I win (I think)
6 views
Skip to first unread message
Isolgrac
Jul 3, 2010, 4:20:29 AM7/3/10
to Nomicron
Ok, this might be a bit confusing, but I'm pretty certain it's legal.
The RFJ on voting confusion all hinges on the change of text from Rule
205.
205.1 states:
An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the
completion of the vote that adopted it; that is, at the end of the
turn in which it is submitted for vote.
205.2 states:
An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the
completion of the vote count that adopted it.
The basis of RFJ 6012 is that there is no defined times for vote
counts on rule-changes. Regardless of each player's agreement with RFJ
6012, it has been ruled true and so must guide game play as per Rule
207.1, Requests for Judgment.
So, while the ruling on RFJ 6012 stands, we cannot count votes on rule-
change proposals.
However...
*** Neither Rule 205 or RFJ 6012 makes any mention of referenda or RFJ
appeals.
Therefore...
*** The passing and failing of referenda and RFJ appeals continue as
before
So....
While the proposals that were up for vote this turn cannot currently
pass or fail, the referenda can. By my count, all the submitted
referenda passed.
Since I joined Nomicron for the first time during the current round, I
claim the rank of Newbie.
I give 425 of my points to Oze.
I give 425 of my points to Corin T.
I have previously given 150 of my points to jdkcubed, so I have given
away a total of at 1000 points to other players during the round, so I
claim the rank of Generous Giver.
So ranks I have held this round are:
Good Player, Novice, Barrister, Senator, Legislator, Tourist, Travel
Guru, Naturalist, Mathematician, Billionaire, Jack of All Trades,
Newbie and Generous Giver
Since Goos has not yet claimed his Earth souvenir, I am still Travel
Guru. As per Rule 341.2, On the Path to Enlightenment, this counts as
3 ranks rather than 1 for the purposes of achieving Enlightenment
(rule 316). So, for the purposes of achieving Enlightenment, I have
held different ranks during the round.
I now forfeit all but 777 of my points, thus meeting the requirements
to achieve Enlightenment as per Rule 316.2, Winning.
Which means I win :-)
Rgds,
Isolgrac
The RFJ on voting confusion all hinges on the change of text from Rule
205.
205.1 states:
An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the
completion of the vote that adopted it; that is, at the end of the
turn in which it is submitted for vote.
205.2 states:
An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the
completion of the vote count that adopted it.
The basis of RFJ 6012 is that there is no defined times for vote
counts on rule-changes. Regardless of each player's agreement with RFJ
6012, it has been ruled true and so must guide game play as per Rule
207.1, Requests for Judgment.
So, while the ruling on RFJ 6012 stands, we cannot count votes on rule-
change proposals.
However...
*** Neither Rule 205 or RFJ 6012 makes any mention of referenda or RFJ
appeals.
Therefore...
*** The passing and failing of referenda and RFJ appeals continue as
before
So....
While the proposals that were up for vote this turn cannot currently
pass or fail, the referenda can. By my count, all the submitted
referenda passed.
Since I joined Nomicron for the first time during the current round, I
claim the rank of Newbie.
I give 425 of my points to Oze.
I give 425 of my points to Corin T.
I have previously given 150 of my points to jdkcubed, so I have given
away a total of at 1000 points to other players during the round, so I
claim the rank of Generous Giver.
So ranks I have held this round are:
Good Player, Novice, Barrister, Senator, Legislator, Tourist, Travel
Guru, Naturalist, Mathematician, Billionaire, Jack of All Trades,
Newbie and Generous Giver
Since Goos has not yet claimed his Earth souvenir, I am still Travel
Guru. As per Rule 341.2, On the Path to Enlightenment, this counts as
3 ranks rather than 1 for the purposes of achieving Enlightenment
(rule 316). So, for the purposes of achieving Enlightenment, I have
held different ranks during the round.
I now forfeit all but 777 of my points, thus meeting the requirements
to achieve Enlightenment as per Rule 316.2, Winning.
Which means I win :-)
Rgds,
Isolgrac
Isolgrac
Jul 3, 2010, 4:22:15 AM7/3/10
to Nomicron
Somehow managed to miss out the '15' in:
- Iso
"So, for the purposes of achieving Enlightenment, I have
held 15 different ranks during the round."
