Subject: spoon-business: okay, it's time to go.
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 00:33:57 +0000 (GMT)

If there are any more gaping holes in the ruleset, consider it your
personal duty to make a proposal for their change.

I hereby declare this day, 5 December 2001, to be the first day of nweek 1
in "B Nomic" and that the game is officially underway.

Remember, none of you are actually playing yet; per rule 26/0 you have to
post a message to the Public Forum declaring that you wish to be a Player.
(Joel agreed to let me use spoon-business as the public forum.)

Remember: spoon-discuss != spoon-business.

For the record, I am explicitly declaring that, at this time, I do *not*
consent be being designated a Player. That'll give me a couple weeks to
find all the broken stuff in my setup and whip out database forms like a
madman.

The Initial Ruleset can be found, like all good things for this game, at
http://www.nomic.net/~g6/ .

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: okay, it's time to go.
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 02:09:12 +0100
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 00:33:57 +0000 (GMT), "David E. Smith" =
<[email-masked]>
wrote:

>If there are any more gaping holes in the ruleset, consider it your
>personal duty to make a proposal for their change.
>
>I hereby declare this day, 5 December 2001, to be the first day of nweek=
 1
>in "B Nomic" and that the game is officially underway.
>
>Remember, none of you are actually playing yet; per rule 26/0 you have =
to
>post a message to the Public Forum declaring that you wish to be a =
Player.
>(Joel agreed to let me use spoon-business as the public forum.)
>
>Remember: spoon-discuss !=3D spoon-business.
>
>For the record, I am explicitly declaring that, at this time, I do *not*
>consent be being designated a Player. That'll give me a couple weeks to
>find all the broken stuff in my setup and whip out database forms like a
>madman.
>
>The Initial Ruleset can be found, like all good things for this game, at
>http://www.nomic.net/~g6/ .
>
>...dave
>
>
>
does that mean spoon-business is the official public forum?
if so I declare myself the first player of B Nomic with the name of =
Antonio

and I also have a proposal ready:

<begin proposal>=20
Proposal Title:Cleaning up

*The sentence "Each Player may only cast one vote on any given Proposal =
or
Motion." shall be removed from rule 20/0

*the sentence "Only the last vote on any given Motion, Proposal, or issue=
 will
be counted." in rule 20/0 shall be removed

*the sentence "Votes may only be cast during the Voting" shall be added =
to rule
31/0=20

*rule 32/0 shall be amended to read "A proposal passes if and only if, it=
 has
recived a majority of affirmative votes at the end of the Voting. A =
proposal
that does not pass has no effect"

<end proposal>
--
Rivoluzione:
  \o_  (o       __)    ( /    |__     o_  _o/
   |   /\  __\o   \o    |   o/  o/__  (\   |
  / \ |\  /) |    ( \  /o) / |  (  (\  /| / \

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

Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 03:46:15 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: eeek!
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

There I go, forgetting my own darn rules.

Antonio's proposal is recognized as Proposal 100/0, and Antonio is a
Player. Wheeee!

...dave

Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:14:00 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Joining the game / Currency proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I declare myself a player, under the name Rob. [[You don't have to call
me "PurpleBob" this time around.]]

I also submit the following three proposals:

\begin{proposal}
\title{Scoring}

1. Create a rule entitled "Proposal Scoring" with the following text:

  When a player's proposal passes, e recieves 3d6 points.
  
  When a player's proposal fails, e loses 1d6 points, unless e does not
  have that many points, in which case eir score simply becomes 0.

  All dice rolls for the purpose of scoring shall be performed by the
  Administrator.

2. Create a rule entitled "Automation" with the following text:

  Any action which is required to be performed by the Administrator may
  also be performed by an automated script acting on the Administrator's
  behalf.

\end{proposal}

\begin{proposal}
\title{Bucks}

1. Create a rule entitled "Objects" with the following text:

  The state of the game includes Objects, which are created by rules or
  proposals and which belong to a specific player. Ownership of an
  object can be transferred from one player to another if both players
  involved agree to the transfer. Only positive integer numbers of
  objects may be transferred, and one may not own a negative or
  fractional number of a particular object.

  A Revisable Object is not an Object. A Revisiable Object is not an
  Object either, and this sentence will delete itself once the ruleset
  no longer refers to Revisiable Objects.

  Unless overridden by another rule, the ownership of objects is kept
  track of by the Administrator.

2. Create a rule entitled "System of Currency" with the following text:

  Bucks are objects. [[Feel free to modify this rule if you come up with
  a better name for the currency.]] A player recieves 10 Bucks at the
  end of a voting period in which e has voted.

\end{proposal}

[[The purpose of a currency is for use in situations where it would make
sense to spend a finite resource, but the score should not be affected.]]

\begin{proposal}
\title{Revisiing the typos}

1. In Rule 4/0, change the word "revisiable" to "revisable".
2. In Rule 11/0, change the word "revisiable" to "revisable".

\end{proposal}

-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 04:25:03 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Joining the game / Currency proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Rob Speer wrote:

> I declare myself a player, under the name Rob. [[You don't have to call
> me "PurpleBob" this time around.]]

Awww, but I liked that name... :-) Welcome!

"Scoring" is recognized as Proposal 101/0.
"Bucks" is recognized as Proposal 102/0.
"Revisiing the typos" is recognized as Proposal 103/0. (Cute. Really.)

...dave

Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:32:33 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: declaration
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I declare myself to be a player in B Nomic. I shall be known as Benjamin.

Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 04:35:52 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: declaration
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Benjamin Bradley wrote:

> I declare myself to be a player in B Nomic. I shall be known as Benjamin.

Acknowledged. Welcome!

...dave

Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:46:32 -0800
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Test, majordomo seems a bit confused.
From: Robin Lee Powell <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Test.

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ 	BTW, I'm male, honest.
le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno
je xlali -- RLP 				http://www.lojban.org/

From: "ID Scott, Science 99" <[email-masked]>
To: spoon-business <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: declaration
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:16:06 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I explicitly state my wish to become a Player. I may be known as Iain.

cheers,
Iain

From: Glenn Overby II <[email-masked]>
To: B Nomic <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 09:19:03 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Declaration
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I declare myself to be a Player of B Nomic.  I wish to be known as Octagon.

Glenn E. Overby II
Clinton Twp, MI
http://home.earthlink.net/~guardcaptain/

=====

::quote temporarily disabled:: 

From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_Rathlev?= <[email-masked]>
To: "A Nomic Business" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Declaration
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:18:40 +0100
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I declare myself to be a player. I wish to be known as Joerg.

Joerg

Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:42:30 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: acknowledgements
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Octagon, Iain, and Joerg are welcomed to B Nomic. Wheeee!

...dave

To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: More Typo Corrections
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:21:33 +0000
From: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Proposal: More Typo Corrections

1. In rule 19/0, change the word =93reviseable=94 to =93revisable=94.
2.  A reviseable Object is not an Object, and this sentence will delete=20
itself once the ruleset no longer refers to reviseable Objects.=20
3. In rule 4/0, change the word =93differientiate=94 to the=20
word =93differentiate=94.
4. In rule 5/0, change the word =93intrerpolated=94 to the=20
word =93interpolated=94.
5. In rule 5/0, change the word =93premissible=94 to the word =93permissi=
ble=94.
6. This proposal will demonstrate an example of the theorem which=20
hypothesizes that any post commenting on typos or grammatical errors=20
will itself have at least one typo and/or grammatical errorr.

cheers,
Iain

-----------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through SilkyMail v1.1.2

From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_Rathlev?= <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal to clean up scoring
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:57:59 +0100
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Scoring is currently a problem because the Administrator has an
infinite number of points, which means he'll win the game by rule 27
as soon as he becomes a player. (On the other hand, rule 21 defines
that the Administrator "controls" the points, not that e owns them.)

The other problem is that the "score" is, if the rule is interpreted
literally, not related to the number of points in one's posession.

I make the following proposal:

\begin{proposal}
\title{Clean up scoring}

Modify the text of rule 21 to the following:

"Players may own points. The number of points in the posession of a
player shall be known as eir score.

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.

Whenever a rule states that a player receives points, the number of
points in eir posession shall be increased accordingly; whenever a
rule states that a players loses points, the number of points in eir
posession shall be lowered accordingly, but it shall never become less
than zero.

New players initially do not posess any points."

\end{proposal}

Joerg

From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: proposals
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 22:08:32 +0100
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

\begin{proposal}
\title{Proposal revision}

in rule 19/0 replace the second paragraph with the following:

 Proposals are revisable. Proposals may only be revised by their original
author. Proposals may not be revised during Voting. A proposal is not =
considered
"recognized" until it has been assigned a serial number by the =
Administrator. A
proposal is not revised until the administrator updates it's serial =
number.

\end{proposal}

********

\begin{proposal}
\title{Rules revision}

in rule 11/0=20

replace any instance of the words "revisiable" or "revisable" with =
"revisable
objects"

remove the sentence "Every Rule must have a unique Rule number."

\end{proposal}

--
Rivoluzione:
  \o_  (o      __)   ( /    |__     o_  _o/
   |   /\  __\o  \o   |   o/  o/__  (\   |
  / \ |\  /) |   ( \ /o) / |  (  (\  /| / \

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

Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:05:22 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal revision
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I revise proposal 102/0 to:

\begin{proposal}
\title{Bucks}

1. Create a rule entitled "Objects" with the following text:

  The state of the game includes Objects, which are created by rules or
  proposals and which belong to a specific player. Ownership of an
  object can be transferred from one player to another if both players
  involved agree to the transfer. Only positive integer numbers of
  objects may be transferred, and one may not own a negative or
  fractional number of a particular object.

  A Revisable Object is not an Object. A Revisiable Object is not an
  Object either, and this sentence will delete itself once the ruleset
  no longer refers to Revisiable Objects, except in this rule.

  Unless overridden by another rule, the ownership of objects is kept
  track of by the Administrator.

2. Create a rule entitled "System of Currency" with the following text:

  Bucks are objects. [[Feel free to modify this rule if you come up with
  a better name for the currency.]] Each player has 10 Bucks created in
  eir possession at the end of a voting period in which e has voted.

  To "spend" Bucks is synonymous with removing those Bucks from the
  game.

\end{proposal}

-- 
Rob Speer

From: "Gavin Doig" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 08:53:48 +0800
Subject: spoon-business: Joining, proosing
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I join B Nomic, under the name "uniquely identifying names". I make the following proposals of varying utility. (I'm somewhat puzzled by the fact that there seems to have been pregame discussion of changes to the starting rules that isn't reflected in the rules on the website, but I'm basing these on that.)

I express my doubts that any proposal can actually change the rules.

Oh, and I complain in advance about my Roster entry being incomplete...

Proposal: I wish you wouldn't say that.
Amend rule 4 by replacing "revisiable" with "revisable", and "differientiate" with "differentiate", if they appear there.
Amend rule 11 by replacing "Rules are revisiable" (or "Rule are revisable" if that is there instead) with "Rules are revisable objects".
Amend rule 8 by replacing "Excepting any text in the Rule" with "Excepting any text in this Rule".

Proposal: When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
Repeal rules 7 and 12.

Proposal: Our physical shells are rotting.
Remove the 3rd paragraph of rule 9.

Proposal: Strictly psychosomatic.
Amend rule 18 by appending the sentence "A Rule Change consists of the creation (enactment), modification (amendment), or deletion (repeal) of a rule."
Amend rule 19 by replacing the first sentence with "A proposal is a formal request for a set of Rule Changes or other changes to the game state."

Proposal: Say something once, why say it again?
Amend rule 22 by replacing "play continues normally; otherwise, play ceases" with "play continues normally".

Proposal: Did you never call? I waited for your call.
Amend rule 22 by replacing "the Administrator shall reset all Scores" with "all scores are immediately reset".
Amend rule 27 by replacing the current text with "Whenever a Player's score reaches or exceeds 1000 points, they are immediately awarded a Win."

Proposal: Nothing ever happens.
Amend rule 32 by appending the sentence "At that time all the Rule Changes and other changes in that proposal take place (if possible)."

Proposal: If he only gives the word.
Replace all instances of the word "proposal" (ignoring case) in the rules and everywhere else in the game with the word "proosal" (keeping the case of the original).

-- 

_______________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

1 cent a minute calls anywhere in the U.S.!

http://www.getpennytalk.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=RG9853KJ&url=http://www.getpennytalk.com

Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:17:55 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: a whole bucket of recognition
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Iain's "More Typo Corrections" proposal is recognized as 104/0. (The cute
jokes about typoes may cease at this time, thank you. Technically this
probably shouldn't be recognized, but it's been a while for all of us.
I'll be a lot less lenient come nweek 2.)

Joerg's "Clean up scoring" is recognized as 105/0, with the
administrator's fiat that "posession" will be spelled "possession." (heh.)

Antonio's "Proposal revision" is recognized as 106/0.

Antonio's "Rules revision" is recognized as 107/0.

Rob's revision to "Bucks" is recognized as 102/1. (Technically, proposals
aren't revisiable yet, but that's not really the point. They're also not
revisable or reviseable or reviewable or redeemable for cash or in-store
credit fnord.)

(Btw: I know the "current proposals" page lists both versions thereof. As
soon as I figure out how to fix it, I will. SQL gurus are welcome to
heckle.)

"uniquely identifying names" is welcomed to the game, as are his buckets
of proposals:

"I wish you wouldn't say that." is recognized as 108/0

"When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed." is recognized as 109/0
and is recognized as having a longer title than body.

"Our physical shells are rotting" is 110/0.

"Strictly psychosomatic" is 111/0.

"Say something once, why say it again?" is 112/0.

"Did you never call? I waited for your call." is 113/0.

"Nothing ever happens." is 114/0.

"If he only gives the word." is 115/0, despite its dubious utility.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to point out something that should
be painfully obvious: I'm new at this, and to that end I'm sorta declaring
administrator fiat when need be to ensure that the game actually can
proceed until we reach a point where it's legitimately self-sustaining
(or, please please pass 114/0 so I don't have to keep winging it).

I never claimed the initial ruleset would be flawless.

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:49:37 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Proposals taking effect
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[Here's where I play around a bit with systems for formatting a
proposal.]]
<proposal title="I demand order!">

1. Revise the most recent version of rule 32, which may be 32/0 or a
version created by another proposal, to:
<text>

  At the end of each voting period, the proposals that have recieved a
  majority of affirmative votes is deemed to have passed. The others are
  deemed to have failed. All proposals that have been voted on during
  that voting period are then processed in numerical order.

  Proposals are processed in numerical order. When a proposal is
  processed, the following events happen in order:

  1. If and only if the proposal passed, its actions (such as Rule
  Changes or other changes to the state of the game) are put into effect
  in the order in which they are described.
  
  2. Other events related to the passage or failure of the proposal,
  such as awarding or deducting points, occur.

  Proposals may not take effect retroactively.
  
</text>
</proposal>

<sig reassurance="No, I won't go overboard like this in the future">
-- 
Rob Speer
<tag type="frivolous" />
</sig>

From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_Rathlev?= <[email-masked]>
To: "B Nomic Business" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal to create judicial system
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 18:14:46 +0100
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I propose to create a judicial system:

\begin{proposal}
\title{Create a judicial system}

Create a new rule entitled "Call for Judgement" with the following
text:

"A Call for Judgement (CFJ) is a statement to be judged. A CFJ can be
made by any player at any time by questioning the legality of a
player's action, or to request a clarification of the rules. The
player making the CFJ shall be known as the plaintiff, the player
whose move the plaintiff claims to be illegal, if any, shall be known
as the defendant.

A Call for Judgement, once made, cannot be modified, but CFJs shall be
given unique identification numbers in the same way as such numbers
are assigned to revisable objects."

Create a new rule entitled "Judges" with the following text:

"When a Call for Judgement has been made, the administrator shall
randomly select one player among the eligible players to be the
judge. Eligble players for the purpose of this rule are all players
but the defendant and the plaintiff. If that leaves no players
eligible to be the judge, all players are eligible."

Create a new rule entitled "Judgement" with the following text:

"The judge shall, within one week after e was selected as the judge,
judge the statement in question as being either true or false or
reject the CFJ, and provide the other players with a legal analysis
that led to his decision. The judge may reject the CFJ only if the
statement in question is unclear or not related to the game.

A judgement cannot be modified. It shall be given the number given to
the CFJ it refers to."

\end{proposal}

\begin{proposal}
\title{Create a statute of limitation}

Create a new rule entitled "Statute of Limitation" with the following
text:

"No Calls for Judgement shall be made regarding any player actions
that have happened more than one nweek ago. Such actions shall always
be treated as if they had been legal.

No Calls for Judgement shall be made regarding any of the rules that
were in effect, or player actions that were performed, before the
voting results of the first voting period of this nomic were made
public."

[[The second paragraph is to avoid that a judge declares any proposals
that fixed issues with the initial ruleset to be illegal or without
effect, which might cause the game to be stuck before it even
started. E.g. before proposal 114 passes, it might be claimed that
proposals do not have any effect.]]

\end{proposal}

Joerg

From: "Chess" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Nomic Business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:24:45 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

\begin{proposal}
\title{Whee!}
Every time the Administrator makes a post to a public forum, he must include
the phrase 'Whee!' in it somewhere, or award a bonus of 10 points to the
first person who calls him on it (by means of sending another email to the
public forum complaining of the omission).
\end{proposal}

Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:54:57 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: still more recognition
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

"I demand order!" is recognized as Proposal 115/0.
"Create a judicial system" is recognized as 116/0.
"Create a statute of limitation" is recognized as 117/0.
"Whee!" is not recognized because I honestly don't recall Chess formally
becoming a player. (If e did and I missed it, let me know.)

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

From: =?us-ascii?Q?Jorg_Rathlev?= <[email-masked]>
To: "B Nomic Business" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-business: still more recognition
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:43:04 +0100
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> "Whee!" is not recognized because I honestly don't recall Chess =
formally
> becoming a player. (If e did and I missed it, let me know.)

And I don't recall the rules requiring you to be a player to make a
proposal. But let's change that (it doesn't change a lot, currently,
as anyone can become a player simply by sending a message to the
public forum):

\begin{proposal}
\title{Only players can make proposals}

Add the following paragraph to rule 19:

"Only players can make proposals."

\end{proposals}

Joerg

Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:40:13 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-business: still more recognition
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Jorg Rathlev wrote:

> And I don't recall the rules requiring you to be a player to make a
> proposal. But let's change that (it doesn't change a lot, currently,
> as anyone can become a player simply by sending a message to the
> public forum):

Point taken. "Whee!" is recognized (118/0) , as is your proposal "Only
players can make proposals" (119/0).

Which reminds me, I'm not using Joel's system, so players aren't obliged
to use those \begin{proposal} tags.

We're up to twenty proposals for the first ballot - Whee!

...dave

From: "Chess" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Nomic Business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: declaration
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:15:49 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I explicitly state my wish to become a Player. I wish to be known as
M'cachessilnath.

Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:51:22 -0800
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Declaration.
From: Robin Lee Powell <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I wish to play B Nomic, and to be known as Turgul.

-Robin, who can't remember if he said this before.

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ 	BTW, I'm male, honest.
le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno
je xlali -- RLP 				http://www.lojban.org/

Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:37:48 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Proposals taking effect
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[This is what I get for rearranging a proposal halfway through.]]

I amend my proposal entitled "I demand order!" as follows:

1. Change the phrase "is deemed to have passed" to "are deemed to have
passed".

2. Remove the paragraph which says "Proposals are processed in numerical
order."

-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:13:06 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Proposals taking effect
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Rob Speer wrote:

> I amend my proposal entitled "I demand order!" as follows:

Noted and recognized as 115/1.

Also, welcome to Turgul and Chess (whose full name I have deemed to be
un-spell-able and so I'll probably habitually refer to em as Chess even
though that's not eir name technically. You'd think by now I'd have the
knack.)

...dave

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:36:29 EST
Subject: spoon-business: Declare
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--part1_120.886e1fd.294676cd_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I declare myself a player in B Nomic. I shall be known as Jesus.

--part1_120.886e1fd.294676cd_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Calisto MT" LANG="0">I declare myself a player in B Nomic. I shall be known as Jesus.</FONT></HTML>

--part1_120.886e1fd.294676cd_boundary--

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:03:13 EST
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--part1_45.104f46f5.29467d11_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Proposal : Max 3 Proposals per NWeek
 
Create a rule entitled "Maximum of 3 Proposals per NWeek"
Include the following text:  Each entity may propose a maximum of 3 proposals 
per NWeek

--part1_45.104f46f5.29467d11_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Calisto MT" LANG="0">Proposal : Max 3 Proposals per NWeek
<BR> 
<BR>Create a rule entitled "Maximum of 3 Proposals per NWeek"
<BR>Include the following text: &nbsp;Each entity may propose a maximum of 3 proposals per NWeek</FONT></HTML>

--part1_45.104f46f5.29467d11_boundary--

Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 08:08:26 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: oops
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Jesus' proposal is still recognized, but now it's being recognized on the
right list. :-)

I'm tempted to just say that both lists count as public fora, but I'm not
sure how well that'd fly. (Either that, or I could try to get the
Reply-To: on the business list to point back to the business list...)

suggestions?

