Proposal: Protagrivation

Create a new rule, entitled Vampires:

Vampires have moved into the city. They are tracked in the GNDT as their own Horde, although they are not considered a Horde for any rule unless otherwise specified. Every time a Horde attacks or Grarhs the humans, they must deduct twice the result of the Dice roll from the Human population in the GNDT; the attacking Horde gains their standard reward for the attack, but the Vampire horde gains in exctly the same way.

Add the following to Rule 16:

In addition:

If a Horde attacks humans during Daytime, then the Vampires do not gain Zombies or Brains, and the Humans do not loose any population beyond that specified in Rule 11.

If, however, a Horde attacks the humans during the nighttime, they must make a GNDT comment of "Vampires: DICE". If the result is a six, the Vampires attempt to dominate the attacking Horde, as specified in Rule 17, as if it were a normal Horde.

Add the following to the Protagonists, both in Rule 15 and the GNDT (set to the Graveyard):

Dracula: Vampric - A Vampire protagonist. May only be attacked during the Daytime. Cannot leave the Graveyard. Cannot have his Brains reduced unless the damage would kill him outright. Cannot be attacked by any Horde with its Allegiance set to the Vampires.

The Horde that kills Dracula may take all of the Vampires' Brains and Zombies, any Hordes dominated by the Vampires have their allegiance set to the attacking Horde.

Dracula may not be deleted from the Ruleset when killed, and regains 100 Brains 48 hours after being killed.

Couldn't reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie.

Proposal: Not So Fast

[ We talked about doing this a while ago - requiring all pending Calls for Judgment to time out, before an Ascension can go through. It's probably worth allowing CfJs to be raised during Hiatus, as well, if anyone's pulled a weird scam out of a hat; clearer to raise a separate CfJ regarding its legality, than to start discussing it in the middle of Ascension-claim comments. ]

In Rule 10 (Victory and Ascension), replace "during which no other game actions (including other victory claims) may be taken" with:-

during which no further game actions (other than Calls for Judgement, and all relevant actions specified in Rule 7) may be taken

Also, after "If more than half of Hordes consider the win legal", add:-

and if no CfJs remain pending

Reached Quorum. Enacted by Cayvie.

Effects of "Existence as a Precondition"

The CfJ to undo the effects of the Brainchild spree has been enacted; I've given everyone zombies equal to those that were lost during the spree, so far as I can tell. If you're concerned about your new total, check the GNDT log and piece together your personal history.

There were actually a few, rare legal Brainchild attacks during the chaos - this means that Ben genuinely, permanently lost 13 of his Zombies to exploding Brainchildren, Heiwa lost 7 and Cayvie lost 2.

Proposal: Reset, Respawn, Rinse, Repeat

Repeal rules 17 - Allegiance and Domination and 18 - Brainchild, if they exist with those names.

Set the Brains of each Horde to 100.
Set the Zombies of each Horde to 1.
Move all Hordes to the Graveyard.
Change all Hordes to Shambling mode.

That's it

Couldn't reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie.

Time

Is moving backwards. Check the year.

Call for JudgEment!

Call for JudgEment!

Make every non-idle Horde an Administrator.

It's an adminocracy.

Additionally, any Horde that signifies they do not wish to become an Admin (it's not like you'll be forced to do anything, so heaven knows why you wouldn't want to) with their vote is excepted from this CfJ should it pass.

Bobby Burns' Timeless Platitude

Happy New Year to All and One. Have a nice day ... or else.

Proposal: You Were Always an Excuse

Anyone may declare victory X - Y hours, or later, subsequent to the enactment of this proposal (where X is equal to the number of Hordes that vote FOR this proposal and Y is equal to the number of Hordes that vote AGAINST this proposal).

For the purposes of this proposal all Hordes, even ones that have zero Zombies, are valid and fully functional participants.

Only the first declaration of victory that occurs within the above mentioned parameters will be considered valid.

Couldn't reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie. Twice. Apparently it didn't publish the first time.

Where I stand

I just had an insight about my own position on rules interpretation, which I will give as a guide to how I will vote on Calls For Judgement in the future.

I will consider each Dynasty to be in one of two modes: Genre Simulation or Absurd Fun.

In the first case, I will apply my genre assumptions to the rules: Zombies are the walking dead, they are material animate things, humanoid in shape, blah blah blah... UNLESS a rule overrides my assumption, in which case I will honor it, of course. If I have no idea what a game object represents, I will treat it as an abstract logical construct. In an Absurd Fun Dynasty I will treat everything that way, trying to suppress my assumptions and use only formal logic.

I first considered this Dynasty Genre Simulation, but now I consider it Absurd Fun. My future votes should reflect that.

Gone

Please remove me from the list of players. I'm not coming back. :)

Proposal: Cool Britannia

add to rule 17:

The first Horde to dominate all other Hordes, including Horde's that have zero Zombies, may declare victory.

Couldn't reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie.

Proposal: The Taste of Clarity

Add a subsection to to the Glossary called "Typographic Conventions" and add to it this item:

* Italicized text is not considered part of the ruleset and may be used to clarify rules with examples, notes and flavor text.

If there is any italicized text in the ruleset when this proposal passes, revert it to normal text styling, before adding this entry.

