Subject: MN: Year 2 Week 47 Proposals

From: dunx@l... (Duncan Ellis (Dunx))
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 22:04:04 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MORNINGTON NOMIC

Proposals for Voting on in Week Forty-Seven
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal 661 - Recycle that rubbish! [Amendment]

Amend the last sentence of Rule 1.7.39 (Ecofriendly) to read:

This exchanges a pair of matching Plastic Tokens, or a Possession worth
more than one Bronze Token, for a single Green Token. This counts as a
Token Exchange Action, and any Possession used is automatically
discarded.

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

Proposal 662 - Randomness Regulated [Enactment]

If any Rule requires a random determination, such as a roll of a dice, then
this shall be done by the Speaker submitting a mail to the PBM dice server.
This shall be set up to send the response directly to the list. If the
random determination isn't directly associated with numbers (such as
choosing a player), the entities involved shall be labelled with an
arbitrary number for the random determination, and this labelling will be
included in the headers of the mail to the dice server.

The message to send is as follows: (entries in <triangle brackets> are tobe
replaced with the appropriate number or text.)

To: dice@p...
Subject: Random determination for <reason>

#p [email-masked] (or appropriate list)
#s <number of choices - equal to the sides on a die>
#d 1
#r 1
#l 1
#c <any comments, such as the labelling of entities to numbers>
#c <up to one hundred such comments are allowed>
#t Random determination for <reason>

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

Proposal 663 - Proposal Revue [Amendment]

{Actually tightening the proposal update process - read the old 0.4.3!}

Replace the last sentence of Rule 0.4.3 with:

A Player may update a Proposal e has in the current Week by emailing the
required changes to the Speaker. This email should have a subject line of
'MN: Updates for Proposals' - if it does not, the update may be considered
invalid. If the Proposal has less than four days to be Voted on, then the
Proposal is voted on in the next Week.

When a Proposal is updated, all Votes for that Proposal are discarded, and
the Speaker must let those Voters know that they should re-vote for the
Proposal in question. The Proposal in its updated form is then posted to
the Discussion Lounge, and note should be made of in which Week the Proposal
is to be voted.

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

Proposal 664 - Blonk Cheque [Action]

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
Action Phase Rule Dur Cost Gain 
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
[Blonking <Player>] Post 1.7.x 20 -1 Re 
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
 
A Player may perform the Action of "[Blonking <Player>]", where 
<Player> is a Player who shares a Station and Line with the Actioning 
Player. This Action may only be performed as the first Action of a 
Player's Post-Move Action phase. 
 
The Blonking Player may destroy a single token in the possession of 
the victim. This effect specifically overrides Money Belts. 
 
{ Comment: 
Yes this overrides Money Belts, and it's not terribly expensive, but 
it is slow. Also, it cannot be combined with a Shunt or anything like 
that. 
 
Another option I considered was Blonking splitting all metallic tokens 
into their next lowest value, so Golds would go to Silvers. But I thought 
that was too powerful. 
} 

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

Proposal 665 - Knerdling [Enactment]

There shall be a Small, Unique, Dispensable Possession called a
Knerdling Stick.
If the following are true:
- The Player, whose Turn it is, has received a Clamp Possession
since e last took a Turn, and has not been Inactive during that period:
- That Player is in possession of the Knerdling Stick, which e must
have received prior to receiving the Clamp in question:

Then the Player may play the Pre-Move Action of "Knerdling
<Player>", where <Player> is any Player (other than the Player who gave
em the Clamp in the first place) whose position can be reached without a
change of Line or of Line Direction, and provided that there are no
Blocks, Bulkheads or other Players in between the Knerdling and Knerdled
Players. Knerdling may only be performed as the first Action of a Turn.
Upon doing this, the Clamp and the Knerdling Stick are removed from
the Knerdling Player's Possessions and added to the Knerdled Player's
Possessions. It should be noted that the Clamp is considered to be
handed over before the Knerdling Stick, which thus cannot be used
against that particular Clamp by the Knerdled Player. This is the only
way in which a Player may get rid of a Clamp without performing the
Clamp-removing Action specific to that type of Clamp.