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 02:46:40 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot for nweek 1
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

These proposals are on the ballot for nweek 1:

Proposal 100/0: Cleaning up
Proposal 101/0: Scoring
Proposal 102/1: Bucks
Proposal 103/0: Revisiing the typos
Proposal 104/0: More Typo Corrections
Proposal 105/0: Clean up scoring
Proposal 106/0: Proposal revision
Proposal 107/0: Rules revision
Proposal 108/0: I wish you wouldn't say that.
Proposal 109/0: When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
Proposal 110/0: Our physical shells are rotting.
Proposal 111/0: Strictly psychosomatic.
Proposal 112/0: Say something once, why say it again?
Proposal 113/0: Did you never call? I waited for your call.
Proposal 114/0: Nothing ever happens.
Proposal 115/1: I demand order!
Proposal 116/0: Create a judicial system
Proposal 117/0: Create a statute of limitation
Proposal 118/0: Whee!
Proposal 119/0: Only players can make proposals
Proposal 120/0: Max 3 Proposals per NWeek

The complete text of these proposals is available at:
http://www.nomic.net/~g6/list.php?t=m&w=1

(That page currently includes "old" revisions of proposals that were
superceded; please ignore them for now. We apologize for the inconvenience.)

Votes are due by the end of nweek 1, which is 14 December 2001 23:59:59
UCT (5:59:59 PM Central time, convert for your local timezone). Votes must
be either mailed to the Administrator privately, or posted to the
spoon-business list, at the voter's discretion.

...dave

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 23:44:53 EST
Subject: spoon-business: Proposals
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--part1_d0.1f65e581.29483ac5_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Modify Rule 13 to say "A player is any entity who has been recognized by the 
Administrator"

--part1_d0.1f65e581.29483ac5_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Calisto MT" LANG="0">Modify Rule 13 to say "A player is any entity who has been recognized by the Administrator"</FONT></HTML>

--part1_d0.1f65e581.29483ac5_boundary--

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 23:55:53 EST
Subject: spoon-business: Votes
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--part1_166.57936bd.29483d59_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Proposal 100/0: Cleaning up - Nay
 Proposal 101/0: Scoring - Yea
Proposal 102/1: Bucks - Nay
Proposal 103/0: Revisiing the typos -  Yea
Proposal 104/0: More Typo Corrections - Yea
Proposal 105/0: Clean up scoring -  Yea
Proposal 106/0: Proposal revision - Yea
Proposal 107/0: Rules revision - Yea
Proposal 108/0: I wish you wouldn't say that. - Nay
Proposal 109/0: When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed. - Nay
Proposal 110/0: Our physical shells are rotting. - Nay
Proposal 111/0: Strictly psychosomatic. - Yea
Proposal 112/0: Say something once, why say it again? - Yea
Proposal 113/0: Did you never call? I waited for your call. - Yea
Proposal 114/0: Nothing ever happens. - Yea
Proposal 115/1: I demand order! - Yea
Proposal 116/0: Create a judicial system - Yea
Proposal 117/0: Create a statute of limitation - Yea
Proposal 118/0: Whee! - Yea
Proposal 119/0: Only players can make proposals - Yea
Proposal 120/0: Max 3 Proposals per NWeek - Yea

--part1_166.57936bd.29483d59_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Calisto MT" LANG="0">Proposal 100/0: Cleaning up - Nay
<BR> Proposal 101/0: Scoring - Yea
<BR>Proposal 102/1: Bucks - Nay
<BR>Proposal 103/0: Revisiing the typos - &nbsp;Yea
<BR>Proposal 104/0: More Typo Corrections - Yea
<BR>Proposal 105/0: Clean up scoring - &nbsp;Yea
<BR>Proposal 106/0: Proposal revision - Yea
<BR>Proposal 107/0: Rules revision - Yea
<BR>Proposal 108/0: I wish you wouldn't say that. - Nay
<BR>Proposal 109/0: When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed. - Nay
<BR>Proposal 110/0: Our physical shells are rotting. - Nay
<BR>Proposal 111/0: Strictly psychosomatic. - Yea
<BR>Proposal 112/0: Say something once, why say it again? - Yea
<BR>Proposal 113/0: Did you never call? I waited for your call. - Yea
<BR>Proposal 114/0: Nothing ever happens. - Yea
<BR>Proposal 115/1: I demand order! - Yea
<BR>Proposal 116/0: Create a judicial system - Yea
<BR>Proposal 117/0: Create a statute of limitation - Yea
<BR>Proposal 118/0: Whee! - Yea
<BR>Proposal 119/0: Only players can make proposals - Yea
<BR>Proposal 120/0: Max 3 Proposals per NWeek - Yea
<BR> 
<BR></FONT></HTML>

--part1_166.57936bd.29483d59_boundary--

Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 06:29:48 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Proposals
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 [email-masked] wrote:

> Modify Rule 13 to say "A player is any entity who has been recognized by the
> Administrator"

Recognized as 121/0. This'll be on next nweek's ballot, obviously...

...dave

P.S. Please vote no on 118/0 so I don't have to add "Whee!" to my
.signature and confuse all the non-nomic people with whom I exchange
email. :-)

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

From: =?US-ASCII?Q?Jorg_Rathlev?= <[email-masked]>
To: "B Nomic Business" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Votes
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:04:58 +0100
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Proposal 100/0: Cleaning up  -- YES
Proposal 101/0: Scoring  -- YES
Proposal 102/1: Bucks  -- YES
Proposal 103/0: Revisiing the typos  -- YES
Proposal 104/0: More Typo Corrections  -- YES
Proposal 105/0: Clean up scoring  -- YES
Proposal 106/0: Proposal revision  -- YES
Proposal 107/0: Rules revision  -- YES
Proposal 108/0: I wish you wouldn't say that.  --YES
Proposal 109/0: When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.  -- NO
Proposal 110/0: Our physical shells are rotting.  -- NO
Proposal 111/0: Strictly psychosomatic.  -- NO
Proposal 112/0: Say something once, why say it again?  -- NO
Proposal 113/0: Did you never call? I waited for your call.  -- YES
Proposal 114/0: Nothing ever happens.  -- YES
Proposal 115/1: I demand order!  -- NO
Proposal 116/0: Create a judicial system  -- YES
Proposal 117/0: Create a statute of limitation  -- YES
Proposal 118/0: Whee!  -- NO
Proposal 119/0: Only players can make proposals  -- YES
Proposal 120/0: Max 3 Proposals per NWeek  -- NO

Joerg

Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:59:07 -0800
To: [email-masked]
Subject: my votes Re: spoon-business: Ballot for nweek 1
From: Robin Lee Powell <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 02:46:40AM +0000, David E. Smith wrote:
> These proposals are on the ballot for nweek 1:
> 
> Proposal 100/0: Cleaning up

No.

> Proposal 101/0: Scoring

Yes.

> Proposal 102/1: Bucks

Yes.

> Proposal 103/0: Revisiing the typos

Yes.

> Proposal 104/0: More Typo Corrections

No: point 2 does nothing, although it seems to be attempting to.  If
someone wants to revise the proposal to fix that, I'll vote yes.

> Proposal 105/0: Clean up scoring

Yes, although as a point of order please note that 'the public forum'
should be 'a public forum'.

> Proposal 106/0: Proposal revision

Yes.

> Proposal 107/0: Rules revision

No.  Unique numbers are *good*.

> Proposal 108/0: I wish you wouldn't say that.

Yes.

> Proposal 109/0: When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.

No.

> Proposal 110/0: Our physical shells are rotting.

No.

> Proposal 111/0: Strictly psychosomatic.

Yes.

> Proposal 112/0: Say something once, why say it again?

Yes.

> Proposal 113/0: Did you never call? I waited for your call.

Yes.

> Proposal 114/0: Nothing ever happens.

No.

> Proposal 115/1: I demand order!

Yes.

> Proposal 116/0: Create a judicial system

No.

> Proposal 117/0: Create a statute of limitation

No.

> Proposal 118/0: Whee!

Damn, this is tempting.  But no.

> Proposal 119/0: Only players can make proposals

No.

> Proposal 120/0: Max 3 Proposals per NWeek

No.

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ 	BTW, I'm male, honest.
le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno
je xlali -- RLP 				http://www.lojban.org/

From: "ID Scott, Science 99" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Ballot for nweek 1
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 11:55:17 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

My votes, below.

On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 02:46:40 +0000 (GMT) "David E. Smith" 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> These proposals are on the ballot for nweek 1:
> 
> Proposal 100/0: Cleaning up

Yes

> Proposal 101/0: Scoring

Yes.

> Proposal 102/1: Bucks

No.

> Proposal 103/0: Revisiing the typos

Yes.

> Proposal 104/0: More Typo Corrections

No.

> Proposal 105/0: Clean up scoring

Yes.

> Proposal 106/0: Proposal revision

Yes.

> Proposal 107/0: Rules revision

No.

> Proposal 108/0: I wish you wouldn't say that.

Yes.

> Proposal 109/0: When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.

No.

> Proposal 110/0: Our physical shells are rotting.

No.

> Proposal 111/0: Strictly psychosomatic.

Yes.

> Proposal 112/0: Say something once, why say it again?

Yes.

> Proposal 113/0: Did you never call? I waited for your call.

Yes.

> Proposal 114/0: Nothing ever happens.

Yes.

> Proposal 115/1: I demand order!

Yes.

> Proposal 116/0: Create a judicial system

No.

> Proposal 117/0: Create a statute of limitation

Yes.

> Proposal 118/0: Whee!

hmm... No..

> Proposal 119/0: Only players can make proposals

Yes.

> Proposal 120/0: Max 3 Proposals per NWeek

No.

cheers,
Iain

From: "Doig, Gavin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Bwuhahahaha, etc.
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 15:13:30 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I create 523 points in my possession, and change the name of the player
currently known as "Jesus" to "Jebus".

uin.

DISCLAIMER: 
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended
recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is
privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning of applicable
law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have
received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please contact the
sender of this message as soon as possible. 

The views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and
may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup Limited 

From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_Rathlev?= <[email-masked]>
To: "B Nomic Business" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-business: Bwuhahahaha, etc.
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:02:28 +0100
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> I create 523 points in my possession, and change the name of the
> player currently known as "Jesus" to "Jebus".

I claim that your points are not the same kind of points as those
defined in rule 21/0, which are controlled by the administrator. I
also claim that your score is still zero either way, as rule 21/0 does
not (yet) define that your score is the number of points you have.

Anyway, to keep up with the competition just in case, I increase my
score to 523 -- this doesn't seem to be illegal, as changing one's
score is currently unregulated.

If you haven't done so yet, please consider voting yes on the creation
of a judicial system. Looks like we might need one ;-)

Joerg

From: Glenn Overby II <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 11:22:56 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Votes for Nweek1
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Proposal 100/0: Cleaning up: NO
Proposal 101/0: Scoring: YES
Proposal 102/1: Bucks: NO
Proposal 103/0: Revisiing the typos: YES
Proposal 104/0: More Typo Corrections: NO
Proposal 105/0: Clean up scoring: YES
Proposal 106/0: Proposal revision: YES
Proposal 107/0: Rules revision: NO
Proposal 108/0: I wish you wouldn't say that.: YES
Proposal 109/0: When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.: YES
Proposal 110/0: Our physical shells are rotting.: NO
Proposal 111/0: Strictly psychosomatic.: NO
Proposal 112/0: Say something once, why say it again?: NO
Proposal 113/0: Did you never call? I waited for your call.: YES
Proposal 114/0: Nothing ever happens.: YES
Proposal 115/1: I demand order!: YES
Proposal 116/0: Create a judicial system: NO
Proposal 117/0: Create a statute of limitation: NO
Proposal 118/0: Whee!: NO
Proposal 119/0: Only players can make proposals: NO
Proposal 120/0: Max 3 Proposals per NWeek: YES

Octagon

Glenn E. Overby II
Clinton Twp, MI
http://home.earthlink.net/~guardcaptain/

=====

::quote temporarily disabled:: 

From: "Doig, Gavin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: spoon-business: Bwuhahahaha, etc.
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:09:42 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Anyway, to keep up with the competition just in case, I increase my
> score to 523 -- this doesn't seem to be illegal, as changing one's
> score is currently unregulated.

I don't think it *is* unregulated, actually (because the rules define ways
in which it can be changed).

Just in case the score=points proosal doesn't pass, I change my score to 523
as well.

> If you haven't done so yet, please consider voting yes on the creation
> of a judicial system. Looks like we might need one ;-)

We do indeed need one. Union rules prohibit me from commenting further at
this time...

uin,
Proud member of the EDU.

DISCLAIMER: 
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended
recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is
privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning of applicable
law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have
received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please contact the
sender of this message as soon as possible. 

The views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and
may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup Limited 

Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:13:44 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Bwuhahahaha, etc.
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2001, Doig, Gavin wrote:

> I create 523 points in my possession, and change the name of the player
> currently known as "Jesus" to "Jebus".

I'm interpreting this as a proposal. Recognized as 122/0.

...dave

Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:16:01 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-business: Bwuhahahaha, etc.
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2001, [iso-8859-1] J=F6rg Rathlev wrote:

> Anyway, to keep up with the competition just in case, I increase my
> score to 523 -- this doesn't seem to be illegal, as changing one's
> score is currently unregulated.

Since I did it for UIN, I'm doing it for you as well. Recognized as 123/0.

=2E..dave

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:16:37 EST
Subject: spoon-business: Eh
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

If thats the case then I increase my score to 1000

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:20:22 EST
Subject: spoon-business: New Proposals
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I propose the creation of a rule entitled "Screw That"
The rule will include the following: "No player may change another players 
name."

Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:23:35 -0800
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: New Proposals
From: Robin Lee Powell <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 05:20:22PM -0500, [email-masked] wrote:
> I propose the creation of a rule entitled "Screw That"
> The rule will include the following: "No player may change another
> players name."

I amend the proposal to read:

New Rule: "Screw That!"

No player's information (name, score, etc) may be changed except as the
rules explicitely allow.

New Rule: "That Wasn't Me!"

A player may change eir own name at any time by a post to the public
forum.

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ 	BTW, I'm male, honest.
le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno
je xlali -- RLP 				http://www.lojban.org/

Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:51:41 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Dealing with the score/points problem
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Whatever my vote on proposal 105 is, I change it to NO.
[[ I suggest that all other players do the same, for the sake of the
game. ]]

I also set my Score to 42 1/3, to muck up any proposal which tries to
turn the Score quantity into any sort of object before resolving this
situation.

-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:39:25 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: State of the game
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[ A situation very similar to this one happened in a face-to-face Nomic
I ran. I started with what I considered to be a simple and complete set
of starting rules for face-to-face Nomic, but left out this important
one: ]]

<proposal title="No messing around with the game state">
Create the following rule entitled "State Changes":

  Changes to the state of the game may only be made via a Proposal or
  via an Action which is permitted by the Rules.

</proposal>
-- 
Rob Speer

From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: the score tinkerer
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 01:30:05 +0100
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Howdy,=20
I create an entity called the score-tinkerer.
the score-tinkerer is a evil fellow that runs around and robs players of
their points and similarly also lowers their score to 0 using arcane and
long-forgotten magical arts.

starting from now he will mantain every players score set to 0 and keep
every player's points at a grand total of 0 until I tell him to stop.

Do you think I can do that?
--
Rivoluzione:
  \o_  (o      __)   ( /    |__     o_  _o/
   |   /\  __\o  \o   |   o/  o/__  (\   |
  / \ |\  /) |   ( \ /o) / |  (  (\  /| / \

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

Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:32:50 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: New Proposals
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2001, Robin Lee Powell wrote:

> I amend the proposal to read:
>
> New Rule: "Screw That!"
>
> No player's information (name, score, etc) may be changed except as the
> rules explicitely allow.
>
> New Rule: "That Wasn't Me!"
>
> A player may change eir own name at any time by a post to the public
> forum.

Recognized as 122/1.

...dave

From: "Doig, Gavin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: The future never happened
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 17:30:09 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I create a new rule numbered 235/0, named "The Future Never Happened", with
the following @@@ delimited text:
@@@
If ever any rule entitled "Statute of Limitation" exists, it is repealed,
and this rule is then repealed.
@@@

That'll do nicely.

NB: there are no proposals in this message.

uin.

DISCLAIMER: 
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended
recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is
privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning of applicable
law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have
received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please contact the
sender of this message as soon as possible. 

The views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and
may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup Limited 

Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 04:01:33 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: nweek 1 results
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

First off, some notes:

* I've fixed the Web page so that the "current rules" page actually shows
the current rules, and not any past revisions thereof.

* Ditto for the current proposals page.

* I'm working on a way to view historical changes to said documents, but
it's not there yet.

* I've chosen a creative interpretation of Rule 8: Since comments included
in [[ double brackets ]] aren't considered part of the Rules per se, I'm
adding bracketed revision notes to the bottom of rules. For instance, the
bottom of the much-abused Rule 32 reads:

[[ Revised by 100/0, 114/0, 115/1 ]]

This week's voting log and results and stuff:

100/0 PASSED.
Created 20/1.
Created 31/1.
Created 32/1.

101/0 PASSED.
Created 124/0.
Created 125/0.

102/1 FAILED.

103/0 PASSED.
Created 4/1.
Created 11/1.

104/0 PASSED.
Created 19/1.
(2) No effect.
Created 104/2. (The way 103/0 and 104/0 are written, they may be mutually
exclusive, but I choose to apply both corrections while I can.)
Created 5/1.
(5) No effect. (The word 'premissible' does not appear in 5/0. Perhaps
you *meant* to change 12/0?)
(6) No effect.

105/0 PASSED (despite a nice effort at the last minute to prevent such)
Created 21/1.
Swallowed more aspirin.

106/0 PASSED.
Created 19/2.

107/0 FAILED.

108/0 PASSED.
Created 4/3.
Created 11/2.
Created 8/1.

109/0 FAILED.

110/0 FAILED.

111/0 PASSED.
Created 18/1.
Created 19/3.

112/0 PASSED.
Created 22/1.

113/0 PASSED.
Created 22/2.
Created 27/1.

114/0 PASSED.
Created 32/2.

115/1 PASSED.
Created 32/3.

116/0 PASSED.
More aspirin ingested.
Created 126/0.
Created 127/0.
Created 128/0.

117/0 PASSED.
Created 129/0.

118/0 FAILED.

119/0 PASSED.
Created 19/4.

120/0 FAILED.

At the end of nweek 1, there were no rules defining in what order these
effects should take place. Therefore, I deem that they all take place
simultaneously (because that way 124/0 can be considered to be "in
effect", points can be awarded via that rule, and happiness can reign over
the land).

This means that scoring shall be handled based on the Rule 124/0 for all
proposals.

A whole bunch of d6's are being rolled, and I'm wishing I'd added a system
for keeping track of proposals' owners.

Antonio scores 10 points for 100/0.
Rob scores 11 points for 101/0.
Rob loses 4 points for 102/1.
Rob scores 13 points for 103/0.
Iain scores 14 points for 104/0.
Joerg scores 4 points for 105/0.
Antonio scores 9 points for 106/0.
Antonio loses 1 points for 107/0.
UIN scores 11 points for 108/0.
UIN loses 1 points for 109/0.
UIN loses 4 points for 110/0.
UIN scores 13 points for 111/0.
UIN scores 10 points for 112/0.
UIN scores 17 points for 113/0.
UIN scores 8 points for 114/0.
Rob scores 11 points for 115/1.
Joerg scores 16 points for 116/0.
Joerg scores 7 points for 117/0.
Chess loses 2 points for 118/0.
Joerg scores 12 points for 119/0.
Jesus loses 4 points for 120/0.

Scores:

Antonio		+19, -1 (18)
Benjamin	0 (0)
Iain		+14 (14)
Jesus		+0, -4 (adjusted to 0)
Joerg		+39, -0 (39)
Chess		+0, -2 (adjusted to 0)
Octagon		0 (0)
Rob		+35, -4 (31)
Turgul		0 (0)
UIN		+59, -5 (54)

The various parties that attempted to create points, banking on Rule 21
being revised, have notations next to their names in the roster, to the
effect of:

"(This player may or may not own X points independent of eir score.)"

Since we now have a rudimentary judicial system, I'll leave it up to the
courts to decide whether those actions were legal.

Vote counts:

(Y/N) Proposal N/R (Author)
(6/3) Proposal 100/0: Cleaning up (Antonio)
(7/2) Proposal 101/0: Scoring (Rob)
(3/6) Proposal 102/1: Bucks (Rob)
(9/0) Proposal 103/0: Revisiing the typos (Rob)
(6/3) Proposal 104/0: More Typo Corrections (Iain)
(6/3) Proposal 105/0: Clean up scoring (Joerg)
(8/1) Proposal 106/0: Proposal revision (Antonio)
(3/6) Proposal 107/0: Rules revision (Antonio)
(7/2) Proposal 108/0: I wish you wouldn't say that. (UIN)
(4/5) Proposal 109/0: When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed. (UIN)
(2/7) Proposal 110/0: Our physical shells are rotting. (UIN)
(6/3) Proposal 111/0: Strictly psychosomatic. (UIN)
(5/4) Proposal 112/0: Say something once, why say it again? (UIN)
(9/0) Proposal 113/0: Did you never call? I waited for your call. (UIN)
(6/3) Proposal 114/0: Nothing ever happens. (UIN)
(7/2) Proposal 115/1: I demand order! (Rob)
(5/4) Proposal 116/0: Create a judicial system (Joerg)
(5/4) Proposal 117/0: Create a statute of limitation (Joerg)
(4/5) Proposal 118/0: Whee! (Chess)
(7/2) Proposal 119/0: Only players can make proposals (Joerg)
(2/7) Proposal 120/0: Max 3 Proposals per NWeek (Jesus)

Note that no rule says I'm required to reveal who voted how, when votes
are submitted privately to me. (31/1 says I shan't reveal them until after
the close of voting, but it doesn't require me to do so afterwards.)