[If the rule text is separated from the flavor text, that may help clarify things. In the interest of further improving rule text wording, I have started a page in the wiki devoted to guidelines of how to phrase rule text, where I hope we will document our collective wisdom.]

Reached Quorum. Enacted by Cayvie.

Ghost of Judgements Past

This is a just a notice of the status of the many resolved Calls for Judgement:

Dec 30th Has reached Quorum, but I am not going to process it. Maybe an admin who was in the fray will know how to enact this.

Dec 20th Passed. No ruleset effect. Majority agrees with Ben's view of Location limits, rather than Cayvie's.

Dec 17th Failed.

Dec 16th Failed. This depends on whether Deferential votes are counted in a CfJ. I believe they are not. If I am wrong, then this CfJ passes.

Dec 15th Passed. Chronos would lose 5 Brain Admin award for improper enactment of a proposal, but I'm not going to comb back through the GNDT logs to see if he voluntarily gave up the award.

Whenever an admin processes Proposals, it would be good to also check on the status of pending Calls for Judgment, and post a reminder about them.

Odd, my admin markups are not appearing on those links... they do in the Blogger Editor.

Proposal: Half off weekends

Add a new rule called "Almost Human"

Some may think that zombies are just mindless creatures, but truth be told they were once human and have some human tendencies.

For instance the local mall of this now doomed town used to have an occasional half off sale, and as such the human part of the zombies feels the need to do something similar. When the 10s digit of the year is a 5 or a 0 all legal 'activities' (as defined by the rule called ‘Horde Activities’) taken by a horde that is located in the mall cost half as many brains. This halving comes after any halving defined by daytime.

If this proposal passes everyone shall forgive Quazie for any past 'game breakings' he has caused. This will not excuse any future game breakings that Quazie might do, which seems inevitable.

If this proposal fails then Quazie shall make a much better apology post.

Further more if this proposal passes AND more than half of all for votes have the word 'apologize' next to them Quazie will still apologize in a better way than this.

FURTHER FURTHER MORE if this proposal fails and more than half of all against votes have 'do not apologize' next to them, this shall be noted as a sufficient apology.

Couldn't reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie.

Proposal: Suggestions that the outbreak were caused by Josh's proposal were dismissed today as utter bullsh-

Create a new rule, entitled Strains:

Zombies are created in a number of different ways. Being witless reanimated corpses, the zombies have no concept of the deliniation, and are content to mingle freely with other Strains within their Hordes.

Every time a Horde would gain or loose a new Zombie, they may chose which Strain to add it to or remove it from. The proportion of zombies of each strain in a Horde is tracked in the GNDT as a percentage in the relevant fields. Obviously, when a Horde is reduced to zero Zombies all Strain fields are set to zero. Once a Zombie has its Strain set, it cannot be changed; these percentile proportions can only be affected by adding or removing zombies in the Horde.

Whenever a Horde gains Zombies from another Horde, it may choose which Strains to take them from, provided that it does not reduce the percentile proportion of any of the target Horde's Strains to below 0%.

Currently identified strains are: Rage-infected Monkeys, Space Dust, Nuclear Fallout, Bad Science and Dark Magickcks.

Create GNDT fields for each of the Strains, and set all Horde's Dark Magickcks to 100%.

Could not reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie.

Proposal: Enough is Enough.

Repeal rule 18, Brainchildren.

(All right, it's been shown that it's horribly broken, and considering the blackhawk rule passed, no longer necessary for "battling" the giant hordes if they're restored by the CfJ.)

Reached Quorum. Enacted by Cayvie.

Call for Sanity

Some of us read every rule seventeen times to try to find the tiniest loopholes to scam to our heart's content. Some of us want to shoot all the people who even think about exploiting a poorly-worded rule. Some of us are in between.

Please, can we all at least agree on the following?

• There is a difference between legitimately exploiting extreme oversights in Rules, and using some obscure grammatic idiosyncrasy to wreak havoc on the Gamestate.


• When a rule clearly allows unintended behavior, the rule should be amended as quickly as possible, but the behavior itself should not be reversed unless it is irreparably destructive to the game itself.


• When someone uses an obscure grammatic idiosyncrasy, it is totally reasonable to amend the rule AND reverse the behavior in a proposal.


• Since you can both amend Rules and reverse behavior in Proposals, CfJs should be reserved for cases where the reasonableness of the scam is in question.


• CfJs should NOT be used for every scam, because the same argument just gets rehashed. Both the scammers and the non-scammers should honestly evaluate whether the scam is legit enough to stand, or illegit enough to protest.

Eh?

Proposal: No Brainer

In rule 18 - Allegiance and Domination change

If, at any time, a Horde has zero Brains and zero Zombies, it may transfer 30 Brains and 3 Zombies from the Horde to which its Allegiance is set. If this would reduce the Dominating Horde to below zero Brains or Zombies, then the action may not be performed, but the Dominated Horde may set their Allegiance back to themselves.

to

If, at any time, a Horde has zero Zombies, it may transfer 3 Zombies from the Horde to which its Allegiance is set. If this would reduce the Dominating Horde to below zero Zombies, then the action may not be performed, but the Dominated Horde may set their Allegiance back to themselves.

Timed out at 6-7. Failed by Cayvie.

Proposal: Anti-Spam (Again)

In rule 4, change:

No ostensible Proposal shall be legal if its posting leads to its poster having more than 2 Proposals pending.

to

No ostensible Proposal shall be legal if its posting leads to its poster having more than 2 Proposals pending. Furthermore, no Horde may post more than 3 Proposals in the same day.

