it is a legal
action for the Bank. The Banker may also cause the bank to repay any debt
that it owes.  If another action is to be performed, the Banker must act
on behalf of the bank, and although the action is performed as if acted by
the bank, it cannot affect items owned by the bank or enter the bank into
any debts, or be any other effect not normally allowed by the action an
independant agent.

_____

Enact a new rule titled "Points Owed"

If an agent owes points, e is considered a debtor.  The agent to which
those points are owed is eir creditor.  If e does not pay those points
which e owes within whatever time is agreed upon in advance by those
parties, or two nweeks otherwise, the debt becomes overdue and eir
creditor may submit a Motion for Repayment for that particular debt.

A Motion for Repayment that is submitted becomes a ballot issue at the
start of the next nweekly voting.  If it passes then a Motive Order is
issued for the repayment of the debt, to be performed as soon as possible.

_____

Poulenc.

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 19:37:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Revision of Salary proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a revised version of my proposal 352.
_____

[[I have made this compatible with Joel's proposal and my idea for a debt
system]]

Enact a new rule with the title "Salaries for Officers and Judges" and
with text as follows:

The Offical Salary and the Judicial Salary are values associated with this
game.  They may be changed only as specified by the rules.  Initially, the
value of each is zero.

At the end of each nweek, the bank owes one Official Salary, in points, to
each agent who hold one or more paid offices.  An agent that holds
multiple offices cannot recieve more that one Official Salary.

When a judge returns a judgement, the bank owes one Judicial Salary to
em.

Once per nweek, with a post to the public forum, the Banker may set the
values of the Official Salary and the Judicial Salary such that the value
of each is neither less than zero nor greater than twenty.

_____

Poulenc

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: proposal recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 20:58:07 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Proposals are recognized:

P346/1, Transferable Votes!, by Poulenc
P347/1, The Bank, by Poulenc
P350/1, Points are transferrable objects, by Poulenc
P352/0, Salaries for Officers and Judges, by Poulenc
P353/0, Tax and Spend, by Joel Uckelman
P354/0, Nomic: not just a game but a way of life!, by Poulenc

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 22:00:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: another Revision of Salary proposal 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a another revised version of my proposal 352.  Or, if I
am not allowed to revise it until the previous revision has been
recognized, I rescind the previous revision and submit instead this as a
new revision.

_____

[[I have made this compatible with Joel's proposal and my idea for a debt
system]]

Enact a new rule with the title "Salaries for Officers and Judges" and
with text as follows:

The Offical Salary and the Judicial Salary are values associated with this
game.  They may be changed only as specified by the rules.  Initially, the
value of each is zero.

At the end of each nweek, the bank owes one Official Salary, in points, to
each agent who holds one or more paid offices.  An agent that holds
multiple offices cannot recieve more that one Official Salary.

When a judge returns a judgement, the bank owes one Judicial Salary to
em.

Once per nweek, with a post to the public forum, the Banker may set the
values of the Official Salary and the Judicial Salary such that the value
of each is neither less than zero nor greater than twenty.

_____

Delete the paragraph following the numerical list in rule 273

_____

Poulenc

Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 22:11:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal Revision: The Bank (again)
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is the second revision of my proposal 347

[[This is a major revision.  I have essentially rewritten the whole thing
here and added in a lot of stuff, including rules for dealing with
debtors, ways for the Banker to act on behalf of the bank, Motions
submittable by any agent that can require (and allow) the bank to take a
wide variety of actions.]]

[[I am applying Joel's comment- that the OBC is already responsible for
the players' scores, so the banker shouldn't have to do it too.  Obviously
I wansn't paying much attention when I wrote that bit.  Thanks Joel]]

Enact a rule entitled "The Bank" with text as follows:

The Bank is an agent, but not an eligible voter.

If a debt owed the Bank is overdue the Bank may submit a Motion for
Repayment of that debt, at the discretion of the Banker.

A Bank Motion is a motion that, once submitted, becomes a Ballot Item on
the next nweekly voting.  A Bank Motion should describe one or more
actions to be performed by the Bank.  If it passes, a Motive Order is
issued for the Bank to perform those actions.
_____

Enact a rule entitled "The Banker" with text as follows:

The Office of The Banker is an elective office.  It is the responsibility
of the Banker to post actions to the public forum for the Bank.  There are
some decisions that must be made and some actions that must be performed
by the bank.  This office acts as the decision-making and
action-performing part of the Bank.

If a CFJ finds that the Banker has not allowed the Bank to perform its
required duties within a reasonable length of time e is expelled from the
office and fined fifty points.

It is up to the Banker to decide what actions the Bank will take, and post
those actions to the public forum.  Eir nweekly report should include a
summary of all actions taken by the Bank in that nweek, and also a list
debts owed by or owed to the bank.