There are already three proposals on the ballot for nweek 2. Voting for
nweek 2 will be from 22-24 December.

The object lesson for this week: Assuming none of those created points end
up affecting anything, UIN has taken a small lead, showing that shotgun
legislation is in fact a valid tactic.

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:01:12 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Permissibility of the Rather Absurd but Unprohibited
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<action>

I give my Player the Attributes "purple" and "Concertmaster".
[[ Since I didn't get to keep the Ace of Spades, I might as well hang
onto that title instead. ]]

</action>
-- 
Rob Speer

From: "Doig, Gavin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:20:08 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<proposal>
<title>I've told lies without hint of regret.</title>
<body>
Amend rule 31 by replacing
"Votes which are not publicly known shall not be revealed by the
Administrator until voting ends."
with
"Votes which are not publicly known shall not be revealed by the
Administrator until voting ends, at which point they must be revealed."
</body>
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title>Same as it ever was</title>
<body>
Create a new rule named "Pay No Attention To The Man Behind The Curtain"
with the following @@@ delimited text:
@@@
For the purposes of the rules, and for all other game purposes, the term
"proposal" shall be considered precisely equivalent to the term "proosal".
@@@
</body>
</proposal>

uin.
NB: This messages contains 2 (two) proposals.

DISCLAIMER: 
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended
recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is
privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning of applicable
law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have
received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please contact the
sender of this message as soon as possible. 

The views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and
may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup Limited 

Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:59:39 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Doig, Gavin wrote:

> <title>I've told lies without hint of regret.</title>

Recognized as 130/0.

> <title>Same as it ever was</title>

Recognized as 131/0.

...dave

Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:13:35 -0800
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: spoon-b	
From: Robin Lee Powell <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 05:09:54PM -0000, Doig, Gavin wrote:
> > Which also means that my flat "No you don't." is also legal. ;)
> >
> No, because you're not a player. And Rob only stated that my actions
> were against the rules, which can't even be interpreted as an attempt
> to cancel my actions out in the loose sense that your "No you don't"
> could (perhaps) be.

Fine.  I hereby give the administrator the option to act as my agent in
cancelling your actions.

-Robin, who'd like to get on with the game now.

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ 	BTW, I'm male, honest.
le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno
je xlali -- RLP 				http://www.lojban.org/

Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:51:13 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: withdrawal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I'd like to withdraw from the game.
I forfiet.

- Benjamin Bradley - "I don't want to be an ant anymore"
- http://lostpoet.tripod.com/
- whee life what a rush

Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:54:52 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: how's this for cancelling actions?
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Robin Lee Powell wrote:

> Fine.  I hereby give the administrator the option to act as my agent in
> cancelling your actions.

Since this would be as effective a way to cancel actions as any, I use my
authority as your agent to make this proposal:

Title: We have always been at war with Eastasia.

The player known as "uniquely identifying names" as of the time this
proposal was written is hereby banished from the land. E shall be
readmitted exactly five seconds after eir banishment, but shall in the
meantime lose all points and any other attributes or objects e may
possess.

[[ Sorry, UIN, you can't change your name to dodge this bullet. ]]

Should any rule numbered 235/0 exist as of the time this proposal passes,
it shall be banished without a similar clause of readmittance. History
itself shall be rewritten as though it never existed.

Any rule entitled "Statute of Limitation" with a number of 129, regardless
of revision number, shall be created or recreated as necessary, to ensure
it exists and has always existed since its initial creation (at the end of
nweek 1).

[[ And as long as we're cleaning up... ]]

The player known as "Jesus" as of the time this proposal was written shall
no longer possess 1000 points independent of eir score, if in fact e
possesses such points.

The player know as "Joerg" as of the time this proposal was written shall
no longer possess 523 points independent of eir score, if in fact e
possesses such points.

The player know as "Rob" as of the time this proposal was written shall no
longer possess 42 1/3 points independent of eir score, if in fact e
possesses such points.

<end proposal>

This is not in fact a serious proposal, but one never knows what'll
happen... I'm not recognizing it (yet), since I'm merely acting with
Turgul's authority and I don't want to overstep my bounds. I'll wait for
em to actually request its recognition.

...dave

Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 05:21:12 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: how's this for cancelling actions?
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Robin Lee Powell wrote:

> > I'll wait
> > for em to actually request its recognition.
>
> I so request.

Done. 132/0.

...dave

From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_Rathlev?= <[email-masked]>
To: "B Nomic Business" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Calls for Judgement
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:46:22 +0100
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I make the following Calls for Judgement:

\begin{CFJ}
The score of the player named uniquely identifying names is 577.
\end{CFJ}

\begin{CFJ}
The score of the player named Joerg is 562. The score of the player
who joined the game as "Jesus" is 996.
\end{CFJ}

Note that I made two different CFJs because uin set both his score and
created points, while Jesus/Jebus and me just set our scores.

\begin{CFJ}
The name of the player who joined as "Jesus" is now "Jebus".
\end{CFJ}

\begin{CFJ}
No rule 235/0 ever existed. The rule entitled "Statute of Limitation"
still exists.
\end{CFJ}

This will hopefully clear up all the things that are currently unclear
about the game state.

I also make the following proposal:

\begin{proposal}
\title{Correct our scores, please}

The score of the player named Joerg is set to 39.

The score of the player named uniquely identifying names is set to 54,
plus or minus any scoring for proposals that were voted on in nweek 2
and passed or failed before this proposal took effect.

The score of the player named Jesus or Jebus is set to 0.

\end{proposal}

Joerg

Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:56:23 -0600 (CST)
From: Benjamin Bradley <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: reset proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I propose that we reset the game and begin with the following initial
ruleset. Hopefully this will start us off from a solid foundation and at a
simple enough point that everyone will understand what's going on. I think
that the fun of a game of nomic is that it grows to be complicated. If it
starts out with inconsistencies and such, it's just no fun (as we've
seen). I've also added a proposal limit so that the game will hopefully
start off slowly. I know this rule set by no means incorporates even a
fraction of the functionality that we want in our ruleset, but I think it
is fairly complete in itself, consistent, and free of exploitable
loopholes.
How about e-mailing the list with 'yay's and 'nay's?

------------------------------
Definitions:
* game state - the game state or the state of the game is exactly
specified by the following:
	definitions of terms
	rules
	objects
	players
	attributes (of players or of objects)
Anything which does not fall into one of these categories is not part of
the game state.

* person - an entity inhabiting a human body

* player - a person whose actions may affect the game state (as specified
by the rules)

* "the list" or "the mailing list" - [email-masked]

* proposal - a proposed change to the game state

Rules:
1. The game state can only be altered as explicitly defined by the rules.

2. All game state changes must be proposed or announced via the mailing
list.

3. A person may become a player by e-mailing the list and announcing
his/her will to do so.

4. A player may propose a game state change by e-mailing the list with a
semantically unambiguous message indicating exactly what changes s/he
wishes to make to the game state.

5. After receiving a player's proposal, each player may send one message
to the list indicating a vote either for (in favor of) or against (not in
favor of) the adoption of the proposal.

6. Each player may make no more than one proposal in each 7-day period.

7. A proposal passes if, 7 days after it was proposed, there have been
more votes "for" the proposal than "against" it.

Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:51:32 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Calls for Judgement
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

First off, a massive apology.

To everyone who was forced to deal with my inane, bizarro-world rant, I
apologize profusely and passionately. Though this isn't an excuse, I've
just been having a lot of really bad days at work, and I think I allowed
my frustration with the rules there to bleed into my frustration with the
rules here.

(It's Christmas time, and I work in retail. Those of you who have done
this will hopefully at least understand the source of my pain. :)

Anyway.

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, [iso-8859-1] J=F6rg Rathlev wrote:

> \begin{CFJ}
> The score of the player named uniquely identifying names is 577.
> \end{CFJ}

133/0, assigned to Rob.

> \begin{CFJ}
> The score of the player named Joerg is 562. The score of the player
> who joined the game as "Jesus" is 996.
> \end{CFJ}

134/0, assigned to Iain.

> Note that I made two different CFJs because uin set both his score and
> created points, while Jesus/Jebus and me just set our scores.

> \begin{CFJ}
> The name of the player who joined as "Jesus" is now "Jebus".
> \end{CFJ}

135/0, assigned to M'cachessilnath.

> \begin{CFJ}
> No rule 235/0 ever existed. The rule entitled "Statute of Limitation"
> still exists.
> \end{CFJ}

136/0, assigned to Octagon.

> {Correct our scores, please}

Recognized as 137/0.

=2E..dave

From: "Doig, Gavin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Proosals
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:52:11 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<proposal>
<title>Just to keep from being thrown to the wolves.</title>
<body>
Amend rule 3 by replacing "ten days" with "7 days".
</body>
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title>Otherwise, what are the characters going to fall off of?</title>
<body>
Create a new rule titled "Precedence" with the following
WEDBETTERHAVEGRAVITY delimited text:
WEDBETTERHAVEGRAVITY
Whenever one rule conflicts with another, the lowest numbered rule (i.e.,
the rule with the lowest number before the "/") will take precedence.

Whenever one section of a rule conflicts with another section of the same
rule, the section which appears later in the rule will take precedence over
the earlier section (e.g., this sentence would take precedence over the
previous one if there were any conflict.) This rule is renumbered to 33/0,
and this sentence is then removed.
WEDBETTERHAVEGRAVITY
</body>
</proposal>

More soon...

uin.

DISCLAIMER: 
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended
recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is
privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning of applicable
law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have
received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please contact the
sender of this message as soon as possible. 

The views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and
may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup Limited 

From: "Doig, Gavin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Proosal
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 17:24:17 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<proposal>
<title>The word being made into flesh.</title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "Universal Law" with the following EXNIHILO
delimited text:

EXNIHILO
A Dimension is any numerical attribute of players which is defined as a
Dimension by the rules. A Dimension can in general have any real number as
its value, although specific Dimensions may have restrictions imposed on the
range of values they can take [e.g. scores may not be -ve].

Players have an attribute called their Distance, which is calculated as the
square root of (the sum of (the square of each of their Dimensions)).

Players have an attribute called their Speed, which is the difference
between their Distance at the start of the current NWeek and their Distance
at the start of the previous NWeek (or 0 if their Distance at the start of
the last NWeek was not defined).

Players have an attribute called their Location, which is a tuple consisting
of each of their Dimensions, in the order in which they are defined by the
rules (i.e., if Dimension a is defined by rule 1, and Dimension b is defined
by rule 2, then a players location would be (a,b)).

Players who have every Dimension at 0 are said to be at the Origin. The
Origin is Full Of Stars.
EXNIHILO

Amend rule 21 by appending the sentence "Score is a Dimension." to the first
paragraph.

Create a new rule named "Charm" with the following @@@ delimited text:
@@@
Players have an attribute named Charm. Charm is a Dimension.

A player's Charm is the number of proposals submitted by them which have
been accepted, minus the number of proposals submitted by them which have
been rejected.
@@@
</body>
</proposal>

uin.

DISCLAIMER: 
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended
recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is
privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning of applicable
law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have
received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please contact the
sender of this message as soon as possible. 

The views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and
may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup Limited 

From: "Doig, Gavin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Proosal revision
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 18:42:50 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I amend proposal 131/1, "Same as it ever was.", to have the following ###
delimited text:

###
Create a new rule named "Pay No Attention To The Man Behind The Curtain"
with the following @@@ delimited text: 
@@@ 
For the purposes of the rules, and for all other game purposes, the term
"proposal" shall be considered precisely equivalent to the term "proosal". 
@@@

Each player who voted for this proposal gains 23 points. Each player who
voted against this proposal loses 17 points.
###

uin.

DISCLAIMER: 
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended
recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is
privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning of applicable
law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have
received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please contact the
sender of this message as soon as possible. 

The views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and
may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup Limited 

From: "Doig, Gavin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Cleaning up
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 18:44:19 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<proposal>
<title>Crazy as a coconut.</title>
<body>
[[
It's worse than I thought. ;-)

Rule 235/0 will come into existence when its creation is deemed to be legal
by rule 129, on the 24th. At that point, it will repeal rule 129, which
means its creation will no longer have been legal, so rule 129 will not have
been repealed, so rule 235/0 will exist, and... well, you get the point. The
admin's proosal is deeply unfair to me, because not only does it take *all*
my points, it also quite possibly prevents my votes on the proosals after it
from counting (depending on what, exactly, "banishment" does). If you feel
that people's scores should be corrected, vote for Joerg's proosal 137. If,
like me, you have philosophical angst about the paradoxical half-existence
of rules 129 and 235, then...
]]

The rules and gamestate are set to what they would had no rule numbered 235
ever been created. The author of this proposal loses 1d7 points.
</body>

DISCLAIMER: 
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended
recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is
privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning of applicable
law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have
received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please contact the
sender of this message as soon as possible. 

The views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and
may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup Limited 

Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:04:06 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: daily status stuff
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

"Just to keep from being thrown to the wolved." recognized 138/0.

"Otherwise, what are the characters going to fall off of?" recognized
139/0.

"The word being made into flesh." recognized 140/0.

Chess' judgement on 135/0 is acknowledged. The roster is being updated to
being the game state in line with same.

"Same as it ever was." revision acknowledged as 131/2.

"Crazy as a coconut." recognized as 141/0. complete with rant about me.
(Which I think I deserve, but still...)

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 15:58:22 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Calls for Judgement
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 10:51:32AM +0000, David E. Smith wrote:
> > \begin{CFJ}
> > The score of the player named uniquely identifying names is 577.
> > \end{CFJ}
> 
> 133/0, assigned to Rob.

I'll have to judge this TRUE, unfortunately.

Analysis:

If uin had only "set his score" (as I did) the score would be overridden
as soon as score was defined to be the number of points. If he had
"transferred points" it would be regulated by the rules and thus
illegal.

But he did neither. He simply _created_ the points, which was not
regulated by the rules at all. 

---

Looking at some proposals uin has just submitted, I have to bring back
this A Nomic proposal:

<proposal title="No kickbacks">

1. Create the following rule delimited by tags:
<rule>

When a proposal goes into effect, if its actions include making use of
the information of what people's votes were for that proposal, this
information is denied to the proposal, in the following way:

If the proposal tries to determine any player's vote was, it appears
temporarily (i.e. no change to the game state or the voting results is
made) that the player voted not YES nor NO, but MU.

If the proposal tries to determine which players cast affirmative votes
or which players cast negative votes, it appears that all the votes came
from an entity named "Bob the Voting Fish".

If a proposal passes in the same nweek as this rule and has already made
use of such voting information when it passes, and the information was
used to make changes to players' scores, then each player's score is
set to what it would have been if that proposal had not passed.
</rule>

2. Create an entity named "Bob the Voting Fish".
</proposal>
-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:51:02 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Request to join
From: Dan <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I would like to become a Player, known as Wonko.

From: Glenn Overby II <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:21:48 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Judgement on 136/0
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--PREFACE--

The Administrator writes:

>First off, a massive apology.
><snip>
>(It's Christmas time, and I work in retail. Those of you who have done
>this will hopefully at least understand the source of my pain. :)

My second, seasonal job is in retail.  Your apology is accepted, and probably 
unnecessary in any case.

--JUDGEMENT FOLLOWS--

The Administrator writes:

>On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, [iso-8859-1] Jörg Rathlev wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> \begin{CFJ}
>> No rule 235/0 ever existed. The rule entitled "Statute of Limitation"
>> still exists.
>> \end{CFJ}
>
>136/0, assigned to Octagon.

Taking the second sentence first...Rule 129/0, Statute of Limitation, was created 
in accordance with the Rules of B Nomic upon the passage of Proposal 117/0 at 
the end of nweek1.  There has been no effective subsequent action to repeal or 
modify that Rule in any manner recognized by the current Rules of B Nomic.  
Therefore, the rule (129/0) entitled "Statute of Limitation" still exists.

Taking the first sentence second...No Proposal creating a Rule 235/0 has ever 
been passed in accordance with the Rules of B Nomic.  Therefore, within the 
constraints of B Nomic, no Rule 235/0 has ever existed.

I judge TRUE on all clauses of this Call for Judgement.

Octagon

Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 05:37:04 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: more acks aplenty
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Judgement on 133/0 is acknowledged. To bring the game in accord with this
judgement, UIN's score is set to 577. Well played.

"No kickbacks" recognized as 142/0.

"Wonko" is welcomed to the farce, er, nomic.

Judgement on 136/0 is acknowledged.

(I finally updated the roster to reflect the ruling that Jesus' name has
been changed to Jebus. Whee!)

...dave

Date: 21 Dec 2001 16:04:07 -0000
From: Josh Utterback <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Fenrir is a Player
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I declare myself to be a player known as Fenrir.

_______________________________________________________
Processed by the CommuniTech.Net Web Mail Program

Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 16:20:17 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: 131/3
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, Doig, Gavin wrote:

> Ack. I'm not sure what Outlook thought it was doing there...

Neither do I. So I'm ignoring the first attempt at a revision in favour of
this one. Recognized as 131/3.

...dave

From: Glenn Overby II <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:03:42 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

//begin proposal
Judicial Compensation

A Judge, upon rendering the decision on a Call for Judgement, shall receive 7-D 
points, where D is the number of complete 24-hour days elapsing between the 
assignment of the Call to that Judge and the posting of the decision.  This point 
award shall also be made to all Judges who have decided Calls for Judgement in 
B Nomic prior to this rule's taking effect.
//end proposal

Octagon

Glenn E. Overby II
Clinton Twp, MI
http://home.earthlink.net/~guardcaptain/

=====

::quote temporarily disabled:: 

From: "Chess" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Nomic Business'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal: Order, order!
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:33:35 -0000
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<proposal>
<title = Order, order!>
<body>
Create a new rule called 'Order In The Monkeyhouse' with the following text:
If there is disagreement (registered by an explicit post to a public forum)
about the verdict given by a Judgement on a CFJ, the Judgement becomes a
proposal, to be voted on as usual, rather than automatically correct.
</body>
</proposal>

[[Yeesh, I didn't know that a little mischief in a CFJ reply would get me
into so much trouble. So I've proposed this, so we can play nice from now
on, and people have a better outlet for their frustrations with Judgements
than name-calling.]]

Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 16:41:39 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: The Cursed Fishbone of Babel
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

[[ Note: HTML makes no sense for proposals. XML does, though. ]]

<proposal title="The Cursed Sushi of Babel">
Create a rule entitled "The Cursed Sushi of Babel" with the following
text, delimited by tags:
<rule>
  The Cursed Sushi of Babel is an Object.
  
  The player who has the Cursed Sushi of Babel may not post any message
  to an official Forum (such as the "spoon-business" list) without first
  taking these steps:
  
    1. Paste the intended message into the translation box at
    babelfish.altavista.com.
    
    2. Choose one of the following sequences of steps:
      
      a. Choose to translate the text from "English to Japanese" and
      submit the form, then copy the Japanese text into the text box,
      choose "Japanese to English" and submit again.

      b. [[This option exists because not all browsers support
      Japanese.]] Choose to translate the text from "English to German"
      and submit the form, copy the German text into the form, choose
      "German to French" and submit, then copy the French text into the
      form, choose "French to English" and submit.

    3. If there are any Japanese characters remaining in the resulting
    text, replace each one with the word "foo".
    
    4. Send the resulting text to the forum. Line breaks and whitespace
    may be added at the player's discretion.
    
  If babelfish.altavista.com is for some reason unusable, the
  player may write the entire message in pig latin instead.

  A player may, at any time, voluntarily transfer the Cursed Sushi of
  Babel into eir possession, so that the former owner no longer has it.

  Additionally, after a player has had the Cursed Sushi of Babel for
  four days, e may forcefully give it to any player. It is then
  transferred into that player's possession.

  The original owner of the Cursed Sushi of Babel is Rob.
  
</rule>
</proposal>

-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 17:54:41 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Proosal
From: Dan <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I issue the following !@#$ delimited proposal, entitled "Don't let the game
die"
!@#$
In rule 15/0, replace the words "the eight day" to "the third to last day"
!@#$

If anyone plans on voting for proposal 138/0, vote for this as well.
Otherwise, an nweek will change to be 7 days long, and voting won't start
until the 8th day, so nobody will be able to vote. 

Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 18:43:29 -0500
Subject: FW: spoon-business: Proosal
From: Dan <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Oops. That didn't make sense. I rescind my proposal, and reissue it:

I issue the following !@#$ delimited proposal, entitled "Don't let the game
die"
!@#$
In rule 15/0, replace the words "the eight day" with "the third to last day"
!@#$

If anyone plans on voting for proposal 138/0, vote for this as well.
Otherwise, an nweek will change to be 7 days long, and voting won't start
until the 8th day, so nobody will be able to vote. 

Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 01:49:21 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Recognitions (again)
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Judicial Compensation: recognized as 143/0.

Order, order! : recognized as 144/0.

The Cursed Sushi of Babel: recognized as 145/0.

Judicial Reform 1: recognized as 146/0.

Judicial Reform 2: 147/0.

Judicial Reform 3, or crime and punishment: 148/0.