- Iso
Jef
Jul 3, 2010, 12:47:52 PM7/3/10
to nomi...@googlegroups.com
Guru Isolgrac-
This is an admirable attempt, and frankly well-deserved, but I don't see how it could have happened... when exactly do you suppose the referenda votes were tallied? Just like proposals, I see no specification of that in the rules. They had previously been counted at the end of the turn like proposals due to the wording of Rule 220: "Referenda are voted on in the same manner as rule change proposals." Since proposals are never tallied, I don't think referenda are either... if you can show when referenda are tallied, I would be willing to accept this as a legitimate enlightenment win, but as it stands, I don't see when the referenda you need to complete this would have been tallied.
-Jef
This is an admirable attempt, and frankly well-deserved, but I don't see how it could have happened... when exactly do you suppose the referenda votes were tallied? Just like proposals, I see no specification of that in the rules. They had previously been counted at the end of the turn like proposals due to the wording of Rule 220: "Referenda are voted on in the same manner as rule change proposals." Since proposals are never tallied, I don't think referenda are either... if you can show when referenda are tallied, I would be willing to accept this as a legitimate enlightenment win, but as it stands, I don't see when the referenda you need to complete this would have been tallied.
-Jef
Isolgrac
Jul 3, 2010, 3:48:53 PM7/3/10
to Nomicron
Jef,
"Referenda are voted on in the same manner as rule change proposals."
This is saying the way votes are cast on referenda is the same as the
way votes are cast on proposals. It says nothing about the counting of
votes.
The problem with proposals is that Rule 205.2, Passage Happens, has
been modified to say "An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the
moment of the completion of the vote count that adopted it." implying
that there has to be a specific time for counting of votes.
There is no such restriction with referenda. Rule 220.2 states "A
referendum is considered to pass if it receives more votes in favor of
it than against it". There is nothing that says this has to happen at
a specific moment in time. The referenda in question clearly have
received more votes in favor than against them. Therefore they have
passed. The rules do not make it clear *when* that happened, but they
are explicit about the fact that it *has* happened.
- Iso
On Jul 3, 5:47 pm, Jef <j...@nomicron.org> wrote:
> Guru Isolgrac-
>
> This is an admirable attempt, and frankly well-deserved, but I don't see how
> it could have happened... when exactly do you suppose the referenda votes
> were tallied? Just like proposals, I see no specification of that in the
> rules. They had previously been counted at the end of the turn like
> proposals due to the wording of Rule 220: "Referenda are voted on in the
> same manner as rule change proposals." Since proposals are never tallied, I
> don't think referenda are either... if you can show when referenda are
> tallied, I would be willing to accept this as a legitimate enlightenment
> win, but as it stands, I don't see when the referenda you need to complete
> this would have been tallied.
>
> -Jef
>
"Referenda are voted on in the same manner as rule change proposals."
way votes are cast on proposals. It says nothing about the counting of
votes.
The problem with proposals is that Rule 205.2, Passage Happens, has
been modified to say "An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the
moment of the completion of the vote count that adopted it." implying
that there has to be a specific time for counting of votes.
There is no such restriction with referenda. Rule 220.2 states "A
referendum is considered to pass if it receives more votes in favor of
it than against it". There is nothing that says this has to happen at
a specific moment in time. The referenda in question clearly have
received more votes in favor than against them. Therefore they have
passed. The rules do not make it clear *when* that happened, but they
are explicit about the fact that it *has* happened.
- Iso
On Jul 3, 5:47 pm, Jef <j...@nomicron.org> wrote:
> Guru Isolgrac-
>
> This is an admirable attempt, and frankly well-deserved, but I don't see how
> it could have happened... when exactly do you suppose the referenda votes
> were tallied? Just like proposals, I see no specification of that in the
> rules. They had previously been counted at the end of the turn like
> proposals due to the wording of Rule 220: "Referenda are voted on in the
> same manner as rule change proposals." Since proposals are never tallied, I
> don't think referenda are either... if you can show when referenda are
> tallied, I would be willing to accept this as a legitimate enlightenment
> win, but as it stands, I don't see when the referenda you need to complete
> this would have been tallied.