Reached Quorum. Enacted by Cayvie.

Proposal: Rotten Eggs

In rule 11, change the Size of the Mall from 100 to Very Big.

add the following to rule 11:

Upon entering the Mall, Hordes may not leave the Mall.

add a rule entitled "Race to the Finish" in which:

If all Hordes are in the Mall, the most recent one to enter the Mall may declare victory.

Could not reach Quorum. Failed by Cayvie.

Proposal: in a building of gold with riches untold ...

Royce is the new Overlord (Knightking is removed from the position). Upon passage of this proposal Royce may immediately deliver his ascension address and excercise the powers of a newly ascended Overlord as per rule 10 without any intervening hiatus.

Vetoed. Fails immediatly.

CFJ: Existence as a Precondition for Just About Everything

At 6:11 AM (GMT) on 30/12 Quazie lobbed five brainchildren at Ben. Unfortunately, Quazie did not have five brainchildren. Although, Quazie claims that since the ruleset does not explicitly say that brainchildren must exist for them to be lobbed it seems rather absurd that one should have to mention that sort of thing outright. Consider the following sentence:

"The lizard may eat the fly."

For this to be meaningful there must first exist a lizard and a fly. If there is lacking in either one then the sentence is meaningless and therefore not applicable. Similarly:

"Quazie may lob as many brainchildren per day as Quazie has zombies."

In order for this to make any sense, there must be: 1 Quazie, at least one brainchild and he must have at least one zombie. Since there are no brainchildren it makes no sense for Quazie to have allegedly lobbed them. Additionally, we have always dealt with useable objects in discrete units. The possibilities of acquisition of the units in question here have already been outlined in rule 19. Neither method was employed by Quazie to acquire brainchildren, therefore everything following that Quazie did involving brainchildren is invalid.

Voting for this CFJ will simply undo Quazie's damage upon Ben and any other damage that is dealt via non-existent brainchildren.

CfJ passed by Kevan, 1st of January: eight in favour (KnightKing, Kevan, Chronos, Truman, Royce, Josh, Ben, Simon), five against (Quazie, Cayvie, Rodney, Aaron, 75th Trombone).

Proposal: Glossed over

If the Proposal titled "Why are you always so Negative?" passed, amend the Glossary entry it added from

* If a game variable is defined to hold numeric values that means non-negative integers by default, unless otherwise specified.

to

* Unless otherwise specified, game variables defined to hold numeric values can hold only non-negative integers, and any action that would set those values below zero instead sets them to zero.

Eliminates loopholes a bit more clearly and thoroughly. And, as I said in the comments of that Proposal, I really like the idea of using the Glossary to stomp out common-sense loopholes.

Reached Cayvie. Enacted by quorum.

Proposal: I Have Lain Awake

Add, to rule 2 - Hordes, after the paragraph about Admin staff, the following paragraph:

Some Hordes are Moderators, responsible for keeping the game fun and clean, and are marked as such in the sidebar, by putting their names in italics. Hordes who wish to become Moderators should behave with respect, decency, and wisdom. Existing Moderators may be removed from their post by Proposal, CfJ or voluntary resignation. If a Moderator feels that a Horde's behavior is becoming detrimental to the game of BlogNomic, that Moderator may issue an Official Warning to that Horde, in whatever manner the Moderator sees fit. If a Horde has received 5 Official Warnings, a Moderator may, at their discretion, Idle that Horde and, if applicable, remove Admin privileges. The only way for a Horde to become a Moderator is to be invited by a current Moderator, though this occurence may only occur once every two Dynasties. A Moderator may not declare victory

Grant Kevan Moderator status, unless he posts a comment to this proposal saying "I do not want this."

I went looking through the history of BlogNomic today, and realized that I, for one, have been a tremendous jerk on numerous occasions, in both comments and in-game actions. I think that my actions have been reprehensible at times, and have quite possibly lessened others' enjoyment of the game to the degree that they quit. I don't want that to happen, and I think that I would be far less likely to make deliberately inflammatory, mean, and/or petty personal remarks if there were some sort of penalty for, well, being a jerk.

I think that, in Blognomic, as in all games, players should keep level heads, think before they act, and refrain from personal attack. I realize that this proposal would give quite abusable power to certain individuals. This is why I suggested that Kevan should be a Moderator, as he has been around since the beginning of this game, and, I believe, cares more about the game of Blognomic than about winning a particular Dynasty. I trust him not to abuse this, but if he doesn't want to be a Moderator, then so be it. I suppose if this passes and he refuses the option, we can have some sort of vote.

If nobody else thinks that this is necessary, then feel free to vote against it. I just know that I (and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone) have the tendency to say and do things before I think about them, and this tendency is exacerbated on the Internet, as there's even less accountability for one's actions here. Perhaps if there were, then people would be less likely to be rude and mean.

Also, this gives us a more "spirit-of-the-law" way of escaping from a veto-hungry tyrant of an Emperor.

Could not reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie

Proposal: Shamble Out Here And Face Me Like A Man

In rule 19, reword:

Brainchildren may only be lobbed at Hordes in locations that contain more Zombies than the location from which it is being lobbed.

to

Brainchildren may only be lobbed at Hordes in the same location as the Horde doing the lobbing.

