Nomic

[Chaos9]

I have decided to post a game just to gain a bit of respect around here. Anyway, once we have all of the players we take turns making new rules to the game. When a rule is announced, the other players must vote on that rule, and if the majority says yes, than that rule goes into play. You win by making a rule that would make you win, but you must be cunning. Does anyone want to play?

[abzde]

i'll play, i suppose. (are we waiting for players, or do i just make a "I WIN" rule now?)

[abzde]

double post, sorry.

what happened to the edit button? and why do i zero posts? i posted in the intro thread... (fail if it like... didn't count the post, because i went to the intro thread from the forums game thread)

[Chaos9]

i'll play, i suppose. (are we waiting for players, or do i just make a "I WIN" rule now?)

We are still waiting for players. We should have at least one more.

[Neuman]

double post, sorry.

what happened to the edit button? and why do i zero posts? i posted in the intro thread... (fail if it like... didn't count the post, because i went to the intro thread from the forums game thread)

They don't count posts in this part of the forum, and editing just got turned off too.

[Rodan]

>cough cough<
http://www.mathpedia.info/wikinomic/index.php?title=Main_Page
It's a tad dead though...
yup. dead.

[Maseiken]

Well... I guess I'm joining the Wiki.

Do all the rules made in the game have to be pertaining to the games actual play though?

Could I make a rule saying
"All Muffins shall now be referred to as 'Terrence'"?

[Chaos9]

Curses...foiled again! That's the end of this topic.

[crazyjimbo]

The Nomic at that wiki is pretty much over. We never really got started because the rule set we started with didn't allow for smooth online play. I'd be up for giving it another go if others are interested but if a new game was to start I think it would be important to use a simpler, smaller, more flexible rule set to begin with.

The wiki is on my hosting and if we're going to start again, I could set up a new one. I'm about to ditch that host actually, and set up a new server within a few days, so I'd prefer to put it on that, which may involve waiting a while.

[Chaos9]

The Nomic at that wiki is pretty much over. We never really got started because the rule set we started with didn't allow for smooth online play. I'd be up for giving it another go if others are interested but if a new game was to start I think it would be important to use a simpler, smaller, more flexible rule set to begin with.

The wiki is on my hosting and if we're going to start again, I could set up a new one. I'm about to ditch that host actually, and set up a new server within a few days, so I'd prefer to put it on that, which may involve waiting a while.

um...ok!

[Macbi]

Perhaps we should agree on some base rules here, before starting the game?

[DragonRidr]

It seems to me that the big failure of the first xkcd-wiki-nomic was that we started with the default ruleset, which had to be absolutely molested with rule-changes and judgments to make it work.

If we informally decided upon and started with a ruleset that took care of order/means of play, entering the game, etc., we could start the game with meaty rules rather than struggling to get the game to work.

So, yeah, what Macbi said.

[Maseiken]

Cool,
I'm in.

[Chaos9]

Base rules:

Turn order:

Chaos9
abzde
Maseiken
Rodan (Who will play. I will make sure of that.... >:-) )

do Macbi, crazyjimbo, and Dragonridr want to play?

People can join in whenever they want. Whenever thier first post enters the game is when thier turn will be in the turn order from then on. If things get a bit too out of hand (In other words, if to many players join and everything gets messed up) I guess I could thow some people out...maybie? Before anything else is decided I think we should wait for crazyjimbo to set up the new server. Do those rules sound OK?

The wiki is on my hosting and if we're going to start again, I could set up a new one. I'm about to ditch that host actually, and set up a new server within a few days, so I'd prefer to put it on that, which may involve waiting a while.

[Rodan]

Rodan (Who will play. I will make sure of that.... >:-) )

Nah, I'm good.

[crazyjimbo]

Before anything else is decided I think we should wait for crazyjimbo to set up the new server. Do those rules sound OK?

The wiki is on my hosting and if we're going to start again, I could set up a new one. I'm about to ditch that host actually, and set up a new server within a few days, so I'd prefer to put it on that, which may involve waiting a while.

I'm feeling terribly guilty, but I'm not sure I'll be able to provide hosting this time around after all. I'm not planning to run PHP on my new server, and setting it up just to run this wiki doesn't really seem worthwhile. All is not lost however, there are plenty of free wiki hosting sites that can probably do exactly the same job I could, if not better.

http://www.wiki-site.com/index.php/Main_Page looks promising as a host.

As far as initial rules go, I would suggest an initial rule set along the lines of:

1. A player is anyone who is registered on the wiki. If you register on the wiki with a different name from on the XKCD forums, you are officially a bad person.
2. Players take turns in the order they register, and any player registering after the game has begun must wait until every previously registered player has another turn before taking theirs.
3. A player's turn consists of two parts. First the player proposes either a change to a current rule, a new rule or the removal of an already existent rule. Second, the other players vote on whether to enact this proposal. After 48 hours, the vote is counted and if over 2/3rds of the players voted for the proposal, it is passed, and the rules amended accordingly. The proposing player casts an automatic 'for' vote.
4. The current turn is played with the current rule set.

I've probably forgotten some stuff, but it's a start.

[Macbi]

We need to formalise these rule so that we can add them to the existing rule set.
We need a rule that skips people's goes if they forget to post.

Perhaps we need an impartial non-player to act as a final authority.

[Chaos9]

Before anything else is decided I think we should wait for crazyjimbo to set up the new server. Do those rules sound OK?

The wiki is on my hosting and if we're going to start again, I could set up a new one. I'm about to ditch that host actually, and set up a new server within a few days, so I'd prefer to put it on that, which may involve waiting a while.

I'm feeling terribly guilty, but I'm not sure I'll be able to provide hosting this time around after all. I'm not planning to run PHP on my new server, and setting it up just to run this wiki doesn't really seem worthwhile. All is not lost however, there are plenty of free wiki hosting sites that can probably do exactly the same job I could, if not better.

http://www.wiki-site.com/index.php/Main_Page looks promising as a host.

As far as initial rules go, I would suggest an initial rule set along the lines of:

1. A player is anyone who is registered on the wiki. If you register on the wiki with a different name from on the XKCD forums, you are officially a bad person.
2. Players take turns in the order they register, and any player registering after the game has begun must wait until every previously registered player has another turn before taking theirs.
3. A player's turn consists of two parts. First the player proposes either a change to a current rule, a new rule or the removal of an already existent rule. Second, the other players vote on whether to enact this proposal. After 48 hours, the vote is counted and if over 2/3rds of the players voted for the proposal, it is passed, and the rules amended accordingly. The proposing player casts an automatic 'for' vote.
4. The current turn is played with the current rule set.

I've probably forgotten some stuff, but it's a start.

I think it would be much easier too just do the game on this topic, unless it what I have just said is not true. Most of your other suggestions sound good.

[Chaos9]

I think it would be much easier too just do the game on this topic, unless it what I have just said is not true. Most of your other suggestions sound good.

Correction: Unless IF what I have just said is not true.

[Cheese]

I'm going to post here, as it was wished for...

But I can't contribute anything apart from necro, sorry.

[Chaos9]

Thats it. We're starting. Now. No more preperation, No more waiting for players. Now.

New rule: Everyone must tell the truth when voting (As in if someone tries to bribe you, blackmail you, etc., you cannot give in.

Now vote on it.

[Macbi]

Vote against.

[Chaos9]

You never officially said you wanted to play, but I am getting desprete so go ahead!

Macbi is now playing.

[Macbi]

It was a bit silly to let me play, knowing I would vote agaist you.
I'll make up for it by voting for, but if we are playing by the standard ruleset then only one vote is needed to stop you.

Votes For.

[Chaos9]

It was a bit silly to let me play, knowing I would vote agaist you.

Well, considering we need 4 players and we onley had 3...Oh well, when it comes to games, it's not about winning, but having fun. *Instantly beats Rodan at Super Smash Bros. Brawl by using cheat codes*

[Chaos9]

abzde? Maseiken?

[Maseiken]

Against.

[Chaos9]

abzde?

[Chaos9]

Ok, abzde is officially not playing.

Since only two people can vote now, if anyone votes against it is instantly vetoed. That means my rule is out. Maseiken's turn!

[DrStalker]

((Has anyone come across an initial rules set for Nomic that is designed for forum play? I'm sure it could be done, but the default starting set is pretty horrid when you don't have everyone in the same place (or when you don't want to spend a lot of time for each move to allow voting)

Maybe having multiple proposals active at once (but no more than one per person) and everyone can vote for/against in an X hour period after a proposal is made, requiring more for votes than against votes to be implemented.

No initial scoring, let people devise rules for that.

Obviously all this could be changed by rules proposals during the actual game.


There is also Nexus's Rules game, which seems nice and simple enough for forums (albeit easy to derail and ruin, I suppose) ))

[Maseiken]

New Rule: Anyone joining in the Game must Officially state as such, in this thread, With the form,
"I <Username>, Do henceforth agree to be involved in this, The Forum ame of Nomic"

[Chaos9]

Against, becuase you spelled "Game" wrong.

[Chaos9]

[quote="DrStalker"]((Has anyone come across an initial rules set for Nomic that is designed for forum play? I'm sure it could be done, but the default starting set is pretty horrid when you don't have everyone in the same place (or when you don't want to spend a lot of time for each move to allow voting)))quote]

I am PMing all of the players to speed things up.

Since I voted against, whatever Macbi says the rule is out, so it is now Macbi's turn.

[Macbi]

Proposal: "Everyone voting for this rule, including me, gets a bonus 10 points, and after this rule has come into effect no bribery can be used to get votes for new rules."

Personally I vote For.

[Maseiken]

For, but it seems kind of cheap.

[Chaos9]

For, but the maker of the rule cannot vote.

Extra rules in play:

1: "Everyone voting for this rule, including me, gets a bonus 10 points, and after this rule has come into effect no bribery can be used to get votes for new rules."

Rule Proposal: after this rule comes into play, you can make three rule proposals on your turn. Only one can be accepted. If more than one rule is not vetoed, the rule-maker gets to choose which one he wants accepted.

[Macbi]

For.

[Maseiken]

For.

[Chaos9]

:-)

Maseiken's turn!

[Maseiken]

Proposal: You may vote for a approval conditionally, The conditions however, must be pertaining only to the content in the proposal, and must be voted on seperatly.