Don't let the game die: 149/0. (Just made it in, a mere fifteen minutes
before the end of the non-voting part of the nweek. I'm also glad someone
else noticed it. :)

...dave

Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 01:49:47 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 2
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following proposals are on the ballot for nweek 2:

Proposal 121/0: (untitled)
Proposal 122/1: Screw That
Proposal 123/0: No messing around with the game state
Proposal 130/0: I've told lies without hint of regret.
Proposal 131/3: Same as it ever was.
Proposal 132/0: We have always been at war with Eastasia.
Proposal 137/0: Correct our scores, please
Proposal 138/0: Just to keep from being thrown to the wolves.
Proposal 139/0: Otherwise, what are the characters going to fall off of?
Proposal 140/0: The word being made into flesh.
Proposal 141/0: Crazy as a coconut.
Proposal 142/0: No kickbacks
Proposal 143/0: Judicial Compensation
Proposal 144/0: Order, order!
Proposal 145/0: The Cursed Sushi of Babel
Proposal 146/0: Judicial reform 1
Proposal 147/0: Judicial Reform 2
Proposal 148/0: Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment
Proposal 149/0: Don't let the game die

Voting shall continue until 23:59:59 24 December 2001 UCT (5:59 PM US
Central, adjust as necessary). Happy holidays!

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 03:06:15 +0100
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: the very end of irreality
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

As I do not have the time to follow the increased traffic and the game of 
b-nomic, I would like to ask you to remove me from the mailing lists spoon-*.

Have all a good time playing,

relet

-- 
thomas hirsch | [email-masked]

Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 22:08:14 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 2
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

My votes:

 NO > Proposal 121/0: (untitled)
YES > Proposal 122/1: Screw That
YES > Proposal 123/0: No messing around with the game state
[[ nothing wrong with redundancy ]]

YES > Proposal 130/0: I've told lies without hint of regret.
 NO > Proposal 131/3: Same as it ever was. 
[[ 131 is dangerous! Do the players who voted for it perpetually gain
points, given that the point gain is specified in a Rule and not an
Action? ]]

YES > Proposal 132/0: We have always been at war with Eastasia.
YES > Proposal 137/0: Correct our scores, please
 NO > Proposal 138/0: Just to keep from being thrown to the wolves.
[[ I'd rather wait until after 149 is passed, to be sure. ]]

YES > Proposal 139/0: Otherwise, what are the characters going to fall off of?
YES > Proposal 140/0: The word being made into flesh.
YES > Proposal 141/0: Crazy as a coconut.
YES > Proposal 142/0: No kickbacks
YES > Proposal 143/0: Judicial Compensation
 NO > Proposal 144/0: Order, order!
YES > Proposal 145/0: The Cursed Sushi of Babel
YES > Proposal 146/0: Judicial reform 1
 NO > Proposal 147/0: Judicial Reform 2
YES > Proposal 148/0: Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment
YES > Proposal 149/0: Don't let the game die

-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 00:15:19 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: A multitude of Proposals
From: Dan <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I issue the following proposals:

<proposal>
<title> The Timeline's on this M=F6bius Strip </title>
<body>
Create a new rule, entitled "Thou Shalt Not Screw With Time" with the
following =BD=BD=BD=BD delimited text:
=BD=BD=BD=BD
No rule or proposal may have retroactive application or otherwise edit the
past.
=BD=BD=BD=BD
</body>
<rationale>
It seems to me that unrestrained meddling with the past is an almost
gauranteed route to paradox, if for no better reason than that a rule which
erases a past event ought never to have been proposed, since the event it's
erasing never happened, so never needed to be erased.
</rationale>
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title> Because I said so, that's why! </title>
<body>
Amend rule 128/0 to add the sentence, "A Judge's decision shall have the
force of law." at the end.
</body>
<rationale>
This way, when the Judge says the statement "Player X has exactly 42 points=
"
is TRUE, the statement will become true. I like this more than just saying
Judges can make changes to the game state because this way the Judge can
only enforce the issue they judged.
</rationale>
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title> Five Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Six Hundred Minutes</title>
<body>
Amend rule 3/0, Days and Nweeks, to be the follwing =85=85=85=85 deliminated text:
=85=85=85=85
    There exist two entities known as The Clock and The Watch. The Clock
shall consist of two numbers, representing nweeks and ndays. The Watch shal=
l
consist of two numbers, representing wweeks and wdays. The Clock shall
always be either On or Off.
    If The Clock is On, then at 00:00:00 UTC, the number of ndays on The
Clock shall increase by one, unless the number of ndays on The Clock is
equal to nine, in which case it shall become equal to 0 and the number of
nweeks on The Clock shall increase by one.
    If The Clock is Off, then at 00:00:00 UTC, the number of wdays on The
Watch shall increase by one, unless the number of wdays on The Watch is
equal to nine, in which case it shall become equal to 0 and the number of
wweeks on The Watch shall increase by one.
    One nday shall be defined as the time between two consecutive changes i=
n
the number of ndays on The Clock. One nweek shall be defined to be 10 ndays=
,
or the time between two consecutive changes in the number of nweeks on The
Clock.
    One wday shall be defined as the time between two consecutive changes i=
n
the number of wdays on The Watch. One wweek shall be defined to be 10 wdays=
,
or the time between two consecutive changes in the number of wweeks on The
Clock.
    Whenever any rule other than this one specifies a certain amount of
time, that time shall be measured according to The Clock, unless that rule
specifies otherwise. [[Thus, if a rule gives someone 1 nweek to do
something, and The Clock is turned Off when the person has 6 days left, the=
n
the person still has 6 days left once The Clock is turned back on]]
    If the Clock is Off, no player may take any game-related actions except
actions which the rules specifically say may be taken while The Clock is
Off.
    The Clock may not be changed from On to Off or from Off to On except in
ways explicitly permitted by the rules. When the Clock is turned Off, the
number of wdays and wweeks on The Watch shall be set to zero.
 At the time that this amendment takes effect, the number of days on the
Clock shall be set to 0, the number of nweeks shall be set to 2, and the
word 'day' in all rules shall be changed to 'nday'. The last paragraph of
this rule will then delete itself. [[For neatness' sake]]
=85=85=85=85
</body>
<rationale>
This allows time to be temporarily 'turned off', to allow for things such a=
s
vacations to happen (so that people can't pass nasty proposals by being the
only one in town and thus the only one able to vote). The Watch is there in
case we ever need to do some sort of time measurement during this 'dead
time' zone.
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title> Now you see me, now you don't </title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "Leaves of Abscence" with the following =DF=DF=DF=DF
delimited text:
=DF=DF=DF=DF
    Each player, at any given time, shall be either On Leave or Off Leave.
Any player who is Off Leave may, by posting a message on a business forum,
declare emself to be On Leave. Any player who is On Leave may, by posting a
message on a business forum, declare emself to be Off Leave. A player who i=
s
On Leave cannot be selected by any process which randomly selects a player,
and may not take any game actions. If more than 2/3 of all players are On
Leave, The Clock shall become Off until such time as at least 1/3 of all
players are Off Leave. Players may place emselves On Leave or Off Leave
while The Clock is Off.
=DF=DF=DF=DF
</body>
<rationale>
If you're the only one who's going to be unable to do anything for a while,
the game shouldn't have to stop for you, but you shouldn't incur penalties
for failing to respond to CFJs, either. If almost everyone goes On Leave,
though, then whoever's left could wreak havoc by being the only voter, so
the game will shut itself down.
</rationale>
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title> The Garbageman Can </title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "Garbage Collection" with the following =BF=BF=BF=BF
delimited text:
=BF=BF=BF=BF
    If any player has been On Leave for more than 3 consecutive nweeks, tha=
t
player shall be removed from the roster and shall cease to be a player.
=BF=BF=BF=BF
</body>
<rationale>
In case somebody goes On Leave and then never comes back, they won't cause
the Merrymaking law to think that 2/3 of all players are On Leave and stop
The Clock.
</rationale>
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title> Boondoggles! Boondoggles! Boondoggles!</title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "Merrymaking" with the following =90=90=90=90 delimited
text:
=90=90=90=90
    A Vacation is defined to be a period of time designated as such by a
rule. At the beginning of each Vacation, The Clock shall turn Off until the
end of the Vacation.
=90=90=90=90
</body>
<rationale>
There are some periods, such as the end of December, Thanksgiving, etc.,
when a large number of players will be likely to be out of town or just too
involved in Real Life to keep track of the Nomic. Under this proposal,
everyone could sit back and relax/work hectically on other things during
these times.
</rationale>
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title> Santa Claus is coming to town! </title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "And a Happy New Year" with the following =87=87=87=87
deliminated text:
=87=87=87=87
    The period of time from December 25 to January 1 of each year shall be =
a
Vacation. Just before this Vacation begins, all players shall recieve 10
points.
=87=87=87=87
</body>
<rationale>
This is a busy time. We should take a break from Nomic for its duration. An=
d
everyone should get a 10-pt New Year's present.
</rationale>
</proposal>

From: Glenn Overby II <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 01:08:19 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot for nweek 2
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

My votes:

Proposal 121/0: (untitled): NO
Proposal 122/1: Screw That: YES
Proposal 123/0: No messing around with the game state: YES
Proposal 130/0: I've told lies without hint of regret.: NO
Proposal 131/3: Same as it ever was.: NO
Proposal 132/0: We have always been at war with Eastasia.: YES
Proposal 137/0: Correct our scores, please: YES
Proposal 138/0: Just to keep from being thrown to the wolves.: NO
Proposal 139/0: Otherwise, what are the characters going to fall off of?: NO
Proposal 140/0: The word being made into flesh.: YES
Proposal 141/0: Crazy as a coconut.: YES
Proposal 142/0: No kickbacks: YES
Proposal 143/0: Judicial Compensation: YES
Proposal 144/0: Order, order!: NO
Proposal 145/0: The Cursed Sushi of Babel: YES
Proposal 146/0: Judicial reform 1: YES
Proposal 147/0: Judicial Reform 2: NO
Proposal 148/0: Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment: YES
Proposal 149/0: Don't let the game die: YES

Octagon

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 12:38:15 EST
Subject: spoon-business: One
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--part1_38.207533d9.29561f07_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I Forfeit all my points and possesions. One

--part1_38.207533d9.29561f07_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Calisto MT" LANG="0">I Forfeit all my points and possesions. One</FONT></HTML>

--part1_38.207533d9.29561f07_boundary--

Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 16:32:44 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: My Votes
From: Dan <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3091883565_225015_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

No  > Proposal 121/0: (untitled)
[[Recognized as what? The admin has to recognize the existence of any
entity]]
No  > Proposal 122/1: Screw That
[[Explicitely isn't a word, so this rule is nonsensical]]
Yes > Proposal 123/0: No messing around with the game state
[[needs to be done]]
Yes > Proposal 130/0: I've told lies without hint of regret.
[[Hey, why not?]]
No  > Proposal 131/3: Same as it ever was.
[[The second part is ambiguous. Do we gain/lose points constantly?]]
No  > Proposal 132/0: We have always been at war with Eastasia.
[[I thought the CFJs already fixed these things]]
Yes > Proposal 137/0: Correct our scores, please
No  > Proposal 138/0: Just to keep from being thrown to the wolves.
Yes > Proposal 139/0: Otherwise, what are the characters going to fall off
of?
Yes > Proposal 140/0: The word being made into flesh.
No  > Proposal 141/0: Crazy as a coconut.
[[redundant =AD rule 235/0 never existed anyway]]
Yes > Proposal 142/0: No kickbacks
No  > Proposal 143/0: Judicial Compensation
[[I hate retroactive rules]]
No  > Proposal 144/0: Order, order!
[[Judgement will take forever with this]]
Yes > Proposal 145/0: The Cursed Sushi of Babel
[[Though I think it would be funnier if the word "Japanese" were replaced
with "Korean", 'cuz I've gotten more interesting results that way]]
No  > Proposal 146/0: Judicial reform 1
[[What's an Agent?]]
No  > Proposal 147/0: Judicial Reform 2
[[Whoever was Judge could legally make 'trivial' rule-changes like giving
emself lots o' points]]
No  > Proposal 148/0: Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment
[[Who starts out on the List?]]
Yes > Proposal 149/0: Don't let the game die
[[It doesn't hurt, and if the length of an nweek ever changes, we'll need
it]] 

--MS_Mac_OE_3091883565_225015_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>My Votes</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 121/0: (untitled)<BR>
[[Recognized as what? The admin has to recognize the existence of any entit=
y]]<BR>
No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 122/1: Screw That<BR>
[[Explicitely isn't a word, so this rule is nonsensical]]<BR>
Yes &gt; Proposal 123/0: No messing around with the game state<BR>
[[needs to be done]]<BR>
Yes &gt; Proposal 130/0: I've told lies without hint of regret.<BR>
[[Hey, why not?]]<BR>
No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 131/3: Same as it ever was.<BR>
[[The second part is ambiguous. Do we gain/lose points constantly?]]<BR>
No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 132/0: We have always been at war with Eastasia.<BR>
[[I thought the CFJs already fixed these things]]<BR>
Yes &gt; Proposal 137/0: Correct our scores, please<BR>
No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 138/0: Just to keep from being thrown to the wolves.=
<BR>
Yes &gt; Proposal 139/0: Otherwise, what are the characters going to fall o=
ff of?<BR>
Yes &gt; Proposal 140/0: The word being made into flesh.<BR>
No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 141/0: Crazy as a coconut.<BR>
[[redundant =AD rule 235/0 never existed anyway]]<BR>
Yes &gt; Proposal 142/0: No kickbacks<BR>
No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 143/0: Judicial Compensation<BR>
[[I hate retroactive rules]]<BR>
No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 144/0: Order, order!<BR>
[[Judgement will take forever with this]]<BR>
Yes &gt; Proposal 145/0: The Cursed Sushi of Babel<BR>
[[Though I think it would be funnier if the word &quot;Japanese&quot; were =
replaced with &quot;Korean&quot;, 'cuz I've gotten more interesting results =
that way]]<BR>
No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 146/0: Judicial reform 1<BR>
[[What's an Agent?]]<BR>
No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 147/0: Judicial Reform 2<BR>
[[Whoever was Judge could legally make 'trivial' rule-changes like giving e=
mself lots o' points]]<BR>
No &nbsp;&gt; Proposal 148/0: Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment<BR>
[[Who starts out on the List?]]<BR>
Yes &gt; Proposal 149/0: Don't let the game die<BR>
[[It doesn't hurt, and if the length of an nweek ever changes, we'll need i=
t]]</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3091883565_225015_MIME_Part--

From: "Gavin Doig" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 04:31:36 +0800
Subject: spoon-business: Voting
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Proposal 121/0: (untitled)
No.
>Proposal 122/1: Screw That
No.
>Proposal 123/0: No messing around with the game state
No.
>Proposal 130/0: I've told lies without hint of regret.
Yes.
>Proposal 131/1: Same as it ever was.
Yes. (The 2 revisions with the bribing rule were never actually made - I only sent them to discuss. Bad admin! Bad!).
>Proposal 132/0: We have always been at war with Eastasia.
No.
>Proposal 137/0: Correct our scores, please
No.
>Proposal 138/0: Just to keep from being thrown to the wolves.
Yes.
>Proposal 139/0: Otherwise, what are the characters going to fall off of?
Yes.
>Proposal 140/0: The word being made into flesh.
Yes.
>Proposal 141/0: Crazy as a coconut.
Yes.
>Proposal 142/0: No kickbacks
No. (It doesn't work.)
>Proposal 143/0: Judicial Compensation
No. (That'll really help us get considered verdicts).
>Proposal 144/0: Order, order!
No.
>Proposal 145/0: The Cursed Sushi of Babel.
No. (Very old, very quickly, I suspect).
>Proposal 146/0: Judicial reform 1
No.
>Proposal 147/0: Judicial Reform 2
No. (Judges should decide what the game is, not change it. If people feel that the game isn't how they want it, then they can proose something.)
>Proposal 148/0: Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment
Yes.
>Proposal 149/0: Don't let the game die
Yes.

uin.
-- 

_______________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

1 cent a minute calls anywhere in the U.S.!

http://www.getpennytalk.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=RG9853KJ&url=http://www.getpennytalk.com

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 04:42:33 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: nweek 2 results!
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Once again, status notes and stuff:

As UIN pointed out, the proper revision of Proposal 131 should be 131/1,
not 131/3. As it failed to pass, I can only issue a massive "mea culpa,"
and ask it to be re-proposed this nweek.

In the future, it would be really keen if drafts could be labeled as such,
to hopefully cut down on the number of oopsen like this.

Proposals 146, 147, and 148 also weren't actually formal proposals, but
they got voted on anyway. I'll keep them in the database, but add a
comment to that effect. Consider the vote counts for those a "straw poll"
sorta thing that's ultimately meaningless.

On with the good stuff.

Event log:

121/0 failed (0-8).
Jebus loses 3 points.

122/1 passed (5-3).
Created rule 150/0.
Created rule 151/0.
Jebus gains 7 points.

123/0 passed (5-3). I'm treating the one abstention as a "no" vote since
the rules only specify affirmative vs. not-affirmative votes. It passes
either way...
Created rule 152/0.
Rob gains 8 points.

130/0 passed (7-1).
Created rule 31/1.
UIN gains 14 points.

131/1 failed (1-7).
UIN loses 1 points.

132/0 failed (4-4).
Turgul loses 2 points.

137/0 passed (6-2).
This'll mess with scoring something fierce... Whee!
Joerg's score is set to 39.
Jebus's score is set to 0.
UIN's score is set to a base of 54 (+/- this nweek's stuff).
Aspirin fails me; I move up to ibuprofen.
Joerg scores 17 points.

138/0 failed (2-6).
UIN loses 4 points.

139/0 passed (6-2).
Created rule 33/0. (Thanks for trashing my numbering system. ;)
UIN gains 12 points.

140/0 passed (8-0).
Created rule 153/0.
Created rule 21/2.
Created rule 154/0.
UIN gains 4 points.

141/0 passed (5-3).
UIN loses 1d7 points. (rolled: UIN loses 5 points.)
UIN gains 6 points.

142/0 passed (6-2).
Created rule 155/0.
Created "Bob the Voting Fish."
Rob gains 16 points.

143/0 failed (3-5).
Octagon loses 4 points.

144/0 failed (0-8).
Chess loses 2 points.

145/0 failed (4-4).
Rob loses 5 points.

146/0 failed (2-6).
No effect.

147/0 failed (0-8).
No effect.

148/0 failed (4-4).
No effect.

149/0 passed (8-0).
No effect (the phrase "the eight day" does not appear in Rule 15. Besides,
it would make even less sense if taken literally. Here's what rule 15
would have looked like, had this measure actually DONE anything:

Voting on a nweek's Ballot opens at the start of the third to last day of
that nweek, and closes at the end of the tenth day of that nweek.

(Thus, no matter what, at least the voting part of an nweek stretches out
to ten days. Weird. Good thing this proposal doesn't do anything,
except...)

Wonko gains 7 points.

END NWEEK 2 BALLOT EVENT LOG.

I'm going back through proposals for the past couple nweeks, to determine
the new Charm attribute for everyone. Thanks ever so much for complicating
my life even more. ;)

Okay... the roster page is updated with everything from the past nweek.

Antonio: Score 18, Charm 1 (Distance 18.03)
Fenrir: Score 0, Charm 0 (Distance 0)
Iain: Score 14, Charm 1 (Distance 14.04)
Jebus: Score 0, Charm -1 (Distance 1)
Joerg: Score 58, Charm 5 (Distance 58.22)
Chess: Score 0, Charm -2 (Distance 2)
Octagon: Score 0, Charm -1 (Distance 1)
Rob: Score 50, Charm 3 (Distance 50.09)
Turgul: Score 0, Charm -1 (Distance 1)
UIN: Score 80, Charm 5 (Distance 80.16)
Wonko: Score 7, Charm 1 (Distance 7.07)

No votes were submitted privately to me, so everyone's vote records are
available via the list archives. This, I trust, satisfies the requirements
of 31/2.

All players' Speed attributes are zero, since Distance was undefined at
the start of the previous nweek. Distance attributes are rounded at two
decimal places, but the figure is easy enough to calculate should it be
needed to greater precision.

The following proposals, all attributable to Wonko, are recognized (with
the caveat that I'm changing all the weird characters that don't
cut-and-paste into XXXX):

"The Timeline's on this Mobius Strip" 156/0.
"Because I said so, that's why!" 157/0.
"525600 Minutes" 158/0.
"Now you see me, now you don't" 159/0.
"The Garbageman Can" 160/0.
"Boondoggles!" etc. 161/0.
"Santa Claus is coming to town!" 162/0.

Happy holidays!

Proposals will be accepted from now 'til the end of the year (31 December
2001). Voting for nweek 3 is 1-3 January 2002.

...dave

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 05:09:12 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Ooo...sign me up for THAT!
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Please admit me as a player in B Nomic under the name of Glotmorf.

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 05:40:48 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: anticipatory proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

This proposal is written in anticipation of my being accepted as a player.=
 (Long as it's fresh in my mind and all.) I therefore state that it can't=
 be considered actually proposed unless/until I'm accepted...

New rule: Proxies
A player may designate another player to be the holder of eir proxy, with=
 or without restrictions.  The holder of a proxy may, depending on any=
 restrictions issued along with the proxy, cast a vote in the name of the=
 player whose proxy is held, on any matter requiring a vote, including, but=
 not limited to, proposals and calls for judgment.  A player who has given=
 eir proxy to be held may withdraw it at any time.