(What's the point of having Zombies at all if anyone who gains an advantage in them can be attacked without any chance of reciprocation whatsoever? This way, players can still team up against large hordes, but they'll have to actually risk something to do it. And it encourages moving around, rather than our current situation of everyone bunkering down in a single location.)

Could not reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie

Proposal: One is in greatest danger of being run over when one has just got out of the way of a carriage.

remove the following from rule 3:

Admins gain 10 Brains for setting up new Hordes. Within 24 hours of joining the game, and only once, a Horde may nominate a single (other) Horde as being responsible for their joining - the nominated Horde gains 20 Brains, and the new Horde gains 10 as a reward for nominating.

Reach quorum it did. By Cayvie enacted it was.

Proposal: Cactus Face Man

Alter rule 14 to read

Each Horde is always in one of three modes: Defending, Shambling, or Rampaging. A Horde may change its mode provided it has not done previously that day. All Hordes start as Shambling.

Change, in rule 11,

Once a day, a Horde may attempt to attack the Humans for their Brains.

to

Once a day, a Horde who is not Defending may attempt to attack the Humans for their Brains.

and change, in rule 18,

Once per day, a Horde with at least 7 Zombies may attempt to Dominate a single other Horde in the same location as themselves. The Dominating Horde makes a "Dominate (Targeted Horde's Name): DICE" comment to the GNDT. The result is subtracted from the Dominating Horde's Zombies, and added to the targeted Horde's Zombies.

to

Once per day, a Horde with at least 7 Zombies may attempt to Dominate a single other Horde in the same location as themselves. The Dominating Horde makes a "Dominate (Targeted Horde's Name): DICE" comment to the GNDT. The result is subtracted from the Dominating Horde's Zombies, and added to the targeted Horde's Zombies, unless the Targeted Horde is currently Defending, in which case twice the DICE roll is transferred from the Dominatng Horde's Zombies to the Targeted Horde's Zombies.

Could not reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie

Proposal: Why are you always so Negative?

Add to the glossary:

* If a game variable is defined to hold numeric values that means non-negative integers by default, unless otherwise specified.

[Negative values muck up the works so often. I don't want negative Brainchildren!]

Reached Quorum. Enacted by Cayvie

Proposal: The Path of Least Resistance

Repeal Rule 13, Courage.

Reached Quorumeded. Enacteded by Cayvied

Proposal: Veto Limits

In Rule 9, Dynasties, replace:

They may veto any Proposal; that Proposal immediately fails. (This veto may be contested with a CfJ if it is thought excessively unreasonable.) .

with:

They may veto any Proposal; that Proposal fails, unless 75% of the current number of Hordes rounded up to the nearest whole number vote in favor of that Proposal.

Could not reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie

Proposal: Try, try again

My first attempt was unpopular, but what if the Quadge rule itself was probationary? How about if we could repeal it with a Quorum of 4? I'll lower its own Quadge value! (Also, a different name is fine by me if anyone has suggestions.)

Consider the remaining text of this proposal the same as my previous Proposal (minus the admin voting result notes, of course) What in the World is Quadge? with this additional line added to the end of the proposed rule text block:

The Quadge rule has a Quadge of -4.

Self-kill. Failed by Cayvie

Proposal: Time Provides the Rope/but Love Will Tie the Slipknot/and I Will Be the Chair You Kick Away

In Rule 4:

Remove:

(A Horde can state in his Proposal's title that the Proposal is Trivial, if they feel that it only makes minor changes, or is otherwise unworthy of reward.)

change:

No ostensible Proposal shall be legal if its posting leads to its poster having more than 4 Trivial Proposals' worth of Proposals pending. For the purpose of this rule, 1 non-Trivial Proposal is worth 2 Trivial ones. The legal maximum is, therefore, 2 non-Trivials, 4 Trivials, or 1 non-Trivial and 2 Trivials. Furthermore, no Horde may post more than the worth of 6 Trivial Proposals in the same day.

If quorum is greater than 7, no ostensible Proposal shall be legal if its posting leads to its poster having more than 2 Proposals pending.

to:

No ostensible Proposal shall be legal if its posting leads to its poster having more than 2 Proposals pending.

In rule 5:

Remove:

Any Horde may mark his vote FOR a Proposal as 'Trivial'. If at least half of a passed Proposal's FOR votes are marked 'Trivial', the Proposal is enacted as though it had been proposed as Trivial.

and

If the Horde who made a proposal casts an explicit 'FOR' vote on said proposal and marks it as trivial, then this self trivial auto-trivials the proposal. In the event of a self-trivial the Horde who made the proposal or an admin may add [trivial] to the proposal title.

In rule 13:

remove:

all mention of "non-trivial"


Quorum equaling seven is nigh and I should like to finally lay this trivial/non-trivial distinction to rest lexically as it has already been done semantically. Besides, if quorum should drop below eight then with the way it is worded now each player could propose up to six proposals.

Reached quorum. Enacted by Cayvie

Give that Human a Spine!

I know it is more of a zombie-versus-zombie game right now, but Humans should have been steadily gaining courage for failed proposals. I just went ahead and pushed it up one point, even though I think it might be due a couple. Also, since more than half of us are Rampaging, the Humans get +1. C'mon, show those Humans a little respect!