New object: Knerdling Stick (Small, Unique, Dispensable, costs 3
Bronze in the Emporium.)
New Action: Knerdling (Pre-Move, 10 mins, cost 2 Red.)

{Comment: The "Encyclopaedia Morningtonia" definition of Knerdling
is based on truth: the term was, indeed, used in cricket commentary to
describe a deliberate deflection of the ball behind the wicket. Hence
the concept of deflecting an attack onto another target. But the
Knerdled Player can use the Knerdling Stick emself next time... and of
course, like the en-passant capture in chess, it can only be done in the
first move after the situation occurs.}

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

Proposal 666 - Vermicious Knids [Enactment]

*The following Rule is to be Enacted:
"A Player may perform the Action of "Knidding <Player>", where
<Player> is a Player who shares a Station and Line with the Actioning
Player. The Knidded Player gains a "Knid Clamp" Indestructable
Possession.
A Player who is in possession of a Knid Clamp may not play the
[Opening MC] Action, or make any Special Moves (those defined as such in
Rule 1.5.0). Also, eir Home Station is considered Open to all Players,
who may make Moves which pass through or land on it without having to
pay a Toll.
A Player may remove a Knid Clamp by playing the "De-Knidding"
Action while situated at eir Home Station with an LV of zero.

New Actions:
Knidding (-2 Red) (Post, 20 mins)
De-Knidding (-2 Blue) (Post, 10 mins)
New Possession:
Knid Clamp (Indestructable)

*The following Amendments are also included in this Proposal:

- Add "Clamps" to the list of Blocks, Impediments and Gaps in Rule
1.5.0
- Change the order of the Validity Checks, to put Special Moves
first before LV Modifiers and Trivial Fares. Add the following sentence
to the "Special Moves" section: "Special Moves (those mentioned in this
section) are not considered to pass through intervening stations, and
are not considered for Trivial Fares or the same-line bonus from the
Token Collection Table."
- Change "Greening" Action to 20 mins duration, and the "Anti-Narg"
and "Degreening" to Post-Move Actions.
{Comments:
At last, a way to prevent a Player doing Special Moves - and also,
describing Homes and Wilds as teleports, so a Player who Wilds to
Leytonstone doesn't have to pay a toll to a Player whose Home is at
Leyton: this is currently ambiguous, and it seems that all previous
attempts to clarify this have failed. The price of the Clamp is not
great, but nor is the price of release from it - a simple Pass at the
Home Station will gain the requisite Blue Tokens and reduce LV to zero.
Getting back to the Home Station to do this without use of the [Home]
and [Wild] Actions could prove tricky, though... :-) And now that there
is a way of preventing teleports, I see no problem with describing these
moves as teleports (the previous objection being that there was no way
of blocking it.)
Also, all Clamping actions now take the same length of time and
occur in the same phase of the Turn, and all Clamp-removing moves are
now likewise consistent. I'm looking towards giving a generic Clamp
status to most of the restrictions that can be placed by one Player on
another.}

*Amend Rule 1.7.10, adding the following at the end:
- The action of "Walking" is valid at all times, and is
specifically exempt from any and all Rules which place restrictions on
Special Moves.
{Comment: To prevent a Player being forced to a complete standstill
when Knidded, Narged and stuck on the diagonal. The Player may still be
forced to make a move of "Pass" by other Rules, for instance the Late
Arrival...}

{ Speaker's Comment:
Well, this was the most Beastly Amendment this Week. If I'd been a little
more on the ball, I would have invited special submissions...
}

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

Proposal 667 - Mad Hatters Tea Party [Amendment]

- Amend Rule 1.4.6, first paragraph: "There exist seven categories
of Hat: A-Z, British Rail, Compass, Terminus, Verdant, Hard, Silly. The
first five types of Hat may only be bought from Stations of the same
type (Terminus Hats from a Terminus Station, for example): Hard and
Silly Hats may be bought from any Emporium station.
- Amend all references of [Collecting Hat] to [Purchasing Hat], an
action which now costs 2 Bronze Tokens, in line with the cost of Silly
and Hard Hats.
- Change the bonus for [Cashing In Hats] to one Gold and two Silver
Tokens, but remove the restriction that it can only take place at Bank.
But add the following words: "No Player may Purchase a Hat in the same
Turn as cashing Hats in."
- Remove the paragraph about [Knocking Hat Off], and all reference
to it in the Action Table. Also, repeal rule 1.7.34 and remove all
reference to the [Hands On Hat] Action.