From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: CFJ
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 14:09:39 +0100
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I wish to issue a call for judgement on the following issue:

A player's points and dimensions are part of the game state.
--
Rivoluzione:
  \o_  (o      __)   ( /    |__     o_  _o/
   |   /\  __\o  \o   |   o/  o/__  (\   |
  / \ |\  /) |   ( \ /o) / |  (  (\  /| / \

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

From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Judiciary Reform, this time it's true!
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 14:33:37 +0100
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I've tried to fix the problems the draft proposals had, I hope you'll =
like
them better this time :)

<proposal>
<title>Judicial reform 1</title>

Replace the text of rule 126 with the following LEGULEIO delimited text
LEGULEIO
Any player may submit a Call For Judgement (CFJ) by posting his intention
to a public list together with a Statement to be judged and optionally an
analyisis. That Player shall be known as the Plaintiff with regard to the
CFJ. While submitting CFJ the Plaintiff may also specify a player as
Defendant for that CFJ.
Calls for Judgement is given a serial number as if it were a revisable
object. A CFJ cannot be modified once submitted.
LEGULEIO
</proposal>

***

<proposal>
<title>Judicial Reform 2</title>
Replace the text of rule 128 with the following GIUDICATO delimited text

GIUDICATO
A Judge shall, within seven days of eir selection, give one of the
following responses to the Call for Judgment to which e was assigned,
accompanied by analysis:

1. Refused: A Judge may refuse to hear the Request if it lacks a clear
Statement or is not germain to the game.
2. True: The Statement is true.
3. False: The Statement is false.
4. Undecided: It cannot be determined at the time of the Judgment whether
the Statement is true or false.
[[completly ripped off from A Nomic]]

This response constitutes the judge's Judgment on that CFJ and has the =
same
serial number of the CFJ
A Judge's decision shall have the force of law.
GIUDICATO
</proposal>

[[proposal 157 does more or less the same thing, but this version of the
rule is better IMO]]

***

<proposal>
<title>Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment</title>

create a new rule named "Misbehaving Judges" with the following CATTIVONE
delimited text
CATTIVONE
the List of Misbehaving Judges (LMJ) is a list of players.
A player is removed from the LMJ two nweeks after he entered it.

When this proposal passes, remove all players from the LMJ, then this
paragraph deletes itself. [[so we're sure no player is tagged as
Misbehaving]]
CATTIVONE

replace the text of rule 127/0 with the following NELLALISTA delimited =
text
NELLALISTA
When a Call for Judgement has been made, the administrator shall randomly
select one player among the eligible players to be the judge. Eligble
players for the purpose of this rule are all players but the defendant, =
the
plaintiff and players in the List of Misbehaving Judges. If that leaves =
no
players eligible to be the judge, all players are eligible.
NELLALISTA
</proposal>

Antonio
--
Rivoluzione:
  \o_  (o      __)   ( /    |__     o_  _o/
   |   /\  __\o  \o   |   o/  o/__  (\   |
  / \ |\  /) |   ( \ /o) / |  (  (\  /| / \

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

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 09:37:29 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Judicial Reform
From: Dan <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092117849_267081_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In light of the fact that Judicial Reform 2 does almost exactly the same
thing as my proposal 157, except more thoroughly and with nifty extra bits
that need to be done, I'm going to completely amend proposal 157 to be an
entirely different proposal, as follows:

I change the title of the proposal to be "Let's do it right this time"

I change the text of the proposal to the following !@#$ delimited text:
!@#$
In rule 15/0, replace the words "the eighth day" with "the third to last
day"
and replace the words "the tenth day" with "the last day"
!@#$

Is it legal for me to completely rewrite my proposal? If not, I rescind
proposal 157 and issue a new proposal with the title and text specified
above. 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092117849_267081_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Judicial Reform</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>In light of the fact that Judicial Reform 2 does almost exactly the sam=
e thing as my proposal 157, except more thoroughly and with nifty extra bits=
 that need to be done, I'm going to completely amend proposal 157 to be an e=
ntirely different proposal, as follows:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I change the title of the proposal to be &quot;Let's do it right this time&=
quot;<BR>
<BR>
I change the text of the proposal to the following !@#$ delimited text:<BR>
!@#$<BR>
In rule 15/0, replace the words &quot;the eighth day&quot; with &quot;the t=
hird to last day&quot;<BR>
and replace the words &quot;the tenth day&quot; with &quot;the last day&quo=
t;<BR>
!@#$<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Is it legal for me to completely rewrite my proposal? If not, I rescind pro=
posal 157 and issue a new proposal with the title and text specified above.<=
/TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092117849_267081_MIME_Part--

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 10:30:22 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Fixing the rules
From: Dan <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092121022_458221_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I issue the following proposal:

<proposal>
<title> Fix the rules </title>
<body>
In rule 150/0, replace the word 'explicitely' with 'explicitly'
</body>
</proposal>

Doesn't its current wording mean that no player's information may be
changed, period, because the rules don't 'explicitely' permit anything? 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092121022_458221_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Fixing the rules</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>I issue the following proposal:<BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; Fix the rules &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
In rule 150/0, replace the word 'explicitely' with 'explicitly'<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;<BR>
<BR>
Doesn't its current wording mean that no player's information may be change=
d, period, because the rules don't 'explicitely' permit anything?</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092121022_458221_MIME_Part--

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 18:13:28 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: the daily batch of recognized stuff
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Glotmorf: welcome to B Nomic!
Your "Proxies" proposal is recognized as 163/0.

Antonio's CFJ is 164, assigned to Fenrir.

*Proposal* 159 is fixed. It's not a rule, I promise. (I just picked the
wrong object-type in my form - it defaults to "rule" and I was in a hurry
last night to get all the new proposals and voting stuff done so I could
get to a party. :)

Antonio's *real* Judicial reform proposals are recognized as 165, 166,
167.

Which reminds me: none of these rules/proposals/whatnots currently include
any way to deal with absentee judges. CFJ 134, assigned to Iain, is due by
sometime on the 27th, and the rules don't seem to specify what happens if
e fails completely to respond.

157/1 (which bears no resemblance to 157/0 aside from them both having
some vowels and consonants) is recognized.

Wonko's "Fix the rules" is recognized as 168.

At some point I'm gonna have to come up with an automated way to handle
votes. (Currently I'm using the "look for a spare piece of grid paper"
method.)

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 16:36:33 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Absentee judges
From: Dan <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092142993_64210_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

<proposal>
<title> Taking a vow of non-silence </title>
<body>
Amend rule 128 to add the sentence, "If a Judge fails to deliver a Judgement
within seven days of eir suggestion, e shall lose 10 points and, if a rule
entitled "Misbehaving Judges" exists, eir name shall be added to the List of
Misbehaving Judges."
</body>
</proposal> 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092142993_64210_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Absentee judges</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; Taking a vow of non-silence &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Amend rule 128 to add the sentence, &quot;If a Judge fails to deliver a Jud=
gement within seven days of eir suggestion, e shall lose 10 points and, if a=
 rule entitled &quot;Misbehaving Judges&quot; exists, eir name shall be adde=
d to the List of Misbehaving Judges.&quot;<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092142993_64210_MIME_Part--

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 17:14:23 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Fixing The Clock
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092145263_200943_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I amend proposal 158 to change the number 2 in the last paragraph to a 3.

I issue the following proposal:

<proposal>
<title> Global Positioning System </title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "You are here" with the following #### delimited
text:
####
Each dimension has a number. Score dimension #1. Charm is dimension #2.
Further dimensions shall be assigned numbers in the order in which they were
created.

Each player has an attribute called Position. Position is list of a player's
values for each dimension. Position shall be represented as {a,b,c...} where
a is the value of dimension 1, b is the value of dimension 2, c is the value
of dimension 3, and so on.
</body>
<rationale>
We need a way to refer to Dimensions easily.
</rationale>
</proposal> 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092145263_200943_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Fixing The Clock</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>I amend proposal 158 to change the number 2 in the last paragraph to a =
3.<BR>
<BR>
I issue the following proposal:<BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; Global Positioning System &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Create a new rule entitled &quot;You are here&quot; with the following ####=
 delimited text:<BR>
####<BR>
Each dimension has a number. Score dimension #1. Charm is dimension #2. Fur=
ther dimensions shall be assigned numbers in the order in which they were cr=
eated.<BR>
<BR>
Each player has an attribute called Position. Position is list of a player'=
s values for each dimension. Position shall be represented as {a,b,c...} whe=
re a is the value of dimension 1, b is the value of dimension 2, c is the va=
lue of dimension 3, and so on.<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
We need a way to refer to Dimensions easily.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092145263_200943_MIME_Part--

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 17:42:43 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Oops
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092146963_303204_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Oops. I forgot to add the second ####.
<proposal>
<title> Global Positioning System </title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "You are Here" with the following #### delimited
text:
####
Each dimension has a number. Score dimension #1. Charm is dimension #2.
Further dimensions shall be assigned numbers in the order in which they were
created.

Each player has an attribute called Position. Position is list of a player's
values for each dimension. Position shall be represented as {a,b,c...} where
a is the value of dimension 1, b is the value of dimension 2, c is the value
of dimension 3, and so on.
####
</body>
<rationale>
We need a way to refer to Dimensions easily.
</rationale>
</proposal> 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092146963_303204_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Oops</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>Oops. I forgot to add the second ####.<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; Global Positioning System &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Create a new rule entitled &quot;You are Here&quot; with the following ####=
 delimited text:<BR>
####<BR>
Each dimension has a number. Score dimension #1. Charm is dimension #2. Fur=
ther dimensions shall be assigned numbers in the order in which they were cr=
eated.<BR>
<BR>
Each player has an attribute called Position. Position is list of a player'=
s values for each dimension. Position shall be represented as {a,b,c...} whe=
re a is the value of dimension 1, b is the value of dimension 2, c is the va=
lue of dimension 3, and so on.<BR>
####<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
We need a way to refer to Dimensions easily.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;</TT> <BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092146963_303204_MIME_Part--

From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Judiciary Reform, version 2b
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 00:35:18 +0100
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Oops, wrong list

I amend my proposal Judicial reform 1=20
<proposal>
<title>Judicial reform 1</title>

Replace the text of rule 126 with the following LEGULEIO delimited text
LEGULEIO
Any player may submit a Call For Judgement (CFJ) by posting his intention
to a public list together with a Statement to be judged and optionally an
analyisis. That Player shall be known as the Plaintiff with regard to the
CFJ. While submitting CFJ the Plaintiff may also specify a player as
Defendant for that CFJ.
Calls for Judgement are given a serial number as if they were a revisable
object. A CFJ cannot be modified once submitted.
LEGULEIO
</proposal>

[[thanks Dan for pointing that out]]

To support absentee judges I also amend Judicial reform 2:

<proposal>
<title>Judicial Reform 2</title>
Replace the text of rule 128 with the following GIUDICATO delimited text

GIUDICATO
A Judge shall, within seven days of eir selection, give one of the
following responses to the Call for Judgment to which e was assigned,
accompanied by analysis:

1. Refused: A Judge may refuse to hear the Request if it lacks a clear
Statement or is not germain to the game.
2. True: The Statement is true.
3. False: The Statement is false.
4. Undecided: It cannot be determined at the time of the Judgment whether
the Statement is true or false.
[[completly ripped off from A Nomic]]

This response constitutes the judge's Judgment on that CFJ and has the =
same
serial number of the CFJ
A Judge's decision shall have the force of law.

Should it happen that a Judge has not issued a Judgement within seven =
days
of eir selection, that Judge shall be recused and a new player shall be
selected in the ways prescribed by the rules as Judge for the CFJ=20
GIUDICATO
</proposal>

--
Rivoluzione:
  \o_  (o      __)   ( /    |__     o_  _o/
   |   /\  __\o  \o   |   o/  o/__  (\   |
  / \ |\  /) |   ( \ /o) / |  (  (\  /| / \

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

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 18:37:13 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Absentee Judges
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092150233_499955_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I amend my "Vow of Non-silence propsal":

<proposal>
<title> Taking a vow of non-silence </title>
<body>
If a proposal entitled Judiciary Reform 2 has passed, append the sentence,
"When a Judge is recused in this manner, e shall lose 10 points and, if a
rule entitled "Misbehaving Judges" exists, eir name shall be added to the
List of Misbehaving Judges." to rule 128
</body>
</proposal> 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092150233_499955_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Absentee Judges</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>I amend my &quot;Vow of Non-silence propsal&quot;:<BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; Taking a vow of non-silence &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
If a proposal entitled Judiciary Reform 2 has passed, append the sentence, =
&quot;When a Judge is recused in this manner, e shall lose 10 points and, if=
 a rule entitled &quot;Misbehaving Judges&quot; exists, eir name shall be ad=
ded to the List of Misbehaving Judges.&quot; to rule 128<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt; <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092150233_499955_MIME_Part--

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 01:06:20 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: guess what!
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Yep, time for the evening batch of recognitions!

"Taking a vow of non-silence" is recognized as 169/0 and its modification
as 169/1.

158 is revised (158/1). (If you're trying to get the clock synchronized to
when this proposal would take effect, you might want to change the "3" to
a "4" - it'd take effect at the start of nweek 4, as it's currently nweek
3.)

"Global Positioning System" is recognized as 170/0. (I'm disregarding the
"first" version of that, as there weren't any substantive changes between
it and the re-post, and I'm lazy.)

The first judicial reform revision is recognized (165/1). Ditto for 166/1,
'cept it's for a different proposal entirely. (Aside: See how easy it is
to get the two lists mixed up? :-)

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 22:49:50 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Paradox prevention proposal
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092165391_112795_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

<proposal>
<title> The Paradox Prevention Proposal </title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "Paradox" with the following %%%% delimited text:
%%%%
If a proposal is passed which causes the creation of a paradox, the
proponent of the proposal shall be awarded 100 points, after which all
effects of the proposal besides the awardment of the win shall be erased and
the proposal shall never have occurred.
%%%%
</body>
<rationale>
Sooner or later, someone's going to make a paradox, either on purpose or
accidentally (nweek 1 is a very good example of that). So, this proposal
allows for play to continue after such a paradox has been formed.
</rationale>
</proposal> 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092165391_112795_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Paradox prevention proposal</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; The Paradox Prevention Proposal &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Create a new rule entitled &quot;Paradox&quot; with the following %%%% deli=
mited text:<BR>
%%%%<BR>
If a proposal is passed which causes the creation of a paradox, the propone=
nt of the proposal shall be awarded 100 points, after which all effects of t=
he proposal besides the awardment of the win shall be erased and the proposa=
l shall never have occurred.<BR>
%%%%<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
Sooner or later, someone's going to make a paradox, either on purpose or ac=
cidentally (nweek 1 is a very good example of that). So, this proposal allow=
s for play to continue after such a paradox has been formed.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092165391_112795_MIME_Part--

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 03:57:35 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Paradox prevention proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Wonko wrote:

> <title> The Paradox Prevention Proposal </title>

Very deep. 171/0.

...dave

Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 23:03:46 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Yet more proposals
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092166227_163139_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

<proposal>
<title> Just to avoid confusion.... </title>
<body>
Amend rule 33 to add the following **** delimited text:
****
If a rule states that it takes precedence over another rule, it does. If a
rule states that it defers to another rule, it does. If two rules try to
take precedence over each other or defer to each other, then the one with
the lowest identification number shall take precedence.
****
</body>
<rationale>
Technically, we have a paradox, or maybe an ambiguity, right now, because
rule 33 states that higher numbered rules take precedence over lower
numbered rules, but rule 10 states that it takes precedence over all other
rules. The problem is that if 10 take precedence over 33, everything's fine,
and if 33 takes precedence over 10, everythings fine, but there's no way to
figure out which is the case. This ambiguity doesn't make much difference
here, but it could concievably cause problems with other rules in the
future. This proposal should fix that.
</rationale>
</proposal> 

<proposal>
<title> Charmed, I'm sure </title>
<body>
Amend rule 154 to replace the last paragraph with the following the
following **** delimited text:
****

Whenever a proposal passes, the proposal's proponent's charm shall increase
by one.
Whenever a proposal fails, the proposal's proponent's charm shall decrease
by one.

****
</body>
<rationale>
This way charm can be increased/decreased by other rules as well as this
one.
</rationale>
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title> Party like it's 2002 </title>
<body>
Each player gets 10 points.
</body>
<rationale>
Happy New Year!
</rationale>
</proposal> 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092166227_163139_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Yet more proposals</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; Just to avoid confusion.... &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Amend rule 33 to add the following **** delimited text:<BR>
****<BR>
If a rule states that it takes precedence over another rule, it does. If a =
rule states that it defers to another rule, it does. If two rules try to tak=
e precedence over each other or defer to each other, then the one with the l=
owest identification number shall take precedence.<BR>
****<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
Technically, we have a paradox, or maybe an ambiguity, right now, because r=
ule 33 states that higher numbered rules take precedence over lower numbered=
 rules, but rule 10 states that it takes precedence over all other rules. Th=
e problem is that if 10 take precedence over 33, everything's fine, and if 3=
3 takes precedence over 10, everythings fine, but there's no way to figure o=
ut which is the case. This ambiguity doesn't make much difference here, but =
it could concievably cause problems with other rules in the future. This pro=
posal should fix that.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt; <BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; Charmed, I'm sure &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Amend rule 154 to replace the last paragraph with the following the followi=
ng **** delimited text:<BR>
****<BR>
<BR>
Whenever a proposal passes, the proposal's proponent's charm shall increase=
 by one.<BR>
Whenever a proposal fails, the proposal's proponent's charm shall decrease =
by one.<BR>
<BR>
****<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
This way charm can be increased/decreased by other rules as well as this on=
e.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;<BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; Party like it's 2002 &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Each player gets 10 points.<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
Happy New Year!<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092166227_163139_MIME_Part--

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 06:25:48 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Yet more proposals
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Wonko wrote:

> <title> Just to avoid confusion.... </title>

Lemme guess... you saw how well UIN was doing with shotgun proposals and
you're trying to imitate em.

Recognized as 172/0.

...dave

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 06:28:44 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Yet more proposals
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Right after I made that flip "shotgun" remark, I scrolled down. ;)

On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Wonko wrote:

> <title> Charmed, I'm sure </title>
173/0.

> <title> Party like it's 2002 </title>
174/0 (and a remarkably good idea).

...dave

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 08:21:13 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: date question
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

An official question, please, for the Gregorian-challenged newbie: What=
 date and time, by US east-coast standards, correspond to the next voting=
 due date?

						Glotmorf

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 08:27:27 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Paradox revision
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092200048_100077_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

I amend proposal 171/0 to read:

<proposal>
<title> The Paradox Prevention Proposal </title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "Paradox" with the following %%%% delimited text=
:
%%%%
If a proposal passes which causes the creation of a paradox upon its
passing, the proponent of the proposal shall be awarded 100 points, after
which all effects of the proposal besides the awardment of the points shall
be erased and the proposal shall be treated as if it had failed. This shall
only happen if a Judge decides that it is in fact a paradox before the end
of the first nweek after the proposal passes. This rule takes precedence
over rule 32.
%%%%
</body>
<rationale>
This should fix the problems Rob pointed out =AD it says effects besides the
awardment of the points now instead of the win, and I think I've got it so
that it will only erase the most recent proposal involved in the paradox. I
think taking precedence over rule 32 is redundant, because rule 33 makes
sure it does anyway, but better safe than sorry.
</rationale>
</proposal>=20

--MS_Mac_OE_3092200048_100077_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Paradox revision</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>I amend proposal 171/0 to read:<BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; The Paradox Prevention Proposal &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Create a new rule entitled &quot;Paradox&quot; with the following %%%% deli=
mited text:<BR>
%%%%<BR>
If a proposal passes which causes the creation of a paradox upon its passin=
g, the proponent of the proposal shall be awarded 100 points, after which al=
l effects of the proposal besides the awardment of the points shall be erase=
d and the proposal shall be treated as if it had failed. This shall only hap=
pen if a Judge decides that it is in fact a paradox before the end of the fi=
rst nweek after the proposal passes. This rule takes precedence over rule 32=
.<BR>
%%%%<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
This should fix the problems Rob pointed out =AD it says effects besides the =
awardment of the points now instead of the win, and I think I've got it so t=
hat it will only erase the most recent proposal involved in the paradox. I t=
hink taking precedence over rule 32 is redundant, because rule 33 makes sure=
 it does anyway, but better safe than sorry.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt; <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092200048_100077_MIME_Part--

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 08:42:04 -0500
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Yet more proposals
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092200924_152870_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Think you misread, guy.  Rule 33, in its current form, says that
lower-numbered rules take precedence, not higher-numbered ones.  So 10 would
have taken precedence over 33.