Calls for Judgment

This is the Call for Judgment blogger account. Its password is quite simply: blognomic

Use it to beef up the grief.

Proposal: We Are the Custard Pie Appreciation Consortium

add to rule 19 the following:

Upon further examination, Brainchildren are explosive. A Horde may lob Brainchildren at any other Horde. When lobbed, Brainchildren kill DICE + 1 Zombies. Brainchildren may only be lobbed at Hordes in locations that contain more Zombies than the location from which it is being lobbed. A Horde may use as many Brainchildren per day as it has Zombies.

Reached quorum. Enacted by Cayvie

Proposal: Hunger strike [Trivial]

Add the following to Rule 18: Allegiance and Domination:

If, at any time, a Horde has zero Brains and zero Zombies, it may transfer 30 Brains and 3 Zombies from the Horde to which its Allegiance is set. If this would reduce the Dominating Horde to below zero Brains or Zombies, then the action may not be performed, but the Dominated Horde may set their Allegiance back to themselves.

edited as no comments have been made yet

Reached quorum. Enacted by Cayvie

Proposal: Back to Basics

The recent proposal concerning Quadge generated interest, but was considered too complex. This solution requires more amendments, but is (I think) much simpler, and it has a lot of benefits for both the Scamming-types and the Spirit-types.

Renumber Rules 1-10 to 101-110, respectively.

Renumber Rules 11-19 to 201-209, respectively.

If there are any rules numbered higher than 19 the moment before this proposal is enacted, renumber them numerically starting with 210.

Change the first paragraph of Rule 101 - Ruleset and Gamestate from

This is the Ruleset for BlogNomic; all Hordes must obey it. Rules 1-10 are the "core Ruleset", covering basic Horde and proposal mechanics; Rules 11 onwards are those specific to the current round.

to

This is the Ruleset for BlogNomic; all Hordes must obey it. Any Rules in the range 101-199 are the "Core Ruleset", covering basic Horde and proposal mechanics; Rules 201 onwards are the "Dynastic Ruleset," specific to the current round.

Change the first paragraph of Rule 104 - Proposals from

Any Horde may propose a change to the Ruleset or gamestate by posting an entry with the subject "Proposal : [Title]" (where [Title] is a title of their choosing), and describes the changes they wish to be made.

to

Any Horde may propose a change to the Ruleset or gamestate by posting an entry with the subject "Proposal : [Title]" (where [Title] is a title of their choosing).

Proposals must contain text describing at most ONE of the following:

• Amendment of a SINGLE rule.


• Repeal of a SINGLE rule.


• Addition of a SINGLE rule.

Proposals may also contain explanatory text and Gamestate changes.

Any ostensible Proposal that affects more than one rule, or affects a rule in a way not permitted by the Ruleset, or has text not allowed earlier in this Rule, is NOT a Proposal and may not be Enacted.

Change the first three paragraphs of Rule 106 - Enactment from

Quorum is equal to half the number of Hordes, rounded down, plus one.

If the oldest pending Proposal's FOR votes exceed or equal Quorum, or if it is more than 48 hours old and more than half of its votes are FOR, then any Admin Staff may mark that Proposal as Enacted, then update the Ruleset and/or Gamestate to include the specified effects of that Proposal.

If the oldest pending Proposal has enough AGAINST votes that it could not be Enacted without one of those votes being changed, or if all Hordes have voted on it and it still cannot be Enacted, or if the Horde who proposed it has voted AGAINST it, or if it is more than 48 hours old and most of its votes are AGAINST, then any Admin Staff may mark that Proposal as Failed. When the proposer votes against his or her own proposal, that vote may not be changed.

to

Quorum is equal to half the number of Hordes, rounded down, plus one.

Superquorum is equal to 3/4 the number of Hordes, rounded down, plus one.

Proposals that amend, repeal, or add to any part of the Core Ruleset require Superquorum FOR votes. All other proposals require Quorum FOR votes.

If the oldest pending Proposal's FOR votes exceed or equal its requirement, then any Admin Staff may mark that Proposal as Enacted, then update the Ruleset and/or Gamestate to include the specified effects of that Proposal.

If a pending Proposal that requires only Quorum FOR votes is more than 48 hours old and more than half of its votes are FOR, it may be Enacted as described above. Pending Proposals requiring Superquorum FOR votes cannot be enacted in this way.

If the oldest pending Proposal has enough AGAINST votes that it could not be Enacted without one of those votes being changed, or if all Hordes have voted on it and it still cannot be Enacted, or if the Horde who proposed it has voted AGAINST it, or if it is more than 48 hours old and at least half of its votes are AGAINST, then any Admin Staff may mark that Proposal as Failed. When the proposer votes against his or her own Proposal, that vote may not be changed.

