Talk:Generic Core Rules

Compressed enactment rules

A pending proposal can only be enacted if all of the following points are true for it:-

• It has a number of FOR Votes that exceed or equal quorum or it has been open for voting for at least 48 hours, it has more than 1 valid vote cast on it, and more valid votes cast on it are FOR than are AGAINST.
• It has been open for voting for at least 12 hours.
• It has not been Vetoed or Self-Killed.

A pending proposal can be failed if any of the following are true for it:-

• The number of players who are not voting AGAINST it is less than quorum; or
• It has been open for voting for at least 48 hours and cannot be enacted; or
• It has been Vetoed or Self-Killed.

A pending CfJ is processed like a proposal, but it ignores the minimum 12 hour period, and Vetoing or Self-Killing a CfJ has no effect on it.

A pending DoV is processed like a proposal, but if it has any AGAINST votes and the Emperor has not voted FOR it, its 12 hour period is extended to 24 hours, and it cannot be failed within the first 12 hours. Vetoing or Self-Killing a DoV has no effect on it.

If a DoV is Failed and it had at least one AGAINST vote, the player who posted it cannot make another DoV until after 120 hours (5 days) have passed since the time their DoV was Failed.

Still needs some polish (the 12-hour window could use a name, for reference), but that looks a bit better than I expected. --Kevan (talk) 15:33, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Retake

Looking back over this again with a fresh brain, some things which are quite idiosyncratic to BlogNomic are:-

• The word "quorum" (which is only used twice in this Generic Ruleset, and is not how most people would use the word)
• All the stuff about not rushing to enact Proposals or DoV in fewer than 12 or 24 hours: if this is a generic system that we want random forums and subreddits and Discords and even tabletops to adopt, some are going to be puzzled when their game's first proposal gets instant approval and hits a weird "come back tomorrow!" wall. This probably merits a wider discussion about pacing: it may even be worth having a clock rule embedded in the ruleset ("a Tick is equal to [X] hours... if a Proposal is more than two Ticks old... cannot make another DoV for five Ticks...") and guidance to set that to two minutes, an hour or a day depending on playing context.
• The minimum-2-votes-to-enact rule is there to stop a particular type of not very common scam, which new Nomics might enjoy encountering and patching.
• The "If a DoV is Failed and it had at least one AGAINST vote clause" seems extremely niche and I can't even remember why it's there in our own rules (are we being generous in the obscure situation where a DoV times out with no votes cast, or is failed by a faster CfJ?)

Trimming that back gives us:

The oldest pending proposal can be enacted if more than half the players have voted FOR it, or if it's timed out and has more votes FOR than AGAINST. (Proposals which have been Vetoed or Self-Killed can never be enacted.)

The oldest pending proposal can be failed if more than half the players have voted AGAINST it, or if it's timed out and cannot otherwise be enacted, or if it has been Vetoed or Self-Killed.

Proposals time out after 48 hours.

CfJs and DoVs are processed like proposals, except that Vetoing and Self-Killing them has no effect. If a DoV is failed, the player who posted it cannot make another DoV for 120 hours (5 days).

Which is pretty spartan, but I'd personally really like to see a short, understandable ruleset that even the most uninterested member of a group will be able to get to grips with, if you threw this at a bunch of players that had never seen a Nomic. The twiddlier BlogNomic legacy clauses seem like more of a why-is-this-here distraction than a genuinely helping hand. (I appreciate you've already cut some, like the "Emperor has voted FOR" DoV stuff.) --Kevan (talk) 19:13, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Tantusar's edits

Linking to User:Tantusar/Generic_core_sandbox before the link disappears from Slack and we risk forgetting it was there. --Kevan (talk) 19:24, 12 January 2021 (UTC)