Nomic:Game 2005-04-02:Rule-breaking
From Carls wiki
All rise!
The issue of today is the lack of respect for the rules of the game Nomic:Game_2005-04-02 shown by its current players. The prosecutor (Johan) is referring to the following set of proposals and putative rules violating previous rules in one way or another:
- 322 has no name.
- 324 has no name.
- 325 has no name.
- 326 has no name.
Name is defined in rule 303 - Silly naming rule in the following way:
Every new rule and rule proposal must have one and only one name. Names are declared before the rule-text with a level 4 heading.
- 326 was accepted but is not on the rulepage.
- 325 is not on the rulepage, and it's dubious whether it actually means anything so therefore
- 323 is not on the rulepage
I will try to cover the issues in order.
- Names: The rule rule 303 - Silly naming rule clearly states that a proposal has a text with a level 4 heading as name. That means that no proposals were voted on, but rather something else not stated in the rules. Since there is a clear and serious violation to the rules; "Guilty!"
- Rules not written down in the rules: This is clearly wrong and in violation to the rules. "Guilty!"
- Proposal 325 dubiosity: The putative proposal 325 Has some dubiosity to what it means. "Guilty!"
I will declare the sentences in a logical order.
- Rules not written down in the rules: Since the game is its representation, the rules will have to be updated. The person who made the now accepted proposal is sentenced to write down the proposal in the rules section.
- Proposal 325 dubiosity: I as used in proposal 325 should refer to the player reading the rule. Thus the proposal states that we all individually propose that rule 323 - Sloth and negativism are sins are removed by us. Since that isn't allowed by the rules, the proposal 325 is void and rule 323 should be written down in the rules section by the proposer of proposal 325.
- Names: The graveness of this felony makes it a hard job to judge. I have no other choice but to declare the harshest punishment available. The putative proposals 322, 324, 325 and 326 are void as if being voted to be skipped as defined rule 305 - Time limit with punishment and their respective proposers thus punished accordingly. The points awarded for voting on the putative proposals 322, 324, 325 and 326 are also void and the score will be recalculated. In order to avoid a herculean task of recalculating the scores, no rule numbers will change and the score adjustments will only affect the scores of the the proposers of the putative proposals 322, 324, 325 and 326 respectively, and only those points gained from (the misuse of) rule 202. The sentence should also be carried out by the proposers of the putative proposals 322, 324, 325 and 326 themselves and respectively.
Court dismissed.