Finally, in Rule 110 - Victory and Ascension, change the paragraph reading

The Hiatus then continues until the new Overlord posts an Ascension Address to the BlogNomic weblog - this should specify the Overlord's chosen theme for the new round, and may optionally include a proclamation that any number of Rules will be repealed (excluding Rules 1-10), and/or that the words "Horde", "Overlord", "Brains", "Year" and “A.E. (Anno EquitisRegis?)" will be replaced with new theme-appropriate terms. If the new Overlord chooses not to repeal a rule with number over 10, he/she may also replace any keyword in those rules with a new theme-appropriate term. The remaining rules, after the new Overlord's proclamation, shall be renumbered to keep a sequential progression. The new Overlord may also proclaim at the Ascension Address the veto of any Pending Proposals. The failure of said proposals shall incur no Thaler penalty for the proposer.

to read

The Hiatus then continues until the new Overlord posts an Ascension Address to the BlogNomic weblog - this should specify the Overlord's chosen theme for the new round, and may optionally include a proclamation that repeals any number of rules from the Dynastic Ruleset, and/or that the words "Horde", "Overlord", "Brains", "Year" and “A.E. (Anno EquitisRegis?)" will be replaced with new theme-appropriate terms. If the new Overlord chooses not to repeal a rule in the Dynastic Ruleset, he/she may also replace any keyword in those rules with a new theme-appropriate term. The remaining Dynastic rules, after the new Overlord's proclamation, shall be renumbered from 201 to keep a sequential progression. The new Overlord may also proclaim at the Ascension Address the veto of any Pending Proposals. The failure of said proposals shall incur no Thaler penalty for the proposer.

This prevents upheaval every proposal. It makes people patch loopholes independently of incorporating new mechanics. It makes the sun shine brighter and your Honey Smacks taste sweeter. I think it's a good thing. Don't you?

Could not reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie

Proposal: all we are saying, is give us a freaking chance

add the following activity to rule 15, Horde Activities

Blackhawk Down - Must be at the Heliport. The horde that performs Blackhawk Down has their Horde attempt to fly a Blackhawk Helicopter. The Helicopter crashes at the location of that horde’s choosing, and all hordes at said location lose half of their zombies. The horde flying the helicopter loses all of its zombies and may not gain zombies in any way for 24 hours after the crash. Blackhawk Down may only be used once per week, meaning once its used by one horde during the week, there are no more helicopters available until the next week.

This will give us small hordes a chance against the giants of Knightking and Ben.

Reached quorum. Enacted by Cayvie

Notice

I have gone through and re-inputed the effects of Actions people took between Smith's normalisation and his undoing of it.

These are basically Heiwa's killing of Bub, Ben's attack on the humans, and my attack on the humans.

I didn't re-input the things I thought people wouldn't have done, such as my (re)-Domination of Chronos, and the things that would now be illegal, such as my move to the Mall.

If you think I was wrong in doing this, you may vote on my below CFJ, as it would undo all my actions. I, however, shall now be voting against it, as I think smith has undone his actions satisfactorily.

Nothing happened to Brains and Zombies, go about your Business

I have reverted all GNDT data. Please double check. Apologies!

CFJ: Generically Inflammatory Title

Smith has behaved illegally in influencing Aaron's vote. At the time Smith dominated Aaron, Smith's Allegiance was set to Ben.

"Once Dominated, the Allegiance of a Horde, as well as the Allegiance of all Hordes who held Allegiance to that Horde, is changed to the Allegiance of the Dominating Horde."

This obviously means that he should have changed Aaron's allegiance to Ben, instead of to Smith.

And, as the rule clearly states "Once per day, a Horde may attempt to exert its influence over a single Horde it has Dominated. It does this by making a comment in the GNDT of "Influence [HordeName?]: DICE" where [HordeName?] is the name of a Horde whose Allegiance is set to the Horde making the comment." Smith couldn't attempt to Influence Aaron, and committed an illegal action in doing so.

This CFJ is to change the gamestate back to the way it was before Smith attempted to Influence Aaron, change Aaron's Allegiance to Ben, and fail Proposal: Tis the Season for Resetting, as Knightking has cast a Veto vote on it, that would have gone through had Smith not done his illegal action.

0-8. Call for Judgement Fails. Failed by Smith, 31st of Dec.

What happened to Brains and Zombies

Tis the Season passed after I influenced Aaron to change his Vote on it. Brains, Zombies and Allegiances have been normalized. Ex-small Hordes rejoice in the new year!

(I note that had we been playing with Quadge and the Brains rule had a Quadge of +1 - my nefarious plot would have been thwarted.)

Proposal: Clarifications of Control (Trivial)

In rule 18, Allegiance and Domination, reword:

Once per day, a Horde may attempt to exert its influence over a single Horde it has Dominated.

to

Once per day, a Horde may attemp to exert its influence over a single other Horde who holds Allegiance to them.

Also, in that same rule, reword:

Once Dominated, the Allegiance of a Horde, as well as the Allegiance of all Hordes who held Allegiance to that Horde, is changed to the Allegiance of the Dominating Horde.

to

Once Dominated, a Horde, as well as all Hordes who hold Allegiance to that Horde, is changed to have the same Allegiance as the Dominating Horde.

(Domination is just an instantaneous effect which changes Allegiance, so this wording for influencing is a bit more appropriate, and open to fewer potential problems. Also, "other" prevents a horde from influencing themselves to get a free move. The second bit is just clarifying the wording of the rule as discussed in comments with people, and doesn't actually change how it is played out.)

Reached quorum. Enacted by Cayvie

Proposal: The Horn of Condo (or the last proposal in this series)

• change the following in rule 7:

If two or more Hordes actively disagree as to the interpretation of the Ruleset, or if a Horde feels that an aspect of the game needs urgent attention, then any Horde may raise a Call for Judgment by posting an entry which begins with the paragraph "Call for Judgment" in bold text, and goes on to describe the issue, and measures that should be taken to resolve it.

to:

If two or more Hordes actively disagree as to the interpretation of the Ruleset, or if a Horde feels that an aspect of the game needs urgent attention, then any Horde may raise a Call for Judgment by posting an anonymous entry (via the blogger account that is specifically designated for CFJs) which begins with the paragraph "Call for Judgment" in bold text, and goes on to describe the issue, and measures that should be taken to resolve it.