Thanks for pointing that out. I did it right in the actual proposal, but
when I was writing the rationale, I must have confused myself somehow (I'm
good at doing that :)

Here's one more proposal(hopefully my last this nweek)  :

<proposal>
<title> Ain't ain't a word </title>
<body>
Replace the words " the proposals that have received a majority of
affirmative votes is deemed to have passed." in rule 32 with the sentence "
the proposals that have received a majority of affirmative votes are deemed
to have passed."
</body>
<rationale>
The use of the word 'is' instead of 'are' is kind of confusing. It looks
like it's referring to 'the proposals' as a single object. (It's nitpicky,
but it ought to be done and it gets me points :)
</rationale>
</proposal>

I'll try to stop shot-gunning my proposals after this one. 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092200924_152870_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Yet more proposals</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT SIZE=3D"2"><FONT FACE=3D"Arial">Think you misread, guy. &nbsp;Rule 33, in=
 its current form, says that lower-numbered rules take precedence, not highe=
r-numbered ones. &nbsp;So 10 would have taken precedence over 33.<BR>
</FONT></FONT><TT><BR>
Thanks for pointing that out. I did it right in the actual proposal, but wh=
en I was writing the rationale, I must have confused myself somehow (I'm goo=
d at doing that :)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Here's one more proposal(hopefully my last this nweek) &nbsp;:<BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; Ain't ain't a word &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Replace the words &quot; the proposals that have received a majority of aff=
irmative votes is deemed to have passed.&quot; in rule 32 with the sentence =
&quot; the proposals that have received a majority of affirmative votes are =
deemed to have passed.&quot;<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
The use of the word 'is' instead of 'are' is kind of confusing. It looks li=
ke it's referring to 'the proposals' as a single object. (It's nitpicky, but=
 it ought to be done and it gets me points :)<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;<BR>
<BR>
I'll try to stop shot-gunning my proposals after this one.</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092200924_152870_MIME_Part--

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:57:20 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Yet more proposals
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Wonko wrote:

> <title> Ain't ain't a word </title>

175/0. And your revision to 171 is recognized as well (171/1).

...dave

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 14:37:05 EST
Subject: spoon-business: Forfeit
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--part1_16f.63c4845.295b80e1_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I forfeited and yet i still get those damn e-mails, wanna take me off the b 
nomic list

--part1_16f.63c4845.295b80e1_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Calisto MT" LANG="0">I forfeited and yet i still get those damn e-mails, wanna take me off the b nomic list</FONT></HTML>

--part1_16f.63c4845.295b80e1_boundary--

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 14:43:16 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: new rule proposal: Paper Trail
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Proposed new rule: Paper Trail

Every proposal awaiting the current voting period shall be displayed for=
 public review, along with the name of the player that proposed it.

Rationale:

There may well be a time in the future that the passage of a given proposal=
 may give victory to the proposer, whether by points gained or some other=
 legality.  I'd want to know that before I voted someone into a win.

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:01:23 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: New Rule Proposal: 
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Append to the end of rule 128 (regardless of whether proposal 166 has=
 passed) the following text:

If a player Insists on objecting to the judge's Response to a Call for=
 Judgment, and this Insistence is seconded by at least two other players, a=
 vote shall be held on whether the Response should be overturned.  If 3/4=
 of the then-current players vote yea, that the Response should be=
 overturned, then the Response is thrown out, and a new judge is selected=
 for the Call for Judgment, excluding any Misbehaving Judges and players=
 who have already served as judge for the Call for Judgment in question.=
  This process shall be repeated until a given Response is not overturned,=
 at which point it is applied, or until there are no more eligible judges=
 for the Call for Judgment, at which point the Call for Judgment is thrown=
 out.

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:09:12 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Er...that last proposal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

That last proposal I sent in...Kindly give it the name Appeal Clause and=
 replace it with the following (grumble)-delimited text:

(grumble)
Append to the end of rule 128 (regardless of whether proposal 166 has=
 passed) the following text:

If a player Insists on objecting to the judge's Response to a Call for=
 Judgment, and this Insistence is seconded by at least two other players, a=
 vote shall be held on whether the Response should be overturned.  If 3/4=
 of the then-current players vote yea, that the Response should be=
 overturned, then the Response is thrown out, and a new judge is selected=
 for the Call for Judgment, excluding any ineligible players (as per rule=
 127) and players who have already served as judge for the Call for=
 Judgment in question.  This process shall be repeated until a given=
 Response is not overturned, at which point it is applied, or until there=
 are no more eligible judges for the Call for Judgment, at which point the=
 Call for Judgment is thrown out.
(grumble)

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:46:07 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: New Rule Proposal: Bandwidth Rationing
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

New Rule: Bandwidth Rationing

Each player is limited to a maximum of three proposals per nweek.

Rationale:

I was also known as Geppetto in Nomopoly II=
 (http://www.mit.edu/people/tivol/nomopoly/) and Blind Nomic=
 (http://www.nomic.net/deadgames/blind/).  I have observed and experienced=
 what it's like for a Nomic administrator to go quite buggy from being=
 inundated with proposals.  If we bombard with proposals, we'll find out=
 where the line is between a labor of love and just plain labor.

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 21:10:48 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: you know it's coming...
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Okay, Jebus/Jesus/whomever has officially forfeited, and has been removed
from the roster. (As mentioned previously, I don't control the mailing
lists; e has to take care of that emself.)

"Paper Trail" is recognized as 176/0. (Ironically, adding the author's
name to the current proposals page was on my to-do list, but now I'll wait
and see if I *have* to do it. :)

"Appeal Clause" is recognized as 177/0. Since you fixed it so quickly, I'm
only taking the more recent version (instead of having an untitled
proposal that gets revised ten seconds later).

"Bandwidth Rationing" is recognized as 178/0. It's eerily similar to
120/0, which was defeated, but I don't recall the margin offhand.

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Let's make it Imperial (sort of)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 01:57:49 +0100
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Since the administrator is kind enough to run the game (and administer =
the
website etc) just for fun, let's make it easier for him by letting him =
have
the final word on any proposal (mostly so he can veto a proposal that =
would
require too much work on the database or something).
He could do so now too by not recognizing it but this will make it legal

<proposal>
<title>let's make it Imperial</title>
Append the following IMPERIAL delimited text to rule 32
IMPERIAL
The Administrator may Veto any given proposal by declaring so. That
proposal fails no matter what votes it recived.
IMPERIAL
</proposal>
--=20
Antonio

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

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 22:41:44 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Let's hang on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the
	economic and social differences in our society
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092251305_375375_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

<proposal>
<title>You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some
watery tart threw a sword at you</title>
Append the following "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!" delimited text to
rule 32
"Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
The Administrator may Veto any given proposal by declaring so. A Vetoed
proposal fails unless at least 3/4 of all players vote for it. If at any
time the administrator is a player, this rule automatically amends itself to
remove this sentence and the preceding two sentences.
"Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
</proposal>

How's this? It gives the admin a fair amount of power, but if e tries to
make emself a player and use that power, the power vanishes faster than you
can say Ecky-ecky-ecky-ecky-pikang-zoop-boing-goodem- zu-owly-zhiv 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092251305_375375_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Let's hang on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the ec=
onomic and social differences in our society</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt;You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause =
some watery tart threw a sword at you&lt;/title&gt;<BR>
Append the following &quot;Help! Help! I'm being repressed!&quot; delimited=
 text to rule 32<BR>
&quot;Help! Help! I'm being repressed!&quot;<BR>
The Administrator may Veto any given proposal by declaring so. A Vetoed pro=
posal fails unless at least 3/4 of all players vote for it. If at any time t=
he administrator is a player, this rule automatically amends itself to remov=
e this sentence and the preceding two sentences.<BR>
&quot;Help! Help! I'm being repressed!&quot;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
How's this? It gives the admin a fair amount of power, but if e tries to ma=
ke emself a player and use that power, the power vanishes faster than you ca=
n say Ecky-ecky-ecky-ecky-pikang-zoop-boing-goodem- zu-owly-zhiv</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092251305_375375_MIME_Part--

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 22:59:07 -0500
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Let's hang on to outdated
	imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in
	our society
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

on 12/26/01 10:49 PM, Rob Speer at [email-masked] wrote:
> 
> Why not just say that if the Administrator is a Player, he cannot use
> the Veto power?
> 
> Anyway, the rule is unclear. If a Veto is used, does it only succeed if
> less than 3/4 of all players voted for it? Is another vote held
> immediately? Or does it go to the next nweek? Furthermore, won't it be
> very difficult to override a Veto considering that at least 1/4 of the
> players tend to idle and not vote?

Oops. You're right. I amend my proposal to read as follows:

<proposal>
<title>You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some
watery tart threw a sword at you</title>
Append the following "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!" delimited text to
rule 32
"Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
If the Administrator is not a player, e may veto a proposal by stating that
e does so on a public forum. If a proposal is vetoed in this manner, but at
least 3/4 of the votes counted for it were affirmative, the veto has no
effect. Otherwise, the proposal is deemed to have failed.
"Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
</proposal>

Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 23:04:11 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: I'm in a Nomic state of mind.
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I propose the following:

<proposal name="Define the Game State">
Amend rule 152 by appending the following paragraph:

The state of the game, which can also be referred to as the game state,
is comprised of all information that the Administrator is required to
keep track of.

</proposal>

-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 06:48:09 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: 179 and 180
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

179/0 and 179/1 are recognized (that's the Monty Python proposal).
Rob's gamestate proposal is 180/0.

Note that my typing grows ever more brief as time passes.

...dave

Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 03:27:35 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Rule change proposal: Apathy Clause
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

With regards to Wonko's concern, I hereby submit the Apathy Clause=
 proposal:

Amend the text of rule 32, changing

"that have received a majority of affirmative votes"

to

"that have received a majority of affirmative votes out of all votes they=
 received"

Rationale:

If no one votes on a proposal, it doesn't have an affirmative majority.  If=
 only one person votes on a proposal, meaning no one else cares if it=
 passes or not, e may as well get eir way.  If only one person is left=
 actively playing the game because all others have abandoned it, e can=
 propose emself the winner and see that it happens.

...Which, in a way, is another Monty Python clause...There was this one=
 episode where there was only one person left in a POW camp; even the=
 guards had left it.  So he shut the gates and started devising hundreds of=
 ways to escape...

Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 08:46:12 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Rule change proposal: Apathy Clause
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Donald Whytock wrote:

> With regards to Wonko's concern, I hereby submit the Apathy Clause proposal:

181/0.

I also spent the last ten minutes designing a handy Web form that I can
print out to track votes, which will no doubt make my life just a little
less unpleasant.

It's not perfect - the biggest flaw is that right now a printed ballot is
about five pages - but it's a start. :)

...dave

Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 06:14:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Let's make it Imperial (sort of)
To: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--- "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Antonio wrote:
> 
> > Since the administrator is kind enough to run the game (and
> administer the
> > website etc) just for fun, let's make it easier for him by letting
> him have
> > the final word on any proposal (mostly so he can veto a proposal
> that would
> > require too much work on the database or something).
> 
> Just to prove your point, I'm gonna refuse to recognize your
> proposal. :)
> 
> Should I choose to become a player, this could give me such an
> obscene
> advantage it's not really even funny.
> 
> I *will* recognize it if you can come up with a version that's fair
> to
> everyone else as well.
> 
> ...dave
> 
Very well: I had thought of that problem just after hitting the send
button (so typical), but then I was tired and just went to bed.
here goes:
<proposal>
<title>let's make it Imperial</title>
Create a new rule named "Administrative Veto" with the following
IMPERIAL delimited text
IMPERIAL
The Administrator may Veto any given proposal by declaring so. That
proposal fails no matter what votes it recived.
Should the Administrator become a player this rule shall repeal itself.
This rule takes precedence over rule 32.
IMPERIAL
</proposal>

I made it a separate rule so it can destroy itself more easily, but
this required taking precedence over rule 32, if you don't like that,
vote for Wonko's proposal instead.
-- 
Antonio

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_Rathlev?= <[email-masked]>
To: "B Nomic Business" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-business: nweek 2 results!
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:56:26 +0100
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> 123/0 passed (5-3). I'm treating the one abstention as a "no" vote
> since the rules only specify affirmative vs. not-affirmative
> votes. It passes either way...

Hmmm. The intended meaning was that I don't vote on that issue.

> 145/0 failed (4-4).

If you counted my abstention as a "no" vote on this issue as well, it
would have passed if you had not counted it at all.

I'm not making a CFJ on this because so much stuff has been submitted
since the end of nweek 2. Instead, I make the following proposal:

\begin{proposal}
\title{To abstain is an explicit way of *not* voting}

Amend rule 31 by adding the following paragraph:

Players may abstain from voting on a given issue by not submitting a
vote on that issue or by explicitly indicating their abstention.
Explicit abstentions shall be treated like votes during Voting, but
for the purpose of determining the voting results, they are treated as
if the player had not submitted a vote.

[[Note: The second sentence is needed to make sure that abstentions
don't conflict with voting multiple times.]]

\end{proposal}

Joerg

Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 18:19:36 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: spoon-business: nweek 2 results!
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, [iso-8859-1] J=F6rg Rathlev wrote:

> > 123/0 passed (5-3). I'm treating the one abstention as a "no" vote
> > since the rules only specify affirmative vs. not-affirmative
> > votes. It passes either way...
>
> Hmmm. The intended meaning was that I don't vote on that issue.

Mea culpa. Had you simply not voted (i.e. sent in a blank line or
something) I would've interpreted that as "not voting". But there was an
explicit vote (the "ABSTAIN" vote) present, so I was obliged to count it
as a non-affirmative vote (which I believed it was).

> \title{To abstain is an explicit way of *not* voting}

Recognized as 183/0.
And Antonio's Imperial proposal is 182/0.

=2E..dave

From: Antonio <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Dimension Reform
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:05:59 +0100
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<proposal>
<title>Reform Dimensions<\title>
Remove the phrase "Score is a Dimension." from rule 21

change rule 154's title to "Dimensions"

amend rule 154 to read in full:
"Score is a Dimension

Players have an attribute named Charm. Charm is a Dimension.=20

A player's Charm is the number of proposals submitted by them which have
been accepted, minus the number of proposals submitted by them which have
been rejected.=20

Players have an attribute named Activity. Activity is a Dimension.=20

A player's Activty is the number of Ballots in which that player casted =
at
least one vote minus the number of Ballots in which that player did not
cast any vote."
--=20
Antonio

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

Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:58:51 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: nweek 2 results!
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 06:19:36PM +0000, David E. Smith wrote:
> > Hmmm. The intended meaning was that I don't vote on that issue.
> 
> Mea culpa. Had you simply not voted (i.e. sent in a blank line or
> something) I would've interpreted that as "not voting". But there was an
> explicit vote (the "ABSTAIN" vote) present, so I was obliged to count it
> as a non-affirmative vote (which I believed it was).

That's probably true. But, since a majority of people who cared favored
the proposal, I'd like to give it another try.

So: I submit a new proposal which is identical to 145/0, except for the
number.

-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 22:41:16 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Clarifying the clarification
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

For the sake of clarity, I modify proposal 180/0 (the game state
proposal) by appending the following sentence to the amendment it
proposes:

Messages on a Forum are not themselves part of the game state.

-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 05:21:07 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: blah
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Antonio's "Dimension Reform" prop is 184.
The Cursed Sushi of Babel, v2.0, is 185.
Revision of 180 is recognized (180/1).

We're up to 29 proposals for nweek 3. Whee.

Can I sleep now?

...dave

Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 08:15:01 -0500
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Dimension Reform
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I've just realized that since proposals happen in numerical order, my
proposal #173 will do absolutely nothing if the new dimension reform
proposal passes, as the rule 173 amends will be completely overwritten.
Therefore, I rescind proposal 173 and issue a new, similar proposal.

<proposal>
<title> Charmed, I'm sure </title>
<body>
Amend rule 154 to replace the following NIGHT delimited text with the
following DAY delimited text:

NIGHT
A player's Charm is the number of proposals submitted by them which have
been accepted, minus the number of proposals submitted by them which have
been rejected. 
NIGHT

DAY
Whenever a proposal passes, the proposal's proponent's charm shall increase
by one.
Whenever a proposal fails, the proposal's proponent's charm shall decrease
by one.
DAY

and the following TOBE delimited text, if it exists, with the following
NOTTOBE delimited text:

TOBE
A player's Activty is the number of Ballots in which that player casted at
least one vote minus the number of Ballots in which that player did not
cast any vote."
TOBE

NOTOBE
Whenever an nweek ends and a player voted on that nweek's Ballot, eir
Activity increases by 1.
Whenever an nweek ends and a player didn't vote on that nweek's Ballot, eir
Activity decreases by 1.
NOTTOBE

</body>
<rationale>
This way charm & activity can be modified by other rules as well as this
one.
</rationale>
</proposal>

Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 08:39:54 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: New Proposal: Clean-up Kickback Clause
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Proposal: Clean-up Kickback Clause

Append to the end of rule 126 the following:

If a Call for Judgment results in the successful identification and=
 rectification of a paradox, the player making the Call for Judgment gains=
 2d6 points.

Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 00:49:17 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: whee
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Proposal 173 is retracted. I haven't worked out how to put rescinded items
in the database yet, so for now it's just a proposal whose text is
"Proposal rescinded" or something. I'll get clever later.

The new "Charmed, I'm sure" is 186/0. I chose to fix the "nottobe" typo
because I'm kind and loving like that.

"Clean-up Kickback Clause" is 187/0.

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 23:12:08 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: Greg Ritter <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Request to be designated as a Player
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I would like to be known as a Player in B Nomic with the name of "gritter"

:-)

Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 04:14:35 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Request to be designated as a Player
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Fri, 28 Dec 2001, Greg Ritter wrote:

> I would like to be known as a Player in B Nomic with the name of "gritter"

Welcome! (You picked a heck of a time to sign on. You're just gonna love
this week's ballot. :)

...dave

Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 23:40:56 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: Greg Ritter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Request to be designated as a Player
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Note: this email contains FOUR separate proposals.

----------------------------------------------------

{BEGIN PROPOSAL A}
{TITLE: Currency}

There shall exist game entities known as "Nomic Dollars." The term Nomic 
Dollars is abbreviated as $N. Nomic Dollars may be assigned to other game 
entities. Nomic Dollars may only be created or destroyed by means 
explicitly stated in the rules of the game.

There shall be a game entity known as the Bank. No other game entity may be 
named "Bank" or "the Bank."

There shall exist a Dimension known as a Bank Account. The sole purpose of 
a Bank Account is to record the number of $N assigned to a game entity.

Each Player shall have a single Bank Account associated with that Player. 
No Player may have more than one Bank Account.

The Bank itself shall also have a single Bank Account, known as the Vault. 
No Player or other game entity may be named "Vault" or "the Vault." The 
Vault records the total number of $N that are not assigned to any other 
Bank Accounts.

Nomic Dollars may only be transferred between Bank Accounts by means 
explicitly stated in the rules of the game.

The Administrator will be responsible for accurately tracking the number of 
$N assigned to Bank Accounts.

Upon passage of this proposal, 100,000 $N will be created and assigned to 
the Vault, at which time this sentence will delete itself from the 
ruleset.  [[just for the sake of cleaning up the text]]

{END PROPOSAL A}

----------------------------------------------------

{BEGIN PROPOSAL B}
{TITLE: Proposal Awards}

Upon the successful passage of a Proposal, a certain amount of $N will be 
transferred from the Vault to the Bank Account of the Player who proposed 
the successful Proposal. The amount transferred will be determined by a 
dice roll of 5d20. If the amount to be transferred exceeds the total amount 
in the Vault, then the Player will receive all the remaining $N in the 
Vault or zero $N if the Vault contains zero $N. (E.g. if the dice roll came 
up as a total of 87, then 87 $N would be transferred from the Vault to the 
Player's Bank Account. However, if the dice roll came up as a total of 87 
and the Vault only contained 45 $N, then 45 $N would be transferred from 
the Vault to the Player's Bank Account.)

The Proposal Award will be deemed complete when the Administrator 
acknowledges that e has recorded the appropriate changes to the Vault and 
the Player's Bank Account resulting from the transfer of $N between the 
accounts.

{END PROPOSAL}

{BEGIN PROPOSAL C}
{TITLE: Sharing the Wealth}

PLAYER TRANSFER: Nomic Dollars may be transferred from the Bank Account of 
one Player (known as the Donor) to the Bank Account of another Player 
(known as the Recepient). To initiate the transfer the Donor must request, 
in a Public Forum, the transfer a specific number of $N (up to the maximum 
amount of $N in the Donor's Bank Account and no more than that) from eir 
Bank Account to the Bank Account of the Recipient.

The Player Transfer will be deemed complete when the Administrator 
acknowledges that e has recorded the appropriate changes to the Donor's and 
Recipient's Bank Accounts resulting from the transfer of $N between the 
accounts.

{END PROPOSAL BC

----------------------------------------------------

{BEGIN PROPOSAL D}
{TITLE: Victory By Monopoly}

If at any time any Player has all of the $N in circulation in eir Bank 
Account, that Player shall be given the title of "Grand Monopolist" and 
immediately awarded a number of points as calculated by the following 
formula: (1000-x) where x is the Player's current score.

{END PROPOSAL D}

----------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------

Rationale for these proposals:

Money is fun and has all kinds of nifty uses! :-)

Looking through the archives, I see there was a currency proposal a few 
weeks ago. Some advantages to this set of proposals:

* Under my first proposal, there is a finite amount of currency in 
circulation. The rule would leave open the possibility of new rules to 
create ways of adding more currency to the economy. Beware of inflation, 
though!

* Via the second and third proposal, there are two mechanisms for transfer 
of $N. The rule would leave open the possibility of other ways of 
transferring currency.

* In the last proposal, a "value" (in game terms) is assigned to the 
currency in that if a Player can find a way to grab all of the Nomic 
Dollars in circulation they can win the game. Given the current methods of 
transferring $N, this is an unlikely requirement, although it provides 
incentive for more creative legislation around the currency concept! Of 
course, this assumes the points needed to win doesn't change... ;-)

I've split this into three proposals to make it easier to pass. E.g., the 
second and third are meaningless without the first, but you could pass A & 
B without having to pass C.

I think these are good rules because they provide the foundation for 
opening the game up in new and interesting ways by encouraging the 
generation of more legislation related to this Nomic currencies.

Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 05:16:10 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Economics Recognitions
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Oh, dear $DEITY.

> {TITLE: Currency}
188/0.

