# Anyone for a game of Nomic? **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [August 10, 2003, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142 "2003-08-10T04:12:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 30
**Author:** ![Treviathan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/838e76/32.png) [@Treviathan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Treviathan)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2003, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/581 "2003-09-18T19:13:39Z")
I’m voting yes, mainly to bump this back onto the front page and generate some interest again. ---
**Author:** ![Spurious\_George](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/94ad74/32.png) [@Spurious\_George](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spurious_George)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2003, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/582 "2003-09-18T19:41:10Z")
**Nemo** , you didn’t get an email from Zev asking for a vote on 308? I got one on Sunday, or Monday morning (from which it might follow that the 72-hour period has expired, and Treviathan’s vote doesn’t count.) But Zev’s webpage [[http://nomic.izev.com/](http://nomic.izev.com/)] hasn’t been updated to show that 308 is finalized or undergoing voting. Future proposers should probably post a Call for Votes here in the thread, so the time of the 72-hour deadline can be firmly established. ---
**Author:** ![zev\_steinhardt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/97f17d/32.png) [@zev\_steinhardt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zev_steinhardt)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2003, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/583 "2003-09-19T02:32:08Z")
My apologies everyone. Unfortunately, I’ve been a bit busy of late and furthermore, access to the boards from work has become a bit more restricted of late. That was why I sent out the CFV by email. In the future, I’ll make a note to make sure to post it on the boards. Likewise, I haven’t had a chance to update the site. I’ll have that done by Saturday night the latest. My apologies to everyone. Zev Steinhardt ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2003, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/584 "2003-09-19T03:17:23Z")
I guess by now my vote is moot. The 72 hour time limit has passed and those who voted within it all voted yes. So it appears 308 will be posted as passed. I have to admit I hadn’t decided how to vote on this proposal. I agree with the intent of what Zev proposed but I had strong reservations about some of the specific language as I’ve already posted. Now that 308’s in place, I think we should close the loopholes. As I pointed out before, at the moment we have only six eligible voters: Achernar, Brahesilver, capybara, Jonmarzie, Mikie, and Spurious George. If MarkofT throws up a quick proposal and votes yes and three of the above agree, the four of them will have passed a new rule. ---
**Author:** ![Spurious\_George](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/94ad74/32.png) [@Spurious\_George](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spurious_George)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2003, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/585 "2003-09-19T20:13:59Z")
Great! **MarkofT** , I am available by email to discuss any evil lightning coup-type proosals. 😉 Note that per Rule 307, **MarkofT** has 96 hours to submit a proposal, else he remains ineligible and play passes to **davidm** (who’s also currently ineligible, I believe). (Rough timetable guessing) Zev’s Call for votes was on Sunday (?) at, say 12 noon? That means the voting period for 308 expired at Wednesday, 12 noon [72 hours]. Per Rule 308, the 96 hours for MarkofT to submit 309 for votes will end Sunday, September 21, at 12 noon (or whatever was the time of day that Zev Called for votes on 308) [96 hours]. (/rough timetable guessing) Zev, could you add “Eligible” and “Ineligible” notes on the player list on your website if you have the time? Or would that be too much of a pain to constantly update after each vote? ---
**Author:** ![MarkofT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@MarkofT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarkofT)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2003, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/586 "2003-09-19T20:47:39Z")
The call for votes was at 9am (PDT) Monday according to the headers of the email **zev** sent. Voting expired at 9am PDT Thursday. I have until 9am PDT Monday to propose my rule. I am currently thinking that we should let the hamsters rest and move to a maillist, either provided by a player or hosted on YahooGroups or other free list provided. I have a domain I can toss a maillist and would be happy to provide this. I don’t know how much space/bandwidth **zev** has but it might be nice to put up archives of the list there as well as archiving this thread for later reference. Or we could pitch in a couple bucks and get a cheaphost somewhere. Geocities or Tripod might even work since we shouldn’t be generating all that much traffic. Any thoughts from the peanut gallery? ---
**Author:** ![Stage\_Manager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stage_manager/32/7267_2.png) [@Stage\_Manager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stage_Manager)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2003, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/587 "2003-09-19T21:08:20Z")
By virtue of precedent, the game has been operating simultaneously on this board and through email. I think anything other than this should be put into a proposal. (Am I being too legalistic?) ---
**Author:** ![TJdude825](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dec6dc/32.png) [@TJdude825](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TJdude825)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2003, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/588 "2003-09-19T22:33:22Z")
I’ll vote yes on 308. By the way, I probably won’t be posting actively, now that school has started, but I’m still going to participate in the game. ---
**Author:** ![capybara](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/capybara/32/202_2.png) [@capybara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capybara)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2003, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/589 "2003-09-22T07:30:11Z")
Ah, sorry, everyone, but I’m going to have to drop out-- I’m now on dial-up and I won’t be able to check in as often as I’d like (although the game does seem to have slowed glacially). Cheers, though. Hate to be a spoilersport. ---