{Comment: Since Hat-Knocking can now only be done by adjacent
players, you may as well go the whole way and say that Hats can only be
lost by Shunting. (There is only one station's worth of difference.)
There is also little point in the [Hands On Hat] action any longer. To
balance these changes, Hats now cost something rather than nothing, and
one cannot cash them in the same turn as purchasing the last one.

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

Proposal 668 - Pocket Fluff [Amendment]

Replace the last sentence of the first paragraph of Rule 1.4.15 (Nantucket)
with:-

If a Possession is in a Nantucket, the Player is not considered to be
carrying it unless the Rule checking such possession specifically details
Nantucketed Possessions. The Possession is still considered to be in play,
however.

{ A bit of a fix for Uniqueness purposes (if Cryer Nantuckets the Drone
Stick, Rushton can create a new one), with rewording to permit other
Rules to fiddle around with Nantucket Possessions, if they really want
to. }

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

Proposal 669 - Dropped Packets [Multiple]

In Rule 1.4.7 (The Suspect Package), replace "a Station passed
through by the Player's Piece during eir Move" with "the Actioning
Player's current location, or any Station e has passed through
so far this Turn".

Rename the rule as "Suspect Packages", also, actually.

And make "[Dropping Package at <Station>]" into a Neutral Action.

{ Just a fix so that you can drop the thing at your current location; you
can't at the moment, which is rather strange. Making it Neutral permits
you to drop it at your starting location, too; since you can drop it
adjacent to such a Station, it's more a common sense thing than much of
a change. }

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

Proposal 670 - Farkle Off [Amendment]

Reword Rule 1.5.12 (Farkling) to:-

A Player may play a Move of "Farkle", provided that e performs no Actions
during that Turn. Such a Play is identical in every respect to a Move of
"Pass", except that, upon making it, the Player who makes it may adjust
Game Time to any day and time.

{ The current Token-gain seems very out-of-keeping with the idea of
"sacrificing one's Move, usually in a frivolous manner" - this
replacement is more fitting, I think; the Player simply takes an
inordinate amount of time to complete a Move which achieves nothing.
(Which does, of course, permit some rather good strategies.)
}

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

Proposal 671 - Vote Race [Multiple]

{ Comment: the current situation on who can vote when is at best unclear
and at worst unjust - the Speaker (both the current one and eir
predecessor) operate(d) a system pretty much as described here, but
this has never been made clear. }

[Amendment: Not Dead But Sleeping]
Amend the first paragraph of Rule 0.5.2 (Voting and Proposal Adoption) so
that it reads thus:

All Players who have been Active at some point during the Nomic Week for
which Votes are being gathered may cast votes on current Proposals by
sending eir votes in an email to the Speaker with a subject line of "MN:
Votes". If the email does not have this subject line, votes may be
considered invalid. Players not Active at all during that period may not
vote.

[Amendment: Charon In The Community]
Amend the first paragraph of Rule 0.5.4 (Abstentions and Quorum) so that
it reads thus:

Any Player who could have Voted but who does not or who submits an
invalid vote shall be deemed to have abstained. Players who could not
have Voted are never counted as having abstained. If the total of
abstentions exceeds the total of valid votes (i.e. votes FOR, AGAINST or
PASS), the Proposal fails to reach Quorum.

{ Comment: As a final point - note this sentence from Rule 0.9.1:
"If a Player is Inactive at the end of the Week, no changes shall be
made to eir Kudos."

I would suggest that if this Proposal passes that this point be more
rigidly enforced.
}

[End of Vote Race]

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

Dunx
--
Ceci n'est pas un .sig

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/l-nomic-d
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com