> {TITLE: Proposal Awards}
189/0.

> {TITLE: Sharing the Wealth}
190/0.

> {TITLE: Victory By Monopoly}
191/0.

And some offhand comments:

> * Under my first proposal, there is a finite amount of currency in
> circulation. The rule would leave open the possibility of new rules to
> create ways of adding more currency to the economy. Beware of inflation,
> though!

In "A Nomic," that led to a whole bunch of awkward proposals trying to
keep the bank solvent. I'm sure a couple of us remember some of the
bizarre economic gymnastics... :)

> I think these are good rules because they provide the foundation for
> opening the game up in new and interesting ways by encouraging the
> generation of more legislation related to this Nomic currencies.

Not to mention it means we can participate in TipJar and Internomic, if
either of those are still viable. :)

...dave

Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:17:20 -0500
From: Fenrir <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: CFJ
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Antonio wrote:

> I wish to issue a call for judgement on the following issue:
> 
> A player's points and dimensions are part of the game state.

I judge this to be TRUE.

Analysis:
   At this point (without proposal 180 being rule) the only hint we have 
as to what the Game State is, comes from rule 152 and that just defines 
that it can only be changed in accordance with the rules or via 
proposal.  So looking at the definitions of points and dimensions (rules 
21/3 and 153/0) might give hints as to whether they are part of the game 
state.  Of course, no luck there.  SO the rules do not provide any 
indication as to which direction this judgment should go.  For that 
reason I'm interjecting my own feelings on this issue, which are that 
the integrity of the game depends on points being reliable, consistent 
and predictable.  Therefore, I feel that they should only be changeable 
through proposal and legal action.  Making them part of the game state 
would insure this to be true.  That is why I rule TRUE.  (Of course, had 
I ruled FALSE, it would only have been overridden if 180 passes.)

Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 22:04:03 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: One last proposal
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<proposal  name="Start at the beginning">
Append the sentence "Whenever a new player joins the game, all of eir
dimensions shall be equal to zero, except for those dimensions whose
starting values are specified by other rules." to rule 154.
</proposal>

This should fix that.

Thanks for fixing the NOTOBE/NOTTOBE error, Dave. 

Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 22:47:28 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: Greg Ritter <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Revisions to Economics Proposals
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

At 02:14 AM 12/30/2001 +0100, you wrote:

>Sorry to always be the nitpick, but those proposals do nothing.
>You should make them create rules to work :)

Arggh. Chalk it up to being the new borg on the cube.

Please revise the four proposals I previously submitted to include the 
following nits that have been so graciously picked:

----------------------------------------------------

{BEGIN PROPOSAL A}
{TITLE: Currency}

Create a new rule with the following FOOBAR-A delimited text:

FOOBAR-A
There shall exist game entities known as "Nomic Dollars." The term Nomic 
Dollars is abbreviated as $N. Nomic Dollars may be assigned to other game 
entities. Nomic Dollars may only be created or destroyed by means 
explicitly stated in the rules of the game.

There shall be a game entity known as the Bank. No other game entity may be 
named "Bank" or "the Bank."

There shall exist a Dimension known as a Bank Account. The sole purpose of 
a Bank Account is to record the number of $N assigned to a game entity.

Each Player shall have a single Bank Account associated with that Player. 
No Player may have more than one Bank Account.

The Bank itself shall also have a single Bank Account, known as the Vault. 
No Player or other game entity may be named "Vault" or "the Vault." The 
Vault records the total number of $N that are not assigned to any other 
Bank Accounts.

Nomic Dollars may only be transferred between Bank Accounts by means 
explicitly stated in the rules of the game.

The Administrator will be responsible for accurately tracking the number of 
$N assigned to Bank Accounts.

Upon passage of this proposal, 100,000 $N will be created and assigned to 
the Vault, at which time this sentence will delete itself from the ruleset 
[[just for the sake of cleaning up the text]].

FOOBAR-A

{END PROPOSAL A}

----------------------------------------------------

{BEGIN PROPOSAL B}
{TITLE: Proposal Awards}

Create a new rule with the following FOOBAR-B delimited text:

FOOBAR-B
Upon the successful passage of a Proposal, a certain amount of $N will be 
transferred from the Vault to the Bank Account of the Player who proposed 
the successful Proposal. The amount transferred will be determined by a 
dice roll of 5d20. If the amount to be transferred exceeds the total amount 
in the Vault, then the Player will receive all the remaining $N in the 
Vault or zero $N if the Vault contains zero $N. (E.g. if the dice roll came 
up as a total of 87, then 87 $N would be transferred from the Vault to the 
Player's Bank Account. However, if the dice roll came up as a total of 87 
and the Vault only contained 45 $N, then 45 $N would be transferred from 
the Vault to the Player's Bank Account.)

The Proposal Award will be deemed complete when the Administrator 
acknowledges that e has recorded the appropriate changes to the Vault and 
the Player's Bank Account resulting from the transfer of $N between the 
accounts.

FOOBAR-B

{END PROPOSAL B}

----------------------------------------------------

{BEGIN PROPOSAL C}
{TITLE: Sharing the Wealth}

Create a new rule with the following FOOBAR-C delimited text:

FOOBAR-C
Nomic Dollars may be transferred from the Bank Account of one Player (known 
as the Donor) to the Bank Account of another Player (known as the 
Recepient). To initiate the transfer the Donor must request, in a Public 
Forum, the transfer a specific number of $N (up to the maximum amount of $N 
in the Donor's Bank Account and no more than that) from eir Bank Account to 
the Bank Account of the Recipient.

The Player Transfer will be deemed complete when the Administrator 
acknowledges that e has recorded the appropriate changes to the Donor's and 
Recipient's Bank Accounts resulting from the transfer of $N between the 
accounts.

FOOBAR-C

{END PROPOSAL C}

----------------------------------------------------

{BEGIN PROPOSAL D}
{TITLE: Victory By Monopoly}

Create a new rule with the following FOOBAR-D delimited text:

FOOBAR-D
If at any time any Player has all of the $N in circulation in eir Bank 
Account, that Player shall be given the title of "Grand Monopolist" and 
immediately awarded a number of points as calculated by the following 
formula: (1000-x) where x is the Player's current score.

FOOBAR-D

{END PROPOSAL D}

Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 23:39:55 -0500
From: Josh Utterback <[email-masked]>
To: spoon-business <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposals
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<PROPOSAL>
<TITLE>I Can't See the Clock</TITLE>

<BODY>
Create a rule with the following text.
<RULE>
If there exists an entity called "The Clock" it's current value must be 
displayed in public view.

If no such entity exists, then the date and time of the end of the 
current nweek must be displayed in public view.
</RULE>
</BODY>

<RATIONALE>
It's frustrating not being able to look at the web page and see where 
within the nweek we are.  I know that David is working on a timer for 
the web page, I just thought that I would mandate it.
</RATIONALE>
</PROPOSAL>

<PROPOSAL>
<TITLE>I Can't See My Watch Either</TITLE>
<BODY>
Create a rule with the following text.
<RULE>
If there exists an entity called "The Watch" and its value is not equal 
to 0 wweeks and 0 wdays, then its value must be displayed in public view.
</RULE>
</BODY>

<RATIONALE>
Might as well force the Watch to be visible as well.
</RATIONALE>
</PROPOSAL>

Fenrir

Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 08:15:26 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: making it official
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Those three proposals that I recognized on the -discuss list are
officially recognized here (on the -business list). I'm too tired to look
up the numbers again. :)

...dave

Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 09:42:04 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: A different sort of bandwidth
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092550124_77145_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

<proposal>
<title> The Many </title>
<body>
If a rule entitled "Bandwidth Rationing" exists, amend its text to be the
following !!!! delimited text. If such a rule doesn't exist, create a new
rule entitled "Bandwidth Rationing" with the following !!!! delimited text.
!!!!
At the beginning of each voting period, each player shall lose n-5 points,
where n is the number of proposals e submitted which are on the current
Ballot. If n-5 is less than zero, eir score shall remain the same. If e
would lose more points than eir score, eir score becomes zero.
!!!!
</body>
<rationale>
With this you could submit as many proposals as you wanted, but there would
be an incentive not to do more than 5. I added the part where it overwrites
the old bandwidth because I've seen problems in other games where the vote
was split between two similar proposals, and the result was that neither
passed. This way, everyone who votes for my bandwidth act can also vote for
Glotmorfs, so at least one of them is gauranteed to pass.
</rationale>
</proposal> 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092550124_77145_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>A different sort of bandwidth</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; The Many &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
If a rule entitled &quot;Bandwidth Rationing&quot; exists, amend its text t=
o be the following !!!! delimited text. If such a rule doesn't exist, create=
 a new rule entitled &quot;Bandwidth Rationing&quot; with the following !!!!=
 delimited text.<BR>
!!!!<BR>
At the beginning of each voting period, each player shall lose n-5 points, =
where n is the number of proposals e submitted which are on the current Ball=
ot. If n-5 is less than zero, eir score shall remain the same. If e would lo=
se more points than eir score, eir score becomes zero.<BR>
!!!!<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
With this you could submit as many proposals as you wanted, but there would=
 be an incentive not to do more than 5. I added the part where it overwrites=
 the old bandwidth because I've seen problems in other games where the vote =
was split between two similar proposals, and the result was that neither pas=
sed. This way, everyone who votes for my bandwidth act can also vote for Glo=
tmorfs, so at least one of them is gauranteed to pass.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092550124_77145_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 11:41:08 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: Greg Ritter <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Revision of Proposal 191/0
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Please replace the text of Proposal 191/0 with the following {proposal 
revision} delimited text:

{proposal revision}

Create a new rule with the following {new rule} delimited text:

{new rule}
If at any time any Player has all of the $N in circulation in eir Bank 
Account, that Player shall be given the title of "Grand Monopolist." Upon 
receiving the title of Grand Monopolist, the Monopoly is officially deemed 
Regulated and one-half of the $N in the Grand Monopolist's Bank Account is 
transferred to the Vault. In compensation, the Grand Monopolist is awarded 
a number of points as calculated by the following formula: (1000-x) where x 
is the Grand Monopolist's current score.
{new rule}

{proposal revision} 

Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 18:33:48 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: (like you don't know what this is)
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

"The Many" is 195/0.

"Victory by Monopoly" is revised to 191/1.

We're now up to 38 proposals for the next ballot. Civic-minded voters
might want to start planning ahead now.

This is NOT the official ballot, but it might be handy for those who want
to get some of the voting stuff out of the way:

Proposal 156/0:The Timeline's on this Mobius Strip
Proposal 157/1:Let's do it right this time
Proposal 158/1:Five Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Six Hundred Minutes
Proposal 159/0:Now you see me, now you don't
Proposal 160/0:The Garbageman Can
Proposal 161/0:Boondoggles! Boondoggles! Boondoggles!
Proposal 162/0:Santa Claus is coming to town!
Proposal 163/0:Proxies
Proposal 165/1:Judicial reform 1
Proposal 166/1:Judicial reform 2
Proposal 167/0:Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment
Proposal 168/0:Fix the rules
Proposal 169/1:Taking a vow of non-silence
Proposal 170/0:Global Positioning System
Proposal 171/1:The Paradox Prevention Proposal
Proposal 172/0:Just to avoid confusion...
Proposal 174/0:Party like it's 2002
Proposal 175/0:Ain't ain't a word
Proposal 176/0:Paper Trail
Proposal 177/0:Appeal Clause
Proposal 178/0:Bandwidth Rationing
Proposal 179/1:You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just
   'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
Proposal 180/1:Define the Game State
Proposal 181/0:Apathy Clause
Proposal 182/0:let's make it Imperial
Proposal 183/0:To abstain is an explicit way of *not* voting
Proposal 184/0:Reform Dimensions
Proposal 185/0:The Cursed Sushi of Babel
Proposal 186/0:Charmed, I'm sure
Proposal 187/0:Clean-up Kickback Clause
Proposal 188/0:Currency
Proposal 189/0:Proposal Awards
Proposal 190/0:Sharing The Wealth
Proposal 191/1:Victory by Monopoly
Proposal 192/0:Start at the beginning
Proposal 193/0:I Can't See the Clock
Proposal 194/0:I Can't See My Watch Either
Proposal 195/0:The Many

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 13:42:56 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Elimination of Boilerplate
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

<proposal title="Elimination of Boilerplate">
Create a rule entitled "Elimination of Boilerplate" containing the
following text delimited by tags:
<rule>

  To "propose a rule" is defined to mean making a proposal which
  contains one Action, which is to create a Rule. The Proposal is given
  the same title as the Rule. The Proposal and the Rule need not be
  introduced separately.

  To "propose [multiple] rules" is defined to mean making a proposal
  which contains a number of actions, each of which creates a Rule. When
  proposing multiple rules, it is only necessary that the beginning of
  each rule be marked in some obvious way (such as "This is a new rule
  whose title is 'Title Goes Here':" ) If the Proposal is not given a
  title, it gets the title of the first Rule it proposes.

  In each case, either the end of the last rule or the end of the
  proposal as a whole should be marked. If the end is not marked, the
  last rule proposed continues until the end of the Forum message.

</rule>

[[ So, to make a proposal that proposes the creation of one rule named
"Foo Bar", you need only to introduce it with "I propose the following
rule entitled 'Foo Bar':" ]]

</proposal>
-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 19:14:52 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Elimination of Boilerplate
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Sun, 30 Dec 2001, Rob Speer wrote:

> <proposal title="Elimination of Boilerplate">

196/0.

...dave

Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 22:21:07 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Yet another form of bandwidth
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092595667_376470_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I amend my proposals entitled " The Many " to be the following:

<proposal>
<title> The Many </title>
<body>
If a rule entitled "Bandwidth Rationing" exists, amend its text to be the
following !!!! delimited text. Otherwise, create a new rule entitled
"Bandwidth Rationing" with that text.
!!!!
At the beginning of each voting period, each player shall lose 7n-35 points,
where n is the number of proposals e submitted which are on the current
Ballot. If 7n-35 is less than zero, eir score shall remain the same. If e
would lose more points than eir score, eir score becomes zero.
!!!!
</body>
<rationale>
Alright, now you lose 7 points for each proposal beyond the fifth, and the
!!!!'s delimit the right text.
</rationale>
</proposal> 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092595667_376470_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Yet another form of bandwidth</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>I amend my proposals entitled &quot; The Many &quot; to be the followin=
g:<BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt; The Many &lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
If a rule entitled &quot;Bandwidth Rationing&quot; exists, amend its text t=
o be the following !!!! delimited text. Otherwise, create a new rule entitle=
d &quot;Bandwidth Rationing&quot; with that text.<BR>
!!!!<BR>
At the beginning of each voting period, each player shall lose 7n-35 points=
, where n is the number of proposals e submitted which are on the current Ba=
llot. If 7n-35 is less than zero, eir score shall remain the same. If e woul=
d lose more points than eir score, eir score becomes zero.<BR>
!!!!<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
Alright, now you lose 7 points for each proposal beyond the fifth, and the =
!!!!'s delimit the right text.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;</TT> <BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092595667_376470_MIME_Part--

Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 22:42:21 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: Re: spoon-discuss: Babel
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Sun, Dec 30, 2001 at 10:31:46PM -0500, Wonko wrote:
> Might I suggest that the proponent of the Cursed Sushi of Babel amend eir
> proposal to replace the word Japanese with Korean? I find the results are
> more interesting that way. 

Okay. I amend proposal 185/0 by replacing the word "Japanese", wherever
it appears, with "Korean".
-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 22:57:16 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: An even more ambitious method of formatting proposals
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I submit the following proposal:

<proposal title="Standard Delimiters">

Create the following rule:            [[ look at all the boilerplate! ]]
<rule title="Standard Delimiters">

The character sequences '{{' and '}}' (without the single quotes) serve
to delimit a proposal or a rule; in any Action where they appear, they
are considered to mark the beginning and end, respectively, of a
proposal or rule. The message in which they appear should specify which.
If the action being performed is to "Propose a Rule" according to the
"Elimination of Boilerplate" proposal, they delimit both simultaneously.
If there are more '{{' than '}}' in a proposal, the end of the Forum
message serves to end the proposal or rule; if there are more '}}' than
'{{', the extra closing delimiters are ignored.

The character sequence '__' (again without the single quotes) delimits
the title of a Rule or Proposal; the title begins after the first '__'
and ends after the second '__'. The title is applied to whatever Rule or
Proposal has most recently been introduced in the text of the message.

[[ The next message will contain an example of how this proposal would
look with the delimiters and the Boilerplate rule. ]]

</rule>
</proposal>
-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 23:05:48 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: An even more ambitious method of formatting proposals
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Sun, Dec 30, 2001 at 10:57:16PM -0500, Rob Speer wrote:
> <proposal title="Standard Delimiters">
> 
> Create the following rule:            [[ look at all the boilerplate! ]]
> <rule title="Standard Delimiters">
> 
> The character sequences '{{' and '}}' (without the single quotes) serve
> to delimit a proposal or a rule; in any Action where they appear, they
> are considered to mark the beginning and end, respectively, of a
> proposal or rule. The message in which they appear should specify which.
> If the action being performed is to "Propose a Rule" according to the
> "Elimination of Boilerplate" proposal, they delimit both simultaneously.
> If there are more '{{' than '}}' in a proposal, the end of the Forum
> message serves to end the proposal or rule; if there are more '}}' than
> '{{', the extra closing delimiters are ignored.
> 
> The character sequence '__' (again without the single quotes) delimits
> the title of a Rule or Proposal; the title begins after the first '__'
> and ends after the second '__'. The title is applied to whatever Rule or
> Proposal has most recently been introduced in the text of the message.
> 
> [[ The next message will contain an example of how this proposal would
> look with the delimiters and the Boilerplate rule. ]]
> 
> </rule>
> </proposal>

[[ Oops. ]]

I amend the proposal entitled "Standard Delimiters" in the following
ways:

1. I change the text 'ends after the second' to 'ends before the
second'.
2. I replace the 3rd paragraph of the rule, which contains nothing but a
comment [[ one which I didn't mean to include in the text of the rule ]]
with the following paragraph:

None of the standard delimiters are considered to apply to this message
[[ because that would screw things up royally ]].

-- 
Rob Speer

Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 06:23:27 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: recognitions, the last batch of today.
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

"The Many" amended, 195/1.

"Cursed Sushi of Babel" amended, 185/1.

"Standard Delimiters" recognized, 197/0. (As is often the case, I got the
original and revised versions at the same time, and just applied the
changes to the "initial" version. Rob, please check that one and be sure
it accurately reflects your intent.)

Dear $DEITY, I hope there's not any more of this. ;)

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:45:45 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: New Proposal: Spur Clause
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Well, as long as we're daisy-chaining proposals, I might as well tie mine=
 on...

Proposal: Spur Clause

If a rule entitled "Bandwidth Rationing" exists, and it has been modified=
 by proposal 195, "The Many," append the following to the end of the=
 "Bandwidth Rationing" rule:

If n is zero, and eir score is greater than four, e loses four points; if n=
 is zero and eir score is four or less, eir score becomes zero.

Rationale:

Idleness should not be rewarded.  There may be some time in the future when=
 all the active players have abysmally low scores and the game is declared=
 over; I would hate to see victory go to a player who hasn't played for=
 months, yet has a high score precisely because he hasn't done anything.

Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 16:10:17 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: New Proposal: Spur Clause
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Donald Whytock wrote:

> Proposal: Spur Clause

I can only wonder just what you're trying to accomplish here... 198/0.

...dave

From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_Rathlev?= <[email-masked]>
To: "B Nomic Business" <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Proposal 183 revision
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:07:02 +0100
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I make the following revision to proposal 183:

\begin{proposal}

Amend rule 31 by adding the following paragraph:=20

Players may abstain from voting on a given issue by not submitting a
vote on that issue or by explicitly indicating their abstention.
Explicit abstentions shall be treated like votes during Voting, but
when Voting has ended, they shall be treated as if the player had not
submitted a vote.

And replace the following sentence in the same rule:

Players may vote multiple times; the last vote on any given issue
shall be the one counted.

with this sentence:

During Voting, players may change eir vote on a given issue by
submitting a different vote for that issue.

\end{proposal}

The problem with my previous proposal was that it said abstentions are
treated as if the player had not voted when votes are counted, and
that rule 31 said the last vote is counted when a player has voted
multiple times. But then the last vote would not be the abstention
because, during counting, it no longer is a vote!

This revision should fix that, because now multiple voting will change
the (single) vote instead of aggregating the different votes.

