Status Report

It is my opinion that Proposals 302 and 304 pass, Proposal 303 is currently being debated and Proposal 305 fails. That means I now have 22 points and niekhilet now has 1 point. It is also my opinion that, by virtue of Proposal 302, mistdragon is no longer a Player.

Proposal 304: Repeal 203

According to Rule 301, a player is free to make proposals (which seems to be how a turn is started) at any time and in any order. Rule 203 no longer seems to have any effect, and I think we should be sure that it remains that way.

304. Repeal Rule 203, which currently reads:
A new player is prohibited from voting and receiving points until it becomes that player's turn to play.

Proposal 303: A re-write of rule 213.

Rule 213. Currently:

213. If players disagree about the legality of a play or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one whose turn it is is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment.

When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players.

The Judge�s Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge�s Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate.

Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge.

New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards.

Proposed (changes indicated in bold):

213. If players disagree about the legality of a play or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player who, by virtue of date/time stamp made the proposal before the one in question is deemed to be the Judge and will decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment.

When Judgment has been invoked, no player may begin his or her turn until the issue has been resolved.

The Judge�s Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next proposal is made. If a Judge�s Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the order of proposals becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate.

Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge.

New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards.

Although there is the possibility that a player can be deemed the Judge for his/her own proposal, for the purposes of determining the judge his/her prior proposals should be considered to not exist. In other words, a player may never be the Judge for his/her own proposal (even if that proposal later becomes a rule, these same restrictions apply.)

Proposal 301 passes; rule 201 is replaced.

guito, niekhilet, and woody6t9 voted in favour of proposal 301. mistdragon, by virtue of not voting, is considered to have voted in favour (see rule 105). The rule passes (rule 204) and guito is awarded 10 points (rule 202).

Rule 201 no longer exists; it has been replaced by the following, which is now rule 301:

There shall be no more than 10 active proposals at any time. Players are free to make proposals at any time and in any order, provided that there are 10 or fewer proposals currently active.

It looks like anybody is free to make a proposal now

Proposal 301: A re-write of rule 201.

Currently:
201. Players shall alternate in ascending alphabetical order by username, taking one whole turn apiece. Full turns may be skipped or passed. Parts of turns may not be omitted (except as explicitly permitted by the rules). All new players begin with zero points.

Proposed:
301. There shall be no more than 10 active proposals at any time. Players are free to make proposals at any time and in any order, provided that there are 10 or fewer proposals currently active. <Edit: "All new players begin with zero points." removed>

Vote to be completed by Feb 4, 2003 1200EST.