The Banker may always cause the Bank to perform an action in an
Administrative, Motive, or Legistative Order, provided that it is a legal
action for the Bank. The Banker may also cause the bank to repay any debt
that it owes.  If another action is to be performed, the Banker must
instead act on behalf of the bank, and although the action is performed as
if acted by the bank, it cannot affect items owned by the bank or enter
the bank into any debts, or be any other effect not normally allowed by
the action an independant agent.

_____

Enact a new rule titled "Points Owed"

If an agent owes points, e is considered a debtor.  The agent to which
those points are owed is eir creditor.  If e does not pay those points
which e owes within whatever time is agreed upon in advance by those
parties, or two nweeks otherwise, the debt becomes overdue and eir
creditor may submit a Motion for Repayment for that particular debt.

A Motion for Repayment that is submitted becomes a ballot issue at the
start of the next nweekly voting.  If it passes then a Motive Order is
issued for the repayment of the debt, to be performed as soon as possible.

_____

Poulenc.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: new Player
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 21:30:15 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Motion to Add 1 received unanimous consent about a minute or so ago, so M'cachessilnath is now a Player.

Everyone say "hi" to Chess.

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Rule Cleanup
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 21:41:42 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following is a Proposal to nix some things no longer needed in the Rules:

1. Repeal R6/0. [["Passage ratio" has superseeded all of the technical uses of "majority".]]

2. Repeal R209/0. [[This Rule applies only to the frist nweek of play.]]

----

Also I, introduce the following Trivial Amendment:

Change "Agent" to "Agents" in R113/0.

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: 
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 17:36:47 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I submit the following proposal entitled 'Who owns the Rules?' with the
following text:

Create a Rule entitled 'Who owns the Rules?' with the following text:

"Rules are Objects. When a new Rule is created the owner of the proposal
that created the Rule becomes the owner of the Rule. When an existing Rule
is modified the owner of the proposal that modified the Rule becomes the
owner of the Rule, regardless of who the previous owner was. When a Rule is
repealed it ceases to exist and as such is not able to be owned."

Change the text of Rule 211/0 : Winning to the following text:
"Whenever an Agent's score reaches or exceeds 500 points, and that Agent
owns 20 or more Rules, the Administrator shall credit em with a Win."

For all existing Rules, determine which proposal created or most recently
modified them, and transfer ownership of the Rule to the player who
submitted that proposal. For any Rules that were not created or modified
[[i.e. those Initial Rules which have not been modified]] transfer ownership
to the Bank, or if there is no Agent defined as the Bank, then these Rules
shall remain unowned.

--
The Kid

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Win Token Proposal
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 17:11:32 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I offer the following Proposal, entitled "Win Tokens":

1. Amend R211 to read:

"Whenever an Agent owns at least the required number of Win Tokens, the Administrator shall credit em with a Win."

2. Amend R122 to read:

"In the event of a Win being awarded, the Administrator shall redistribute all Objects to their initial Owners as specified in the Rules and play shall continue normally, if possible; otherwise, play ceases."

3. Create a new Rule entitled "Win Tokens" with the following text:

"Win Tokens are transferrable Objects. The Administrator shall award an Agent with a Win Token if that Agent meets any of the following conditions:

1. possesses 500 or more Points
2. holds some Elected Office for a full Term
3. renders a Judgment as a Judge

Once an Agent has been awarded a Win Token for a condition, e may not receive another Win Token for that condition until after the next Win is awarded."

From: "Chess" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: The Name Game
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 14:21:27 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I submit the following proposal titled "The Name Game" with the following
text:

Revise Rule 1/0, entitled "The Game", to the following text:

"'A Nomic' shall refer to the specific instance of Nomic game which
possesses the body of rules containing this definition, unless it is made
clear, whether explicitly or via the context, that 'A Nomic' refers to
something else. Only the permutation of letter case which has both the
initial A and the initial N of the second word capitalised may be take in
this context, since the name in any other permutation case may be
ambiguous."

--
M'cachessilnath The Insane One

From: "Chess" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Nomic Business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: Home sweet Home
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 14:40:32 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I submit a proposal entitled 'No place like home' with the following text:

If Proposal 345/0 passes, enact a new rule with the title "No place like
home" and with text as follows:

"A Place is a special instance of Object, which has the additional variables
'position', 'Player-capacity' and 'Object-capacity'. A Place may hold a
given number of Players and a given number of Objects, and may be owned by
more than one Player at one time. Places may be subdivided, but only into
subcatagories such as 'rooms' which belong strictly to that Place - this
part of this rule supersedes the relevant part of the rule entitled
'Objects'."

Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:02:05 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: prop:titles
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<proposal title="naming the nameless">
enact a new rule entitled 'proposal titles' with the following text:

This rule applies only to proposals which (propose to) create a single new
rule.