Joerg

Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 00:10:19 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 3
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The following measures are on the ballot for nweek 3:

Proposal 156/0:The Timeline's on this Mobius Strip
Proposal 157/1:Let's do it right this time
Proposal 158/1:Five Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Six Hundred Minutes
Proposal 159/0:Now you see me, now you don't
Proposal 160/0:The Garbageman Can
Proposal 161/0:Boondoggles! Boondoggles! Boondoggles!
Proposal 162/0:Santa Claus is coming to town!
Proposal 163/0:Proxies
Proposal 165/1:Judicial reform 1
Proposal 166/1:Judicial reform 2
Proposal 167/0:Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment
Proposal 168/0:Fix the rules
Proposal 169/1:Taking a vow of non-silence
Proposal 170/0:Global Positioning System
Proposal 171/1:The Paradox Prevention Proposal
Proposal 172/0:Just to avoid confusion...
Proposal 174/0:Party like it's 2002
Proposal 175/0:Ain't ain't a word
Proposal 176/0:Paper Trail
Proposal 177/0:Appeal Clause
Proposal 178/0:Bandwidth Rationing
Proposal 179/1:You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just
               'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
Proposal 180/1:Define the Game State
Proposal 181/0:Apathy Clause
Proposal 182/0:let's make it Imperial
Proposal 183/1:To abstain is an explicit way of *not* voting
Proposal 184/0:Reform Dimensions
Proposal 185/1:The Cursed Sushi of Babel
Proposal 186/0:Charmed, I'm sure
Proposal 187/0:Clean-up Kickback Clause
Proposal 188/0:Currency
Proposal 189/0:Proposal Awards
Proposal 190/0:Sharing The Wealth
Proposal 191/1:Victory by Monopoly
Proposal 192/0:Start at the beginning
Proposal 193/0:I Can't See the Clock
Proposal 194/0:I Can't See My Watch Either
Proposal 195/1:The Many
Proposal 196/0:Elimination of Boilerplate
Proposal 197/0:Standard Delimiters
Proposal 198/0:Spur Clause

Voting continues from now 'til 23:59 3 January 2002, GMT (that's 5:59 PM
US Central time, adjust as needed).

I'm going to go eat lots of proteins so I'll be ready to count all these
darn votes.

...dave

---- David E. Smith, POB 515045, St. Louis MO 63151
http://www.technopagan.org/    http://metadave.net/
http://www.bureau42.com/       http://whatIsay.com/

"Use anger to throw them into disarray." -- Sun Tzu

Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:31:35 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: My Votes
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092671896_481117_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

For future reference, would it be allowable for me to simply say, "Yes for
everything but 182"?

156: Yes
157: Yes
158: Yes
159: Yes
160: Yes
161: Yes
162: Yes
163: Yes
165: Yes
166: Yes
167: Yes
168: Yes
169: Yes
170: Yes
171: Yes
172: Yes
174: Yes
175: Yes
176: Yes
177: Yes
178: Yes
179: Yes
180: Yes
181: Yes
182: No
183: Yes
184: Yes
185: Yes
186: Yes
187: Yes
188: Yes
189: Yes
190: Yes
191: Yes
192: Yes
193: Yes
194: Yes
195: Yes
196: Yes
197: Yes
198: Yes 

--MS_Mac_OE_3092671896_481117_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>My Votes</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>For future reference, would it be allowable for me to simply say, &quot=
;Yes for everything but 182&quot;?<BR>
<BR>
156: Yes<BR>
157: Yes<BR>
158: Yes<BR>
159: Yes<BR>
160: Yes<BR>
161: Yes<BR>
162: Yes<BR>
163: Yes<BR>
165: Yes<BR>
166: Yes<BR>
167: Yes<BR>
168: Yes<BR>
169: Yes<BR>
170: Yes<BR>
171: Yes<BR>
172: Yes<BR>
174: Yes<BR>
175: Yes<BR>
176: Yes<BR>
177: Yes<BR>
178: Yes<BR>
179: Yes<BR>
180: Yes<BR>
181: Yes<BR>
182: No<BR>
183: Yes<BR>
184: Yes<BR>
185: Yes<BR>
186: Yes<BR>
187: Yes<BR>
188: Yes<BR>
189: Yes<BR>
190: Yes<BR>
191: Yes<BR>
192: Yes<BR>
193: Yes<BR>
194: Yes<BR>
195: Yes<BR>
196: Yes<BR>
197: Yes<BR>
198: Yes</TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092671896_481117_MIME_Part--

Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 20:41:13 -0500
From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Ballot, nweek 3
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

My votes:

 NO > Proposal 156/0:The Timeline's on this Mobius Strip
[[ It wouldn't work, as a rule could simply override it. That section of
Rule 32 doesn't work either. I might get around to fixing this
unfortunate fact. ]]

YES > Proposal 157/1:Let's do it right this time
 NO > Proposal 158/1:Five Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Six Hundred Minutes
YES > Proposal 159/0:Now you see me, now you don't
YES > Proposal 160/0:The Garbageman Can
 NO > Proposal 161/0:Boondoggles! Boondoggles! Boondoggles!
 NO > Proposal 162/0:Santa Claus is coming to town!
[[ You can call me Scrooge. ]]

YES > Proposal 163/0:Proxies
YES > Proposal 165/1:Judicial reform 1
YES > Proposal 166/1:Judicial reform 2
 NO > Proposal 167/0:Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment
YES > Proposal 168/0:Fix the rules
YES > Proposal 169/1:Taking a vow of non-silence
YES > Proposal 170/0:Global Positioning System
 NO > Proposal 171/1:The Paradox Prevention Proposal
YES > Proposal 172/0:Just to avoid confusion...
YES > Proposal 174/0:Party like it's 2002
[[ ...but even Scrooge lightened up in the end. ]]

YES > Proposal 175/0:Ain't ain't a word
YES > Proposal 176/0:Paper Trail
 NO > Proposal 177/0:Appeal Clause
 NO > Proposal 178/0:Bandwidth Rationing
YES > Proposal 179/1:You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just
                     'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
YES > Proposal 180/1:Define the Game State
YES > Proposal 181/0:Apathy Clause
 NO > Proposal 182/0:let's make it Imperial
YES > Proposal 183/1:To abstain is an explicit way of *not* voting
YES > Proposal 184/0:Reform Dimensions
YES > Proposal 185/1:The Cursed Sushi of Babel
YES > Proposal 186/0:Charmed, I'm sure
 NO > Proposal 187/0:Clean-up Kickback Clause
 NO > Proposal 188/0:Currency
 NO > Proposal 189/0:Proposal Awards
 NO > Proposal 190/0:Sharing The Wealth
 NO > Proposal 191/1:Victory by Monopoly
YES > Proposal 192/0:Start at the beginning
YES > Proposal 193/0:I Can't See the Clock
 NO > Proposal 194/0:I Can't See My Watch Either
YES > Proposal 195/1:The Many
YES > Proposal 196/0:Elimination of Boilerplate
YES > Proposal 197/0:Standard Delimiters
 NO > Proposal 198/0:Spur Clause

-- 
Rob Speer

From: Glenn Overby II <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 21:05:16 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: My nweek3 votes
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I suppose I'm voting against some good stuff.  But for the most part I'm reacting to 
the stupid length of this ballot.

>Proposal 156/0:The Timeline's on this Mobius Strip: YES
>Proposal 157/1:Let's do it right this time: NO
>Proposal 158/1:Five Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Six Hundred Minutes: NO
>Proposal 159/0:Now you see me, now you don't: NO
>Proposal 160/0:The Garbageman Can: NO
>Proposal 161/0:Boondoggles! Boondoggles! Boondoggles!: NO
>Proposal 162/0:Santa Claus is coming to town!: NO
>Proposal 163/0:Proxies: NO
>Proposal 165/1:Judicial reform 1: NO
>Proposal 166/1:Judicial reform 2: NO
>Proposal 167/0:Judicial Reform 3 or crime and punishment: NO
>Proposal 168/0:Fix the rules: NO
>Proposal 169/1:Taking a vow of non-silence: NO
>Proposal 170/0:Global Positioning System: NO
>Proposal 171/1:The Paradox Prevention Proposal: NO
>Proposal 172/0:Just to avoid confusion...: NO
>Proposal 174/0:Party like it's 2002: YES
>Proposal 175/0:Ain't ain't a word: NO
>Proposal 176/0:Paper Trail: YES
>Proposal 177/0:Appeal Clause: NO
>Proposal 178/0:Bandwidth Rationing: YES
>Proposal 179/1:You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just
>               'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!: NO
>Proposal 180/1:Define the Game State: NO
>Proposal 181/0:Apathy Clause: NO
>Proposal 182/0:let's make it Imperial: NO
>Proposal 183/1:To abstain is an explicit way of *not* voting: YES
>Proposal 184/0:Reform Dimensions: NO
>Proposal 185/1:The Cursed Sushi of Babel: YES
>Proposal 186/0:Charmed, I'm sure: NO
>Proposal 187/0:Clean-up Kickback Clause: NO
>Proposal 188/0:Currency: ABSTAIN
>Proposal 189/0:Proposal Awards: ABSTAIN
>Proposal 190/0:Sharing The Wealth: ABSTAIN
>Proposal 191/1:Victory by Monopoly: ABSTAIN
>Proposal 192/0:Start at the beginning: NO
>Proposal 193/0:I Can't See the Clock: NO
>Proposal 194/0:I Can't See My Watch Either: NO
>Proposal 195/1:The Many: NO
>Proposal 196/0:Elimination of Boilerplate: YES
>Proposal 197/0:Standard Delimiters: YES
>Proposal 198/0:Spur Clause: NO

Glenn

===

Glenn E. Overby II
Clinton Twp, MI

=====

Icehouse Games Pages (take the IcePoll!)
http://home.earthlink.net/~guardcaptain/IceGames.html

Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 21:50:38 -0500
Subject: spoon-business: Typos and Gremlins
From: Wonko <[email-masked]>
To: Business Nomic <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3092680238_983504_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

I issue the following three proposals (the last two are just demonstrations
of what a Gremlin might look like)

<proposal>
<title>Me failed English? That's Unpossible!</title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "Typos" with the following SPELRITE delimited
text:
SPELRITE
Whenever the administrator notices an error in grammar or spelling within a
proposal, e shall be permitted to Rectify it by posting a Rectification to a
public forum stating what is being changed and correcting the faulty text.
Once a Rectification is posted, the proponent of the proposal being
Rectified may, if e thinks the Rectification changes the meaning of the
proposal, object to the Rectification via a post to a public forum, in which
case the Rectification shall be anulled, and the proposal shall revert to
its original text. Objections posted more than 3 ndays after the
Rectification they object to shall have no effect.
SPELRITE
</body>
<rationale>
It happens already. Let's make it official.
</rationale>
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title>They're everywhere!</title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "Gremlins" with the following WHEEE delimited
text:
WHEEE
There exists an entity known as the Gremlinometer. The Gremlinometer shall
contain a number, known as the Gremlin number. If the Gremlin number is less
than 1, 120 shall be added to it immediately. If the Gremlin number is
greater than 120, 120 shall be subtracted from in immediately. At the
beginning of each nweek, the Gremlin number shall become equal to
1d120.[[120 because it's divisible evenly by 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,10,and 12.]]

The nth Gremlin number shall be defined to be the Gremlin number divided by
120/n, rounded up to the nearest integer. [[Thus, the 1st Gremlin number is
1, the second is either 1 or 2, the third is 1,2,or 3, etc. This allows for
many Gremlins to use random numbers without having to do seperate random
rolls for each Gremlin. It also allows multiple Gremlins to work in tandem
bcs they know the random number governing any other Gremlin that uses random
numbers.]]

There exist entities known as Gremlins. No Gremlin may exist except as
specified in the rules. All Gremlins must have unique names, in the form of
"the **** Gremlin", where **** is a string of at least 1 alphanumeric
character. Each Gremlin shall have a Bank Account. At any time, each Gremlin
may be in one of two conditions: Active or Hiding. When a Gremlin is first
defined by the rules, it starts out Active unless the defining rule
specifies otherwise.
WHEEE
<rationale>
I've got plans for a bunch of Gremlins.
</rationale>
</proposal>

<proposal>
<title>They're Everywhere! Part 2</title>
<body>
Append to the rule entitled "Gremlins" the following WHEEE delimited text:
WHEEE
There exists an entity known as the Plague of Gremlins. All Gremlins are
considered to be part of the Plague of Gremlins. At the beginning of each
voting period, if all Gremlins are Hiding, all Gremlins shall become Active.
Otherwise, the following shall occur:
If the Gremlin number is greater than 62, the Plague of Gremlins votes No on
all proposals on the current Ballot.
If the Gremlin number is less than 59, the Plague of Gremlins votes Yes on
all proposals on the current Ballot.
If the Gremlin number is equal to 59, 60, 61, or 62, all Gremlins shall go
into Hiding, and may not become Active for at least 9 ndays.

This rule takes precedence over all rules which determine when Gremlins may
become Active.
WHEEE
</body>
<rationale>
This should be part of the previous proposal, but I'm not sure whether
people will go for the whole 'Gremlins voting' thing, and I'd hate it if
people voted down this entire proposal set based on one problem in one rule.
</rationale>
</proposal>

An example of a Gremlin might look like this (note that the following two
"proposals" are NOT actual proposals, just demonstrations)
<DEMONSTRATION>

<proposal>
<title>The Mugging Gremlin</title>
<body>
Create a new rule entitled "The Mugging Gremlin" with the following GREMLIN
delimited text:
GREMLIN
There exists a Gremlin known as the Mugging Gremlin. If the Mugging Gremlin
is Active, any player with at least 500$N may pay 500$N to the Mugging
Gremlin to cause the Mugging Gremlin to Mug another player. When the Mugging
Gremlin Mugs a player, that player pays the Mugging Gremlin 400$N divided by
the Second Gremlin Number, unless e does not have that much $N, in which
case e pays all of his Nomic Dollars to the Mugging Gremlin. If the Mugging
Gremlin owns more than 8999$N, it goes into Hiding. If the Vault contains
less than 10000$N, the Mugging Gremlin transfers all of its $N to the Vault
and becomes Active. [[The Mugging Gremlin gives all its $N to the bank
whether it's active or not]]
GREMLIN 
</body>
</proposal>

<description>
This is a Gremlin called the Mugging Gremlin, which can be paid 500$N to
take 400$N from a player if the Gremlin Number is between 1 and 60, or 200$N
if the Gremlin number is between 61 and 120. When it's been used too much,
it disappears until it's needed to stimulate the economy.
</description>

{{
__The Scoring Gremlin__

Create a new rule entitled "The Scoring Gremlin" with the following GREMLIN
delimited text:
GREMLIN
There exists a Gremlin known as the Scoring Gremlin. Whenever a proposal is
recognized, if the Scoring Gremlin is active, it shall award the player with
the fewest points 1 point. If at any time multiple players are tied for the
lowest score, the Scoring Gremlin shall go into Hiding. If one player has at
least 90 fewer points than any other, the Scoring Gremlin shall become
Active.
GREMLIN

This is a Gremlin called the Scoring Gremlin which awards the player with
the lowest score points until eir score equals someone else's, in which case
the Gremlin disappears until someone falls back far enough to need it.
}}

</DEMONSTRATION>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092680238_983504_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Typos and Gremlins</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<TT>I issue the following three proposals (the last two are just demonstrat=
ions of what a Gremlin might look like)<BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt;Me failed English? That's Unpossible!&lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Create a new rule entitled &quot;Typos&quot; with the following SPELRITE de=
limited text:<BR>
SPELRITE<BR>
Whenever the administrator notices an error in grammar or spelling within a=
 proposal, e shall be permitted to Rectify it by posting a Rectification to =
a public forum stating what is being changed and correcting the faulty text.=
 Once a Rectification is posted, the proponent of the proposal being Rectifi=
ed may, if e thinks the Rectification changes the meaning of the proposal, o=
bject to the Rectification via a post to a public forum, in which case the R=
ectification shall be anulled, and the proposal shall revert to its original=
 text. Objections posted more than 3 ndays after the Rectification they obje=
ct to shall have no effect.<BR>
SPELRITE<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
It happens already. Let's make it official.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;<BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt;They're everywhere!&lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Create a new rule entitled &quot;Gremlins&quot; with the following WHEEE de=
limited text:<BR>
WHEEE<BR>
There exists an entity known as the Gremlinometer. The Gremlinometer shall =
contain a number, known as the Gremlin number. If the Gremlin number is less=
 than 1, 120 shall be added to it immediately. If the Gremlin number is grea=
ter than 120, 120 shall be subtracted from in immediately. At the beginning =
of each nweek, the Gremlin number shall become equal to 1d120.[[120 because =
it's divisible evenly by 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,10,and 12.]]<BR>
<BR>
The nth Gremlin number shall be defined to be the Gremlin number divided by=
 120/n, rounded up to the nearest integer. [[Thus, the 1st Gremlin number is=
 1, the second is either 1 or 2, the third is 1,2,or 3, etc. This allows for=
 many Gremlins to use random numbers without having to do seperate random ro=
lls for each Gremlin. It also allows multiple Gremlins to work in tandem bcs=
 they know the random number governing any other Gremlin that uses random nu=
mbers.]]<BR>
<BR>
There exist entities known as Gremlins. No Gremlin may exist except as spec=
ified in the rules. All Gremlins must have unique names, in the form of &quo=
t;the **** Gremlin&quot;, where **** is a string of at least 1 alphanumeric =
character. Each Gremlin shall have a Bank Account. At any time, each Gremlin=
 may be in one of two conditions: Active or Hiding. When a Gremlin is first =
defined by the rules, it starts out Active unless the defining rule specifie=
s otherwise.<BR>
WHEEE<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
I've got plans for a bunch of Gremlins.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt;They're Everywhere! Part 2&lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Append to the rule entitled &quot;Gremlins&quot; the following WHEEE delimi=
ted text:<BR>
WHEEE<BR>
There exists an entity known as the Plague of Gremlins. All Gremlins are co=
nsidered to be part of the Plague of Gremlins. At the beginning of each voti=
ng period, if all Gremlins are Hiding, all Gremlins shall become Active. Oth=
erwise, the following shall occur:<BR>
If the Gremlin number is greater than 62, the Plague of Gremlins votes No o=
n all proposals on the current Ballot.<BR>
If the Gremlin number is less than 59, the Plague of Gremlins votes Yes on =
all proposals on the current Ballot.<BR>
If the Gremlin number is equal to 59, 60, 61, or 62, all Gremlins shall go =
into Hiding, and may not become Active for at least 9 ndays.<BR>
<BR>
This rule takes precedence over all rules which determine when Gremlins may=
 become Active.<BR>
WHEEE<BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;rationale&gt;<BR>
This should be part of the previous proposal, but I'm not sure whether peop=
le will go for the whole 'Gremlins voting' thing, and I'd hate it if people =
voted down this entire proposal set based on one problem in one rule.<BR>
&lt;/rationale&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;<BR>
<BR>
<HR ALIGN=3DCENTER SIZE=3D"3" WIDTH=3D"95%"><BR>
An example of a Gremlin might look like this (note that the following two &=
quot;proposals&quot; are <B><U>NOT</U></B> actual proposals, just demonstrat=
ions)<BR>
<H6>&lt;DEMONSTRATION&gt;<BR>
</H6><BR>
&lt;proposal&gt;<BR>
&lt;title&gt;The Mugging Gremlin&lt;/title&gt;<BR>
&lt;body&gt;<BR>
Create a new rule entitled &quot;The Mugging Gremlin&quot; with the followi=
ng GREMLIN delimited text:<BR>
GREMLIN<BR>
There exists a Gremlin known as the Mugging Gremlin. If the Mugging Gremlin=
 is Active, any player with at least 500$N may pay 500$N to the Mugging Grem=
lin to cause the Mugging Gremlin to Mug another player. When the Mugging Gre=
mlin Mugs a player, that player pays the Mugging Gremlin 400$N divided by th=
e Second Gremlin Number, unless e does not have that much $N, in which case =
e pays all of his Nomic Dollars to the Mugging Gremlin. If the Mugging Greml=
in owns more than 8999$N, it goes into Hiding. If the Vault contains less th=
an 10000$N, the Mugging Gremlin transfers all of its $N to the Vault and bec=
omes Active. [[The Mugging Gremlin gives all its $N to the bank whether it's=
 active or not]]<BR>
GREMLIN <BR>
&lt;/body&gt;<BR>
&lt;/proposal&gt;<BR>
<BR>
&lt;description&gt;<BR>
This is a Gremlin called the Mugging Gremlin, which can be paid 500$N to ta=
ke 400$N from a player if the Gremlin Number is between 1 and 60, or 200$N i=
f the Gremlin number is between 61 and 120. When it's been used too much, it=
 disappears until it's needed to stimulate the economy.<BR>
&lt;/description&gt;<BR>
<BR>
{{<BR>
__The Scoring Gremlin__<BR>
<BR>
Create a new rule entitled &quot;The Scoring Gremlin&quot; with the followi=
ng GREMLIN delimited text:<BR>
GREMLIN<BR>
There exists a Gremlin known as the Scoring Gremlin. Whenever a proposal is=
 recognized, if the Scoring Gremlin is active, it shall award the player wit=
h the fewest points 1 point. If at any time multiple players are tied for th=
e lowest score, the Scoring Gremlin shall go into Hiding. If one player has =
at least 90 fewer points than any other, the Scoring Gremlin shall become Ac=
tive.<BR>
GREMLIN<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
This is a Gremlin called the Scoring Gremlin which awards the player with t=
he lowest score points until eir score equals someone else's, in which case =
the Gremlin disappears until someone falls back far enough to need it.<BR>
}}<BR>
<BR>
<H6>&lt;/DEMONSTRATION&gt;</H6></TT>
</BODY>
</HTML>

--MS_Mac_OE_3092680238_983504_MIME_Part--

Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 03:18:54 +0000 (GMT)
From: "David E. Smith" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: spoon-business: Typos and Gremlins
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Wonko wrote:

(These will be on the ballot for nweek 4, obviously.)

> <title>Me failed English? That's Unpossible!</title>
199/0. and if I could, I'd give you bonus points for the "Simpsons"
reference.

> <title>They're everywhere!</title>
200/0.

> <title>They're Everywhere! Part 2</title>
201/0.

...dave

Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2002 00:31:31 -0500
From: "Donald Whytock" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: spoon-business: New Proposal: Neener
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Proposal: Neener

Glotmorf wins B Nomic.