>
> -Jef
>
Isolgrac
Jul 4, 2010, 4:34:21 AM7/4/10
to Nomicron
Actually Jef, I've just realised that a vote count *did* happen, and
more than that, I have realised *when* it happened.
I happened about 15 mins before I posted that first message. I know
this because I did it.
Vote counts are clearly something that need to happen. We know this or
else we would not be having this discussion.
Who does the vote count? The rules do not say who has to do it - it is
not regulated. The rules also do not prohibit anyone from counting the
votes. This means that anyone can count the votes. For practical
purposes I think this could be limited to players, and possibly non-
player lifeforms.
When is the vote count performed? Again, the rules do not say when it
should be done - it is not regulated. The rules do not give any times
when the vote count can not take place - it is not prohibited.
Therefore the vote count can take place at any time. Again, for
practical purposes I think it's best if we refrain from counting the
votes till the end of the turn in question.
So, since the counting of votes in not regulated or prohibited, I did
it. I don't think I need to quote Rule 113 at you ;-)
BTW, I can also count the votes on the upcoming RFJ appeal if you'd
like.
Rgds,
Isolgrac
more than that, I have realised *when* it happened.
I happened about 15 mins before I posted that first message. I know
this because I did it.
Vote counts are clearly something that need to happen. We know this or
else we would not be having this discussion.
Who does the vote count? The rules do not say who has to do it - it is
not regulated. The rules also do not prohibit anyone from counting the
votes. This means that anyone can count the votes. For practical
purposes I think this could be limited to players, and possibly non-
player lifeforms.
When is the vote count performed? Again, the rules do not say when it
should be done - it is not regulated. The rules do not give any times
when the vote count can not take place - it is not prohibited.
Therefore the vote count can take place at any time. Again, for
practical purposes I think it's best if we refrain from counting the
votes till the end of the turn in question.
So, since the counting of votes in not regulated or prohibited, I did
it. I don't think I need to quote Rule 113 at you ;-)
BTW, I can also count the votes on the upcoming RFJ appeal if you'd
like.
Rgds,
Isolgrac
Jef
Jul 4, 2010, 12:32:27 PM7/4/10
to nomi...@googlegroups.com
No matter what is determined to have happened, the round either has ended or will be ending shortly... the question now is how. I see the following 4 possibilities:
1. If Case 6013 is rule True, then the change to Rule 205 never took effect and votes are still tallied for proposals and referenda at the end of the turn. In that case, the round ends immediately with Isolgrac winning by achieving enlightenment.
2. If the ruling on Case 6012 is overturned to False, then the change to Rule 205 took effect, but votes are still implicitly tallied when someone decides to do so. In that case, the round ends at the end of next turn 11-41 when the appeal is passed and Isolgrac will win the round by achieving enlightenment.
3. Isolgrac's assertion that the ruling on Case 6012 does not apply to referenda is accepted as True and Isolgrac wins immediately due to achieving enlightenment.
4. If Case 6013 is ruled False, Case 6012 is not overturned and Isolgrac's assertion that the referenda are tallied whenever someone decides to do it is challenged and lost, then the round ends at the end of next turn 11-41 with both Isolgrac and Jef winning due to the impossible game state--with Isolgrac as the player who created the paradoxical situation and Jef who submitted the RFJ describing the situation.
In all cases, congratulations to Guru Isolgrac is in order!
It is not my intent to take Isolgrac's well-earned win away (or half of it anyway), but I think in order to determine this with finality, one more RFJ is needed to determine if outcome #3 or #4 occurred... I'll submit that now.
-Jef
1. If Case 6013 is rule True, then the change to Rule 205 never took effect and votes are still tallied for proposals and referenda at the end of the turn. In that case, the round ends immediately with Isolgrac winning by achieving enlightenment.
2. If the ruling on Case 6012 is overturned to False, then the change to Rule 205 took effect, but votes are still implicitly tallied when someone decides to do so. In that case, the round ends at the end of next turn 11-41 when the appeal is passed and Isolgrac will win the round by achieving enlightenment.