**Author:** ![MarkofT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@MarkofT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarkofT)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2003, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/590 "2003-09-22T13:36:07Z")
I wasn’t able to test my mailserver to ensure that majordomo was happy so I think I’m going to propose a rule for the game instead of for the process of the game. Proposal 309: All points will expire 9 propsals after they are earned. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2003, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/591 "2003-09-22T19:05:48Z")
Unless you can come up with some reason for that rule I can’t see, I plan on voting no. ---
**Author:** ![MarkofT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@MarkofT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarkofT)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2003, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/592 "2003-09-22T19:17:12Z")
Just makes the game harder to win. Someone would have to get a rule passed that changes the way points are awarded. We wouldn’t need to worry about the various ways people could jerk around on earning points until we rebuilt the points system. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2003, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/593 "2003-09-22T19:23:38Z")
I agree that the current point system should be changed. But I don’t think putting in a time limit, especially one so short, is the right direction. Sorry, but I’m voting no 309. ---
**Author:** ![BraheSilver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecccb3/32.png) [@BraheSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BraheSilver)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2003, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/594 "2003-09-22T21:22:51Z")
I think 9 turns is a pretty short time to expect to earn 200 points (Although we’ve been playing for a month and are only on turn 9). Even if you consistently earned ten points a round, you’d never get enough. I have to vote NO on 309, unless MarkofT does some seriously gifted 'splaining. If I can suggest something to think about for a future proposal: How about editing 209? We have 14 mutable rules, and if we don’t plan ahead we’re going to run out of things to discuss besides changing existing rules to immutable. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2003, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/595 "2003-09-22T23:17:40Z")
> [@](#): > > How about editing 209? We have 14 mutable rules, and if we don’t plan ahead we’re going to run out of things to discuss besides changing existing rules to immutable. I don’t see it as being a major problem. If we actually reached the 25 mutable rule limit, we could then eliminate or edit rule 209 so play could continue. That said, I would be willing to put forth a proposal for eliminating 209 on my turn if there are no better suggestions. ---
**Author:** ![MarkofT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@MarkofT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarkofT)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2003, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/596 "2003-09-23T01:40:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by BraheSilver \* > \*\*I think 9 turns is a pretty short time to expect to earn 200 points (Although we’ve been playing for a month and are only on turn 9). Even if you consistently earned ten points a round, you’d never get enough. I have to vote NO on 309, unless MarkofT does some seriously gifted 'splaining. \*\* Blah. I was thinking the winning score was 100, but that is for face to face games. Too late to change the proposal and call for votes. :wally I’ll vote no on my own proposal. ---
**Author:** ![Spurious\_George](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/94ad74/32.png) [@Spurious\_George](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spurious_George)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2003, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/597 "2003-09-23T18:41:46Z")
No, for the same reasons. Hamsters ate my first post. ---
**Author:** ![TJdude825](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dec6dc/32.png) [@TJdude825](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TJdude825)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2003, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/598 "2003-09-24T23:56:43Z")
I’m confused… has 309 been called to votes yet? We’re still voting on 308, aren’t we? So in that case, MarkofT can still revise his proposal. Unless, I’m completely mistaken. Anway, assuming I’m not mistaken, maybe just make the limit longer, like 20 or so. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/599 "2003-09-25T05:29:30Z")
No, the vote for 308 ended at the seventy hour mark as per rule 307. This was 9:00 am Thursday, September 18. At that point, six people had voted, all in favor. All other players were therefore temporarily ineligible under the provisions of 307 so Rule 308 was passed. Reading MarkofT’s post of 8:36 am on 9-22, it appears he was making an actual proposal, not just suggesting a topic for discussion. I, along with other people, have acted on that basis and MarkofT has not said otherwise. So Proposal 309 will reach its deadline at 8:36 am on Sept 25. Players who haven’t voted by then will be temporarily ineligible. Davidm will then have until 8:36 am on Monday, September 29, to submit his proposal for a vote. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2003, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142/600 "2003-09-25T05:42:28Z")
I’ve noticed another problem that could arise from Rule 308. A rule can only be passed if “majority of the eligible voters at the time the rule-change was proposed” vote on it. As an example, at the moment it appears that Proposal 309 is going to receive four votes. This means that when Proposal 310 is made, only Brahesilver, MarkofT, Spurious George, and myself will be eligible voters. So in order for 310 to pass, at least three of the us will have to vote on it. This means that regardless of how popular 310 is and how many votes it receives in its favor, any two of us can effectively veto it by simply refusing to cast a vote. Getting back to a point I made in a previous post, I think Rule 308 should be amended and the words “majority of the eligible voters at the time the rule-change was proposed” should be changed to “majority of players”. I feel this language will change the letter of this rule to what its intent actually was. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142.md?page=29) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anyone-for-a-game-of-nomic/194142.md?page=31)