• The admin that enacts this proposal will then add an account to blogger that is to be used exclusively for CFJs and make public its password.

• Any and all praise, applause, criticism, and cross-eyed glares that Aaron would or will get for this proposal shall instead be immediately redirected to Simon.

Reached quorum. Enacted by Cayvie

Proposal: What in the world is Quadge?

Create a rule called Quadge,

All rules have a measure of resistance to change, called Quadge, which is a whole number (and may be negative). Unless otherwise specified, a rule has a Quadge of zero.

When a Proposer attempts to repeal or amend a rule, or create a rule which overrides another rule, or change gamestate values of a variable defined by another rule, the highest Quadge of any of those affected rules modifies the Enactment requirements for that Proposal.

During the Voting and Enactment process on that Proposal only, Quorum is temporarily modified by adding the determined Quadge value, and if the Proposal times out, the Quadge is added to the number of votes required for its Enactment and subtracted from the number of votes required for its Failure.

Quadge can never make Enactment impossible or automatic, so its adjustment is constrained to certain bounds:

- Quorum cannot be increased to more than the number of Hordes, and cannot be lower than 2.

- Timed Out Enactment requirements must stay within these ranges:
(total number of votes) >= (required number FOR to Enact) >= 2
(total number of votes -1) >= (required number AGAINST to Fail) >= 1

I wanted a nonsense word to limit confusion, and "Demostasis" sounded too dry. Quadge came from "Quorum Adjustment". Core rules might be good candidates for positive Quadge, whereas controversial rules might be more readily approved if given a negative Quadge.

Couldn't reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie

Observation: 50/50 Ties

The ruleset doesn't deal with perfectly tied voting on a timed-out proposal. There has to be >50% FOR to pass and >50% AGAINST to fail. An even split would result in deadlock that would stall the queue until someone change their vote. It is an interesting twist I hadn't seen before and I thought worth sharing.

Proposal: Vote Manipulation Sucks.

Under Rule 18, Allegiance and Domination, change the following paragraph:

3) It may force the Horde to cast a vote, that cannot be changed, on a pending proposal. This is done by making a comment to said proposal with the text "[HordeName] decides to vote this way," and the appropriate vote.

to:

3) It may force the Horde to cast a vote, that cannot be changed, on a pending proposal. This is done by making a comment to said proposal with the text "[HordeName] decides to vote this way," and the appropriate vote. Hordes cannot be forced to self-kill their own proposals.

Because forcing someone to vote Against their own proposal, thus killing it, violates very basic tenets of the game. I really don't see how it benefits this Nomic in any way for people to put a lot of work into an idea only for it to be shot down by themselves, against their own will. We're starting to venture into making players irrelevant.

Reached quorum, 10-4 (good buddy). Enacted by Cayvie

Idle me, please

I have things to do, and the game's running just slightly too fast for me right now. I'll be back in a while. Sooner if things slow down a little.

Thank you!

Proposal: Here comes the equestrian statue!

Change, in rule 6,

Whenever an Admin Enacts or Fails a Proposal that has been pending for more than 48 hours, he/she has the option of deducting 5 Brains from the accounts of all active Hordes who did not vote on the Proposal. This deduction cannot take place if a proposal has been vetoed or self failed.

to

Whenever an Admin Enacts or Fails a Proposal that has been pending for more than 48 hours, he/she has the option of idling all active Hordes who did not vote on the Proposal. This idling cannot take place if the proposal in question has been vetoed or self failed.

Also, in Rule 5, change

Any Horde may cast their vote on a Pending Proposal by declaring it in the comments of the entry. Valid votes are FOR, AGAINST, and DEFERENTIAL, which must be represented by appropriate icons. If there exists more than one Vote from a single Horde on a single Proposal, only the most recent of those Votes is counted. If a Horde leaves the game or goes idle, their Vote no longer counts.

to

Any Horde may cast their vote on a Pending Proposal by declaring it in the comments of the entry. Valid votes are FOR, AGAINST, ABSTAIN, and DEFERENTIAL, which must be represented by appropriate icons. If there exists more than one Vote from a single Horde on a single Proposal, only the most recent of those Votes is counted. If a Horde leaves the game or goes idle, their Vote no longer counts.

and add the following paragraph after the second one in the rule:

A vote of ABSTAIN is a vote of absolutely no opinion whatsoever. It counts as one/half of a FOR vote and one/half of an AGAINST vote when tallying up the votes.

I know this has been proposed before, but, really, I've been doing a lot of minus-fiving, and I could have been doing more, and it seems to fit in with our current movement toward lessening proposals' effects on people's Brains. And, if people are worried that coming around every other day and voting randomly would have horrible effects, now they have an option that doesn't affect anything at all, except for making the queue go faster! yay!

Couldn't reach quorum. Failed by Cayvie

Proposal: Fold Your Hands Child, You Walk Like A Peasant

add a rule entitled "Brainchild" in which:

Once per day a Horde may spend 10 Brains to create a Brainchild. Brainchildren shall be tracked by a column in the GNDT titled "Brainchildren".
Once per day a Horde may trade all of his or her Brainchild(ren) for all of another Horde's Brainchild(ren).

OMGWTFHAPPYNEWYEARBBQWWJDFBI!!! This is so totally pointless. He hasn't even suggested a use for these so-called Brainchildren.

Reached Quorum 9-4. Enacted by Cayvie.

Ornithopter Idled

Yes, verily it is so.

And, anyway, why do my changes to the template keep getting reversed? Dirk keeps becoming unidled, and quorum keeps going back up to 10.

Also, has it been white and dateless for everyone else for the past few days? What's up?

Even if they are out to get you, there's no reason to be paranoid

Domination is just not as powerful and/or easy as some people seem to be making it out to be. There are several limiting factors here.

1) You can only do it to one person a day.

2) Each time you do it, you become more susceptible to domination.

3) It isn't permanent.

These are the obvious ones.

4) If you play strategically, it is possible to be almost completely immune to domination. Look. There are population caps on certain areas. This means that, if you want to avoid being dominated, simply go to a place where someone larger than you won't fit. Now, of course, they can always call you to the mall. But that's a lot of work. And, if everyone who wishes to dominate others goes to the mall, then the mall will be filled up pretty quickly as well.

5) It's just not that bad. I already mentioned that it wasn't permanent. But, right now, there are no drawbacks to it. You can still do everything you want to, even including dominating others in your name. Now, even if UNGHHH passes, it stll won't be horribly overpowered. One vote, movement, or attack might be ordered by your Dominator. Once per day. With a one-third chance of actually going through. This is not enough to start passing victory conditions willy-nilly. And do notice that this gets even weaker the larger a Horde's spread of influence is. Even if KnightKing controlled all of us, he'd still only be able to order around one of us each day.

Please, if you still consider Domination to be ridiculously overpowered, do explain why. But at least consider what I've said here, instead of mindlessly panicking. Please?

Proposal: Tis the Season for Resetting [trivial]

Find the average number of Brains and average number of Zombies of all Hordes. Set every Horde's (including those with 0 zombies) Brains and Zombies to the corresponding average, rounding up to the nearest whole number. Then set every Horde's Allegiance to itself.

Vetoed! Incorrectly enacted by Smith, 27th of Dec at 11:57 PM, correctly Failed on Dec 28th at 2:25

Proposal: Condo Need No King

(A new variation on an old and resoundingly stupid and disliked song. Perhaps this is more liked and moderate.)

add:

• a GNDT column titled "Judgment"

change:

• rule 7:

• If two or more Hordes actively disagree as to the interpretation of the Ruleset, or if a Horde feels that an aspect of the game needs urgent attention, then any Horde may raise a Call for Judgment by posting an entry which begins with the paragraph "Call for Judgment" in bold text, and goes on to describe the issue, and measures that should be taken to resolve it.

  All Hordes may add votes of agreement or disagreement in comments to this entry, using appropriate voting icons (a Horde's later votes overriding its earlier ones). CfJs continue until they reach a quorum of FOR votes, or until four days have passed. After this time, if more than half of the cast votes are in favour, the Gamestate and Ruleset should be amended as was specified. Otherwise, the CfJ fails and may have no further effect.

to:

• If two or more Hordes actively disagree as to the interpretation of the Ruleset, or if a Horde feels that an aspect of the game needs urgent attention, then any Horde (this Horde is also known as the plaintiff) may raise a Call for Judgment by posting an entry which begins with the paragraph "Call for Judgment" in bold text, and goes on to describe the issue, and measures that should be taken to resolve it.

  A given Horde’s jurisprudence is marked by his or her Judgment Coefficient. A Horde's Judgment Coefficient is the ratio of its passed CFJs to its failed CFJs rounded down to the third decimal. Judgment Coefficients are tracked by a “Judgment” column in the GNDT.

  All Hordes may add votes of FOR or AGAINST in comments to this entry (a Horde's later votes overriding its earlier ones). CfJs continue for 72 hours. After this time, if the sum of the FOR votes multiplied by their constituent Hordes’ Judgment Coefficients exceeds the sum of the AGAINST votes multiplied by their constituent Hordes’ Judgment Coefficients, then the Gamestate and Ruleset should be amended as was specified. Otherwise, the CfJ fails and may have no further effect.

  The Horde with the highest Judgment Coefficient shall be known as the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice may overturn an Overlord’s veto if he or she so chooses by making a direct “OVERTURNED” reply comment to the veto. If there are two or more Hordes tied for the highest Judgment Coefficient then there is no Chief Justice.

  A vote of DEFERENTIAL on a CFJ is a vote of no opinion, or of faith in the decision of the Chief Justice. The vote will count as the same as the Chief Justice’s vote. The Chief Justice cannot cast a vote of DEFERENTIAL for CFJs. If there is no Chief Justice, then a vote of DEFERENTIAL on a CFJ counts as an explicit vote of abstention.

Upon passage of this proposal, all Hordes' Judgment Coefficients are set to one(1).

(I am counting on there still being few CFJs, so the admins, hopefully, will not have to work much harder. Politics and intrigue are the order of the day ... I hope.)

No way of reaching quorum. Failed by Cayvie, 27th of Dec.