3. Isolgrac's assertion that the ruling on Case 6012 does not apply to referenda is accepted as True and Isolgrac wins immediately due to achieving enlightenment.
4. If Case 6013 is ruled False, Case 6012 is not overturned and Isolgrac's assertion that the referenda are tallied whenever someone decides to do it is challenged and lost, then the round ends at the end of next turn 11-41 with both Isolgrac and Jef winning due to the impossible game state--with Isolgrac as the player who created the paradoxical situation and Jef who submitted the RFJ describing the situation.
In all cases, congratulations to Guru Isolgrac is in order!
It is not my intent to take Isolgrac's well-earned win away (or half of it anyway), but I think in order to determine this with finality, one more RFJ is needed to determine if outcome #3 or #4 occurred... I'll submit that now.
-Jef
Isolgrac
Jul 4, 2010, 3:10:21 PM7/4/10
to Nomicron
Jef, I think you've summed things up nicely, I agree with your
conclusions above. It's a bit strange to have practically won, but
have three outstanding RFJs to determine exactly how I've won! I
intend to submit a ruling on RFJ 6013. There is possibly a bit of
conflict of interest, but I've always had to recuse myself to I just
want to actually give a ruling before the round is over. If anyone
thinks I should have recused myself then feel free to appeal!
Rgds,
Isolgrac
conclusions above. It's a bit strange to have practically won, but
have three outstanding RFJs to determine exactly how I've won! I
intend to submit a ruling on RFJ 6013. There is possibly a bit of
conflict of interest, but I've always had to recuse myself to I just
want to actually give a ruling before the round is over. If anyone
thinks I should have recused myself then feel free to appeal!
Rgds,
Isolgrac
Jef
Jul 5, 2010, 12:00:23 PM7/5/10
to nomi...@googlegroups.com
With the ruling on Case 6015, I believe we have now settled this issue with finality... though there was the additional Case 6015 to get there, it appears that scenario 1 is what occurred:
1. {If Case 6013 is rule True}, then the change to Rule 205 never took effect and votes are still tallied for proposals and referenda at the end of the turn. In that case, the round ends immediately with Isolgrac winning by achieving enlightenment.
Congratulations to Isolgrac for winning Round 11 of Nomicron!
With that the round has ended and we are officially in Convention...
-Jef
1. {If Case 6013 is rule True}, then the change to Rule 205 never took effect and votes are still tallied for proposals and referenda at the end of the turn. In that case, the round ends immediately with Isolgrac winning by achieving enlightenment.
Congratulations to Isolgrac for winning Round 11 of Nomicron!
With that the round has ended and we are officially in Convention...
-Jef
Isolgrac
Jul 6, 2010, 2:45:00 AM7/6/10
to Nomicron
Yay! :-) Thanks Jef, thanks all.
So, how does this convention thing work then?
- Iso
On Jul 5, 5:00 pm, Jef <j...@nomicron.org> wrote:
> With the ruling on Case 6015, I believe we have now settled this issue with
> finality... though there was the additional Case 6015 to get there, it
> appears that scenario 1 is what occurred:
>
> 1. {If Case 6013 is rule True}, then the change to Rule 205 never took
> effect and votes are still tallied for proposals and referenda at the end of
> the turn. In that case, the round ends immediately with Isolgrac winning by
> achieving enlightenment.
>
> Congratulations to Isolgrac for winning Round 11 of Nomicron!
>
> With that the round has ended and we are officially in Convention...
>
> -Jef
>
So, how does this convention thing work then?
- Iso
On Jul 5, 5:00 pm, Jef <j...@nomicron.org> wrote:
> With the ruling on Case 6015, I believe we have now settled this issue with
> finality... though there was the additional Case 6015 to get there, it
> appears that scenario 1 is what occurred:
>
> 1. {If Case 6013 is rule True}, then the change to Rule 205 never took
> effect and votes are still tallied for proposals and referenda at the end of
> the turn. In that case, the round ends immediately with Isolgrac winning by
> achieving enlightenment.
>
> Congratulations to Isolgrac for winning Round 11 of Nomicron!
>
> With that the round has ended and we are officially in Convention...
>
> -Jef
>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages