Forum Nomic anyone?

Sniff, I don't even rate a zero.

These are the current rules, the original rules follow.

''1.' This game is named Forum Nomic. This document is the set of rules by which Forum Nomic is run.

'2.' "Forum" in this ruleset is taken to mean this bulletin board, located at <http://forums.secondlife.com>

'3.' All players must abide by all rules currently in effect. The author of each message replying to this post is considered a player, unless they state that they do not wish to be a player. The Roster, or list of players, is part of the game state. Any player may forfeit their player status at will by by posting their forfeiture to this post.

'4.' The Administrator is a player who is responsible for maintaining the ruleset and the game state, and regularly posting these to the Forum. The identification of the Administrator is part of the game state. The Administrator is Catfart Grayson.

'5.' Any player may propose a rule change by posting a message describing the change to be made to this post. Players responding to a message containing a proposal are entitled to one vote each on it, until five votes have been cast on the proposal. At that point, if there are more votes in favor than against, the change is made by the Administrator; otherwise the message loses its proposal status. No player is entitled to more than one vote on any proposal.

'6.' The score of each player is part of the game state. Initially the score of a player is 0.

'7.' Anything not prohibited in the rules is allowed. The game state may only be changed as described in the rules.

'8' Willow Zander is Eggy Lippmann's sex slave.

'9' There is no rule 9

Right judegment time on my part. The first rule to be passed was actually labled rule 13.
But Im going to asume that was just the number that Neehai thought was next. So Im going to put this into rule 10

'10' Use of the word "quintuplet" in any rule proposal will result in immediate disqualification of the person proposing the rule.

Now, here's the point, the next rule to be approved was this one
'11' that Danny DeGroot will be personally liable for a one time payment of $250L to the author of the proposal accepted into the Game State as Rule 10, such liability to be discharged within seven days of the rule's acceptance,

but,

that such liability shall be null and void if no Rule 10 has been accepted into the Game State by March 1, 2005.

'12' Siobhan Taylor can do what she wants, as long as she does'nt tickle Willow Zander.

'13' The correct maner for prposals to be communicated is cynacism. Extra points will be awarded to players for being bitter and/or jaded.(ADMINISTRATOR NOTE: There are however no rules on how, when or how many points are to awarded)

'14' The official mascot of SL Nomic is pie. The filling of said pie shall be determined by Kris Ritter and may change at will (ADMINISTRATORS NOTE: What is SL Nomic? This game is Forum Nomic.

'15' All proposals must be easy to understand. A proposal may not contain words with over 4 syllables.

'16' The use of obviously trivial proposals with absolutely no bearing on anything is restricted. Players who continue to propose silly proposals be punished by the traditional method of a stern look and wagged finger (ADMIN: No definition of restricted, no definition of trivial )

Sorry Devlin,

Amendment made.

In accordance with Rule 13, the following proposal is communicated in a cynical manner. Not that you lot care whether or not I obey the rules.

Well I suppose I might as well put a new proposal in, not that I expect anyone of you lot to vote for it.

New Rule: Background: It is obvious that since all PONGs are POSLs, they can be expected to behave in a similar manner and have the nomic equivilant of Alts. In addition there is no reason to believe that a PONG will be any less depraved than a POSL, in which case they are likely to have sex slaves.

Each PONG may have up to three ALTs. An ALT is a PONG that has been declared to be the first PONG's ALT.

A PONG begins the game with 0 ALTS and 0 Sex Slaves.

Designating Alts: If a PONG notices that a second PONG has agreed three times in a row with a third PONG (For example by voting yes to three proposals from the same PONG in a row). Then the first PONG may declare that the second PONG is an ALT of the third. If the PONG currently has less than three ALTS, then the first PONG becomes the ALT of the second. If the PONG is already the ALT of a different PONG, then the original relationship is terminated.

Each ALT of a PONG must be a different PONG.

A PONG cannot be their own ALT
A PONG cannot be the ALT of a PONG that is the first PONG's ALT.
A PONG cannot be the ALT of more than one PONG.

Each PONG may have up to three Sex Slaves (SS). An SS is a PONG that has been declared to be the first PONG's SS.

Designating SS: A PONG is designated as another PONG's SS by both PONGs declaring that one PONG is the SS of the second. The relationship is active as soon as the second PONG posts.

Each SS of a PONG must be a different PONG.

A PONG cannot be their own SS
A PONG cannot be the SS of a PONG that is the first PONG's SS.
A PONG cannot be the SS of more than one PONG.

The Administrator must periodically report on the game state in relation to PONG's ALTs and SSs.

AND:
At the time of the acceptance of this proposal, the game state is to be changed to reflect the fact that Willow Zander is Eggy Lippmann's Sex Slave. As this will make rule 11 redundant, the Administraotr is to remove the rule at the next update.


END OF PROPOSAL

Not that I think anyone will bother reading this far. Not that I'm bitter about no one voting for my first proposal. I supposed Im just jaded by all the hurt I see in the forums.

Proposed,

that a unilateral declaration shall be rendered null and void by a dissenting post from any PONG registered at the time of the declaration's issue,

and,

that a single dissent shall serve as full execution of Game State against the unilateral declaration, and shall relieve the Administrator of any responsibility to acknowledge the declaration beyond a single appearance in the next Synopsis of Game State.

and,

that the passage of this Proposal into the Game State as a Rule shall be publicly remarked upon by the Administrator as a "dazzling display of charity toward the utterly undeserving," but only if the Administrator can be bothered to quit feeling sorry for himself for the few seconds it would take to show some actual interest in the Game State.

== danny d.

ACE-001

Proposal :

Rule #13 shall be amended to so that the term "cynacism" is properly spelled "cynicism". The author of this proposal shall be considered both bitter and jaded.

YES to SG-02.

== danny d.

Pfft, it already was but our beloved administrater couldn't be arsed to read my proposal.
Also, rule 12... it's Kris Ritter not Willow Zander who's free from being tickled, provided I can do whatever I want.

I propose that rule 69 be added, whereby I can lick, suck and bite anyone I want, preferably Kris, Sio, or Lotte

I would vote yes to this, except for two things:

1. This proposal was not properly cynical.
2. You didn't mention a timescale or add the 'whenever I please' clause.

Please ammend this proposal or I shall wag my finger at you in a condescending manner.

I vote yes to original proposal and to Siobhans ammendments.

Proposal:

Rule 9 1/2: Do not taunt rule 9.

Secondary Proposal:

Rule 333: Use of backspace is prohibeted except when Rule 13 is in effect.

Amendement 1.0 to proposed rule 69

I can lick, suck and bite anyone I want, preferably Kris, Sio or Lotte, but Sio can do what she likes, whenever she likes.

Er, not quite what I meant hun... try revising as :

LMAO! sorry

Amendment 1.1 to proposed rule 69

I can lick, suck or bite anyone I want, any time I want, whatever anyone thinks. Preferably Kris, Sio or Lotte. Pfft!

I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I see nothing in the rules that prohibits one from voting on his/her own proposals. Therefore, I vote YES on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote YES on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote YES on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote YES on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote YES on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.



I vote NO on this proposal.

---

*whew*... How the hell are you keeping up with all of this, Catfart?

- Ace

Devlin's proposal: NO

LM-001 YES
LM-002 NO
LM-003 YES

SG-01 NO (I dont think there is any confusion and so the acronyms arent needed)

DDG-005 NO
DDG-006 NO
DDG-007 YES
DDG-008 NO (corruption is fun. this is a game )
DDG-009 YES

Furthermore, I propose EGGY-002:

Proposal posts should be kept as short as possible to avoid confusion.
When making a complex proposal, players should consider splitting it into multiple proposals, each with its own label and individual votes.

Additionally, and exemplifying the above stated doctrine, I propose EGGY-003:

Players should show some restraint in offering proposals, so that the voting queue does not get out of hand, making it easier for us (and CatFart) to keep track of things.


(I purposefully leave out any solid numbers in terms of maximum lines per proposal, or maximum simultaneous proposals, which may be debated later should the need arise.)

I hadn't noticed that voting for yourself was allowed, so therefore, I vote YES to all of my own proposals that are still waiting for votes.

I vote NO to SG-02, and respectfully ask SG and DDG to refrain from using acronymic nomenclature that has not been officially approved

Ditto - casting my vote as YES for EGGY-001, EGGY-002, and EGGY-003, as stated below

EGGY - 003:
For simplicity's sake, you may not vote for or against your own proposal.
This shall not be used to retroactively cancel any votes.

I vote YES for all proposals which I have authored, except the one which I withdrew from consideration, and YES for EGGY-003.

== danny d.

I vote Yes to this...

I've transfered the last update to a new Wiki page! Plus the corrections.

Forum Nomic Wiki

Proposed,

that the phrase "For simplicity's sake" as employed in EGGY - 003 be universally accepted as the minimum tone of thinly-veiled contempt for the intellectual capacities of fellow players which a proposal author may employ.

== danny d.

I vote yes for this because, and only because it's obvious to me that this is by far the best you can come up with.

Rejected by the Administrator as failing Rule 13 requiring the use of cynicism in the proposal.

Your too cheerful Willow, try hanging out in the General forum more.