When the appropriate officer recognizes a new proposal, then:
if the proposal lacks a title but the proposed new rule would have a
title, the title of the proposal becomes the same same as the title of the
rule;
if the new rule lacks a title but the proposal has a title, the new rule's
title becomes the same as the title of the proposal.

If neither the proposal nor the new rule have titles, this rule has no
effect.

</proposal>

- You have received mail from Quebec. my beard will eat your mustache.
- http://lostpoet.tripod.com/
- whee life what a rush

Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:39:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal Revision: NTV
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I revise proposal 346 by changing, in the second paragraph, "Eacn" to
"Each"

Poulenc

Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:42:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Waldron <[email-masked]>
To: "'nomic-business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Another revision of NTVs
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I change the first paragraph of proposal 346 to read as follows:

If proposal 345 passed then the rules are to be modified in the following
ways:  Rules 224 and 226 shall be repealed, and a new rule shall be
enacted titled "New Transferable Votes" with text as follows below.

Delete the last two paragraphs and the line of underscore characters.

Poulenc

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: proposal recognition
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:17:52 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following Proposals are recognized:

P346/2, Transferable Voting!, by Poulenc
P346/3, Transferable Voting!, by Poulenc
P347/2, The Bank, by Poulenc 
P352/2, Salaries for Officers and Judges, by Poulenc
P355/0, Rule Cleanup, by Joel Uckelman
P356/0, Who owns the Rules?, by The Kid
P357/0, Win Tokens, by Joel Uckelman
P358/0, No place like home, by M'cachessilnath
P359/0, The Name Game, by M'cachessilnath
P360/0, naming the nameless, by Benjamin

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 6
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:36:22 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Here is the Ballot for nweek 6. Voting ends at 00:00:00, 1 December 2000.

P344/0, R227/2 Amendment, by The Kid
P345/0, Object proposal, by Joel Uckelman
P346/1, Transferable Voting!, by Poulenc
P347/2, The Bank, by Poulenc
P348/0, Extra Votes, by Poulenc
P349/0, The Officer of Bean Counting, by The Kid
P350/1, Points are transferrable objects, by Poulenc
P351/0, AWAY players - slight change, by Poulenc
P352/2, Salaries for Officers and Judges, by Poulenc
P353/0, Tax and Spend, by Joel Uckelman
P354/0, Nomic: not just a game but a way of life!, by Poulenc
P355/0, Rule Cleanup, by Joel Uckelman
P356/0, Who owns the Rules?, by The Kid
P357/0, Win Tokens, by Joel Uckelman
P358/0, No place like home, by M'cachessilnath
P359/0, The Name Game, by M'cachessilnath
P360/0, naming the nameless, by Benjamin

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot revision
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:00:23 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Oops. What appears as "P346/1" on the Ballot should be "P346/3". Unless 
told otherwise, I'll assume votes for P346 are for the current version.

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net

From: "Harrison, Andrew" <[email-masked]>
To: 'Nomic Business' <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 6 
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:02:53 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> > Am I correct in saying that because I was the only player 
> nominated for OSJ
> > then I get it by default, or do we still have a vote with 
> just my name on
> > the ballot?
> 
> Oh, yeah. I forgot that we have an election this time. The 
> way I read it, 
> so long as *someone* casts a vote for you, you are elected, since the 
> election rule precludes write-ins.

Well, in that case I vote for me.

--
The Kid

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: voting results
From: Joel Uckelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 20:34:25 -0600
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Here are the voting results in brief:

P344/0 passed (7-2-0-5)
P345/0 passed (6-3-0-5)
P346/3 failed (4-5-0-5)
P347/2 passed (6-3-0-5)
P348/0 passed (6-3-0-5)
P349/0 passed (8-1-0-5)
P350/1 passed (5-4-0-5)
P351/0 passed (5-3-1-5)
P352/2 passed (5-4-0-5)
P353/0 passed (6-3-0-5)
P354/0 failed (2-7-0-5)
P355/0 passed (6-3-0-5)
P356/0 passed (5-4-0-5)
P357/0 failed (2-6-1-5)
P358/0 passed (8-1-0-5)
P359/0 passed (5-4-0-5)
P360/0 passed (7-2-0-5)

I'm not exactly sure who is AWAY right now--I think the non-voters should 
number only 2 or 3, but I need to check on that.

This stuff will find its way to the page either late tonight or sometime 
tomorrow.

On a side note, the end of the semester is nearing for those of us who are 
students. I for one will be a little busier than normal from now until the 
week after next; I hope it doesn't bother anyone if I shift from being slow 
to slower in the meantime.

Looking forward to more coding over break and the coming of age of division 
of labor... :)

-- 
J.

--
Play Nomic!
http://www.nomic.net