MeFiNo | The MetaFilter Nomic Game

jay can you pls add a list of active players?

!jim's or 1's?

i'll settle for whoever shows up

201. Players shall alternate by handle/wiki login name in the order of Unicode.

Under this rule, shouldn't Aaron A Aaronson be going first rather than notJim?

Or are we going by MeFi handle rather than MeFiNo handle?

The current rules posted here are not the valid set

201. Players shall alternate by handle/wiki login name in the order of Unicode.

That is not part of the original set.

So 301's proposal is illegitimate? Are we playing by the official (nomic.net) rules or has play not even begun yet?

I reverted the rules to match the wiki and the original set and the wiki.

Looks like we are playing:

Nope. Let's go. Your turn, 1.
posted by Taksi Putra at 9:31 PM on March 24 [+] [!]

Some suggestions:

1. Allow players to change their vote before the deadline is over.
2. Boolean votes until otherwise modified. Abstain==Inactive.
3. Hygiene Officer Robo is the final arbiter unless otherwise modified.
4. RSS/Mailing list to send rule updates.
5. Proxy votes.
6. Sidebar, perhaps? (the blue)
7. Divvy up into 'tribes' when group members exceed a certain limit.
8. 'Tribes' based on timezone?
9. Nomic.net rules until 301 is passed/quashed.
10. Ordered alphabetically (not Unicode) as per MeFi username.
11. You can only vote on rules proposed *after* you sign up here on MeFiNo.
12. Paused if MeFiNo crashes.
13. Propose and vote for an alternate Judge if Robo doesn't show up in 24 hours.
14. MeFiNo (and I mean jayC's Drupal) is now the canon. MeFi Wiki may be updated to reflect this.

Yeah jeblis, we're playing.

I'm here! In my limited past nomic experience, the Hygiene Officer (or Minister of Health, as this was a parliamentary procedure-themed drinking game that sprung up spontaneously one night) just made sure that everyone's beers were at least four inches from the edge of the table and ruthlessly enforced said rule by making the own of any offending beer drink up.

While I am more than willing to bring some of that drunken spite here, I'd happily stand aside for more online nomic knowledgeable peeps to judge before the true might of my corruption is unleashed. I imagine myself a provincial English judge, robes tattered and face beet red from fieldwork and port. I bang my gavel, the same hammer I used to fix the Taylor's barn roof a fortnight ago, and squint down my bulbous nose at litigants. Wise solicitors leave gifts of port or roast lamb, the unwise leave Bibles and interrupted naps.

1. Allow players to change their vote before the deadline is over. What deadline?
2. Boolean votes until otherwise modified. Abstain==Inactive. Currently inactive has no meaning
3. Hygiene Officer Robo is the final arbiter unless otherwise modified. since we didn't select a judge before starting, we have none. Rule 212. We don;t have a preceding player since this is the first round
4. RSS/Mailing list to send rule updates.
5. Proxy votes. not in the rules yet
6. Sidebar, perhaps? (the blue) Mefi mail?
7. Divvy up into 'tribes' when group members exceed a certain limit. Good idea, probably not an issue though
8. 'Tribes' based on timezone?
9. Nomic.net rules until 301 is passed/quashed.
10. Ordered alphabetically (not Unicode) as per MeFi username.
11. You can only vote on rules proposed *after* you sign up here on MeFiNo. In the interest of getting things moving this seems fair
12. Paused if MeFiNo crashes. seems fair, but not a rule yet
13. Propose and vote for an alternate Judge if Robo doesn't show up in 24 hours. Again we don;t have a judge yet
14. MeFiNo (and I mean jayC's Drupal) is now the canon. MeFi Wiki may be updated to reflect this. that's fine, but we need to turn off editing or get a history method a la wiki.

I'd put the priority on

1. play order
2. a voting mechanism

Let's get an easy one passed first so we can have a judge.

I would say that ~ would be the judge for this turn. I'm not sure who could give a ruling on that though..

I would say that ~ would be the judge for this turn. I'm not sure who could give a ruling on that though..

Since Chuck voted no on the first proposal, notJim will be the Judge on the next proposal.

So... if we're going by the rules-as-written, then don't we need to know everyone's surnames (per 201)? Or are we temporarily breaking these rules?

EDIT: Woops, took too long to compose my comment.

I think Taksi Putra set the order prior to invoking the game. So we can assume that the order was an intial condition. And as far as y'all are concerned jeblis is my surname.

Ah, okay. Sounds good to me. I think we should have these "initial conditions" written out somewhere. Maybe include an official vote casting protocol (I like the one you suggested in 301's discussion) and a procedure for dealing with non-participating players (which, if I read the RAW correctly, will halt the game indefinitely by not voting). Though I suppose the judge can decide these things once the first turn ends.

Though I suppose the judge can decide these things once the first turn ends.

That's why it's god to vote NO on the first one. That way we have a judge.

Votes now down to 2 stars = yes/no boolean. With public voting records will this work, or does everyone want textual votes via comments as suggested?

I feel like it would be cleaner to jsut vote yea or nay in thread, but having two stars only is also OK.

The stars seem bad as we don't have a public record of who voted.

Also seems that we now have another player cmtf. Not that I don;t want him to play but we don't have any rules regarding new players (nor do we have anything prohibiting them.)

Let's vote about voting.

I'll build in voting transparency no matter what method we pick.

Is there a way each proposal could get it's own wiki page, editable by only the vote-tallier (which would have to be established)? You could just blat on there the current text of the proposal and a list of players with yes/no for each. Then voting would be "any method of letting the vote-tallier know what you want." In-thread, email, whatever. It would also be easy to see the current status without wading through a giant comment thread.

You can propose that when it's your turn, ctmf ;)

Heh. I guess I am getting a little ahead. I just don't know if that's even possible - I don't know anything about wikis.

I'm just breaking your stones ctmf. I think it's a fine idea, and I proposed something like it myself - no comments in the thread, other than votes, once voting has begun. I think your idea is really good to tell you the truth, and it should not require a formal vote to be adopted as a sort of operational policy (not an ironclad rule). Having a "clean" thread just devoted to the actual voting seems like a good idea.

Getting this workflow down is important so we can get on with the real intended game.

I propose discussion threads be started first, and the proposal post would include a link to the discussions, and the comments on the proposal itself is reserved for votes.

The proposal might also include a list of eligible voters.

I'm in favor of jay's solution.

(So then amendments to proposals would automatically be the only non-voting comments in the proposal, right?)

Can a proposal be amended after any votes have taken place? If so I can allow editing of your own submitted proposals. If not, there would be no non-voting comments except maybe implementor/feasibility notes.

You can't amend the proposal after voting starts - it would invalidate previous votes.

I think maybe a proposal ought to start as a thread like 301 did, with discussion and/or amendments in the comments. When the proposer feels the discussion is pretty much run out, or feels that the proposal is as good as it's going to get, they call the vote.

The vote itself should be a new thread, called "Rule X: voting" or something, with the proposal text (not editable) and votes only.

Ah, ctmf, I like that. And maybe the proposer's own suggested amendments could be marked in some way (e.g. red text, bold) in the discussion/amendment thread?

I created a forum category for proposal discussion before posting the official Rule Proposal.

301's new thread is here.

I like the two thread idea too. Somehow voting by actually going in there and putting yes or no feels more satisfying than fiddling with a star. I can be pretty indecisive so forcing me to openly choose is also good.