[This file contains all known texts of all known rules. NOT A SOURCE FILE: automatically generated, do not edit. NOT A PRIMARY SOURCE: if you're researching ruleset history, look at the rulesets themselves. This file incorporates corrections that could be mistaken. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 101 history: Initial Immutable Rule 101, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: All Players must always abide by all the Rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The Rules in the Initial Set are in effect at the beginning of the first game. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (Immutable) and 201-219 (Mutable). text: All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect at the beginning of the first game. The Initial Set consists of rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-219 (mutable). history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1480, 15 March 1995 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3915 (harvel), 27 September 1999 text: All Players must always abide by all the Rules currently in effect, in the form in which they are currently in effect. However, a Player besides the Speaker may always deregister rather than continue to play. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by the Rules is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the Rules, which is permitted only when the Rules explicitly or implicitly permit it. Any change to the game state which would make it impossible to make arbitrary modifications to the Rules by any combination of actions by Players does not occur, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. The Rules in the Initial Set are in effect at the beginning of the first game. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (Immutable) and 201-219 (Mutable). history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4833 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: Any player is permitted to perform an action which is not regulated. An action is regulated if: (a) the action is prohibited; (b) the rules indicate that if certain conditions are satisfied, then some player is permitted to perform the action; (c) the action would, as part of its effect, modify information for which some player is required to be a recordkeepor; (d) the action would, as part of its effect, make it impossible to make arbitrary modifications to the rules by any combinations of actions by players; or (e) the courts have held that the action is regulated, and this finding has not been overturned. A player besides the Speaker is always permitted to deregister rather than continue to play. Please treat Agora right good forever. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The rules may define persons as possessing specific rights or privileges. Be it hereby proclaimed that no binding agreement or interpretation of Agoran law may abridge, reduce, limit, or remove a person's defined rights. A person's defined privileges are assumed to exist in the absense of an explicit, binding agreement to the contrary. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would allow restrictions of a person's rights or privileges. i. Every person has the privilege of doing what e wilt. ii. Every player has the right to perform an action which is not regulated. iii. Every person has the right to invoke judgement, appeal a judgement, and to initiate an appeal on a sentencing or judicial order binding em. iv. Every person has the right to refuse to become party to a binding agreement. The absense of a person's explicit, willful consent shall be considered a refusal. v. Every person has the right to not be considered bound by an agreement, or an amendment to an agreement, which e has not had the reasonable opportunity to view. vi. Every player has the right of participation in the fora. vii. Every person has the right to not be penalized more than once for any single action or inaction. viii. Every player besides the Speaker has the right to deregister rather than continue to play. Please treat Agora right good forever. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The rules may define persons as possessing specific rights or privileges. Be it hereby proclaimed that no binding agreement or interpretation of Agoran law may abridge, reduce, limit, or remove a person's defined rights. A person's defined privileges are assumed to exist in the absense of an explicit, binding agreement to the contrary. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would allow restrictions of a person's rights or privileges. i. Every person has the privilege of doing what e wilt. ii. Every player has the right to perform an action which is not regulated. iii. Every person has the right to invoke judgement, appeal a judgement, and to initiate an appeal on a sentencing or judicial order binding em. iv. Every person has the right to refuse to become party to a binding agreement. The absense of a person's explicit, willful consent shall be considered a refusal. v. Every person has the right to not be considered bound by an agreement, or an amendment to an agreement, which e has not had the reasonable opportunity to review. vi. Every player has the right of participation in the fora. vii. Every person has the right to not be penalized more than once for any single action or inaction. viii. Every player besides the Speaker has the right to deregister rather than continue to play. Please treat Agora right good forever. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: The rules may define persons as possessing specific rights or privileges. Be it hereby proclaimed that no binding agreement or interpretation of Agoran law may abridge, reduce, limit, or remove a person's defined rights. A person's defined privileges are assumed to exist in the absence of an explicit, binding agreement to the contrary. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would allow restrictions of a person's rights or privileges. i. Every person has the privilege of doing what e wilt. ii. Every player has the right to perform an action which is not regulated. iii. Every person has the right to invoke judgement, appeal a judgement, and to initiate an appeal on a sentencing or judicial order binding em. iv. Every person has the right to refuse to become party to a binding agreement. The absence of a person's explicit, willful consent shall be considered a refusal. v. Every person has the right to not be considered bound by an agreement, or an amendment to an agreement, which e has not had the reasonable opportunity to review. vi. Every player has the right of participation in the fora. vii. Every person has the right to not be penalized more than once for any single action or inaction. viii. Every player besides the Speaker has the right to deregister rather than continue to play. Please treat Agora right good forever. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4944 (Zefram), 3 May 2007 text: The rules may define persons as possessing specific rights or privileges. Be it hereby proclaimed that no binding agreement or interpretation of Agoran law may abridge, reduce, limit, or remove a person's defined rights. A person's defined privileges are assumed to exist in the absence of an explicit, binding agreement to the contrary. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would allow restrictions of a person's rights or privileges. i. Every person has the privilege of doing what e wilt. ii. Every player has the right to perform an action which is not regulated. iii. Every person has the right to invoke judgement, appeal a judgement, and to initiate an appeal on a sentencing or judicial order binding em. iv. Every person has the right to refuse to become party to a binding agreement. The absence of a person's explicit, willful consent shall be considered a refusal. v. Every person has the right to not be considered bound by an agreement, or an amendment to an agreement, which e has not had the reasonable opportunity to review. vi. Every player has the right of participation in the fora. vii. Every person has the right to not be penalized more than once for any single action or inaction. viii. Every player has the right to deregister rather than continue to play. Please treat Agora right good forever. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5090 (Zefram), 25 July 2007 text: The rules may define persons as possessing specific rights or privileges. Be it hereby proclaimed that no binding agreement or interpretation of Agoran law may abridge, reduce, limit, or remove a person's defined rights. A person's defined privileges are assumed to exist in the absence of an explicit, binding agreement to the contrary. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would allow restrictions of a person's rights or privileges. i. Every person has the privilege of doing what e wilt. ii. Every player has the right to perform an action which is not regulated. iii. Every person has the right to initiate a formal process to resolve matters of controversy, in the reasonable expectation that the controversy will thereby be resolved. Every person has the right to cause formal reconsideration of any judicial determination that e should be punished. iv. Every person has the right to refuse to become party to a binding agreement. The absence of a person's explicit, willful consent shall be considered a refusal. v. Every person has the right to not be considered bound by an agreement, or an amendment to an agreement, which e has not had the reasonable opportunity to review. vi. Every player has the right of participation in the fora. vii. Every person has the right to not be penalized more than once for any single action or inaction. viii. Every player has the right to deregister rather than continue to play. Please treat Agora right good forever. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 102 history: Initial Immutable Rule 102, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Initially Rules in the 100's are Immutable and Rules in the 200's are Mutable. Rules subsequently Enacted or Transmuted (that is, changed from Immutable to Mutable or vice versa) may be Immutable or Mutable regardless of their Numbers, and Rules in the Initial Set may be Transmuted regardless of their Numbers. text: Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 103 history: Initial Immutable Rule 103, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: At any time, each Player shall be either a Voter or the Speaker; no Player may simultaneously be a Voter and a Speaker. At any time, there shall be exactly one Speaker. The term "Player" in the Rules shall specifically include both the Voters and the Speaker. text: At any time, each Player shall be either a Voter or the Speaker; no Player may simultaneously be a Voter and a Speaker. At any time, there shall be exactly one Speaker. The term "Player" in the Rules shall specifically include both the Voters and the Speaker. text: At any time, each player shall be either a Voter or the Speaker; no player may simultaneously be a Voter and a Speaker. At any time there shall be exactly one Speaker. The term "player" in the rules shall specifically include both the Voters and the Speaker. history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1481, 15 March 1995 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3829 (Steve), 8 February 1999 text: At any time, there is exactly one Player who is the Speaker. The Speaker may not deregister or be deregistered for any reason, any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Retitled by Proposal 4944 (Zefram), 3 May 2007 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4944 (Zefram), 3 May 2007 text: There should always be exactly one player who is the Speaker. No one other than a player can be Speaker, and there can never be more than one Speaker. If there is ever no Speaker then the player whose most recent registration was earliest becomes the Speaker. history: Retitled by Proposal 5257 (AFO), 27 October 2007 history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5257 (AFO), 27 October 2007 text: The Speaker is the figurehead of Agora, embodying its spirit. Diplomatic missions from Agora to foreign nomics operate on the Speaker's behalf. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5407 (root), 22 January 2008 text: The Speaker is an imposed office. The Speaker is the figurehead of Agora, embodying its spirit. Diplomatic missions from Agora to foreign nomics operate on the Speaker's behalf. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 104 history: Initial Immutable Rule 104, 30 June 1993 text: The Speaker for the first game shall be Michael Norrish. history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1482, 15 March 1995 history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 105,1072 history: Initial Immutable Rule 105, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: A Rule Change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable Rule; or (2) the transmutation of an immutable Rule into a mutable Rule or vice versa. (Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new Rules are Mutable; Immutable Rules, as long as they are Immutable, may not be Amended or Repealed; Mutable Rules, as long as they are Mutable, may be Amended or Repealed; any Rule of any status may be Transmuted; no Rule is absolutely immune to change.) text: A Rule Change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable Rule; or (2) the transmutation of an immutable Rule into a mutable Rule or vice versa. (Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new Rules are Mutable; Immutable Rules, as long as they are Immutable, may not be Amended or Repealed; Mutable Rules, as long as they are Mutable, may be Amended or Repealed; any Rule of any status may be Transmuted; no Rule is absolutely immune to change.) text: A rule change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule; or (2) the transmutation of an immutable rule into a mutable rule or vice versa. (Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.) history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1072, 4 October 1994 history: Amended by Proposal 1275, 24 October 1994 text: A Rule Change is any of the following: 1) the enactment of a new Rule (a "Creation"). ; 2) the amendment of an existing Rule (an "Amendment"); 3) the repeal of an existing Rule (a "Repeal"); 4) the modification of an existing Rule's Mutability Index (a "Mutation"). Additional Rule Changes may be created by appropriate legislation. No Rule Change may directly change any part of the Game State other than the Rules. No Rule may be changed except by the means of a Rule Change of a type specified in the Rules. history: Renumbered from 1072 to 105 by Rule 1295, 1 November 1994 history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: A Rule Change is any of the following: * The enactment of a new Rule; * The repeal of an existing Rule; * The amendment of the text of an existing Rule; or * Any change to a substantive property of a Rule other than its text. A "substantive property of a Rule" is any property of that Rule (other than its text) which determines in part or in full the ability of that Rule to govern by itself or in conjunction with other Rules. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: A proposal generally can, as part of its effect: (a) Enact a rule. When a rule is enacted, the Rulekeepor shall assign it a number, which must be greater than any number previously assigned. If the enacting proposal does not specify the power, the rule shall have power equal to one. If the proposal specifies the power, then the rule shall have power equal to the minimum of four, the power of the proposal, and the power specified by the proposal. If the title is not specified, the Rulekeepor may select any title e sees fit. (b) Modify the power, title, or text of a rule. A Proposal can modify the power, title, or text of a rule with power no greater than its own. However, a proposal cannot cause a rule to have power greater than its own. Any ambiguity in a modification specified by a proposal causes that modification to be void and without effect. A variation in whitespace or capitalization in the quotation of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity for the purposes of this rule, but any other variation does. (c) Repeal a rule. When a proposal repeals a rule, it ceases to be a rule, and the Rulekeepor need no longer maintain a record of it. This rule provides the only mechanism by which rules can be enacted, modified, or repealed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4886 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: A proposal generally can, as part of its effect: (a) Enact a rule. When a rule is enacted, the Rulekeepor shall assign it a number, which must be greater than any number previously assigned. If the enacting proposal does not specify the power, the rule shall have power equal to one. If the proposal specifies the power, then the rule shall have power equal to the minimum of four, the power of the proposal, and the power specified by the proposal. If the title is not specified, the Rulekeepor may select any title e sees fit. (b) Modify the power, title, or text of a rule. A Proposal can modify the power, title, or text of a rule with power no greater than its own. However, a proposal cannot cause a rule to have power greater than its own. Any ambiguity in a modification specified by a proposal causes that modification to be void and without effect. A variation in whitespace, capitalization, or substitution of section labels with the same ordinal position (e.g. 1 / a / i, 2 / b / ii, etc.) in the quotation of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity for the purposes of this rule, but any other variation does. (c) Repeal a rule. When a proposal repeals a rule, it ceases to be a rule, and the Rulekeepor need no longer maintain a record of it. This rule provides the only mechanism by which rules can be enacted, modified, or repealed. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 105 by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 105,2131 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2131 by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 text: A proposal generally can, as part of its effect: (a) Enact a rule. When enacted, rules have Power 1. (b) Assign a number to a rule. (c) Modify the power, title, or text of a rule. (d) Repeal a rule. When a proposal repeals a rule, it ceases to be a rule, and the Rulekeepor need no longer maintain a record of it. history: Renumbered from 2131 to 105 by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 history: Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 history: Retitled by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 text: A proposal generally can, as part of its effect: (a) Enact a rule. When a rule is enacted, the Rulekeepor shall assign it a number, which must be greater than any number previously assigned. If the enacting proposal does not specify the power, the rule shall have power equal to one. If the proposal specifies the power, then the rule shall have power equal to the minimum of four, the power of the proposal, and the power specified by the proposal. If the title is not specified, the Rulekeepor may select any title e sees fit. (b) Modify the power, title, or text of a rule. A Proposal can modify the power, title, or text of a rule with power no greater than its own. However, a proposal cannot cause a rule to have power greater than its own. Any ambiguity in a modification specified by a proposal causes that modification to be void and without effect. A variation in whitespace or capitalization in the quotation of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity for the purposes of this rule, but any other variation does. (c) Repeal a rule. A Proposal can repeal a rule with power no greater than its own. When a proposal repeals a rule, it ceases to be a rule, and the Rulekeepor need no longer maintain a record of it. This rule provides the only mechanism by which rules can be enacted, modified, or repealed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4940 (Zefram), 29 April 2007 text: Where permitted by other rules, an instrument generally can, as part of its effect, (a) enact a rule. The new rule has power equal to the minimum of the power specified by the enacting instrument, defaulting to one if the enacting instrument does not specify, and the maximum power permitted by other rules. The enacting instrument may specify a title for the new rule, which if present shall prevail. The number of the new rule cannot be specified by the enacting instrument; any attempt to so specify is null and void. (b) repeal a rule. When a rule is repealed, it ceases to be a rule, and the Rulekeepor need no longer maintain a record of it. (c) amend the text of a rule. (d) retitle a rule. (e) change the power of a rule. A rule change is any effect that falls into the above classes. Rule changes always occur sequentially, never simultaneously. Any ambiguity in the specification of a rule change causes that change to be void and without effect. A variation in whitespace or capitalization in the quotation of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity for the purposes of this rule, but any other variation does. This rule provides the only mechanism by which rules can be created, modified, or destroyed, or by which an entity can become a rule or cease to be a rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: Where permitted by other rules, an instrument generally can, as part of its effect, (a) enact a rule. The new rule has power equal to the minimum of the power specified by the enacting instrument, defaulting to one if the enacting instrument does not specify, and the maximum power permitted by other rules. The enacting instrument may specify a title for the new rule, which if present shall prevail. The ID number of the new rule cannot be specified by the enacting instrument; any attempt to so specify is null and void. (b) repeal a rule. When a rule is repealed, it ceases to be a rule, and the Rulekeepor need no longer maintain a record of it. (c) amend the text of a rule. (d) retitle a rule. (e) change the power of a rule. A rule change is any effect that falls into the above classes. Rule changes always occur sequentially, never simultaneously. Any ambiguity in the specification of a rule change causes that change to be void and without effect. A variation in whitespace or capitalization in the quotation of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity for the purposes of this rule, but any other variation does. This rule provides the only mechanism by which rules can be created, modified, or destroyed, or by which an entity can become a rule or cease to be a rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 106,1073 history: Initial Immutable Rule 106, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: All Rule Changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes and Quorum is achieved. text: All Rule Changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes and Quorum is achieved. text: All rule changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes and quorum is achieved. history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1073, 4 October 1994 history: Amended by Proposal 1278, 24 October 1994 text: All Proposals made in the proper way shall be voted upon. A Proposal shall be adopted if and only if it receives the required number of votes and if Quorum is achieved. history: Renumbered from 1073 to 106 by Rule 1295, 1 November 1994 history: Infected but not Amended by Rule 1454, 7 May 1995 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3736 (Blob), 3 May 1998 text: All Proposals made and distributed in the proper way shall be voted upon. A Proposal shall be adopted if and only if it receives the required number of votes and if Quorum is achieved. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT, and by default, the eligible voters are the active players, the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal, and the vote collector is the Assessor. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. The proposer of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT, and by default, the eligible voters are the active players, the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal, and the vote collector is the Speaker. The default adoption index of a proposal is one. Before the Promotor distributes a proposal, its proposer may modify its adoption index by announcement. A Proposal with an Adoption Index of 1 is Ordinary. All other Proposals are Democratic. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4918 (OscarMeyr), 2 April 2007 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. The proposer of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT, and by default, the eligible voters are the active players, the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal, and the vote collector is the Speaker. The adoption index of a proposal is an integral multiple of 0.1, with a default and minimum value of 1.0. Before the Promotor distributes a proposal, its proposer may modify its adoption index by announcement. A Proposal with an Adoption Index of 1 is Ordinary. All other Proposals are Democratic. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4939 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. The proposer of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT, and by default, the eligible voters are the active players, and the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal. The adoption index of a proposal is an integral multiple of 0.1, with a default and minimum value of 1.0. Before the Promotor distributes a proposal, its proposer may modify its adoption index by announcement. A Proposal with an Adoption Index of 1 is Ordinary. All other Proposals are Democratic. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5010 (Levi), 24 June 2007 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. The proposer of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT, and by default, the eligible voters are the active players, and the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal. The adoption index of a proposal is an integral multiple of 0.1, with a default and minimum value of 1.0. Before the Promotor distributes a proposal, its proposer may modify its adoption index by announcement. A Proposal with an Adoption Index of less than 2 is Ordinary. All other Proposals are Democratic. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5078 (Zefram), 18 July 2007 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. The proposer of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT, and the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal. The adoption index of a proposal is an integral multiple of 0.1, with a default and minimum value of 1.0. Before the Promotor distributes a proposal, its proposer may modify its adoption index by announcement. A Proposal with an Adoption Index of less than 2 is Ordinary. All other Proposals are Democratic. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5083 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. The proposer of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT, and the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal. The adoption index of a proposal is an integral multiple of 0.1, with a minimum value of 1.0. It may be set by the proposer at the time of submission, or otherwise defaults to 1.0. A Proposal with an Adoption Index of less than 2 is Ordinary. All other Proposals are Democratic. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5334 (Murphy), 5 December 2007 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. That player is its author (syn. proposer). The author of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. A person is a co-author of a proposal if and only if e is distinct from its author, and unambiguously identified by its author as being its co-author at the time of submission. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT, and the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal. The adoption index of a proposal is an integral multiple of 0.1, with a minimum value of 1.0. It may be set by the proposer at the time of submission, or otherwise defaults to 1.0. A Proposal with an Adoption Index of less than 2 is Ordinary. All other Proposals are Democratic. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5356 (root), 16 December 2007 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. That player is its author (syn. proposer). The author of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. A person is a co-author of a proposal if and only if e is distinct from its author, and unambiguously identified by its author as being its co-author at the time of submission. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT, and the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal. The adoption index of a proposal is an integral multiple of 0.1, with a minimum value of 1.0. It may be set by the proposer at the time of submission, or otherwise defaults to 1.0. A Proposal with an Adoption Index of less than 2 is Ordinary. All other Proposals are Democratic. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. Preventing a proposal from taking effect is a secured change. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. That player is its author (syn. proposer). The author of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. A person is a co-author of a proposal if and only if e is distinct from its author, and unambiguously identified by its author as being its co-author at the time of submission. The adoption index of a proposal is an integral multiple of 0.1, with a minimum value of 1.0. It may be set by the proposer at the time of submission, or otherwise defaults to 1.0. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. Preventing a proposal from taking effect is a secured change. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 5453 (Murphy), 1 March 2008 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. That player is its author (syn. proposer). The author of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. A person is a co-author of a proposal if and only if e is distinct from its author, and unambiguously identified by its author as being its co-author at the time of submission. The adoption index of a proposal is an integral multiple of 0.1, with a minimum value of 1.0. It may be set by the proposer at the time of submission, or otherwise defaults to 1.0. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal, and the vote collector is the Assessor. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. Preventing a proposal from taking effect is a secured change. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 5572 (Murphy), 4 July 2008 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A player submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal, which places the proposal in the Proposal Pool. That player is its author (syn. proposer). The author of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. A person is a co-author of a proposal if and only if e is distinct from its author, and unambiguously identified by its author as being its co-author at the time of submission. The adoption index of a proposal is an integral multiple of 0.1 from 1.0 to 9.9. It may be set by the proposer at the time of submission, or otherwise defaults to 1.0. Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the adoption index is the adoption index of the proposal, and the vote collector is the Assessor. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the proposal is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption index, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. Preventing a proposal from taking effect is a secured change. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a proposal to take effect. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 107 history: Initial Immutable Rule 107, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Any proposed Rule Change must be written down (or otherwise communicated in print media) before it is voted on. If adopted, it must guide play in the form in which it was voted on. text: Any proposed Rule Change must be written down (or otherwise communicated in print media) before it is voted on. If adopted, it must guide play in the form in which it was voted on. text: Any proposed rule change must be written down (or otherwise communicated in print media) before it is voted on. If adopted, it must guide play in the form in which it was voted on. history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1391, 24 January 1995 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3889 (harvel), 9 August 1999 text: Any proposed Rule Change must be written down (or otherwise communicated in valid media) before it is voted on. If adopted, it must guide play in the form in which it was voted on. For the purposes of this rule, print and electronic media, including mailing lists, are valid media. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: An Agoran decision is initiated when a person authorized to initiate it publishes a valid notice which sets forth the intent to initiate the decision. To be valid, this notice must contain the following information: (a) The matter to be decided (for example, "the election for Scorekeepor" or "the adoption of proposal 4781"). (b) A description of the class of eligible voters sufficient to enable public agreement on which persons are eligible. In particular, an explicit list of the eligible voters is always sufficient for this purpose. (c) The identity of the vote collector. (d) Any additional information required by the rules for this announcement. The publication of such a valid notice initiates the voting period for the decision. By default, the voting period lasts for seven days. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would require a voting period for some decision to be shorter than seven days. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: An Agoran decision is initiated when a person authorized to initiate it publishes a valid notice which sets forth the intent to initiate the decision. To be valid, this notice must contain the following information: (a) The matter to be decided (for example, "the adoption of proposal 4781"). (b) A description of the class of eligible voters sufficient to enable public agreement on which persons are eligible. In particular, an explicit list of the eligible voters is always sufficient for this purpose. (c) The identity of the vote collector. (d) Any additional information required by the rules for this announcement. The publication of such a valid notice initiates the voting period for the decision. By default, the voting period lasts for seven days. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would require a voting period for some decision to be shorter than seven days. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4964 (Murphy), 3 June 2007 text: An Agoran decision is initiated when a person authorized to initiate it publishes a valid notice which sets forth the intent to initiate the decision. This notice is invalid if it lacks any of the following information, and the lack is correctly identified within one week after the notice is published: (a) The matter to be decided (for example, "the adoption of proposal 4781"). (b) A description of the class of eligible voters sufficient to enable public agreement on which persons are eligible. In particular, an explicit list of the eligible voters is always sufficient for this purpose. (c) The identity of the vote collector. (d) Any additional information required by the rules for this announcement. The publication of such a valid notice initiates the voting period for the decision. By default, the voting period lasts for seven days. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would require a voting period for some decision to be shorter than seven days. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5113 (Murphy, Maud), 2 August 2007 text: An Agoran decision is initiated when a person authorized to initiate it publishes a valid notice which sets forth the intent to initiate the decision. This notice is invalid if it lacks any of the following information, and the lack is correctly identified within one week after the notice is published: (a) The matter to be decided (for example, "the adoption of proposal 4781"). (b) A description of the class of eligible voters sufficient to enable public agreement on which persons are eligible. In particular, an explicit list of the eligible voters is always sufficient for this purpose. (c) The identity of the vote collector. (d) Any additional information required by the rules for this announcement. The publication of such a valid notice initiates the voting period for the decision. By default, the voting period lasts for seven days. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would require a voting period for some decision to be shorter than seven days, unless the decision is whether to approve a dependent action. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5229 (root), 27 September 2007 text: An Agoran decision is initiated when a person authorized to initiate it publishes a valid notice which sets forth the intent to initiate the decision. This notice is invalid if it lacks any of the following information, and the lack is correctly identified within one week after the notice is published: (a) The matter to be decided (for example, "the adoption of proposal 4781"). (b) A description of the class of eligible voters sufficient to enable public agreement on which persons are eligible. In particular, an explicit list of the eligible voters is always sufficient for this purpose. (c) A clear indication of the options available. (d) The identity of the vote collector. (e) Any additional information required by the rules for this announcement. The publication of such a valid notice initiates the voting period for the decision. By default, the voting period lasts for seven days. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would require a voting period for some decision to be shorter than seven days, unless the decision is whether to approve a dependent action. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5413 (root), 26 January 2008 text: An Agoran decision is initiated when a person authorized to initiate it publishes a valid notice which sets forth the intent to initiate the decision. This notice is invalid if it lacks any of the following information, and the lack is correctly identified within one week after the notice is published: (a) The matter to be decided (for example, "the adoption of proposal 4781"). (b) A description of the class of eligible voters sufficient to enable public agreement on which persons are eligible. In particular, an explicit list of the eligible voters is always sufficient for this purpose. (c) A clear indication of the options available. (d) The identity of the vote collector. (e) Any additional information required by the rules for this announcement. The publication of such a valid notice initiates the voting period for the decision. By default, the voting period lasts for seven days. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, the voting period for a decision cannot be shorter than seven days, unless the decision is whether to approve a dependent action. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5445 (Goethe, Murphy), 21 February 2008 text: An Agoran decision is initiated when a person authorized to initiate it publishes a valid notice which sets forth the intent to initiate the decision. This notice is invalid if it lacks any of the following information, and the lack is correctly identified within one week after the notice is published: (a) The matter to be decided (for example, "the adoption of proposal 4781"). (b) A description of the class of eligible voters sufficient to enable public agreement on which persons are eligible. In particular, an explicit list of the eligible voters is always sufficient for this purpose. (c) A clear indication of the options available. (d) The identity of the vote collector. (e) Any additional information required by the rules for this announcement. The publication of such a valid notice initiates the voting period for the decision. By default, the voting period lasts for seven days. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, the voting period for a decision cannot be shorter than seven days. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5455 (Murphy), 1 March 2008 text: An Agoran decision is initiated when a person authorized to initiate it publishes a valid notice which sets forth the intent to initiate the decision. This notice is invalid if it lacks any of the following information, and the lack is correctly identified within one week after the notice is published: (a) The matter to be decided (for example, "the adoption of proposal 4781"). (b) A description of the class of eligible voters sufficient to enable public agreement on which persons are eligible. In particular, an explicit list of the eligible voters is always sufficient for this purpose. (c) A clear indication of the options available. (d) The identity of the vote collector. (e) Any additional information defined by the rules as essential parameters. The publication of such a valid notice initiates the voting period for the decision. By default, the voting period lasts for seven days. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, the voting period for a decision cannot be shorter than seven days. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 108,1074 history: Initial Immutable Rule 108, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: No Rule Change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule change may have retroactive application. text: No rule change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule change may have retroactive application. history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1074 history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 1276, 24 October 1994 text: No Rule Change may take effect earlier than the moment of the adoption of the Proposal in which it is contained, if it is a proposed Rule Change, or the moment of the adoption of the current form of the Rule which requires the Rule Change, if it is a non-proposed Rule Change. No Rule Change may have retroactive application. history: Renumbered from 1074 to 108 by Rule 1295, 1 November 1994 history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3572 (Steve), 30 October 1997 text: A given form of a Rule may not have effects earlier than the moment it came to have that form. The form of a Rule consists of its text and other substantive properties. No Rule Change may have retroactive application. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 108 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 109,1057,1067 history: Initial Immutable Rule 109, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: The Speaker shall give each proposed Rule Change a Number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each Rule Change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the Proposal is adopted. If a Rule is Repealed and Reenacted, it receives the Number of the Proposal to Reenact it. If a Rule is Amended or Transmuted, it receives the Number of the Proposal to Amend or Transmute it. text: The Speaker shall give each proposed Rule Change a Number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each Rule Change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the Proposal is adopted. If a Rule is Repealed and Reenacted, it receives the Number of the Proposal to Reenact it. If a Rule is Amended or Transmuted, it receives the Number of the Proposal to Amend or Transmute it. text: The Speaker shall give each proposed rule change a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted. If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1057, 20 September 1994 history: Amended by Proposal 1067, 4 October 1994 text: The Speaker shall give each Proposal which has been proposed in the proper way a Number for reference. The Number assigned to a given Proposal shall be the least integer greater than all Numbers previously assigned, or 301, whichever is greater. No Proposal may have the same Number as any previous Proposal. When a Rule is Created, it receives the Number of the Proposal to Create it. Once created, a Rule shall not have its Number changed, except as specified in the Rules. history: Amended by Rule 750, 4 October 1994 text: The Speaker shall give each Proposal which has been proposed in the proper way a Number for reference. The Number assigned to a given Proposal shall be the least integer greater than all Numbers previously assigned, or 301, whichever is greater. No Proposal may have the same Number as any previous Proposal. When a Rule is Created, it receives the Number of the Proposal to Create it. Once created, a Rule shall not have its Number changed, except as specified in the Rules. (*Was: 1057*) history: Renumbered from 1067 to 109 by Rule 1295, 1 November 1994 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1435, 14 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1530, 24 March 1995 text: The Promotor shall give each submitted Proposal a Number for reference. The Number of a Proposal shall be the least integer greater than all other Numbers previously assigned to a Proposal (including numbers assigned to Proposals later determined to have been incorrectly submitted), or 301, whichever is greater. history: Mutated from MI=3 to MI=2 by Proposal 2601, 26 May 1996 history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3706 (Harlequin), 9 March 1998 text: At the time e distributes it, the Promotor shall give each Proposal a Number for reference. The Number of a Proposal shall be the least integer greater than all other Numbers previously assigned to a Proposal (including numbers assigned to Proposals later determined to have been incorrectly submitted), or 301, whichever is greater. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 109 by Proposal 3842 (Chuck), 15 March 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 110 history: Initial Immutable Rule 110, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Rule Changes that Transmute Immutable Rules into Mutable Rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among Votes legally cast. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a Proposal to take effect. text: Rule changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among votes legally cast. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 111,1076 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 112 history: Initial Immutable Rule 112, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and Rules that establish a Winner when play cannot continue may be Enacted and (while they are mutable) be Amended or Repealed. text: The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and Rules that establish a Winner when play cannot continue may be Enacted and (while they are mutable) be Amended or Repealed. text: The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed. history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1268, 19 October 1994 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1451, 1 March 1995 text: Ways for a Player to Win a Game may be defined by other Rules. Also, ways to prevent a Player from Winning a Game may be defined by other Rules. A Player Wins whenever a Win condition defined by one or more of those Rules occurs for that Player, provided that no Win-Preventing conditions are also occurring at that time for that Player. If no Rule defining a way to Win exists, then a Player Wins upon each Winter and Summer Solstice, and upon each Vernal and Autumnal Equinox, with the Winner being chosen randomly by the Speaker from among all Voters not on Hold who are not ineligible to Win because of an applicable Win-preventing Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1735, 15 October 1995 text: Ways for a Player to Win a Game may be defined by other Rules. Also, ways to prevent a Player from Winning a Game may be defined by other Rules. A Player Wins whenever a Win condition defined by one or more of those Rules occurs for that Player, provided that no Win-Preventing conditions are also occurring at that time for that Player. If no other Rule defining a way to Win exists, then a Player Wins upon each Winter and Summer Solstice, and upon each Vernal and Autumnal Equinox, with the Winner being chosen randomly by the Speaker from among all Voters not on Hold who are not ineligible to Win because of an applicable Win-preventing Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3829 (Steve), 8 February 1999 text: Ways for a Player to Win a Game may be defined by other Rules. Also, ways to prevent a Player from Winning a Game may be defined by other Rules. A Player Wins whenever a Win condition defined by one or more of those Rules occurs for that Player, provided that no Win-Preventing conditions are also occurring at that time for that Player. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4377 (Murphy), 11 September 2002 text: A Player is eligible to Win the Game while e meets at least one Win Condition, and does not meet any Win-Preventing Conditions. Any Player may publish a Notice of Victory that lists all Players eligible to Win the Game, and (for each listed Player) identifies at least one Win Condition met by that Player. If this information is accurate, then the listed Players Win the Game. This is the only way to Win the Game. If a Player would otherwise Win the Game due to other Rules, then e instead meets a Win Condition for one week (and may Win the Game as described above). history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 112 by Proposal 4488 (Peekee), 6 May 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 113 history: Initial Immutable Rule 113, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: A Player always has the option to forfeit the Game rather than continue to play or incur a Game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the Player to incur it, may be imposed. text: A Player always has the option to forfeit the Game rather than continue to play or incur a Game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the Player to incur it, may be imposed. text: A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed. history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1290, 27 October 1994 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1304, 4 November 1994 text: A Player may always deregister from the Game rather than continue to play or incur a Game penalty. No penalty worse than deregistration, in the judgment of the Player to incur it, may be imposed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3829 (Steve), 8 February 1999 text: A Player other than the Speaker may always deregister from the Game rather than continue to play or incur a Game penalty. No penalty worse than deregistration, in the judgment of the Player to incur it, may be imposed. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 114,1077 history: Initial Immutable Rule 114, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: There must always be at least one Mutable Rule. The adoption of Rule Changes must never become completely inpermissible. text: There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule changes must never become completely inpermissible. history: Power changed from Unanimity to 3 by Proposal 1077 history: Amended by Proposal 1277, 24 October 1994 text: There must always be at least one Rule with a Mutability Index of 1. Any Rule Change which would result in this condition becoming false shall not have any legal force. The Adoption of Rule Changes shall never become completely impermissible. history: Renumbered from 1077 to 114 by Rule 1295, 1 November 1994 history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2802 (Zefram; disi.), 8 February 1997 text: It must always be possible to make arbitrary modifications to the ruleset by some combination of player actions. Any change to the gamestate that would cause this condition to become false does not occur, any rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 115 history: Initial Immutable Rule 115, 30 June 1993 [Have 4 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Rule Changes that affect Rules needed to allow or apply Rule Changes are as permissible as other Rule Changes. Even Rule Changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No Rule Change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a Rule. text: Rule Changes that affect Rules needed to allow or apply Rule Changes are as permissible as other Rule Changes. Even Rule Changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No Rule Change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a Rule. text: Rule Changes that affect Rules needed to allow or apply Rule Changes are as permissible as other Rule Changes. Even Rule Changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No Rule Change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a Rule. text: Rule changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule changes are as permissible as other rule changes. Even rule changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule. history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1392, 24 January 1995 history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 115 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 116 history: Initial Immutable Rule 116, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a Rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the Rules, which is permitted only when a Rule or set of Rules explicitly or implicitly permits it. text: Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a Rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the Rules, which is permitted only when a Rule or set of Rules explicitly or implicitly permits it. text: Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it. history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1483, 15 March 1995 history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 201,879 history: Initial Mutable Rule 201, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: Quorum for a proposed Rule Change is defined to be 20% of Voters at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal. text: Quorum for a proposed Rule Change is defined to be 20% of Voters at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal. text: Quorum for a proposed rule change is defined to be 20% of Voters at the beginning of the prescribed voting period for that proposal history: Amended by Proposal 879 (Garth), 13 April 1994 text: Quorum for a Proposal is defined as 35% of all Players, or 50% of all Voters not On Hold, whichever is greater. Any determination of whether a Proposal has made Quorum shall use the number of Players or Voters at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal. history: Amended by Rule 750, 13 April 1994 text: Quorum for a Proposal is defined as 35% of all Players, or 50% of all Voters not On Hold, whichever is greater. Any determination of whether a Proposal has made Quorum shall use the number of Players or Voters at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal. (*Was: 201*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1471, 8 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1554, 17 April 1995 text: Quorum for a Proposal is achieved if a vote is cast on that Proposal by 35% of all Players, or 50% of all the Players not On Hold, whichever is greater. Any determination of whether a Proposal has made Quorum shall use the number of Players or Players at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal. (*Was: 201*) history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1708, 4 September 1995 text: Quorum for a Proposal is achieved if a vote is cast on that Proposal by 35% of all Players, or 50% of all the Players not On Hold, whichever is greater. Quorum for a Proposal is calculated using the number of Registered Players at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal. history: Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, 27 July 1996 text: Quorum for a Proposal is achieved if a vote is cast on that Proposal by 35% of all Players, or 50% of all the Players not On Hold, whichever is greater. Quorum for a Proposal is calculated using the number of Registered Players at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 2786 (Steve), 15 January 1997 text: Quorum for a Proposal is achieved if a vote is cast on that Proposal by 35% of all Players, or 50% of all the Players not On Hold, whichever is greater. Quorum for a Proposal is calculated using the number of Registered Players, and their Hold statuses (On or Off), at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3643 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: Quorum for a Proposal is achieved if a vote is cast on that Proposal by one-third of Active Players, or one-fifth of all Players, whichever is greater. Quorum for a Proposal is calculated using the number of Registered Players, and their Hold statuses (On or Off), at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3777 (Blob), 3 August 1998 text: Quorum for a Proposal is achieved if a vote is cast on that Proposal by one-third of Active Players not denied voting privileges, or one-fifth of all Players, whichever is greater. Quorum for a Proposal is calculated at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal, using information current at that time. history: Amended(8) by Proposal "A Separation of Powers" (Steve, Without Objection), 20 April 1999 text: Quorum for a Proposal is achieved if a vote is cast on that Proposal by one-third of Active Voters not denied voting privileges, or one-fifth of all Players, whichever is greater. Quorum for a Proposal is calculated at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal, using information current at that time. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3956 (harvel), 28 December 1999 text: Quorum for a Proposal is achieved if a vote is cast on that Proposal by one-third of Active Players not denied voting privileges, or one-fifth of all Players, whichever is greater. Quorum for a Proposal is calculated at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal, using information current at that time. Other Rules may provide an explicit method whereby a Player who has not voted on a Proposal may be considered, for the purposes of Quorum, to have voted on that Proposal. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3972 (Peekee), 14 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 text: Quorum for an Ordinary Proposal is achieved if three Oligarchs cast votes on the Proposal. Quorum for a Democratic Proposal is achieved if a vote is cast on the Proposal by one-third of Active Players who are not Denied on that Proposal, or one-fifth of all Players, whichever is greater. Quorum for a Proposal is calculated at the beginning of the prescribed Voting Period for that Proposal, using information current at that time. However, if an Ordinary Proposal becomes a Democratic Proposal during its Voting Period (or vice versa), then Quorum is recalculated at the time of the change. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: An Ordinary Proposal achieves Quorum if at least three Oligarchs cast votes on it. A Democratic Proposal achieves Quorum if: (1) at least one-third of all Active Players, or (2) at least one-fifth of all Players cast votes on it. Quorum for a Democratic Proposal shall be determined from the number of Players and number of Active Players at the time that the Proposal was distributed, or at the time it was made a Democratic Proposal, whichever is later. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4239 (Murphy), 29 January 2002 text: An Ordinary Proposal achieves Quorum if at least three Oligarchs cast votes on it. A Democratic Proposal achieves Quorum if: (1) at least one-third of all Active Noisy Players, or (2) at least one-fifth of all Players cast votes on it. Quorum for a Democratic Proposal shall be determined from the number of Players and number of Active Noisy Players at the time that the Proposal was distributed, or at the time it was made a Democratic Proposal, whichever is later. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4276 (Steve), 28 March 2002 text: An Ordinary Proposal achieves Quorum if at least three Oligarchs cast votes on it, and the Speaker did not Veto it. A Democratic Proposal achieves Quorum if: (1) at least one-third of all Active Noisy Players, or (2) at least one-fifth of all Players cast votes on it. Quorum for a Democratic Proposal shall be determined from the number of Players and number of Active Noisy Players at the time that the Proposal was distributed, or at the time it was made a Democratic Proposal, whichever is later. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: An ordinary proposal achieves quorum if at least three oligarchs cast votes on it. A democratic proposal achieves quorum if: (1) at least one third of all active noisy players, or (2) at least one fifth of all non-frozen players cast votes on it. Quorum for a democratic proposal shall be determined from the number of non-frozen players and number of active noisy players at the time that the proposal was distributed, or at the time it was made a democratic proposal, whichever is later. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4282 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: An ordinary proposal achieves quorum if at least three oligarchs cast votes on it. A democratic proposal achieves quorum if: (1) at least one third of all active noisy players, or (2) at least one fifth of all non-frozen players cast votes on it. Quorum for a democratic proposal shall be determined from the number of non-frozen players and number of active noisy players at the time that the proposal was distributed, or at the time it was made a democratic proposal, whichever is later. A Parliamentary Proposal acheives quorum if at least two of the entities with Voting Power on the Proposal are deemed to have cast votes either FOR or AGAINST it. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4311 (root), 28 May 2002 text: An ordinary proposal achieves quorum if at least three oligarchs cast votes on it, and the Speaker did not veto it. A democratic proposal achieves quorum if: (1) at least one third of all active noisy players, or (2) at least one fifth of all non-frozen players cast votes on it. Quorum for a democratic proposal shall be determined from the number of non-frozen players and number of active noisy players at the time that the proposal was distributed, or at the time it was made a democratic proposal, whichever is later. A Parliamentary Proposal acheives quorum if at least two of the entities with Voting Power on the Proposal are deemed to have cast votes either FOR or AGAINST it. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 4410 (Steve), 6 November 2002 text: (a) An ordinary proposal achieves quorum if at least three oligarchs cast votes on it, and the Speaker did not veto it. (b) A democratic proposal achieves quorum if at least one third of all active noisy players cast votes on it. (c) Quorum for a democratic proposal shall be determined from the number of active noisy players at the time that the proposal was distributed, or at the time it was made a democratic proposal, whichever is later. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: (a) An ordinary proposal achieves quorum if at least three shareholders cast votes on it, and the Speaker did not veto it. (b) A democratic proposal achieves quorum if at least one third of all active noisy players cast votes on it. (c) Quorum for a democratic proposal shall be determined from the number of active noisy players at the time that the proposal was distributed, or at the time it was made a democratic proposal, whichever is later. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 4665 (Kolja), 9 April 2005 text: (a) An ordinary proposal achieves quorum if at least three players cast votes on it, and the Speaker did not veto it. (b) A democratic proposal achieves quorum if at least one third of all active noisy players cast votes on it. (c) Quorum for a democratic proposal shall be determined from the number of active noisy players at the time that the proposal was distributed, or at the time it was made a democratic proposal, whichever is later. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: The quorum for an Agoran decision is one third the number of eligible voters, rounded up, with a minimum of five (unless there are fewer than five eligible voters, in which case the quorum level is the number of eligible voters). history: Amended(23) by Proposal 4964 (Murphy), 3 June 2007 text: Quorum for an Agoran decision is N/3 (where N is the number of eligible voters at the start of the voting period), rounded up, with a minimum of five (unless this is greater than N, in which quorum is N). history: Amended(24) by Proposal 4997 (Zefram, Goddess Eris), 6 June 2007 text: Quorum for an Agoran decision is N/3 (where N is the number of eligible voters at the start of the voting period), rounded up, with a minimum of five (unless this is greater than N, in which quorum is N). Voters whose voting limit is less than one are not considered eligible for the purposes of this rule. history: Amended(25) by Proposal 5000 (Murphy), 12 June 2007 text: Quorum for an Agoran decision is N/3 (where N is the number of eligible voters with a positive voting limit on that decision), rounded up, with a minimum of five (unless this is greater than N, in which case quorum is N). history: Amended(26) by Proposal 5113 (Murphy, Maud), 2 August 2007 text: Quorum for an Agoran decision is N/3 (where N is the number of eligible voters with a positive voting limit on that decision), rounded up, with a minimum of five (unless this is greater than N, in which case quorum is N, or the decision is whether to approve a dependent action, in which case quorum is zero). history: Amended(27) by Proposal 5445 (Goethe, Murphy), 21 February 2008 text: Quorum for an Agoran decision is N/3 (where N is the number of eligible voters with a positive voting limit on that decision), rounded up, with a minimum of five (unless this is greater than N, in which case quorum is N). history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 202 history: Initial Mutable Rule 202, 30 June 1993 text: All players begin with 0 points. Points may not be gained, lost, or traded except as explicitly stated in the rules. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 203 history: Initial Mutable Rule 203, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: The Winner is the first Voter to achieve 100 (positive) points. If more than one Voter achieves this condition simultaneously, all such Voters win. When a game ends in this manner: -If there is only one Winner, that Voter becomes the Speaker, and the old Speaker becomes a Voter -If there is more than one Winner, the Speaker randomly selects one of the Winners, who becomes the new Speaker, and the old Speaker Speaker becomes a Voter. -All Players' scores are reset to 0. -A new game is begun. All Rules and proposed Rule Changes retain the status they had at the end of the old game. text: The winner is the first Voter to achieve 100 (positive) points. If more than one Voter achieves this condition simultaneously, all such Voters win. When a game ends in this manner: -If there is only one winner, that Voter becomes the Speaker, and the old Speaker becomes a Voter -If there is more than one winner, the Speaker randomly selects one of the winners, who becomes the new Speaker, and the old Speaker becomes a Voter. -All players' scores are reset to 0. -A new game is begun. All rules and proposed rule changes retain the status they had at the end of the old game. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 204,415,1036 history: Initial Mutable Rule 204, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: A Proposal shall be made by submitting it to the Speaker. Only Voters may make Proposals. As soon as possible after receiving a Proposal, the Speaker shall assign the Proposal a Number and distribute the Proposal along with its Number to all Players. text: A proposal shall be made by submitting it to the Speaker. Only Voters may make proposals. As soon as possible after receiving a proposal, the Speaker shall assign the proposal a number and distribute the proposal along with its number to all players history: Amended by Proposal 415 (KoJen), 3 September 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: A Proposal by a Voter shall be made by submitting it to the Mighty Speaker. As soon as possible after receiving the Proposal, the Mighty Speaker shall assign the Proposal a Number and distribute the Proposal along with its number to all Players. The Mighty Speaker may also make Proposals. The Mighty Speaker must process all pending Voter-submitted Proposals first, and may then Process Proposals of the Mighty Speaker, assigning these Proposals a number and distributing them in the same fashion as any other Proposal. text: A Proposal by a Voter shall be made by submitting it to the Mighty Speaker. As soon as possible after receiving the Proposal, the Mighty Speaker shall assign the Proposal a Number and distribute the Proposal along with its number to all Players. The Mighty Speaker may also make Proposals. The Mighty Speaker must process all pending voter-submitted Proposals first, and may then Process Proposals of the Mighty Speaker, assigning these Proposals a number and distributing them in the same fashion as any other Proposal. history: Amended by Proposal 1036, 21 September 1994 text: A Proposal by a Player shall be made by submitting it to the Mighty Speaker. As soon as possible after receiving the Proposal, the Mighty Speaker shall assign the Proposal a Number. Within seven (7) days of the receipt of the Proposal, and not later than any subsequently received Proposal, the Speaker shall distribute the numbered Proposal to all Players. history: Amended by Rule 750, 21 September 1994 text: A Proposal by a Player shall be made by submitting it to the Mighty Speaker. As soon as possible after receiving the Proposal, the Mighty Speaker shall assign the Proposal a Number. Within seven (7) days of the receipt of the Proposal, and not later than any subsequently received Proposal, the Speaker shall distribute the numbered Proposal to all Players. (*Was: 415*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1530, 24 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1546, 14 April 1995 text: Let there be an Officer called the Promotor. The Promotor shall receive a weekly salary of 3 Points. A Proposal by a Player shall be made by submitting it to the Promotor. As soon as possible after receiving the Proposal, the Promotor shall assign the Proposal a Number. Within seven (7) days of the receipt of the Proposal, and not later than any subsequently received Proposal, the Promotor shall distribute the numbered Proposal to all Players. At the same time e shall distribute any text not part of the proposal which is required to be submitted with it, but eir failure to do so shall not deprive the act of distributing the Proposal of the effects which it would otherwise have. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2056, 19 December 1995 text: Let there be an Officer called the Promotor. The Promotor shall receive a weekly salary of 3 Points. A Proposal by a Player shall be made by submitting it to the Promotor. As soon as possible after receiving the Proposal, the Promotor shall assign the Proposal a Number. Within seven (7) days of the receipt of the Proposal, and not later than any subsequently received Proposal, the Promotor shall post the Proposal to the Public Forum accompanied by its Number, the name of the Player who Proposed the Proposal, and its Adoption Index. At the same time e shall distribute any text not part of the proposal which is required to be submitted with it, but eir failure to do so shall not deprive the act of distributing the Proposal of the effects which it would otherwise have. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2451, 6 February 1996 text: Let there be an Officer called the Promotor. The Promotor shall receive a weekly salary of 5 Points. A Proposal by a Player shall be made by submitting it to the Promotor. As soon as possible after receiving the Proposal, the Promotor shall assign the Proposal a Number. Within seven (7) days of the receipt of the Proposal, and not later than any subsequently received Proposal, the Promotor shall post the Proposal to the Public Forum accompanied by its Number, the name of the Player who Proposed the Proposal, and its Adoption Index. At the same time e shall distribute any text not part of the proposal which is required to be submitted with it, but eir failure to do so shall not deprive the act of distributing the Proposal of the effects which it would otherwise have. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2522, 10 March 1996 text: As soon as possible after the Promotor receives a new Proposal, e shall assign to it a Number as specified in other Rules. Within seven days of the receipt of a Proposal, and not later than any subsequently received Proposal, the Promotor shall distribute this Proposal to the Public Forum, accompanied by its Number, the identity of its Proposing Entity, and its Adoption Index. The failure of the Promotor to distribute any of the above accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 2829 (Zefram), 7 March 1997 text: As soon as possible after the Promotor receives a new Proposal, e shall assign to it a Number as specified in other Rules. As Soon As Possible after the receipt of the Proposal, the Promotor shall distribute it to the Public Forum, accompanied by its Number, the identity of its Proposing Entity, and a clear indication of whether the Proposal is Disinterested. The failure of the Promotor to distribute any of the above accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 text: As soon as possible after the Promotor receives a new Proposal, e shall assign to it a Number as specified in other Rules. E shall then place this Proposal on the Proposal Queue. The Proposal Queue is a list of Proposals, sorted in order of descending Priority. Proposals of the same priority are listed in the order they were proposed. A Proposal's Priority is an integer value. All Proposals initially have a Priority of zero. The Promotor shall publish the Proposal Queue weekly. This publication shall include the number, title, priority, and time of proposal, for each proposal in the Queue. If a Proposal's Priority has changed since the Queue was last published, then this change shall also be published. The actual text of the Proposals in the Queue need not be published. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3706 (Harlequin), 9 March 1998 text: As soon as possible after the Promotor receives a new Proposal, e shall place this Proposal in the Proposal Queue. The Proposal Queue is a list of Proposals, sorted in order of descending Priority. Proposals of the same priority are listed in the order they were proposed. A Proposal's Priority is an integer value. All Proposals initially have a Priority of zero. The Promotor shall publish the Proposal Queue weekly. This publication shall include the number, title, priority, and time of proposal, for each proposal in the Queue. If a Proposal's Priority has changed since the Queue was last published, then this change shall also be published. The actual text of the Proposals in the Queue need not be published. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3841 (Blob), 15 March 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3842 (Chuck), 15 March 1999 text: As soon as possible after the Promotor receives a new Proposal, e shall place this Proposal in the Proposal Queue. The Proposal Queue is a list of Proposals, sorted in order of descending Priority. Proposals of the same priority are listed in the order they were proposed. A Proposal's Priority is an integer multiple of the MUQ of P-Notes. All Proposals initially have a Priority of zero. The Promotor shall publish the Proposal Queue weekly. This publication shall include the title, priority, and time of Proposal, for each Proposal in the Queue. If a Proposal's Priority has changed since the Queue was last published, then this change shall also be published. The actual text of the Proposals in the Queue need not be published. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(13) by Proposal 3945 (Peekee), 20 November 1999 text: As soon as possible after the Promotor receives a new Proposal, e shall place this Proposal in the Proposal Queue. The Proposal Queue is a list of Proposals, sorted in order of descending Priority. Proposals of the same priority are listed in the order they were proposed. A Proposal's Priority is an integer. All Proposals initially have a Priority of zero. A Proposal's Priority Cost is an integer multiple of the MUQ of P-Notes. The base Priority Cost for a Proposal is 1, but this may be altered by other Rules. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 text: As soon as possible after the Promotor receives a new Proposal, e shall place this Proposal in the Proposal Pool. A Proposal's Distribution Cost is an integer multiple of the MUQ of Papyri. The base Distribution Cost of a Proposal is 1, but this may be altered by other Rules. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: As soon as possible after the Promotor receives a new Proposal, e shall place this Proposal in the Proposal Pool. The base Distribution Cost of a Proposal is 1, but this may be altered by other Rules as long as it remains a positive integer. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1036 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 205,693 history: Initial Mutable Rule 205, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal shall be one week, beginning at the time the Speaker distributes the Proposal to all Players. text: The prescribed voting period for a proposal shall be one week, beginning at the time the Speaker distributes the proposal to all players. history: Amended by Proposal 693 (Wes), 12 November 1993 text: The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal shall be seven days, beginning at the time that the Proposal is distributed to all Players. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1564 (Steve), 28 April 1995 text: The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is ten days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Players. history: Infected and Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1454, 14 September 1997 text: The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is ten days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Players. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Rule 693, 28 September 1997 text: The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is ten days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Players. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3809 (General Chaos), 7 December 1998 text: The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is seven days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Players. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3921 (Wes), 3 October 1999 text: The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is seven days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Players. Other Rules may specify other Voting Periods for particular types of Proposals. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3968 (harvel), 4 February 2000 text: The Voting Period for a Proposal is seven days, beginning when the Proposal is distributed. Other Rules may specify other lengths of Voting Periods for particular classes of Proposals. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4040 (Oerjan), 7 August 2000 history: Power changed from 2 to 3 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: When the rules calls for an Agoran decision to be made, the decisionmaking process takes place in the following three stages: (a) Initiation of the decision: The decisionmaking process begins when a person authorized to initiate the decision announces the matter to be decided, including any additional information the rules require to be in that announcement. (b) Voting of the people: Immediately thereafter, the voting period for the decision begins. During the voting period, eligible voters may vote on the matter, as described elsewhere. (c) Resolution of the decision: After the voting period for the decision ends, any person authorized by the rules to resolve the decision may announce that the matter has been decided, specifying the option selected by Agora. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: When the rules calls for an Agoran decision to be made, the decisionmaking process takes place in the following three stages, each described elsewhere: (a) Initiation of the decision. (b) Voting of the people. (c) Resolution of the decision. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: When the rules calls for an Agoran decision to be made, the decision-making process takes place in the following three stages, each described elsewhere: (a) Initiation of the decision. (b) Voting of the people. (c) Resolution of the decision. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 206 history: Initial Mutable Rule 206, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Each Voter has exactly one Vote. The Speaker may not Vote. text: Each Voter has exactly one vote. The Speaker may not vote. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1479, 15 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1553, 14 April 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1565, 28 April 1995 text: Each Player has two votes per Proposal, unless another Rule specifically says otherwise, and no Player shall have more than five votes on any Proposal, regardless of what any other Rule may say to the contrary. The casting of any votes in addition to a Player's first vote may only be achieved by the casting of Extra Votes, as specified in other Rules. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1641, 1 August 1995 text: A Voting Entity is an Entity which is generally authorized by the Rules to cast a vote or votes on a Proposal, although other Rules may withdraw this authorization from a Voting Entity in specific circumstances without that Entity thereby ceasing to be a Voting Entity. No Entity is permitted to vote on a Proposal unless it is a Voting Entity, and only those Entities designated by the Rules to be Voting Entites are Voting Entities. Players and Groups are Voting Entities. Each Voting Entity has two votes on a Proposal, unless another Rule says otherwise. However, no such Entity shall have more than five votes on any Proposal, regardless of what any other Rule may say to the contrary. The casting of any votes in addition to an Entity's first vote may only be achieved by the casting of Extra Votes, if that is permitted, as specified in other Rules. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: A Voting Entity is an Entity which is generally authorized by the Rules to cast a vote or votes on a Proposal, although other Rules may withdraw this authorization from a Voting Entity in specific circumstances without that Entity thereby ceasing to be a Voting Entity. No Entity is permitted to vote on a Proposal unless it is a Voting Entity, and only those Entities designated by the Rules to be Voting Entities are Voting Entities. Players and Groups are Voting Entities. Each Voting Entity has two votes on a Proposal, unless another Rule says otherwise. However, no such Entity shall have more than five votes on any Proposal, regardless of what any other Rule may say to the contrary. The casting of any votes in addition to an Entity's first vote may only be achieved by the casting of Extra Votes, if that is permitted, as specified in other Rules. history: Infected and Amended(6) by Rule 1454, 14 November 1995 text: A Voting Entity is an Entity which is generally authorized by the Rules to cast a vote or votes on a Proposal, although other Rules may withdraw this authorization from a Voting Entity in specific circumstances without that Entity thereby ceasing to be a Voting Entity. No Entity is permitted to vote on a Proposal unless it is a Voting Entity, and only those Entities designated by the Rules to be Voting Entities are Voting Entities. Players and Groups are Voting Entities. Each Voting Entity has two votes on a Proposal, unless another Rule says otherwise. However, no such Entity shall have more than five votes on any Proposal, regardless of what any other Rule may say to the contrary. The casting of any votes in addition to an Entity's first vote may only be achieved by the casting of Extra Votes, if that is permitted, as specified in other Rules. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2672, 26 September 1996 text: A Voting Entity is an Entity which is generally authorized by the Rules to cast a vote or votes on a Proposal, although other Rules may withdraw this authorization from a Voting Entity in specific circumstances without that Entity thereby ceasing to be a Voting Entity. No Entity is permitted to vote on a Proposal unless it is a Voting Entity, and only those Entities designated by the Rules to be Voting Entities are Voting Entities. Players and Groups are Voting Entities. Each Voting Entity has two votes on a Proposal, unless another Rule says otherwise. However, no such Entity shall have more than five votes on any Proposal, regardless of what any other Rule may say to the contrary. The casting of any votes in addition to an Entity's first vote may only be achieved by the casting of Extra Votes, if that is permitted, as specified in other Rules. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=2 by Proposal 2672, 26 September 1996 history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 2817 (Blob), 23 February 1997 text: A Voting Entity is an Entity which is generally authorized by the Rules to cast a vote or votes on a Proposal, although other Rules may withdraw this authorization from a Voting Entity in specific circumstances without that Entity thereby ceasing to be a Voting Entity. No Entity is permitted to vote on a Proposal unless it is a Voting Entity, and only those Entities designated by the Rules to be Voting Entities are Voting Entities. Players and Groups are Voting Entities. Each Voting Entity has two votes on a Proposal, unless another Rule says otherwise. However, no such Entity shall have more than five votes on any Proposal, regardless of what any other Rule may say to the contrary. The casting of any votes may only be achieved by the casting of Extra Votes, as specified in other Rules. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: A Voting Entity is an Entity which is generally authorized by the Rules to cast a vote or votes on a Proposal, although other Rules may withdraw this authorization from a Voting Entity in specific circumstances without that Entity thereby ceasing to be a Voting Entity. No Entity is permitted to vote on a Proposal unless it is a Voting Entity, and only those Entities designated by the Rules to be Voting Entities are Voting Entities. Players and Groups are Voting Entities. Each Voting Entity has two votes on a Proposal, unless another Rule says otherwise. However, no such Entity shall have more than five votes on any Proposal, regardless of what any other Rule may say to the contrary. The casting of any votes may only be achieved by the casting of Voting Tokens, as specified in other Rules. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3693 (Steve), 26 February 1998 text: A Voting Entity is an Entity which is generally authorized by the Rules to cast a vote or votes on a Proposal, although other Rules may withdraw this authorization from a Voting Entity in specific circumstances without that Entity thereby ceasing to be a Voting Entity. No Entity is permitted to vote on a Proposal unless it is a Voting Entity, and only those Entities designated by the Rules to be Voting Entities are Voting Entities. Players and Groups are Voting Entities. Each Voting Entity has two votes on a Proposal, unless another Rule says otherwise. However, no such Entity shall have more than five votes on any Proposal, regardless of what any other Rule may say to the contrary. history: ... history: Amended(11) text: A Voting Entity is an Entity which is generally authorized by the Rules to cast a vote or votes on a Proposal, although other Rules may withdraw this authorization from a Voting Entity in specific circumstances without that Entity thereby ceasing to be a Voting Entity. No Entity is permitted to vote on a Proposal unless it is a Voting Entity, and only those Entities designated by the Rules to be Voting Entities are Voting Entities. Each Voting Entity has two votes on a Proposal, unless another Rule says otherwise. However, no such Entity shall have more than five votes on any Proposal, regardless of what any other Rule may say to the contrary. history: ... history: Amended(13) text: A Voting Entity is an Entity which is generally authorized by the Rules to cast a vote or votes on a Proposal, although other Rules may withdraw this authorization from a Voting Entity in specific circumstances without that Entity thereby ceasing to be a Voting Entity. No Entity is permitted to vote on a Proposal unless it is a Voting Entity, and only those Entities designated by the Rules to be Voting Entities are Voting Entities. All players with less than 15 Blots are Voting Entities. Each Voting Entity may cast a number of votes on a Proposal up to the Maximum Votes for that Entity most recently reported in an Accountor's Report at the time the Proposal is distributed. If the Maximum Votes for a Voting Entity has never been published at the time the Proposal is distributed, that Entity may cast up to 5 Votes on that Proposal. history: ... history: Amended(17) text: An entity is permitted to vote on a Proposal if and only if e is a Voter and is not Denied for that Proposal at the time e attempts to cast eir vote. On a Democratic Proposal, each entity which is permitted to vote on that Proposal may cast a number of votes up to their Maximum Votes as shown in the most recently published Accountor's Report at the time that the Proposal is distributed, unless other Rules prohibit them from doing so. If the Maximum Votes for a Voter have never been published at the time a Proposal is distributed, their Maximum Votes is 5 for that Proposal. All Players are Voters. However, a Player is Denied for all Proposals while e has more than 3 Blots. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 207,683 history: Initial Mutable Rule 207, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Voters may Vote either FOR or AGAINST any Proposal within its prescribed Voting Period. In order to be legally cast, the Vote must be received by the Speaker by the end of the prescribed Voting Period. The Speaker may not reveal any Votes until the end of the prescribed Voting Period. Any Voter who does not legally Vote within the prescribed Voting Period shall be deemed to have abstained. text: Voters may vote either for or against any proposal within its prescribed voting period. In order to be legally cast, the vote must be received by the Speaker by the end of the prescribed voting period. The Speaker may not reveal any votes until the end of the prescribed voting period. Any Voter who does not legally vote within the prescribed voting period shall be deemed to have abstained. history: Amended by Proposal 683 (Jeffrey S.), 10 November 1993 text: Voters may cast of a Vote of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN for any Proposal within its prescribed Voting Period. In order to be legally cast, the Vote must be received by the Counting Speaker during the prescribed Voting Period. The Speaker will reveal the Votes cast by each Voter only after the prescribed Voting Period has ended. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1473, 8 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1531, 24 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1554, 17 April 1995 text: Players may cast of a Vote of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN for any Proposal within its prescribed Voting Period. In order to be legally cast, the Vote must be received by the Counting Assessor or posted to the Public Forum during the prescribed Voting Period. The Assessor will reveal the Votes cast by each Player only after the prescribed Voting Period has ended. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1641, 1 August 1995 text: Voting Entities may cast a vote of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN on any Proposal within its prescribed Voting Period. In order to be legally cast, a vote by a Player or a Group must be received by the Counting Assessor or posted to the Public Forum during the prescribed Voting Period. The conditions under which a Vote by a Voting Entity which is not a Player or a Group (if any such exist) is legally cast are described in other Rules. The Assessor will reveal the Votes cast by each Voting Entity only after the prescribed Voting Period has ended. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2590, 1 May 1996 text: A Vote upon a Proposal must be one of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN (or an obvious synonym of one of these). Something which is not one of these is not a Vote upon a Proposal. A Vote cast upon a Proposal by a Voting Entity which has an Executor is cast at the time its Executor either posts it to the Public Forum or otherwise sends it to the Assessor. A Vote is legally cast if it is cast during the Voting Period of that Proposal, and if that Voting Entity is entitled to cast a Vote on that particular Proposal. A Vote cast by a Voting Entity which does not have an Executor is cast at a time and in a manner specified in other Rules. This Rule in no way authorizes any Entity to cast Votes upon Proposals. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3718 (Steve), 3 April 1998 text: A Voting Entity votes upon a Proposal when, during the Voting Period of that Proposal, e informs the Assessor of the vote or votes e is casting upon that Proposal, provided that e is authorized to cast those votes on that Proposal. Once cast, a vote cannot be changed or cancelled by the Voting Entity which cast it, although it may be cancelled as other Rules require. A vote upon a Proposal must be one of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN (or an obvious synonym of one of these). Something which is not one of these is not a vote upon a Proposal. A vote cast by a Voting Entity which does not have an Executor is cast at a time and in a manner specified in other Rules. This Rule in no way authorizes any entity to cast votes upon Proposals. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3937 (Wes), 31 October 1999 text: an Entity votes upon a Proposal when, during the Voting Period of that Proposal, e informs the Assessor of the vote or votes e is casting upon that Proposal, provided that e is authorized to cast those votes on that Proposal. Once cast, a vote cannot be changed or cancelled by the Voting Entity which cast it, although it may be cancelled as other Rules require. A vote upon a Proposal must be one of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN (or an obvious synonym of one of these). Something which is not one of these is not a vote upon a Proposal. A vote cast by an Entity which does not have an Executor is cast at a time and in a manner specified in other Rules. This Rule in no way authorizes any entity to cast votes upon Proposals. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3968 (harvel), 4 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3972 (Peekee), 14 February 2000 text: A Voter authorised to cast votes on a particular Proposal may do so only by informing the Assessor of the vote or votes e is casting on that Proposal. Once cast, a vote cannot be changed or cancelled by the Voter which cast it, although it may be cancelled as other Rules require. A vote upon a Proposal must be one of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN (or an obvious synonym of one of these). Something which is not one of these is not a vote upon a Proposal. A vote cast by an entity which does not have an Executor is cast at a time and in a manner specified in other Rules. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4190 (Steve), 18 July 2001 text: A Voter authorised to cast votes on a particular Proposal may do so only by informing the Assessor of the vote or votes e is casting on that Proposal. Once cast, a vote cannot be changed or cancelled by the Voter which cast it, although it may be cancelled as other Rules require. A vote upon a Proposal must be one of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN (or an obvious synonym of one of these). Something which is not one of these is not a vote upon a Proposal. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4699 (Sherlock), 18 April 2005 text: A Voter authorised to cast votes on a particular Proposal may do so only by informing the Assessor of the vote or votes e is casting on that Proposal. A Voter may change or cancel eir vote or votes during the Voting Period by informing the Assessor. A vote upon a Proposal must be one of FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN (or an obvious synonym of one of these). Something which is not one of these is not a vote upon a Proposal. history: Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: An eligible voter on a particular Agoran decision submits a ballot to the vote collector by publishing a valid notice indicating which one of the available options e selects. To be valid, the ballot must satisfy the following conditions: (a) The ballot is submitted by an eligible voter during the voting period for the decision. (b) The ballot clearly identifies the matter to be decided. (c) The ballot clearly identifies the option selected by the voter. (d) The voter has not publicly retracted the ballot during the voting period. The strength of an option is the number of valid ballots selecting that option. Other rules may place further constraints on the validity of ballots. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would loosen the constraints specified by this rule. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4964 (Murphy), 3 June 2007 text: An eligible voter on a particular Agoran decision submits a ballot to the vote collector by publishing a valid notice indicating which one of the available options e selects. To be valid, the ballot must satisfy the following conditions: (a) The ballot is submitted during the voting period for the decision, and the submitter is an eligible voter at the time of submission. (b) The ballot clearly identifies the matter to be decided. (c) The ballot clearly identifies the option selected by the voter. (d) The voter has not publicly retracted the ballot during the voting period. The strength of an option is the number of valid ballots selecting that option. Other rules may place further constraints on the validity of ballots. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would loosen the constraints specified by this rule. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 5078 (Zefram), 18 July 2007 text: An eligible voter on a particular Agoran decision submits a ballot to the vote collector by publishing a valid notice indicating which one of the available options e selects. To be valid, the ballot must satisfy the following conditions: (a) The ballot is submitted during the voting period for the decision, and the submitter is an eligible voter at the time of submission. (b) The ballot clearly identifies the matter to be decided. (c) The ballot clearly identifies the option selected by the voter. (d) The voter has not publicly retracted the ballot during the voting period. Among the otherwise-valid votes on an Agoran decision, only the first N submitted by each entity are valid, where N is the entity's voting limit on that decision. The voting limit of an entity that is not an eligible voter on an Agoran decision is zero. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an Agoran decision is one, except where rules say otherwise. The strength of an option is the number of valid ballots selecting that option. Other rules may place further constraints on the validity of ballots. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would loosen the constraints specified by this rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 208 history: Initial Mutable Rule 208, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: At the end of the prescribed Voting Period on a Proposal, the Speaker shall reveal all Votes legally cast on that Proposal. If the Speaker's consent may be required for a Proposal to be adopted then the Speaker should indicate at that time whether or not e gives eir consent. If the Speaker does not explicitly indicate that e refuses to consent to the Proposal, it shall be assumed that e consents. text: At the end of the prescribed Voting Period on a Proposal, the Speaker shall reveal all Votes legally cast on that Proposal. If the Speaker's consent may be required for a Proposal to be adopted then the Speaker should indicate at that time whether or not e gives eir consent. If the Speaker does not explicitly indicate that e refuses to consent to the Proposal, it shall be assumed that e consents. text: At the end of the prescribed voting period on a proposal, the Speaker shall reveal all votes legally cast on that proposal. If the Speaker's consent may be required for a proposal to be adopted, then the Speaker should indicate at that time whether or not e gives eir consent. If the Speaker does not explicitly indicate that e refuses to consent to the proposal, it shall be assumed that e consents. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1401, 29 January 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1531, 24 March 1995 text: As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period on a given Proposal, the Assessor shall publish all the Votes cast upon that Proposal. history: Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: The vote collector for a particular Agoran decision is authorized to resolve that decision, and does so by publishing a valid notice which states that the matter has been resolved, indicating the option selected by Agora. To be valid, this notice must satisfy the following conditions: (a) It is published after the voting period has ended. (b) It clearly identifies the matter to be resolved. (c) It clearly identifies the options available. (d) It specifies which option was selected by Agora, as described elsewhere, and provides a tally of the voters' valid ballots on the various options. Each Agoran decision shall have at most one vote collector at a time. The identity of the vote collector is set by the message initiating the decision, and can only be changed as specified by other rules with power at least as great as that of this rule. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would provide another mechanism by which an Agoran decision may be resolved. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5113 (Murphy, Maud), 2 August 2007 text: The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision may resolve it by announcement, indicating the option selected by Agora. E SHALL do so as soon as possible after the end of the voting period. To be valid, this announcement must satisfy the following conditions: (a) It is published after the voting period has ended. (b) It clearly identifies the matter to be resolved. (c) It clearly identifies the options available. (d) It specifies which option was selected by Agora, as described elsewhere, and provides a tally of the voters' valid ballots on the various options. Each Agoran decision has exactly one vote collector. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would provide another mechanism by which an Agoran decision may be resolved. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5229 (root), 27 September 2007 text: The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision may resolve it by announcement, indicating the option selected by Agora. E SHALL do so as soon as possible after the end of the voting period. To be valid, this announcement must satisfy the following conditions: (a) It is published after the voting period has ended. (b) It clearly identifies the matter to be resolved. (c) It specifies which option was selected by Agora, as described elsewhere, and provides a tally of the voters' valid ballots on the various options. Each Agoran decision has exactly one vote collector. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would provide another mechanism by which an Agoran decision may be resolved. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5450 (Murphy), 27 February 2008 text: The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision CAN resolve it by announcement, indicating the option selected by Agora. If it was required to be initiated, then e SHALL resolve it as soon as possible after the end of the voting period. To be valid, this announcement must satisfy the following conditions: (a) It is published after the voting period has ended. (b) It clearly identifies the matter to be resolved. (c) It specifies which option was selected by Agora, as described elsewhere, and provides a tally of the voters' valid ballots on the various options. Each Agoran decision has exactly one vote collector. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would provide another mechanism by which an Agoran decision may be resolved. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5453 (Murphy), 1 March 2008 text: The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision CAN resolve it by announcement, indicating the option selected by Agora. If it was required to be initiated, then e SHALL resolve it as soon as possible after the end of the voting period. To be valid, this announcement must satisfy the following conditions: (a) It is published after the voting period has ended. (b) It clearly identifies the matter to be resolved. (c) It specifies which option was selected by Agora, as described elsewhere, and provides a tally of the voters' valid ballots on the various options. Each Agoran decision has exactly one vote collector, defaulting to the initiator of the decision. If the vote collector is defined by reference to a position (or, in the default case, if the initiator was so defined), then the vote collector is the current holder of that position. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would provide another mechanism by which an Agoran decision may be resolved. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 209,396,658,761,955 history: Initial Mutable Rule 209, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: The required Votes for a Proposal to be adopted is as follows: For a Proposal which would directly alter the actions which are required of and/or forbidden to the Speaker: a) a simple majority of all Votes legally cast, if the Speaker consents; b) a 2/3 majority of all Votes legally cast, if the Speaker does not consent; For all other Proposals, a simple majority of Votes legally cast. This Rule defers to Rules which set the required number of Votes for Proposals which propose to transmute a Rule. text: The required votes for a proposal to be adopted is as follows: For a proposal which would directly alter the actions which are required of and/or forbidden to the Speaker: a) a simple majority of all votes legally cast, if the Speaker consents; b) a 2/3 majority of all votes legally cast, if the Speaker does not consent; For all other proposals, a simple majority of votes legally cast. This rule defers to rules which set the required number of votes for proposals which propose to transmute a rule. history: Amended by Proposal 396 (KoJen), 23 August 1993 text: The required votes for a Proposal to be adopted is as follows: For a Proposal which would directly alter the actions which are required of and/or forbidden to the Mighty Speaker: a) a simple majority of all votes legally cast, if the Mighty Speaker consents; b) a 2/3 majority of all votes legally cast, if the Mighty Speaker does not consent; For all other Proposals, a simple majority of votes legally cast. In case of a tie in a simple-majority Vote, the Mighty Speaker may, but is not required to, cast a tie-breaking Vote. The Mighty Speaker receives no Point awards or penalties for doing so. This Rule defers to rules which set the required Number of Votes for Proposals which propose to Transmute a Rule. history: Amended by Proposal 658, 29 October 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Proposal 761, 8 December 1993 text: When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the Votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Speaker. If a Proposal is not Contested, and there are more FOR votes cast then AGAINST votes, then that Proposal shall take effect. If such a Proposal has an equal number of FOR and AGAINST Votes, then the Speaker shall decide whether the Proposal shall be Adopted, or if that Proposal shall fail. If the Proposal is Contested, and the number of FOR votes cast is at least twice the number of AGAINST votes cast, then that Proposal shall take effect. If a Rule will change the actions required of or forbidden to the Speaker, and the Speaker opposed the Proposal, then that Proposal shall be considered Contested. The Speaker shall declare if e opposes the Proposal when e distributes the Proposal. history: Amended by Rule 750, 8 December 1993 text: When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the Votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Speaker. If a Proposal is not Contested, and there are more FOR votes cast then AGAINST votes, then that Proposal shall take effect. If such a Proposal has an equal number of FOR and AGAINST Votes, then the Speaker shall decide whether the Proposal shall be Adopted, or if that Proposal shall fail. If the Proposal is Contested, and the number of FOR votes cast is at least twice the number of AGAINST votes cast, then that Proposal shall take effect. If a Rule will change the actions required of or forbidden to the Speaker, and the Speaker opposed the Proposal, then that Proposal shall be considered Contested. The Speaker shall declare if e opposes the Proposal when e distributes the Proposal. (*Was: 658*) history: Amended by Proposal 955 (Garth), 25 July 1994 text: When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the Votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Speaker. Let the number of Votes in favor of a Proposal divided by the number of Votes opposed to that Proposal be known as the Voting Factor for that Proposal. If the Voting Factor exceeds the mandated Adoption Factor for a given Proposal, then that Proposal shall be Adopted. If the Voting Factor exactly equals the required Adoption Factor, then the Speaker shall decide whether the Proposal shall be Adopted, or if the Proposal shall fail. The Adoption Factor for all Proposals shall be 1, unless otherwise specified in the Rules. An Adoption Factor of unanimity is a special case: It is defined as an absence of Votes in opposition, with at least one Vote in favor. history: Amended by Rule 750, 25 July 1994 text: When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the Votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Speaker. Let the number of Votes in favor of a Proposal divided by the number of Votes opposed to that Proposal be known as the Voting Factor for that Proposal. If the Voting Factor exceeds the mandated Adoption Factor for a given Proposal, then that Proposal shall be Adopted. If the Voting Factor exactly equals the required Adoption Factor, then the Speaker shall decide whether the Proposal shall be Adopted, or if the Proposal shall fail. The Adoption Factor for all Proposals shall be 1, unless otherwise specified in the Rules. An Adoption Factor of unanimity is a special case: It is defined as an absence of Votes in opposition, with at least one Vote in favor. (*Was: 761*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1279, 24 October 1994 text: When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the Votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Speaker. The Proposal shall then be assigned a Voting Index, as follows: the Proposal received no Votes opposed, and at least one Vote in favor, the Voting Index shall be Unanimity; if there are no Votes in favor, the Voting Index shall be zero; in all other cases, the Voting Index shall be the number of Votes in favor divided by the number of Votes opposed. If the Voting Index is greater than the Adoption Index for the given Proposal, then that Proposal shall pass. If the Voting Index exactly equals the Adoption Index, then the Speaker shall choose whether the Proposal passes or fails. If the Voting Index is less than the Adoption Index, the Proposal shall fail. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1531, 24 March 1995 text: When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the Votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Assessor. The Proposal shall then be assigned a Voting Index, as follows: the Proposal received no Votes opposed, and at least one Vote in favor, the Voting Index shall be Unanimity; if there are no Votes in favor, the Voting Index shall be zero; in all other cases, the Voting Index shall be the number of Votes in favor divided by the number of Votes opposed. If the Voting Index is greater than the Adoption Index for the given Proposal, then that Proposal shall pass. If the Voting Index exactly equals the Adoption Index, then the Assessor shall choose whether the Proposal passes or fails. If the Voting Index is less than the Adoption Index, the Proposal shall fail. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1723, 6 October 1995 text: When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the Votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Assessor. The Proposal shall then be assigned a Voting Index, as follows: the Proposal received no Votes opposed, and at least one Vote in favor, the Voting Index shall be Unanimity; if there are no Votes in favor, the Voting Index shall be zero; in all other cases, the Voting Index shall be the number of Votes in favor divided by the number of Votes opposed. If the Voting Index is greater than the Adoption Index for the given Proposal, or if both equal Unanimity, then that Proposal passes. Otherwise, it fails. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=3 by Proposal 2398, 20 January 1996 history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3721 (Steve), 16 April 1998 text: When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the uncancelled votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Assessor. The Proposal shall then be assigned a Voting Index, as follows: if the Proposal received no votes opposed, and at least one vote in favor, the Voting Index shall be Unanimity; if there are no votes in favor, the Voting Index shall be zero; in all other cases, the Voting Index shall be the number of votes in favor divided by the number of votes opposed. If the Voting Index is greater than the Adoption Index for the Proposal, or if both equal Unanimity, and there were at least three votes in favor of the Proposal, then that Proposal is adopted. Otherwise, it fails. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3818 (Chuck), 21 December 1998 text: When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the uncancelled votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Assessor. The Proposal shall then be assigned a Voting Index, as follows: if the Proposal received no votes opposed, and at least one vote in favor, the Voting Index shall be Unanimity; if there are no votes in favor, the Voting Index shall be zero; in all other cases, the Voting Index shall be the number of votes in favor divided by the number of votes opposed. If the Voting Index is greater than the Adoption Index for the Proposal, or if both equal Unanimity, and there were at least three votes in favor of the Proposal, then that Proposal is adopted. Otherwise, it fails. A Proposal may not have its Voting Index set except as described in this Rule. A Proposal may not be adopted (synonymous with the Proposal passing) except as described in this Rule. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4263 (Steve), 4 March 2002 text: (a) When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the uncancelled votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Assessor. The Proposal shall then be assigned a Voting Index, as follows: if the Proposal received no votes against, and at least one vote for, the Voting Index shall be Unanimity; if there are no votes for, the Voting Index shall be zero; in all other cases, the Voting Index shall be the number of votes for divided by the number of votes against. (b) If the Voting Index is greater than the Adoption Index for the Proposal (or if both equal Unanimity), and if Quorum for the Proposal is achieved, then that Proposal is adopted. Otherwise, it fails. (c) A Proposal may not have its Voting Index set except as described in this Rule. A Proposal cannot be adopted except as described in this Rule. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4302 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: (a) When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the uncancelled votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Assessor. The Proposal shall then be assigned a Voting Index, as follows: if the Proposal received no votes against, and at least one vote for, the Voting Index shall be Unanimity; if there are no votes for, the Voting Index shall be zero; in all other cases, the Voting Index shall be the number of votes for divided by the number of votes against. (b) If the Voting Index is greater than or equal to the Adoption Index for the Proposal, and if Quorum for the Proposal is achieved, then that Proposal is adopted. Otherwise, it fails. (c) A Proposal may not have its Voting Index set except as described in this Rule. A Proposal cannot be adopted except as described in this Rule. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4412 (Steve), 6 November 2002 text: (a) When the Voting Period for a Proposal has ended, the uncancelled votes which have been legally cast shall be counted by the Assessor. The Proposal shall then be assigned a Voting Index, as follows: if the Proposal received no votes against, and at least one vote for, the Voting Index shall be Unanimity; if there are no votes for, the Voting Index shall be zero; in all other cases, the Voting Index shall be the number of votes for divided by the number of votes against. (b) If the Voting Index is greater than one, and greater than or equal to the Adoption Index for the Proposal, and if Quorum for the Proposal is achieved, then that Proposal is adopted. Otherwise, it fails. (c) A Proposal may not have its Voting Index set except as described in this Rule. A Proposal cannot be adopted except as described in this Rule. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: To determine which option on a particular Agoran decision was selected by Agora, the vote collector shall perform the following steps in order after the voting period has ended. (a) E shall invalidate any ballots which the rules require em to invalidate, and no others. (b) E shall count the number of distinct voters who submitted ballots which remain valid. If this number is less than the quorum and there is more than one available option, then the option selected by Agora is FAILED QUORUM. Otherwise, the decision achieved quorum. (c) If the decision is whether to adopt a proposal or referendum, e shall determine the voting index as follows: (1) if the strength of FOR is positive and the strength of AGAINST is zero, then the voting index is Unanimity; but (2) if the strength of FOR is zero, then the voting index is zero; otherwise, (3) the voting index is the ratio of the strength of FOR to the strength of AGAINST. If the voting index exceeds one and meets or exceeds the adoption index of the decision, and if further quorum was achieved, then the option selected by Agora is ADOPTED. Otherwise, the option selected by Agora is REJECTED. (d) If the decision is an election, then as long as quorum is achieved, the vote collector has the privilege to choose any option the strength of which meets or exceeds that of any other option to be the option selected by Agora. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: To determine which option on a particular Agoran decision was selected by Agora, the vote collector shall perform the following steps in order after the voting period has ended. (a) E shall invalidate any ballots which the rules require em to invalidate, and no others. (b) E shall count the number of distinct voters who submitted ballots which remain valid. If this number is less than the quorum and there is more than one available option, then the option selected by Agora is FAILED QUORUM. Otherwise, the decision achieved quorum. (c) If the decision is whether to adopt a proposal, e shall determine the voting index as follows: (1) if the strength of FOR is positive and the strength of AGAINST is zero, then the voting index is Unanimity; but (2) if the strength of FOR is zero, then the voting index is zero; otherwise, (3) the voting index is the ratio of the strength of FOR to the strength of AGAINST. If the voting index exceeds one and meets or exceeds the adoption index of the decision, and if further quorum was achieved, then the option selected by Agora is ADOPTED. Otherwise, the option selected by Agora is REJECTED. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5113 (Murphy, Maud), 2 August 2007 text: The outcome of an Agoran decision is determined as follows. (a) If there is more than one available option, and the number of distinct voters who submitted valid ballots is less than quorum, then the outcome is FAILED QUORUM, regardless of the remainder of this rule. Otherwise, the decision achieved quorum. (b) If the decision is whether to adopt a proposal, then the voting index is the ratio of the strength of FOR to the strength of AGAINST. If the voting index is greater than 1, and greater than or equal to the decision's adoption index, then the outcome is ADOPTED; otherwise, the outcome is REJECTED. (d) If the decision is whether to approve a dependent action: (1) If the strength of OBJECT is greater than or equal to the objection index (if any), then the outcome is REJECTED. (2) If the strength of SUPPORT is less than the support index (if any), then the outcome is REJECTED. (3) If the ratio of the strength of SUPPORT to the combined strength of SUPPORT and OBJECT is less than or equal to the majority index (if any), then the outcome is REJECTED. (4) Otherwise, the outcome is APPROVED. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 text: The outcome of an Agoran decision is determined as follows. (a) If there is more than one available option, and the number of distinct voters who submitted valid ballots is less than quorum, then the outcome is FAILED QUORUM, regardless of the remainder of this rule. Otherwise, the decision achieved quorum. (b) If the decision is ordinary or democratic, then the voting index is the ratio of the strength of FOR to the strength of AGAINST. If the voting index is greater than 1, and greater than or equal to the decision's adoption index, then the outcome is ADOPTED; otherwise, the outcome is REJECTED. (d) If the decision is whether to approve a dependent action: (1) If the strength of OBJECT is greater than or equal to the objection index (if any), then the outcome is REJECTED. (2) If the strength of SUPPORT is less than the support index (if any), then the outcome is REJECTED. (3) If the ratio of the strength of SUPPORT to the combined strength of SUPPORT and OBJECT is less than or equal to the majority index (if any), then the outcome is REJECTED. (4) Otherwise, the outcome is APPROVED. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 5445 (Goethe, Murphy), 21 February 2008 text: The outcome of an Agoran decision is determined as follows. (a) If there is more than one available option, and the number of distinct voters who submitted valid ballots is less than quorum, then the outcome is FAILED QUORUM, regardless of the remainder of this rule. Otherwise, the decision achieved quorum. (b) If the decision is ordinary or democratic, then the voting index is the ratio of the strength of FOR to the strength of AGAINST. If the voting index is greater than 1, and greater than or equal to the decision's adoption index, then the outcome is ADOPTED; otherwise, the outcome is REJECTED. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 210,376 history: Initial Mutable Rule 210, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: An adopted Rule Change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the Vote that adopted it. text: An adopted rule change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it. history: Amended by Proposal 376 (Ronald Kunne), ca. Aug. 16 1993 text: An adopted rule change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it. The moment of the completion of the vote is defined by the date and time given in the line starting with "Date:" of the Nomic listserver message send by the Benevolent Speaker, announcing the result of the vote on the corresponding proposal. history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1271, 24 October 1994 text: A Proposal which is Adopted takes effect at the time date- stamped on the first message sent by the Speaker to reach the Public Forum announcing the results of the voting on that Proposal. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1490, 15 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1531, 24 March 1995 text: A Proposal which is Adopted takes effect at the time date- stamped on the first message sent by the Assessor to reach the Public Forum announcing the results of the voting on that Proposal. If the message sent by the Assessor announcing the results of the voting on a Proposal also contains the results of voting upon other Proposals, all such Proposals shall take effect at the same time, but in order by increasing Proposal Number. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3842 (Chuck), 15 March 1999 text: A Proposal which is Adopted takes effect at the time date- stamped on the first message sent by the Assessor to reach the Public Forum announcing the results of the voting on that Proposal. If the message sent by the Assessor announcing the results of the voting on a Proposal also contains the results of voting upon other Proposals, all such Proposals shall take effect at the same time, but in the order in which they were distributed. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4040 (Oerjan), 7 August 2000 history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 376 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 [orphaned text: An adopted rule change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it. The moment of the completion of the vote is defined by the date and time given in the line starting with "Date:" of the Nomic listserver message send by the Benevolent Speaker, announcing the result of the vote on the corresponding proposal. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 211 history: Initial Mutable Rule 211, 30 June 1993 text: Voters who voted against proposals which are adopted receive 10 points apiece. Players whose proposals are adopted shall receive a random number of points in the range 1-10 inclusive. Players whose proposals are not adopted shall lose 10 points. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 212,1030 history: Initial Mutable Rule 212, 30 June 1993 [Have 3 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: If two or more Mutable Rules conflict with one another, or if two or more Immutable Rules conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lowest ordinal Number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. text: If two or more Mutable Rules conflict with one another, or if two or more Immutable Rules conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lowest ordinal Number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. text: If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence. If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. history: Amended by Proposal 1030, 15 September 1994 text: There are two types of conflicts between rules: (a) conflicts between rules with the same Mutability Indices; (b) conflicts between rules with different Mutability Indices. (a) Conflicts between Rules with the same Mutability Indices: If two or more Rules with the same Mutability Indices conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lower Number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. (b) Conflicts between Rules with different Mutability Indices: Other Rules define the resolution of conflicts between Rules with Mutability Indices of Unanimity and Rules with Mutability Indices of 1. Otherwise, in a conflict between rules with different Mutability Indices, the rule with the higher Mutability Index takes precedence over the Rule with the lower Mutability Index. history: Amended by Rule 750, 15 September 1994 text: There are two types of conflicts between rules: (a) conflicts between rules with the same Mutability Indices; (b) conflicts between rules with different Mutability Indices. (a) Conflicts between Rules with the same Mutability Indices: If two or more Rules with the same Mutability Indices conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lower Number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. (b) Conflicts between Rules with different Mutability Indices: Other Rules define the resolution of conflicts between Rules with Mutability Indices of Unanimity and Rules with Mutability Indices of 1. Otherwise, in a conflict between rules with different Mutability Indices, the rule with the higher Mutability Index takes precedence over the Rule with the lower Mutability Index. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1527, 24 March 1995 text: There are two types of conflicts between rules: (a) conflicts between rules with the same Mutability Indices; (b) conflicts between rules with different Mutability Indices. (a) Conflicts between Rules with the same Mutability Indices: If two or more Rules with the same Mutability Indices conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lower Number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. (b) Conflicts between Rules with different Mutability Indices: In a conflict between rules with different Mutability Indices, the rule with the higher Mutability Index takes precedence over the Rule with the lower Mutability Index. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1603, 19 June 1995 text: If two or more Rules with the same Mutability Indices conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lower Number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of Rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2520, 10 March 1996 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: If two or more Rules with the same Mutability Indices conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lower Number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of Rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If all of the Rules in conflict explicitly say that their precedence relations are determined by some other Rule for determining precedence relations, then the determinations of the precedence determining Rule shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. text: If two or more Rules with the same Mutability Indices conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lower Number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of Rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If all of the Rules in conflict explicitly say that their precedence relations are determined by some other Rule for determining precedence relations, then the determinations of the precedence determining Rule shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=3 by Proposal 2763 (Steve), 30 November 1996 history: Amended(4) Cosmetically by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: If two or more Rules with the same Power conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lower Number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of Rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If all of the Rules in conflict explicitly say that their precedence relations are determined by some other Rule for determining precedence relations, then the determinations of the precedence determining Rule shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: If two or more Rules with the same Power conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lower Number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of Rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If all of the Rules in conflict explicitly say that their precedence relations are determined by some other Rule for determining precedence relations, then the determinations of the precedence-determining Rule shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: If two or more Rules with the same Power conflict with one another, then the Rule with the lower ID number takes precedence. If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of Rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If all of the Rules in conflict explicitly say that their precedence relations are determined by some other Rule for determining precedence relations, then the determinations of the precedence-determining Rule shall supercede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more Rules claim to take precedence over one another or defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 213,407,991 history: Initial Mutable Rule 213, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: If Players disagree about the legality of a Move or the interpretation or application of a Rule, then a player may invoke Judgement by submitting a Statement for Judgement to the Speaker. Disagreement, for the purposes of this Rule, may be created by the insistence of any Player. When Judgement is invoked, the Speaker must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Speaker must then distribute the Statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all Players. text: If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then a player may invoke judgement by submitting a statement for judgement to the Speaker. Disagreement, for the purposes of this rule, may be created by the insistence of any player. When judgement is invoked, the Speaker must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Speaker must then distribute the statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all players. history: Amended by Proposal 407 (Alexx), 3 September 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: If Players disagree about the legality of a Move or the interpretation or application of a Rule, then a Player may invoke Judgement by submitting a Statement for Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. Disagreement, for the purposes of this Rule, may be created by the insistence of any Player. When Judgement is invoked, the Clerk of the Courts must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Clerk of the Courts must then distribute the Statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all Players. text: If Players disagree about the legality of a Move or the interpretation or application of a Rule, then a Player may invoke Judgement by submitting a Statement for Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. Disagreement, for the purposes of this Rule, may be created by the insistence of any Player. When Judgement is invoked, the Clerk of the Courts must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Clerk of the Courts must then distribute the Statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all Players. history: Amended by Proposal 991, ca. Aug. 12 1994 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: If Players disagree about the legality of a Move or the interpretation or application of a Rule, then a Player may invoke Judgement by submitting a Statement for Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. Disagreement, for the purposes of this Rule, may be created by the insistence of any Player. When Judgement is invoked, the Clerk of the Courts must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Clerk of the Courts must then distribute the Statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all Players. No Player shall submit more than five CFJ's per week. text: If Players disagree about the legality of a Move or the interpretation or application of a Rule, then a Player may invoke Judgement by submitting a Statement for Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. Disagrement, for the purposes of this Rule, may be created by the insistence of any Player. When Judgement is invoked, the Clerk of the Courts must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Clerk of the Courts must then distribute the Statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all Players. No Player shall submit more than five CFJ's per week. history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Aug. 12 1994 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: If Players disagree about the legality of a Move or the interpretation or application of a Rule, then a Player may invoke Judgement by submitting a Statement for Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. Disagreement, for the purposes of this Rule, may be created by the insistence of any Player. When Judgement is invoked, the Clerk of the Courts must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Clerk of the Courts must then distribute the Statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all Players. No Player shall submit more than five CFJ's per week. (*Was: 407*) text: If Players disagree about the legality of a Move or the interpretation or application of a Rule, then a Player may invoke Judgement by submitting a Statement for Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. Disagrement, for the purposes of this Rule, may be created by the insistence of any Player. When Judgement is invoked, the Clerk of the Courts must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Clerk of the Courts must then distribute the Statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all Players. No Player shall submit more than five CFJ's per week. (*Was: 407*) history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 23 October 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: If Players disagree about the legality of a Move or the interpretation or application of a Rule, then a Player may invoke Judgement by submitting a Statement for Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. Disagreement, for the purposes of this Rule, may be created by the insistence of any Player. When Judgement is invoked, the Clerk of the Courts must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Clerk of the Courts must then distribute the Statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all Players. No Player shall submit more than five CFJ's per week. (*Was: 407*) This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. text: If Players disagree about the legality of a Move or the interpretation or application of a Rule, then a Player may invoke Judgement by submitting a Statement for Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. Disagrement, for the purposes of this Rule, may be created by the insistence of any Player. When Judgement is invoked, the Clerk of the Courts must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Clerk of the Courts must then distribute the Statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all Players. No Player shall submit more than five CFJ's per week. (*Was: 407*) This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: If Players disagree about the legality of a Move or the interpretation or application of a Rule, then a Player may invoke Judgement by submitting a Statement for Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. Disagreement, for the purposes of this Rule, may be created by the insistence of any Player. When Judgement is invoked, the Clerk of the Courts must, as soon as possible, select a Judge as described in the Rules. The Clerk of the Courts must then distribute the Statement to be judged, along with the identity of the Judge, to all Players. No Player shall submit more than five CFJ's per week. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: Any Player who seeks formal resolution of any dispute pertaining to this Nomic shall be permitted to request such by submitting a Call for Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. For the purpose of this and other Rules, the submission of a Call for Judgement shall constitute proof of the existence of a dispute. Any document submitted to the Clerk of the Courts and which is clearly marked as a Call for Judgement is a Call for Judgement. The Clerk shall distribute the text of a Call for Judgement, along with any additional material submitted by the Caller (including, but not limited to, Arguments and Evidence) not later than the time e announces the identity of the first Judge assigned to Judge it. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=2 by Proposal 2669, 19 September 1996 history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4170 (Elysion), 26 June 2001 text: Any person may seek formal resolution of any dispute pertaining to this Nomic by submitting a Call for Judgement (CFJ) to the Clerk of the Courts or Justiciar. Any document submitted to the Clerk of the Courts or Justiciar and which is clearly marked as a Call for Judgement is a Call for Judgement. (Although any CFJ may be filed with the Justiciar, Players are encouraged to file with the CotC unless there is a good reason not to.) For the purpose of this and other Rules, the submission of a CFJ shall constitute proof of the existence of a dispute. The Clerk shall distribute the text of a CFJ along with any additional material submitted by the Caller (including, but not limited to, Arguments and Evidence) not later than the time e announces the identity of the first Judge assigned to Judge it. However, if the CFJ is submitted to the Justiciar, e shall perform all duties of the Clerk of the Courts with respect to that CFJ. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: Any person may request formal resolution of a dispute pertaining to this Nomic by submitting a Call for Judgement (CFJ) to the Clerk of the Courts. The submission of a CFJ constitutes proof of the existence of such a dispute. A CFJ should be a single clearly-labeled Statement whose truth or falsity can be determined using logical reasoning, assuming perfect knowledge. A CFJ may be accompanied by Arguments, Evidence, or other related material; the Judge is encouraged, but not required, to take notice of these things. The Clerk of the Courts shall publish the text of a CFJ, along with any additional material submitted by the Caller (including but not limited to Arguments and Evidence), no later than the time e announces the identity of the first Judge assigned to that CFJ. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Any person may request formal resolution of a dispute pertaining to this Nomic by submitting a Call for Judgement (CFJ) to the Clerk of the Courts. The submission of a CFJ constitutes proof of the existence of such a dispute. A CFJ should be a single clearly-labeled Statement whose truth or falsity can be determined using logical reasoning, assuming perfect knowledge. A CFJ may be accompanied by Arguments, Evidence, or other related material; the Judge is encouraged, but not required, to take notice of these things. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5015 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 text: Any person may request formal resolution of a dispute pertaining to this Nomic by publishing a Call for Judgement (CFJ). The submission of a CFJ constitutes proof of the existence of such a dispute. A CFJ should be a single clearly-labeled Statement whose truth or falsity can be determined using logical reasoning, assuming perfect knowledge. A CFJ may be accompanied by Arguments, Evidence, or other related material; the Judge is encouraged, but not required, to take notice of these things. history: Retitled by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: A judicial case, also known as a call for judgement (CFJ), is a procedure to settle a matter of controversy. There are subclasses of judicial case with particular features defined by other rules. Subclasses of judicial case exist only as defined by the rules. The Clerk of the Courts (CotC) is an office, responsible for managing judicial activity. The CotC's report includes the status of all judicial cases that either require a judge or have at least one applicable judicial question that has no judgement. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: A judicial case, also known as a call for judgement (CFJ), is a procedure to settle a matter of controversy. There are subclasses of judicial case with particular features defined by other rules. Subclasses of judicial case exist only as defined by the rules. The Clerk of the Courts (CotC) is an office, responsible for managing judicial activity. The CotC's report includes the status of all judicial cases that either require a judge or have at least one applicable judicial question that has no judgement. Judicial cases other than appeal cases have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5317 (Murphy), 28 November 2007 text: A judicial case, also known as a call for judgement (CFJ), is a procedure to settle a matter of controversy. Each judicial case has exactly one subclass, with particular features as defined by other rules. Subclasses of judicial case exist only as defined by the rules. A judicial case's subclass CAN be specified by its initiator, or otherwise defaults to inquiry. The Clerk of the Courts (CotC) is an office, responsible for managing judicial activity. The CotC's report includes the status of all judicial cases that either require a judge or have at least one applicable judicial question that has no judgement. Judicial cases (other than appeal cases, which have historically been identified by reference to the prior case) have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5464 (Murphy), 13 March 2008 text: A judicial case, also known as a call for judgement (CFJ), is a procedure to settle a matter of controversy. Each judicial case has exactly one subclass, with particular features as defined by other rules. Subclasses of judicial case exist only as defined by the rules. Defining a subclass of judicial case is secured, with a power threshold of 1.7. A judicial case's subclass CAN be specified by its initiator, or otherwise defaults to inquiry. The Clerk of the Courts (CotC) is an office, responsible for managing judicial activity. The CotC's report includes the status of all judicial cases that either require a judge or have at least one applicable judicial question that has no judgement. Judicial cases (other than appeal cases, which have historically been identified by reference to the prior case) have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Clerk of the Courts. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 214,364,410,586,647,793,890,951 history: Initial Mutable Rule 214, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: If Judgement was invoked by a Voter, then the first Judge to be selected to Judge that Statement shall be the Speaker. If Judgement was invoked by the Speaker, the first Judge to be selected shall be be a randomly selected Voter. In all cases, if a Judge beyond the first must be selected to judge a Statement, it shall be a randomly selected Voter. The Voter thus selected may not be the Player most recently selected as Judge for that Statement, nor may e be the Player who invoked Judgement. text: If judgement was invoked by a Voter, then the first Judge to be selected to judge that statement shall be the Speaker. If judgement was invoked by the Speaker, the first Judge to be selected shall be a randomly selected Voter. In all cases, if a Judge beyond the first must be selected to judge a statement, it shall be a randomly selected Voter. The Voter thus selected may not be the player most recently selected as Judge for that statement, nor may e be the player who invoked judgement. history: Amended by Proposal 364, 8 August 1993 text: When Judgement has been called for, a Judge is randomly selected from among the Players (excluding the Player who called for Judgement). The Player selected has 3 days in which to accept or refuse the appointment by posting to the listserv. Any Player who does not respond to selection in 3 days shall be penalized 10 points, and is deemed to have refused appointment. If a selected Player refuses appointment, then a further random selection is made from the remaining pool. history: Amended by Proposal 410, 26 August 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 586 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Proposal 647, 29 October 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Proposal 793, ca. Jan. 31 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Jan. 31 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Proposal 890 (Garth), 13 April 1994 text: Upon receipt of a Call For Judgement (CFJ), the Clerk of the Courts (CotC) shall randomly appoint a Player to be Judge excluding those on hold, calling for judgement, whose move is under judgement in said CFJ, or have declined appointment on this CFJ. Players may decline to serve on a particular case by notifying the CotC within 72 hours of appointment. The declining Player shall not be eligible to serve as Judge for this CFJ and shall also lose two points, one of which shall be given to the CotC. Upon receiving notice of a Player declining to serve the CotC shall randomly appoint a new Judge from eligible Player. (*Was: 647*) history: Amended by Rule 750, 13 April 1994 text: Upon receipt of a Call For Judgement (CFJ), the Clerk of the Courts (CotC) shall randomly appoint a Player to be Judge excluding those on hold, calling for judgement, whose move is under judgement in said CFJ, or have declined appointment on this CFJ. Players may decline to serve on a particular case by notifying the CotC within 72 hours of appointment. The declining Player shall not be eligible to serve as Judge for this CFJ and shall also lose two points, one of which shall be given to the CotC. Upon receiving notice of a Player declining to serve the CotC shall randomly appoint a new Judge from eligible Player. (*Was: 647/793*) history: Amended by Proposal 951 (Steve), 25 July 1994 text: Upon receipt of a Call For Judgement (CFJ), the Clerk of the Courts (CotC) shall randomly appoint a Player to be Judge excluding those on hold, barred from Judging said CFJ, calling for judgement, whose move is under judgement in said CFJ, or have declined appointment on this CFJ. Players may decline to serve on a particular case by notifying the CotC within 72 hours of appointment. The declining Player shall not be eligible to serve as Judge for this CFJ and shall also lose two points, one of which shall be given to the CotC. Upon receiving notice of a Player declining to serve the CotC shall randomly appoint a new Judge from eligible Player. (*Was: 647/793*) history: Amended by Rule 750, 25 July 1994 text: Upon receipt of a Call For Judgement (CFJ), the Clerk of the Courts (CotC) shall randomly appoint a Player to be Judge excluding those on hold, barred from Judging said CFJ, calling for judgement, whose move is under judgement in said CFJ, or have declined appointment on this CFJ. Players may decline to serve on a particular case by notifying the CotC within 72 hours of appointment. The declining Player shall not be eligible to serve as Judge for this CFJ and shall also lose two points, one of which shall be given to the CotC. Upon receiving notice of a Player declining to serve the CotC shall randomly appoint a new Judge from eligible Player. (*Was: 647/793/890*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1306, 4 November 1994 text: Upon receipt of a Call For Judgement (CFJ), the Clerk of the Courts (CotC) shall randomply appoint a Player to Judge that CFJ from amongst the Eligible Players. For the purposes of this Rule, the Eligible Players shall be the set of Players excluding those: (i) who are On Hold; (ii) who are Barred from Judging the CFJ; (iii) who made the CFJ; (iv) whose Move the legality of which is to be determined by the CFJ; (v) who have declined to be Appointed as Judge on the CFJ; (vi) who are otherwise ineligible to Judge as specified in the Rules. Players may decline to be Appointed as Judge on a particular CFJ by notifying the CotC within 72 hours of appointment. The declining Player shall not be Eligible to serve as Judge for that CFJ and shall also lose two points, one of which shall be given to the CotC. If for any reason a Player who has been selected as a Judge of a CFJ becomes ineligible to Judge, either by declining Appointment, by going On Hold, by being deregistered and hence ceasing to be a Player, or by other means specified in the Rules, then the CotC shall select another Eligible Player to Judge the CFJ. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1384, 17 January 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1408, 29 January 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1500, 24 March 1995 text: Upon receipt of a Call For Judgement (CFJ), the Clerk of the Courts (CotC) shall randomply appoint a Player to Judge that CFJ from amongst the Eligible Players. For the purposes of this Rule, the Eligible Players shall be the set of Players excluding those: (i) who are On Hold; (ii) who are Barred from Judging the CFJ; (iii) who made the CFJ; (iv) who have declined to be Appointed as Judge on the CFJ; (v) who are otherwise ineligible to Judge as specified in the Rules. Players may decline to be Appointed as Judge on a particular CFJ by notifying the CotC within 72 hours of appointment. The declining Player shall not be Eligible to serve as Judge for that CFJ and shall also lose two points, one of which shall be given to the CotC. No Blots are gained by the declining Player. If for any reason a Player who has been selected as a Judge of a CFJ becomes ineligible to Judge, either by declining Appointment, by going On Hold, by being deregistered and hence ceasing to be a Player, or by other means specified in the Rules, then the CotC shall randomly select another Eligible Player to Judge the CFJ. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 1644, 1 August 1995 text: Upon receipt of a Call For Judgement (CFJ), the Clerk of the Courts (CotC) shall randomly appoint a Player to Judge that CFJ from amongst the Eligible Players. For the purposes of this Rule, the Eligible Players shall be the set of Players excluding those: (i) who are On Hold; (ii) who are Barred from Judging the CFJ; (iii) who made the CFJ; (iv) who have declined to be Appointed as Judge on the CFJ; (v) who are otherwise ineligible to Judge as specified in the Rules. Players may decline to be Appointed as Judge on a particular CFJ by notifying the CotC within 72 hours of appointment. The declining Player shall not be Eligible to serve as Judge for that CFJ and shall also lose two points, one of which shall be given to the CotC. No Blots are gained by the declining Player. If for any reason a Player who has been selected as a Judge of a CFJ becomes ineligible to Judge, either by declining Appointment, by going On Hold, by being deregistered and hence ceasing to be a Player, or by other means specified in the Rules, then the CotC shall randomly select another Eligible Player to Judge the CFJ. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 1705, 4 September 1995 text: Upon receipt of a Call For Judgement (CFJ), the Clerk of the Courts (CotC) shall randomly appoint a Player to Judge that CFJ from amongst the Eligible Players. For the purposes of this Rule, the Eligible Players shall be the set of Players excluding those: (i) who are On Hold; (ii) who are Barred from Judging the CFJ; (iii) who made the CFJ; (iv) who have declined to be Appointed as Judge on the CFJ; (v) who are otherwise ineligible to Judge as specified in the Rules. Players may decline to be Appointed as Judge on a particular CFJ by notifying the CotC within 72 hours of appointment. The declining Player shall not be Eligible to serve as Judge for that CFJ and shall also lose two points, one of which shall be given to the CotC. No Blots are gained by the declining Player. The Clerk of the Courts shall report Point transfers wihch occur as a result of this Rule. If for any reason a Player who has been selected as a Judge of a CFJ becomes ineligible to Judge, either by declining Appointment, by going On Hold, by being deregistered and hence ceasing to be a Player, or by other means specified in the Rules, then the CotC shall randomly select another Eligible Player to Judge the CFJ. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: Whenever there is a Call for Judgement which has been neither Judged nor dismissed, and to which no Player who is eligible to Judge that CFJ is assigned to Judge that CFJ, the Clerk of the Courts shall randomly select, from amongst those Players eligible, a Judge to be assigned to Judge that CFJ as soon as possible after this condition becomes known to the Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk shall distribute the identity of the Player who is assigned to Judge a CFJ as soon as possible after the selection is made. history: Null-Amended(8) by Proposal 2506, 3 March 1996 text: Whenever there is a Call for Judgement which has been neither Judged nor dismissed, and to which no Player who is eligible to Judge that CFJ is assigned to Judge that CFJ, the Clerk of the Courts shall randomly select, from amongst those Players eligible, a Judge to be assigned to Judge that CFJ as soon as possible after this condition becomes known to the Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk shall distribute the identity of the Player who is assigned to Judge a CFJ as soon as possible after the selection is made. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 2553, 22 March 1996 text: Whenever there is a Call for Judgement which is neither Judged nor dismissed, and to which no Player who is eligible to Judge that CFJ is assigned to Judge that CFJ, the Clerk of the Courts shall randomly select, from amongst those Players eligible, a Judge to be assigned to Judge that CFJ as soon as possible after this condition becomes known to the Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk shall distribute the identity of the Player who is assigned to Judge a CFJ as soon as possible after the selection is made. history: Amended(10) Substantially by Proposal 3629 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: Whenever there is an open Call for Judgement to which no Player has been assigned as its Judge, the Clerk of the Court shall, as soon as possible after being made aware of this condition, randomly select a Player to be assigned as its Judge. This selection shall be made from amongst all those Players eligible to serve as the Judge of that CFJ. Once assigned as the Judge of a CFJ, that Player remains the Judge of that CFJ until e is recused from that CFJ, or e ceases to be a Player. The Clerk shall announce the identity of the Player who is assigned to Judge a CFJ as soon as possible after the selection is made. A CFJ is "open" if it has neither been dismissed nor judged, or if there is an outstanding judicial motion pertaining to that CFJ which has been neither granted nor denied. A CFJ which is not open is closed. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 951 by Proposal 3816 (Repeal-O-Matic), 21 December 1998 [orphaned text: Upon receipt of a Call For Judgement (CFJ), the Clerk of the Courts (CotC) shall randomly appoint a Voter to be Judge excluding those on hold, calling for judgement, whose move is under judgement in said CFJ, or have declined appointment on this CFJ. Voters may decline to serve on a particular case by notifying the CotC within 72 hours of appointment. The declining Player shall not be eligible to serve as Judge for this CFJ and shall also lose two points, one of which shall be given to the CotC. Upon receiving notice of a Voter declining to serve the CotC shall randomly appoint a new Judge from eligible Voters. (*Was: 647*) ] [orphaned text: When Judgement has been called for, a Judge is randomly selected by the Clerk of the Courts from among the eligible Players (excluding the Player who called for Judgement). The Player selected has 3 days in which to accept or refuse the appointment by posting to the listserv. Any Player who does not respond to selection in 3 days shall be penalized 10 points, and is deemed to have refused appointment. If a selected Player refuses appointment, then a further random selection is made from the remaining pool. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 215,408 history: Initial Mutable Rule 215, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: After the Speaker has distributed the Statement to be judged and the identity of the Judge, the Judge has one week in which to deliver a legal Judgement. If the Judge fails to deliver a Judgement within this time, e is penalized 10 points and a new Judge is selected. A Judgement is delivered by submitting that Judgement to the Speaker, who must then distribute that Judgement to all players as soon as possible. text: After the Speaker has distributed the statement to be judged and the identity of the Judge, the Judge has one week in which to deliver a legal judgement. If the Judge fails to deliver a judgement within this time, e is penalized 10 points and a new Judge is selected. A judgement is delivered by submitting that judgement to the Speaker, who must then distribute that judgement to all players as soon as possible. history: Amended by Proposal 408 (Alexx), 3 September 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: After the Clerk of the Courts has distributed the Statement to be judged and the identity of the Judge, the Judge has one week in which to deliver a legal Judgement. If the Judge fails to deliver a Judgement within this time, e is penalized 10 points and a new Judge is selected. A Judgement is delivered by submitting that Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts, who must then distribute that Judgement to all Players as soon as possible. text: After the Clerk of the Courts has distributed the Statement to be judged and the identity of the Judge, the Judge has one week in which to deliver a legal Judgement. If the Judge fails to deliver a Judgement within this time, e is penalized 10 points and a new Judge is selected. A Judgement is delivered by submitting that Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts, who must then distribute that Judgement to all Players as soon as possible. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1383, 17 January 1995 text: After the Clerk of the Courts has distributed the Statement to be judged and the identity of the Judge, the Judge has one week in which to deliver a legal Judgement. If the Judge fails to deliver a Judgement within this time, e is penalized 10 points and the CotC randomly selects another Judge from among eligible Players. A Judgement is delivered by submitting that Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts, who must then distribute that Judgement to all Players as soon as possible. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1500, 24 March 1995 text: After the Clerk of the Courts has distributed the Statement to be judged and the identity of the Judge, the Judge has one week in which to deliver a legal Judgement. If the Judge fails to deliver a Judgement within this time, e gains 3 Blots and the CotC randomly selects another Judge from among eligible Players. A Judgement is delivered by submitting that Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts, who must then distribute that Judgement to all Players as soon as possible. Blots gained via this rule are reported to the Tabulator by the CotC. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: The Player assigned to Judge a Call for Judgement is required to either return a Judgement upon that CFJ or dismiss that CFJ within seven days of when e was assigned to Judge it. If e fails to do so, e ceases to be eligible to Judge that CFJ, ceases to be assigned to Judge that CFJ, and commits an Infraction to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and breaing bearing a penalty of three Blots. However, if the Player assigned to Judge a CFJ ceases to be eligible prior to the end of the permitted time, e is neither required nor permitted to either return a Judgement on, or dismiss, that CFJ, and ceases to be the Judge assigned to that CFJ at the moment e becomes ineligible. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2587, 1 May 1996 text: The Player assigned to Judge a Call for Judgement is required to either return a Judgement upon that CFJ or dismiss that CFJ within seven days of when e was assigned to Judge it. If e fails to do so, e ceases to be eligible to Judge that CFJ, ceases to be assigned to Judge that CFJ, and commits an Infraction to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of three Blots. However, if the Player assigned to Judge a CFJ ceases to be eligible prior to the end of the permitted time, e is neither required nor permitted to either return a Judgement on, or dismiss, that CFJ, and ceases to be the Judge assigned to that CFJ at the moment e becomes ineligible. history: Amended(5) Cosmetically by Proposal 2830 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: The Player assigned to Judge a Call for Judgement is required to either return a Judgement upon that CFJ or dismiss that CFJ within seven days of when e was assigned to Judge it. If e fails to do so, e ceases to be eligible to Judge that CFJ, ceases to be assigned to Judge that CFJ, and commits the Infraction of Failing to Judge to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of three Blots. However, if the Player assigned to Judge a CFJ ceases to be eligible prior to the end of the permitted time, e is neither required nor permitted to either return a Judgement on, or dismiss, that CFJ, and ceases to be the Judge assigned to that CFJ at the moment e becomes ineligible. history: Infected and Amended(6) Substantially by Rule 1454, 14 August 1997 text: The Player assigned to Judge a Call for Judgement is required to either return a Judgement upon that CFJ or dismiss that CFJ within seven days of when e was assigned to Judge it. If e fails to do so, e ceases to be eligible to Judge that CFJ, ceases to be assigned to Judge that CFJ, and commits the Infraction of Failing to Judge to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of three Blots. However, if the Player assigned to Judge a CFJ ceases to be eligible prior to the end of the permitted time, e is neither required nor permitted to either return a Judgement on, or dismiss, that CFJ, and ceases to be the Judge assigned to that CFJ at the moment e becomes ineligible. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Rule 408, 28 August 1997 text: The Player assigned to Judge a Call for Judgement is required to either return a Judgement upon that CFJ or dismiss that CFJ within seven days of when e was assigned to Judge it. If e fails to do so, e ceases to be eligible to Judge that CFJ, ceases to be assigned to Judge that CFJ, and commits the Infraction of Failing to Judge to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of three Blots. However, if the Player assigned to Judge a CFJ ceases to be eligible prior to the end of the permitted time, e is neither required nor permitted to either return a Judgement on, or dismiss, that CFJ, and ceases to be the Judge assigned to that CFJ at the moment e becomes ineligible. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3629 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3645 (elJefe), 29 December 1997 text: The Player assigned to Judge a Call for Judgement is required to either return a Judgement upon that CFJ or dismiss that CFJ within the assigned deliberation period, which ends seven days after e is assigned to Judge it. Failure to do so is the Infraction of Judging Late, detected and reported by the CotC. At the time of the report of infraction, if the CFJ has been Judged or dismissed then the penalty is 1 VT and the Judgement or dismissal is legal even though delivered late. Otherwise the penalty is 3 Blots, and the Judge becomes ineligible to Judge that CFJ, and a new Judge shall be assigned in the usual manner. A Judge who has neither judged nor dismissed a CFJ within seven days after the end of the assigned deliberation period becomes ineligible to Judge that CFJ, and any Judgement or Dismissal submitted after this time is not legal and shall not be accepted by the CotC. However, if the Player assigned to Judge a CFJ ceases to be eligible before judging or dismissing that CFJ, then e is neither required nor permitted to either return a Judgement on, or dismiss, that CFJ, and ceases to be the Judge assigned to that CFJ at the moment e becomes ineligible. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The Player assigned to Judge a Call for Judgement is required to either return a Judgement upon that CFJ or dismiss that CFJ within the assigned deliberation period, which ends seven days after e is assigned to Judge it. Failure to do so is the Infraction of Judging Late, detected and reported by the CotC. At the time of the report of the Infraction, if the CFJ has been Judged or dismissed then the penalty is 1 VT and the Judgement or dismissal is legal even though delivered late. Otherwise the penalty is 3 Blots, and the Judge becomes ineligible to Judge that CFJ, and a new Judge shall be assigned in the usual manner. A Judge who has neither judged nor dismissed a CFJ within seven days after the end of the assigned deliberation period becomes ineligible to Judge that CFJ, and any Judgement or Dismissal submitted after this time is not legal and shall not be accepted by the CotC. However, if the Player assigned to Judge a CFJ ceases to be eligible before judging or dismissing that CFJ, then e is neither required nor permitted to either return a Judgement on, or dismiss, that CFJ, and ceases to be the Judge assigned to that CFJ at the moment e becomes ineligible. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: The Player assigned to Judge a Call for Judgement is required to either return a Judgement upon that CFJ or dismiss that CFJ within the assigned deliberation period, which ends seven days after e is assigned to Judge it. Failure to do so is the Infraction of Judging Late, detected and reported by the CotC. This is a Class 0.2 Infraction if the CFJ has been Judged or dismissed at the time the Infraction is reported (such Judgement or dismissal is legal even though delivered late); otherwise it is a Class 3 Infraction, the Judge becomes ineligible to Judge that CFJ, and a new Judge shall be assigned in the usual manner. A Judge who has neither judged nor dismissed a CFJ within seven days after the end of the assigned deliberation period becomes ineligible to Judge that CFJ, and any Judgement or Dismissal submitted after this time is not legal and shall not be accepted by the CotC. However, if the Player assigned to Judge a CFJ ceases to be eligible before judging or dismissing that CFJ, then e is neither required nor permitted to either return a Judgement on, or dismiss, that CFJ, and ceases to be the Judge assigned to that CFJ at the moment e becomes ineligible. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3962 (Wes), 20 January 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: The Deliberation Period for any particular CFJ begins when the Clerk of the Courts announces the identity of the Judge and ends seven days later. At any point after the end of the Deliberation Period for a particular CFJ, if the Judge has not yet returned Judgement or Dismissed that CFJ, then the Clerk of the Courts may Recuse that Judge from the case and assign a new one as usual. If this occurs, then the Recused Judge shall commit the Class 3 Infraction of Judging Late, detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts, and shall furthermore be ineligible to Judge any future CFJ's until such time as e requests to be made eligible again by publicly posting such a request. Seven days after the end of the Deliberation Period, the Judge becomes ineligible to Judge that CFJ and commits the Infraction of Judging Late as described elsewhere in this Rule. If the Judge returned a Judgement or Dismisses that CFJ after the end of the Deliberation Period but before being Recused as Judge, then e shall commit the Infraction of Judging a Bit Late, a Class 0.2 Infraction to be detected and Reported by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4076b (Steve), 10 October 2000 text: The Deliberation Period for a CFJ begins when the Clerk of the Courts announces the identity of the Judge, and ends seven days later. In the week following the end of the Deliberation Period, if the Judge has not yet returned Judgement or Dismissed the CFJ, then the Clerk of the Courts may recuse the Judge from the CFJ and assign it to a new Judge, by posting an announcement to that effect. A Judge who Judges or Dismisses a CFJ after the end of the Deliberation Period, but before being recused as a Judge, commits the Class 0.5 Infraction of Judging a Bit Late, to be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. A Judge who has neither Judged nor Dismissed a CFJ seven days after the end of its Deliberation Period is automatically recused from that CFJ. A Judge who is recused from a CFJ in accordance with this Rule commits the Class 3 Infraction of Failure to Judge (to be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts), and becomes ineligible to be a Judge until e publicly requests to be made eligible again. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: For each Judge assigned to a CFJ, eir Deliberation Period begins when the Clerk of the Courts announces eir assignment, and lasts seven days; eir Overtime Period begins when eir Deliberation Period ends, and lasts seven days. A Judge who Judges a CFJ during eir Overtime Period commits the Class 0.5 Infraction of Judging a Bit Late, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. During a Judge's Overtime Period, if e has not yet Judged the CFJ, then the Clerk of the Courts may recuse the Judge by announcing that e does so. At the end of a Judge's Overtime Period, if e has not yet Judged the CFJ, then e is automatically recused. A Judge recused according to this Rule commits the Class 3 Infraction of Failure to Judge, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. E becomes ineligible to Judge any CFJ for one month, or until e publicly requests to become eligible again, whichever is soonest. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4670 (OscarMeyr), 9 April 2005 text: For each Judge assigned to a CFJ, eir Deliberation Period begins when the Clerk of the Courts announces eir assignment, and lasts seven days; eir Overtime Period begins when eir Deliberation Period ends, and lasts seven days. A Judge who Judges a CFJ during eir Overtime Period commits the Class 0.5 Infraction of Judging a Bit Late, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. During a Judge's Overtime Period, if e has not yet Judged the CFJ, then the Clerk of the Courts may recuse the Judge by announcing that e does so. At the end of a Judge's Overtime Period, if e has not yet Judged the CFJ, then e is automatically recused. A Judge recused according to this Rule commits the Infraction of Failure to Judge; the Class of this Infraction is Class 3 for an unlinked CFJ, or for a single incident of Linked CFJs, Class 2 plus the number of Linked CFJs. This Infraction is to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. The recused Judge becomes ineligible to Judge any CFJ for one month, or until e publicly requests to become eligible again, whichever is sooner. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4808 (Murphy), 15 June 2005 text: For each Judge assigned to a CFJ, eir Deliberation Period begins when the Clerk of the Courts announces eir assignment, and lasts seven days; eir Overtime Period begins when eir Deliberation Period ends, and lasts seven days. A Judge who Judges a CFJ during eir Overtime Period commits the Class 0.5 Infraction of Judging a Bit Late, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. During a Judge's Overtime Period, if e has not yet Judged the CFJ, then the Clerk of the Courts may recuse em by announcement. Upon the end of a Judge's Overtime Period, if e has not yet Judged the CFJ, then the Clerk of the Courts shall recuse em by announcement as soon as possible. A Judge recused according to this Rule commits the Infraction of Failure to Judge; the Class of this Infraction is Class 3 for an unlinked CFJ, or for a single incident of Linked CFJs, Class 2 plus the number of Linked CFJs. This Infraction is to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. The recused Judge becomes ineligible to Judge any CFJ for one month, or until e publicly requests to become eligible again, whichever is sooner. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: For each Judge assigned to a CFJ, eir Deliberation Period begins when the Clerk of the Courts announces eir assignment, and lasts seven days; eir Overtime Period begins when eir Deliberation Period ends, and lasts seven days. During a Judge's Overtime Period, if e has not yet Judged the CFJ, then the Clerk of the Courts may recuse em by announcement. Upon the end of a Judge's Overtime Period, if e has not yet Judged the CFJ, then the Clerk of the Courts shall recuse em by announcement as soon as possible. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 408 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 216,409,591 history: Initial Mutable Rule 216, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: A legal Judgement is either TRUE, FALSE, or UNDECIDED. The Judgement may be accompanied by reasons and arguments, but such reasons and arguments form no part of the Judgement itself. If a Judgement is accompanied by reasons and arguments, the Speaker must distribute the reasons and arguments along with the Judgement. text: A legal judgement is either TRUE, FALSE, or UNDECIDED. The judgement may be accompanied by reasons and arguments, but such reasons and arguments form no part of the judgement itself. If a judgement is accompanied by reasons and arguments, the Speaker must distribute the reasons and arguments along with the judgement. history: Amended by Proposal 409 (Alexx), 26 August 1993 text: A legal Judgement is either TRUE, FALSE, or UNDECIDED. The Judgement may be accompanied by reasons and arguments, but such reasons and arguments form no part of the Judgement itself. If a Judgement is accompanied by reasons and arguments, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the reasons and arguments along with the Judgement. history: Amended by Proposal 591 (KoJen), 21 October 1993 text: A legal Judgement is either TRUE, FALSE, or UNDECIDED. The Judgement must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgements, and game custom. A Judgement delivered without reasons and/or arguments is completely invalid. Such reasons and arguments form no part of the Judgement itself. However, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the reasons and arguments along with the Judgement. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1320, 21 November 1994 text: A legal Judgement is either TRUE, FALSE, or UNDECIDED. The Judgement must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgements, and game custom. A Judgement delivered without reasons and/or arguments is completely invalid. Such reasons and arguments form no part of the Judgement itself. However, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the reasons and arguments along with the Judgement. Any evidence which is used to justify the Judgement, other than appeals to Game Custom or to common sense, must be presented by the Judge. If the Judge introduces evidence beyond that submitted in the Call for Judgement, e must include this evidence in eir Judgement. All such added evidence must be distributed as part of the reasons and arguments by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1487, 15 March 1995 text: A legal Judgement is either TRUE, FALSE, UNDECIDABLE, or UNKNOWN. The Judgement of UNDECIDABLE is reserved for those statements which are logically neither TRUE nor FALSE. The Judgement of UNKNOWN is for those statements for which the Judge is unable to obtain information necessary to determine whether the statement is TRUE, FALSE, or UNDECIDABLE. The Judge must make a reasonable effort to obtain all information necessary to determine whether the statement is TRUE, FALSE, or UNDECIDABLE. The Judgement must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgements, and game custom. A Judgement delivered without reasons and/or arguments is completely invalid. Such reasons and arguments form no part of the Judgement itself. However, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the reasons and arguments along with the Judgement. Any evidence which is used to justify the Judgement, other than appeals to Game Custom or to common sense, must be presented by the Judge. If the Judge introduces evidence beyond that submitted in the Call for Judgement, e must include this evidence in eir Judgement. All such added evidence must be distributed as part of the reasons and arguments by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: A Judge returns a Judgement by sending it to the Clerk of the Courts. A Judgement must be either TRUE or FALSE, and must be delivered to the Clerk not later than the end of the permitted time for deliberation. A Judgement returned after the end of the permitted deliberation period, or by a Player ineligible to be Judge of that CFJ is not legal and shall not be accepted by the Clerk. A CFJ has been Judged when a legal Judgement has been received by the Clerk. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. A Judge who delivers Judgement on a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Points. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: A Judge returns a Judgement by sending it to the Clerk of the Courts. A Judgement must be either TRUE or FALSE, and must be delivered to the Clerk not later than the end of the permitted time for deliberation. A Judgement returned after the end of the permitted deliberation period, or by a Player ineligible to be Judge of that CFJ is not legal and shall not be accepted by the Clerk. A CFJ has been Judged when a legal Judgement has been received by the Clerk. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. A Judge who delivers Judgement on a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mils. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: A Judge returns a Judgement by sending it to the Clerk of the Courts. A Judgement must be either TRUE or FALSE, and must be delivered to the Clerk not later than the end of the permitted time for deliberation. A Judgement returned after the end of the permitted deliberation period, or by a Player ineligible to be Judge of that CFJ is not legal and shall not be accepted by the Clerk. A CFJ has been Judged when a legal Judgement has been received by the Clerk. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. A Judge who delivers Judgement on a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mil. history: Infected and Amended(6) Substantially by Rule 1454, 27 November 1996 text: A Judge returns a Judgement by sending it to the Clerk of the Courts. A Judgement must be either TRUE or FALSE, and must be delivered to the Clerk not later than the end of the permitted time for deliberation. A Judgement returned after the end of the permitted deliberation period, or by a Player ineligible to be Judge of that CFJ is not legal and shall not be accepted by the Clerk. A CFJ has been Judged when a legal Judgement has been received by the Clerk. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. A Judge who delivers Judgement on a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mil. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: A Judge returns a Judgement by sending it to the Clerk of the Courts. A Judgement must be either TRUE or FALSE, and must be delivered to the Clerk not later than the end of the permitted time for deliberation. A Judgement returned after the end of the permitted deliberation period, or by a Player ineligible to be Judge of that CFJ is not legal and shall not be accepted by the Clerk. A CFJ has been Judged when a legal Judgement has been received by the Clerk. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. A Judge who delivers Judgement on a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mil. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: A Judge returns a Judgement by sending it to the Clerk of the Courts. A Judgement must be either TRUE or FALSE, and must be delivered to the Clerk not later than the end of the permitted time for deliberation. A Judgement returned after the end of the permitted deliberation period, or by a Player ineligible to be Judge of that CFJ is not legal and shall not be accepted by the Clerk. A CFJ has been Judged when a legal Judgement has been received by the Clerk. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. A Judge who delivers Judgement on a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT. history: Infected and Amended(9) Substantially by Rule 1454, 7 May 1997 text: A Judge returns a Judgement by sending it to the Clerk of the Courts. A Judgement must be either TRUE or FALSE, and must be delivered to the Clerk not later than the end of the permitted time for deliberation. A Judgement returned after the end of the permitted deliberation period, or by a Player ineligible to be Judge of that CFJ is not legal and shall not be accepted by the Clerk. A CFJ has been Judged when a legal Judgement has been received by the Clerk. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. A Judge who delivers Judgement on a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(10) Substantially by Rule 591, 21 May 1997 text: A Judge returns a Judgement by sending it to the Clerk of the Courts. A Judgement must be either TRUE or FALSE, and must be delivered to the Clerk not later than the end of the permitted time for deliberation. A Judgement returned after the end of the permitted deliberation period, or by a Player ineligible to be Judge of that CFJ is not legal and shall not be accepted by the Clerk. A CFJ has been Judged when a legal Judgement has been received by the Clerk. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. A Judge who delivers Judgement on a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT. history: Amended(11) Substantially by Proposal 3629 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3645 (elJefe), 29 December 1997 text: A Judge judges a CFJ by sending eir Judgment to the Clerk of the Courts. The Judgement of a CFJ must be either TRUE or FALSE. Only the Judge assigned to a CFJ may Judge that CFJ. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. A Judge who delivers Judgement on a CFJ before the end of the assigned deliberation period shall receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 3889 (harvel), 9 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(14) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: A Judge judges a CFJ by sending eir Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. The Judgement of a CFJ must be either TRUE or FALSE. Only the Judge assigned to a CFJ may Judge that CFJ. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. A Judge who delivers Judgement on a CFJ before the end of the assigned deliberation period shall receive a Judicial Salary of 20 Stems history: Amended(15) by Proposal 3968 (harvel), 4 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(16) by Proposal 3998 (harvel), 2 May 2000 text: A Judge judges a CFJ by sending eir Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. The Judgement of a CFJ must be either TRUE or FALSE. Only the Judge assigned to a CFJ may Judge that CFJ. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall distribute the Judgement to the Public Forum. If a Judge delivers Judgement on a CFJ before the end of the assigned deliberation period, then the Clerk of the Courts shall pay out to the Judge the Judicial Salary as soon as possible after the publication of eir Judgement. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Judge judges a CFJ by sending eir Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. The Judgement of a CFJ must be either TRUE or FALSE. Only the Judge assigned to a CFJ may Judge that CFJ. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal Judgement, the Clerk shall publish the Judgement. If a Judge delivers Judgement on a CFJ before the end of the assigned deliberation period, then the Clerk of the Courts shall pay out to the Judge the Judicial Salary as soon as possible after the publication of eir Judgement. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: The Judge of a CFJ Judges it by submitting eir Judgement to the Clerk of the Courts. "Decision", "Finding", and "Response" are unambiguous synonyms for "Judgement". For a Trial Judge, a Judgement is exactly one of the following: TRUE, FALSE, or DISMISSED. As soon as possible after receiving a Judgement, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish it, along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with the Judgement. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5068 (Zefram), 11 July 2007 text: The judge of a CFJ judges it by publishing eir judgement, along with any arguments, evidence, or other material that e considers relevant. For a trial judge, a judgement is exactly one of the following: TRUE, FALSE, or DISMISSED. history: Retitled by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Power changed from 1 to 1.7 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an inquiry case. An inquiry case's purpose is to determine the veracity of a particular statement. An inquiry case CAN be initiated by any person, by announcement which includes the statement to be inquired into. The initiator is unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case, and in the initiating announcement e CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case. An inquiry case has a judicial question on veracity, which is always applicable. The valid judgements for this question are: * FALSE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically false at the time the inquiry case was initiated * TRUE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically true at the time the inquiry case was initiated * UNDECIDABLE, appropriate if the statement was logically undecidable, nonsensical, too vague, or otherwise not capable of being accurately described as either false or true, at the time the inquiry case was initiated * IRRELEVANT, appropriate if the veracity of the statement at the time the inquiry case was initiated is not relevant to the game * UNDETERMINED, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine which of the FALSE, TRUE, and UNDECIDABLE judgements is appropriate; however, uncertainty as to how to interpret or apply the rules cannot constitute insufficiency of information for this purpose The judgement of the question in an inquiry case SHOULD guide future play, including future judgements, but does not directly affect the veracity of the statement. The rulekeepor is ENCOURAGED to annotate rules to draw attention to relevant inquiry case judgements. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5296 (root), 28 November 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an inquiry case. An inquiry case's purpose is to determine the veracity of a particular statement. An inquiry case CAN be initiated by any person, by announcement which includes the statement to be inquired into. The initiator is unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case, and in the initiating announcement e CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case. An inquiry case has a judicial question on veracity, which is always applicable. The valid judgements for this question are: * FALSE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically false at the time the inquiry case was initiated * TRUE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically true at the time the inquiry case was initiated * UNDECIDABLE, appropriate if the statement was logically undecidable or otherwise not capable of being accurately described as either false or true, at the time the inquiry case was initiated * IRRELEVANT, appropriate if the veracity of the statement at the time the inquiry case was initiated is not relevant to the game * UNDETERMINED, appropriate if the statement is nonsensical or too vague, or if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine which of the FALSE, TRUE, and UNDECIDABLE judgements is appropriate; however, uncertainty as to how to interpret or apply the rules cannot constitute insufficiency of information for this purpose The judgement of the question in an inquiry case SHOULD guide future play, including future judgements, but does not directly affect the veracity of the statement. The rulekeepor is ENCOURAGED to annotate rules to draw attention to relevant inquiry case judgements. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5360 (Murphy), 20 December 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an inquiry case. An inquiry case's purpose is to determine the veracity of a particular statement. An inquiry case CAN be initiated by any person, by announcement which includes the statement to be inquired into. The initiator is unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case, and in the initiating announcement e CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case. An inquiry case has a judicial question on veracity, which is always applicable. The valid judgements for this question are: * FALSE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically false at the time the inquiry case was initiated * TRUE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically true at the time the inquiry case was initiated * UNDECIDABLE, appropriate if the statement was logically undecidable or otherwise not capable of being accurately described as either false or true, at the time the inquiry case was initiated * IRRELEVANT, appropriate if the veracity of the statement at the time the inquiry case was initiated is not relevant to the game * UNDETERMINED, appropriate if the statement is nonsensical or too vague, or if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine which of the FALSE, TRUE, and UNDECIDABLE judgements is appropriate; however, uncertainty as to how to interpret or apply the rules cannot constitute insufficiency of information for this purpose The judgement of the question in an inquiry case, and the reasoning by which it was reached, SHOULD guide future play (including future judgements), but do not directly affect the veracity of the statement. The rulekeepor is ENCOURAGED to annotate rules to draw attention to relevant inquiry case judgements. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5371 (Zefram), 20 December 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an inquiry case. An inquiry case's purpose is to determine the veracity of a particular statement. An inquiry case CAN be initiated by any first-class person, by announcement which includes the statement to be inquired into. The initiator is unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case, and in the initiating announcement e CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case. An inquiry case has a judicial question on veracity, which is always applicable. The valid judgements for this question are: * FALSE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically false at the time the inquiry case was initiated * TRUE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically true at the time the inquiry case was initiated * UNDECIDABLE, appropriate if the statement was logically undecidable or otherwise not capable of being accurately described as either false or true, at the time the inquiry case was initiated * IRRELEVANT, appropriate if the veracity of the statement at the time the inquiry case was initiated is not relevant to the game * UNDETERMINED, appropriate if the statement is nonsensical or too vague, or if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine which of the FALSE, TRUE, and UNDECIDABLE judgements is appropriate; however, uncertainty as to how to interpret or apply the rules cannot constitute insufficiency of information for this purpose The judgement of the question in an inquiry case, and the reasoning by which it was reached, SHOULD guide future play (including future judgements), but do not directly affect the veracity of the statement. The rulekeepor is ENCOURAGED to annotate rules to draw attention to relevant inquiry case judgements. history: Amended(24) by Proposal 5425 (Murphy), 6 February 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an inquiry case. An inquiry case's purpose is to determine the veracity of a particular statement. An inquiry case CAN be initiated by any first-class person, by announcement which includes the statement to be inquired into. (Including a yes/no question is equivalent to including a statement that the answer to that question is yes.) The initiator is unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case, and in the initiating announcement e CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case. An inquiry case has a judicial question on veracity, which is always applicable. The valid judgements for this question are: * FALSE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically false at the time the inquiry case was initiated * TRUE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically true at the time the inquiry case was initiated * UNDECIDABLE, appropriate if the statement was logically undecidable or otherwise not capable of being accurately described as either false or true, at the time the inquiry case was initiated * IRRELEVANT, appropriate if the veracity of the statement at the time the inquiry case was initiated is not relevant to the game * UNDETERMINED, appropriate if the statement is nonsensical or too vague, or if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine which of the FALSE, TRUE, and UNDECIDABLE judgements is appropriate; however, uncertainty as to how to interpret or apply the rules cannot constitute insufficiency of information for this purpose The judgement of the question in an inquiry case, and the reasoning by which it was reached, SHOULD guide future play (including future judgements), but do not directly affect the veracity of the statement. The rulekeepor is ENCOURAGED to annotate rules to draw attention to relevant inquiry case judgements. history: Amended(25) by Proposal 5470 (Murphy), 24 March 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an inquiry case. An inquiry case's purpose is to determine the veracity of a particular statement. An inquiry case CAN be initiated by any first-class person, by announcement which includes the statement to be inquired into. (Including a yes/no question is equivalent to including a statement that the answer to that question is yes, and for such a case, YES and NO are synonymous with the judgements TRUE and FALSE respectively.) The initiator is unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case, and in the initiating announcement e CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case. An inquiry case has a judicial question on veracity, which is always applicable. The valid judgements for this question are: * FALSE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically false at the time the inquiry case was initiated * TRUE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically true at the time the inquiry case was initiated * UNDECIDABLE, appropriate if the statement was logically undecidable or otherwise not capable of being accurately described as either false or true, at the time the inquiry case was initiated * IRRELEVANT, appropriate if the veracity of the statement at the time the inquiry case was initiated is not relevant to the game * UNDETERMINED, appropriate if the statement is nonsensical or too vague, or if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine which of the FALSE, TRUE, and UNDECIDABLE judgements is appropriate; however, uncertainty as to how to interpret or apply the rules cannot constitute insufficiency of information for this purpose The judgement of the question in an inquiry case, and the reasoning by which it was reached, SHOULD guide future play (including future judgements), but do not directly affect the veracity of the statement. The rulekeepor is ENCOURAGED to annotate rules to draw attention to relevant inquiry case judgements. history: Amended(26) by Proposal 5476 (Murphy; disi.), 27 March 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an inquiry case. An inquiry case's purpose is to determine the veracity of a particular statement. An inquiry case CAN be initiated by any first-class person, by announcement which includes the statement to be inquired into. (Including a yes/no question is equivalent to including a statement that the answer to that question is yes, and for such a case, YES and NO are synonymous with the judgements TRUE and FALSE respectively.) The initiator is unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case, and in the initiating announcement e CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case. An inquiry case has a judicial question on veracity, which is always applicable. The valid judgements for this question are: * FALSE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically false at the time the inquiry case was initiated * TRUE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically true at the time the inquiry case was initiated * UNDECIDABLE, appropriate if the statement was logically undecidable or otherwise not capable of being accurately described as either false or true, at the time the inquiry case was initiated * IRRELEVANT, appropriate if the veracity of the statement at the time the inquiry case was initiated is not relevant to the game * UNDETERMINED, appropriate if the statement is nonsensical or too vague, or if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine which of the FALSE, TRUE, and UNDECIDABLE judgements is appropriate; however, uncertainty as to how to interpret or apply the rules cannot constitute insufficiency of information for this purpose The judgement of the question in an inquiry case, and the reasoning by which it was reached, SHOULD guide future play (including future judgements), but do not directly affect the veracity of the statement. The Rulekeepor is ENCOURAGED to annotate rules to draw attention to relevant inquiry case judgements. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 217 history: Initial Mutable Rule 217, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Game Custom and the Spirit of the Game before applying other standards. text: All judgements must be in accordance with the rules; however, if the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the statement to be judged, then the Judge shall consider game custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1635, 25 July 1995 text: All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Game Custom, the Spirit of the Game and past Judgements before applying other standards. history: Infected and Amended(2) by Rule 1454, 7 August 1995 text: All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Game Custom, the Spirit of the Game and past Judgements before applying other standards. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2507, 3 March 1996 text: All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider game custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the game before applying other standards. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 text: All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider game custom, common sense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the game before applying other standards. history: Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider game custom, common sense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the game before applying other standards. When a Judge is considering eir Judgement of a Statement contained in a CFJ, e shall make eir evaluation based on the truth or falsity of the Statement at the time the CFJ was issued. history: Retitled by Proposal 5105 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5105 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: When interpreting and applying the rules, the text of the rules takes precedence. Where the text is silent, inconsistent, or unclear, it is to be augmented by game custom, common sense, past judgements, and consideration of the best interests of the game. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 218,411,494 history: Initial Mutable Rule 218, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: In addition to duties which may be listed elsewhere in the Rules, the Speaker shall have the following duties: -register new Players -maintain a list of all Players and their current scores, and make such a list available to all Players -maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and make such a list available to all Players -make a random determination whenever such determination is required by the Rules. text: In addition to duties which may be listed elsewhere in the rules, the Speaker shall have the following duties: -register new players -maintain a list of all players and their current scores, and make such a list available to all players -maintain a complete list of the current rules, and make such a list available to all players -make a random determination whenever such determination is required by the rules. history: Amended by Proposal 411, 26 August 1993 text: In addition to duties which may be listed elsewhere in the Rules, the Industrious Speaker shall have the following duties: -register new Players -maintain a list of all Players and their current scores, and make such a list available to all Players -maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and make such a list available to all Players -make a random determination whenever such determination is required by the Rules and no other Player is specified to make the determination. history: Amended by Proposal 494, 29 September 1993 text: The Speaker shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 219 history: Initial Mutable Rule 219, 30 June 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: If a Player believes that the Rules are such that further play is impossible, or that the legality of a Move cannot be determined with finality, or that a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the Player may invoke Judgement on a Statement to that effect. If the Statement is judged TRUE, then the Player who invoked Judgement shall be declared the Winner of that Game, and the Game ends, with no provision for starting another Game. This Rule takes precedence over every other Rule determining the Winner of the Game. text: If a player believes that the rules are such that further play is impossible, or that the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or that a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the player may invoke judgement on a statement to that effect. If the statement is judged TRUE, then the player who invoked judgement shall be declared the winner of that game, and the game ends, with no provision for starting another game. This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner of the game. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 305 history: Created as Power=1 Rule text: All Players begin with 0 points. Points may not be gained, lost, or traded except as explicitly stated in the Rules. history: Amended by Proposal 305 text: All Players begin with 0 points, except that new Voters who enter part-way through a game in progress shall be given the average of all current Voters scores. Points may not be gained, lost, or traded except as explicitly stated in the Rules. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 308 history: Created as Power=1 Rule text: Voters who voted AGAINST Proposals which are adopted receive 10 points apiece. Players whose Proposals are adopted shall receive a random number of points in the range 1-10 inclusive. Players whose Proposals are not adopted shall lose 10 points. history: Amended text: When the prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is finished, the Player who proposed the Proposal shall receive F-A points, where F is the number of Votes cast FOR the Proposal and A is the number of Votes cast AGAINST it. history: Amended by Proposal 308 text: When the prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is finished, the Player who proposed the Proposal shall receive F-A points, where F is the number of Votes cast FOR the Proposal and A is the number of Votes cast AGAINST it; all Players who vote AGAINST a Proposal which passes shall receive 2(F-A) points. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 312 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 312 by Proposal 312, 15 July 1993 text: If a Voter votes, he gets one (1) point at the end of the Voting Period. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1554, 17 April 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1556, 17 April 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1579, 28 April 1995 text: If a Player votes, e gets one (1) point at the end of the Voting Period. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1705, 4 September 1995 text: For each Proposal, and for each Player, if that Player casts a legal Vote on that Proposal, then that Player shall receive one Point at the end of the Voting Period of that Proposal. The Assessor shall detect and report these Point transfers, and shall do so no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal for which the Player's Vote was cast. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: For each Proposal, and for each Player, if that Player casts a legal Vote on that Proposal, then that Player shall receive one Mil at the end of the Voting Period of that Proposal. The Assessor shall detect and report these Mark transfers, and shall do so no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal for which the Player's Vote was cast. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 316 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 316 history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 316 by Proposal 353 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 319 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 319 by Proposal 319 text: Every Proposal submitted to the Speaker must be headed with a Title. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 326,783 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 326 by Proposal 326, 19 July 1993 text: Proposals submitted after the passage of this rule (# 326) which contain clauses awarding, trading, penalizing or otherwise changing points to Players based on the Vote they cast on that Proposal are disallowed. history: Amended by Proposal 783, ca. Jan. 1994 text: Proposals which contain clauses awarding, trading, penalizing, or otherwise changing the account of any Nomic Entity's holding of Points or any other form of Currency based on the Vote they cast on that Proposal are invalid, shall not be deemed to have been properly submitted, and shall not be Voted upon. history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Jan. 1994 text: Proposals which contain clauses awarding, trading, penalizing, or otherwise changing the account of any Nomic Entity's holding of Points or any other form of Currency based on the Vote they cast on that Proposal are invalid, shall not be deemed to have been properly submitted, and shall not be Voted upon. (*Was: 326*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1622, 17 July 1995 text: Proposals which contain clauses awarding, trading, penalizing, or otherwise changing the account of any Nomic Entity's holding of Points or any other form of Currency based on the Vote they cast on that Proposal shall not take effect even if adopted, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Infected and Amended(2) by Rule 1454, 31 July 1995 text: Proposals which contain clauses awarding, trading, penalizing, or otherwise changing the account of any Nomic Entity's holding of Points or any other form of Currency based on the Vote they cast on that Proposal shall not take effect even if adopted, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1683, 29 August 1995 text: Proposals which contain clauses awarding, trading, penalizing, or otherwise changing the account of any Nomic Entity's holding of Points or any other form of Currency based on the Vote they cast on that Proposal shall not take effect even if adopted, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 330 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 330 by Proposal 330 text: Every time a Voter proposes a Proposal, that Voter shall gain one Entry into a weekly Lottery. Each week, a random Entry shall be selected by the Speaker, and the Voter who "owns" that Entry shall receive 5 points. For purposes of this Rule, a "week" shall begin on Monday at 12:00 noon and last seven days, ending on Monday at 11:59 am, in the time zone in which the Speaker resides. The weekly drawing shall take place as soon as possible after the end of the week. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 337 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 337 by Proposal 337 text: For the purposes of applying Rule 213, a "Move" refers to a Proposal of a Rule, vote on a Proposal, call for Judgement, or Judgement. Any invocation of Judgement must be in regard to a particular Move or question the legality of a particular Rule, which move or Rule must be clearly stated in the CFJ. A CFJ which does not contain such reference is invalid and not considered for Judgement. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 349 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 349 by Proposal 349 text: Points shall be computed according to the Rules in effect, then shall be rounded to the nearest integer. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 352 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 352 by Proposal 352 text: Not less than once a week, the Speaker shall post the current scores of all Players to the mailing lists, making his best efforts to determine the correct scores. If a Player feels the posted scores are incorrect, he may make a Call for Judgement, stating what he believes to be the correct scores. If the resulting Judgement is TRUE, the scores stated in the Call for Judgement become the official scores of all Players. Otherwise, the scores posted by the Speaker become the official scores of all Players. If no Call for Judgement is made during the week following a posting of scores by the Speaker, the posted scores become official, that is, each Player's score is changed, if necessary, to the amount posted by the Speaker. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 355,848 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 355 by Proposal 355 text: If a Player believes that any Player has not abided by a Rule then in effect, in the form in which it was then in effect, then the Player may invoke Judgement on a Statement to that effect. However, -The Accusing player immediately loses 5 points. -No Player may be so Accused of actions committed before the adoption of this Rule or more than 30 days before the Accusation. -No Player may be so Accused more than once concerning the same committed act, unless the last such Accusation has been judged UNDECIDED. -The following exception takes precedence over previous Rules concerning Judgement: Neither Accusing nor Accused Player may act as Judge for the Accusation; in any case where this would occur, a random Voter, neither Accuser nor Accused, shall be Judge. If the Statement is judged TRUE, the Accused Player has been convicted of breaking the Rule. If the Statement is judged FALSE, the Accused Player has been acquitted of breaking the Rule. history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 848 (Garth), 3 March 1994 text: If a Player believes that any Player has not abided by a Rule then in effect, in the form in which it was then in effect, then the Player may invoke Judgement on a Statement to that effect. Similarly, if a Player believes that any Player has commited a Crime, e may invoke Judgement on a Statement to that effect. Either kind of Statement is known as an Accusation. A Criminal Court is defined as the Judge of an Accusation. However, -The Accusing player immediately loses 5 points. -No Player may be so Accused of actions committed before the adoption of this Rule or more than 30 days before the Accusation. -No Player may be so Accused more than once concerning the same committed act, unless the last such Accusation has been judged UNDECIDED. -The following exception takes precedence over previous Rules concerning Judgement: Neither Accusing nor Accused Player may act as Judge for the Accusation; in any case where this would occur, a random Voter, neither Accuser nor Accused, shall be Judge. If the Statement is judged TRUE, the Accused Player has been found Guilty of breaking the Rule or committing the Crime, as applicable. If the Statement is judged FALSE, the Accused Player has been found Not Guilty of breaking the Rule or committing the Crime, as applicable. history: Amended by Rule 750, 3 March 1994 text: If a Player believes that any Player has not abided by a Rule then in effect, in the form in which it was then in effect, then the Player may invoke Judgement on a Statement to that effect. Similarly, if a Player believes that any Player has commited a Crime, e may invoke Judgement on a Statement to that effect. Either kind of Statement is known as an Accusation. A Criminal Court is defined as the Judge of an Accusation. However, -The Accusing player immediately loses 5 points. -No Player may be so Accused of actions committed before the adoption of this Rule or more than 30 days before the Accusation. -No Player may be so Accused more than once concerning the same committed act, unless the last such Accusation has been judged UNDECIDED. -The following exception takes precedence over previous Rules concerning Judgement: Neither Accusing nor Accused Player may act as Judge for the Accusation; in any case where this would occur, a random Voter, neither Accuser nor Accused, shall be Judge. If the Statement is judged TRUE, the Accused Player has been found Guilty of breaking the Rule or committing the Crime, as applicable. If the Statement is judged FALSE, the Accused Player has been found Not Guilty of breaking the Rule or committing the Crime, as applicable. (*Was: 355*) history: ... [orphaned text: If a Player believes that any Player has not abided by a Rule then in effect, in the form in which it was then in effect, then the Player may invoke Judgement on a Statement to that effect. However, -The Accusing player immediately loses 5 points. -No Player may be so Accused of actions committed before the adoption of this Rule or more than 30 days before the Accusation. -No Player may be so Accused more than once concerning the same committed act, unless the last such Accusation has been judged UNDECIDED. -The following exception takes precedence over previous Rules concerning Judgement: Neither Accusing nor Accused Player may act as Judge for the Accusation; in any case where this would occur, a random Voter, neither Accuser nor Accused, shall be Judge. If the Statement is judged TRUE, the Accused Player has been convicted of breaking the Rule. If the Statement is judged FALSE, the Accused Player has been acquitted of breaking the Rule. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 356 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 356 by Proposal 356 text: Let there be three Groups named Group Red, Group Blue, and Group Yellow. Upon the passage of this Rule, each Voter shall be designated as a member of one, and only one, of these Groups. The Groups shall be as close to equal in population as possible, and the Group designated to each Voter shall be chosen randomly, such that the above population restriction is followed. At no time may any Voter be a member of more than one of these Groups. The Speaker shall reveal to all Players the members of each Group when the above actions have taken place, and whenever the members of any Group change. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 357 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 357 by Proposal 357 text: When a Voter refers to the Nomic Speaker, or any other Speaker, that Voter must use one of the following adjectives in conjuction with the Speaker: Admirable, Amazing, August, Astonishing, Astounding, Beloved, Benevolent, Brilliant, Celebrated, Circumcised, Circumspect, Cogetative, Competant, Consummate, Courteous, Deserving, Devoted, Diligent, Distinguished, Divine, Effulgent, Elevated, Eminent, Excellent, Exceptional, Extraordinary, Exalted, Fabulous, Famed, Fine, Foremost, Generous, Glorious, Gracious, Grand, Great, Hallowed, High, Holy, Honored, Illustrious, Impartial, Impressive, Incredible, Industrious, Influential, Judicious, Just, Kind, Kosher, Kindred, Lofty, Magnificent, Majestic, Magnanimous, Marvelous, Mighty, Neat, Noble, Omnilaborant, Outstanding, Overworked, Persuasive, Pensive, Phenominal, Pious, Prime, Qualified, Quintessential, Regal, Reknown, Remarkable, Respected, Revered, Solicitous, Spectacular, Splendid, Superb, Superior, Transcendant, Trustful, Unparalleled, Upright, Unusual, Venerated, Vigilent, Virile, Virtuous, Watchful, Wonderful, Worshipped, Xenophilic, Zealous, or any combination of the preceeding. Any Voter not following this directive shall lose 1 point per reference to the Great and Virtuous Speaker which does not use one of the above words. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 357 by Proposal 397 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 358 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 358 by Proposal 358 text: No proposal is allowed to contain any word which begins with the letter indicated in the Title of this proposal, being the second to the last letter of the English alphabet. If a Proposal does contain a word beginning with the aforementioned letter, the Voter who proposed that Proposal shall lose 1 point per instance of a word beginning with said letter. This is not dependant upon the passage of the offending Proposal into a Rule. This Rule shall be repealed when Proposal 357 is Amended to include a word beginning with said Evil letter. If Proposal 357 is not accepted as a Rule, then this Rule shall remain in effect until Repealed. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 358 by Proposal 497 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 362,795 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 362 by Proposal 362 text: When a Player quotes a Rule, Proposal, Statement, Judgement, the words of another Player, or other references, that Player shall not be penalized in points for the terminology or grammar used in those quotes. For example, if a Player were to quote Rule 203 in its entirety, that Player would not lose points for not referring to our Benevolent Speaker properly withing this quote. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which specifies terminology or grammar. history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 795 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1507, 24 March 1995 text: When a Player quotes a Rule, Proposal, Statement, Judgement, the words of another Player, or other references, that Player shall not be penalized in points nor blots for the terminology or grammar used in those quotes. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which specifies terminology or grammar. (*Was: 362*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1756, 21 October 1995 text: When a Player quotes a Rule, Proposal, Statement, Judgement, the words of another Player, or other references, that Player shall not be penalized in any way for the terminology or grammar used in those quotes. For the purpose of this Rule, a gain or loss of Kudos by any means shall not be construed as a punishment. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which specifies terminology or grammar. history: ... [orphaned text: When a Player quotes a Rule, Proposal, Statement, Judgement, the words of another Player, or other references, that Player shall not be penalized in points for the terminology or grammar used in those quotes. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which specifies terminology or grammar. (*Was: 362*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 363 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 363 by Proposal 363 text: If a Player is convicted of breaking a rule, then the Player who first formally accused him of breaking that rule shall receive back any points which the accusing Player may have lost as a direct result of that accusation. In addition, he shall receive a reward of three additional points. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 366,464,870,1016 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 366 by Proposal 366 (KoJen), 10 August 1993 text: A Player may put self on hold for the purposes of Nomic game play. A Player who is on hold may not participate in the Game in any way. Specifically: * Cannot Vote * Cannot send any message to the list, except a request to revert to active status. * Cannot send any private message to any Player which concerns the game. * Does not gain or lose points. * Is absolved of all normal duties, such as serving as a Judge. Putting oneself on hold is intended for Players who cannot participate for some time, because of vacation, temporary loss of email, or whatever. Its use is completely optional, but since penalties could acrue from inability to respond to judgeship duties, it is a good idea. A Player puts self on hold by writing a message to the list, stating, "Put me on hold", or something to that effect. This message must also include a reasonable excuse; this is left to Judgement at this time to decide. A Player puts self back on active status by writing a mesage to the list, stating, "Put me on active status", or something similar. A request to return to active status must be at least 4 days later than the request to go on hold. (This is intended to prevent such hold periods from being too frequent.) The Benevolent Speaker takes note of these hold and active status messages and marks the Player's status accordingly. If a Player makes excessive use of hold status, the Player may lose the privilege. Again, this is left to Judgement to define what is excessive. history: Amended by Proposal 464 (Wes), 20 September 1993 text: A Player may choose to be placed On Hold at any time by notifying the Speaker of the fact. The Speaker shall then notify all other Players. If a Player wishes to cease being On Hold, that Player shall notify the Speaker of the fact. The Speaker shall then notify all other Players. A Player may not be On Hold for less than 96 consecutive hours. While On Hold, a Player may not communicate with any other Player in any way regarding the Game, with the exception of notifying the Speaker of the desire to stop being On Hold. This prohibits the Player from Voting, proposing Proposals, campaigning, or discussing the Game whatsoever with another Player. The Player is also absolved of any duties which would require said participation, including appointment as a Judge. history: Amended by Proposal 870 (Garth), 4 April 1994 text: A Player may choose to be placed On Hold at any time by notifying the Speaker of the fact. The Speaker shall then notify all other Players. If a Player wishes to cease being On Hold, that Player shall notify the Speaker of the fact. The Speaker shall then notify all other Players. A Player may not be On Hold for less than 96 consecutive hours. While On Hold, a Player may not Vote, propose Proposals, or campaign for or hold Office. E is also absolved of any duties which would otherwise be required of eim, including appointment as a Judge history: Amended by Rule 750, 4 April 1994 text: A Player may choose to be placed On Hold at any time by notifying the Speaker of the fact. The Speaker shall then notify all other Players. If a Player wishes to cease being On Hold, that Player shall notify the Speaker of the fact. The Speaker shall then notify all other Players. A Player may not be On Hold for less than 96 consecutive hours. While On Hold, a Player may not Vote, propose Proposals, or campaign for or hold Office. E is also absolved of any duties which would otherwise be required of eim, including appointment as a Judge (*Was: 464*) history: Amended by Proposal 1016, 4 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, 4 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1337, 22 November 1994 text: A Player may choose to be placed On Hold at any time by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum. A Player may not place any other Player besides emself on Hold. A Player may cease to be On Hold by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum, so long as it has been at least 96 hours since e last went On Hold. While On Hold, a Player may not Vote, propose Proposals, or campaign for or hold Office. E is also absolved of any duties which would otherwise be required of eim, including appointment as a Judge (*Was: 464/870*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1374, 17 January 1995 text: A Player may choose to be placed On Hold at any time by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum. A Player may not place any other Player besides emself on Hold. A Player may cease to be On Hold by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum, so long as it has been at least 96 hours since e last went On Hold. While On Hold, a Player may not Vote, propose Proposals, or campaign for or hold Office. E is also absolved of any duties which would otherwise be required of eim, including appointment as a Judge This rule takes precedence over any rule giving special duties to a particular player or a particular group of players. (*Was: 464/870*) history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=2 by Proposal 1407, 29 January 1995 history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1618, 10 July 1995 text: A Player may choose to be placed On Hold at any time by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum. A Player may not place any other Player besides emself on Hold. A Player may cease to be On Hold by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum, so long as it has been at least 96 hours since e last went On Hold. An Active Player is a Player who is not On Hold. While On Hold, a Player may not Vote, propose Proposals, or campaign for or hold Office. E is also absolved of any duties which would otherwise be required of eim, including appointment as a Judge This rule takes precedence over any rule giving special duties to a particular player or a particular group of players. (*Was: 464/870*) history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1700, 1 September 1995 text: A Player may choose to be placed On Hold at any time by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum. A Player may not place any other Player besides emself on Hold. A Player may cease to be On Hold by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum, so long as it has been at least 96 hours since e last went On Hold. An Active Player is a Player who is not On Hold. While On Hold, a Player may not Vote, propose Proposals, or campaign for or hold Office. E is also absolved of any duties which would otherwise be required of em, including appointment as a Judge This rule takes precedence over any rule giving special duties to a particular player or a particular group of players. (*Was: 464/870*) history: Amended(5) by Proposal 1735, 15 October 1995 text: A Player may choose to be placed On Hold at any time by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum. A Player may not place any other Player besides emself on Hold. A Player may cease to be On Hold by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum, so long as it has been at least 96 hours since e last went On Hold. An Active Player is a Player who is not On Hold. While On Hold, a Player may not Vote, propose Proposals, or campaign for or hold Office. E is also absolved of any duties which would otherwise be required of em, including appointment as a Judge. This rule takes precedence over any rule giving special duties to a particular player or a particular group of players. (*Was: 464/870*) history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: A Player may choose to be placed On Hold at any time by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum. A Player may not place any other Player besides emself on Hold. A Player may cease to be On Hold by sending a message indicating such to the Public Forum, so long as it has been at least 96 hours since e last went On Hold. An Active Player is a Player who is not On Hold. While On Hold, a Player may not Vote, propose Proposals, or campaign for or hold Office. E is also absolved of any duties which would otherwise be required of em, including appointment as a Judge. This rule takes precedence over any rule giving special duties to a particular player or a particular group of players. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2464, 16 February 1996 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 2479, 16 February 1996 text: At any time, each Player shall either be On Hold or Off Hold. This status shall not be changed except as specified in the Rules. When a Player registers (or reregisters), e is Off Hold. An Off Hold Player becomes On Hold when e posts a message to the Public Forum stating that e wishes to be On Hold. An On Hold Player becomes Off Hold when e posts a message to the Public Forum stating that e wishes to be Off Hold, provided that e has been On Hold for at least 96 hours. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), 11 May 1997 text: At any time, each Player shall either be On Hold or Off Hold. This status shall not be changed except as specified in the Rules. When a Player registers (or reregisters), e is Off Hold. An Off Hold Player becomes On Hold when e Moves to the Stasis Chamber. An On Hold Player becomes Off Hold when e Moves from the Stasis Chamber. E may not do so until at least 96 hours after e last went On Hold. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3665 (General Chaos), 22 January 1998 text: At any time, each Player shall either be On Hold or Off Hold. This status shall not be changed except as specified in the Rules. When a Player registers (or reregisters), e is Off Hold. An Off Hold Player becomes On Hold when e Moves to the Stasis Chamber. An On Hold Player becomes Off Hold when e Moves from the Stasis Chamber. E may not do so until at least 96 hours after e last went On Hold. "Active" and "Inactive" are unambiguous synonyms for "Off Hold" and "On Hold", respectively. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3740 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 May 1998 text: At any time, each Player shall either be On Hold or Off Hold. This status shall not be changed except as specified in the Rules. When a Player registers (or reregisters), e is Off Hold. An Off Hold Player becomes On Hold when e announces in the Public Forum that e goes On Hold. An On Hold Player becomes Off Hold when e announces in the Public Forum that e comes Off Hold. E may not do so until at least 96 hours after e last went On Hold. "Active" and "Inactive" are unambiguous synonyms for "Off Hold" and "On Hold", respectively. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: Each player has an activity level, which is always exactly one of active, inactive, and frozen. A player's activity level may not be modified except by methods described explicitly in the rules. This rule takes precedence over each rule that regulates activity levels and the powers or duties that a player may have because of eir activity level. An activity level of active is higher than any other activity level. An activity level of inactive is higher than an activity level of frozen. Whenever a player registers or reregisters, e becomes active. A player may lower eir activity level by announcing that e does so and indicating eir new activity level, unless the rules do not permit that player to change to that activity level. If the player becomes inactive in this way, e may not become active until at least 96 hours after e last become inactive. An inactive player may become active by announcing that e does so, unless the rules do not permit that player to become active. A frozen player who has been frozen for at least 90 days may increase eir activity level by announcing that e does so and indicating eir new activity level, unless the rules do not permit that player to change to that activity level. "Off hold" and "on hold" are unambiguous synonyms for "active" and "inactive", respectively. "put in cold storage" is an unambiguous synonym for "frozen". Only active players may vote, make proposals, or hold office. Inactive players may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action unless the rules explicitly state that they can require inactive players to perform that duty or action. Frozen players may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4385 (Steve), 17 September 2002 text: Each player has an activity level, which is always exactly one of active, inactive, and frozen. A player's activity level may not be modified except by methods described explicitly in the rules. This rule takes precedence over each rule that regulates activity levels and the powers or duties that a player may have because of eir activity level. An activity level of active is higher than any other activity level. An activity level of inactive is higher than an activity level of frozen. Whenever a player registers or reregisters, e becomes active. A player may lower eir activity level by announcing that e does so and indicating eir new activity level, unless the rules do not permit that player to change to that activity level. If the player becomes inactive in this way, e may not become active until at least 96 hours after e last become inactive. An inactive player may become active by announcing that e does so, unless the rules do not permit that player to become active. A frozen player who has been frozen for at least 90 days may increase eir activity level by announcing that e does so and indicating eir new activity level, unless the rules do not permit that player to change to that activity level. "Off hold" and "on hold" are unambiguous synonyms for "active" and "inactive", respectively. "put in cold storage" is an unambiguous synonym for "frozen". Only an active player may vote, make proposals, hold office, or be a Judge of a CFJ. An inactive player may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action unless the rules explicitly state that they can require inactive players to perform that duty or action. A frozen player may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action, and is not permitted to perform any of the actions defined by the Rules that non-frozen Players are explicitly permitted by the Rules to perform, with the exception of changing eir activity level, and deregistering. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4388 (OscarMeyr), 5 October 2002 text: Each player has an activity level, which is always exactly one of active, inactive, and frozen. A player's activity level may not be modified except by methods described explicitly in the rules. This rule takes precedence over each rule that regulates activity levels and the powers or duties that a player may have because of eir activity level. An activity level of active is higher than any other activity level. An activity level of inactive is higher than an activity level of frozen. Whenever a player registers or reregisters, e becomes active. A player may lower eir activity level by announcing that e does so and indicating eir new activity level, unless the rules do not permit that player to change to that activity level. If the player becomes inactive in this way, e may not become active until at least 96 hours after e last become inactive. An inactive player may become active by announcing that e does so, unless the rules do not permit that player to become active. A frozen player who has been frozen for at least 90 days may increase eir activity level by announcing that e does so and indicating eir new activity level, unless the rules do not permit that player to change to that activity level. "Off hold" and "on hold" are unambiguous synonyms for "active" and "inactive", respectively. "put in cold storage" is an unambiguous synonym for "frozen". Only an active player may vote, make proposals, hold office, or be a Judge of a CFJ. An inactive player may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action unless the rules explicitly state that they can require inactive players to perform that duty or action. A frozen player may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action, and is not permitted to perform any of the actions defined by the Rules that non-frozen Players are explicitly permitted by the Rules to perform, with the exception of changing eir activity level, and deregistering. Not being Active is a Win-Preventing Condition. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4400 (Pakaran), 23 October 2002 text: Each player has an activity level, which is always exactly one of active, inactive, and frozen. A player's activity level may not be modified except by methods described explicitly in the rules. This rule takes precedence over each rule that regulates activity levels and the powers or duties that a player may have because of eir activity level. An activity level of active is higher than any other activity level. An activity level of inactive is higher than an activity level of frozen. Whenever a player registers or reregisters, e becomes active. A player may lower eir activity level by announcing that e does so and indicating eir new activity level, unless the rules do not permit that player to change to that activity level. If the player becomes inactive in this way, e may not become active until at least 96 hours after e last become inactive. An inactive player may become active by announcing that e does so, unless the rules do not permit that player to become active. A frozen player who has been frozen for at least 90 days may increase eir activity level by announcing that e does so and indicating eir new activity level, unless the rules do not permit that player to change to that activity level. "Off hold" and "on hold" are unambiguous synonyms for "active" and "inactive", respectively. "put in cold storage" is an unambiguous synonym for "frozen". Only an active player may vote, make proposals, hold office, or be a Judge of a CFJ. An inactive player may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action unless the rules explicitly state that they can require inactive players to perform that duty or action. A frozen player may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action. Not being Active is a Win-Preventing Condition. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4407 (Steve), 30 October 2002 text: (a) Each player has an activity level, which is either active or inactive. "Off hold" and "on hold" are unambiguous synonyms for "active" and "inactive", respectively. (b) Whenever a player registers or reregisters, e is active. (c) A player may change eir activity level by announcing that e does so, provided that a week has passed since e last changed eir activity level. (d) Inactive players may not vote, make proposals, hold office, or be a Judge of a CFJ. An inactive player may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action, unless the rules explicitly state that they can require inactive players to perform that duty or action. (e) This rule takes precedence over each other rule that regulates activity levels and the powers or duties that a player may have because of eir activity level. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4527 (Murphy), 16 September 2003 text: Activity is a stuck player switch with values active and inactive. "Off hold" and "on hold" are unambiguous synonyms for "active" and "inactive", respectively. A player may flip eir activity, unless e has done so within the past week. Inactive players may not vote, make proposals, hold office, or be a judge of a CFJ. An inactive player may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action, unless the rules explicitly state that they can require inactive players to perform that duty or action. This rule takes precedence over all other rules that regulate activity, or the powers or duties that a player may have because of eir activity. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4820 (Goethe), 10 July 2005 text: Activity is a stuck player switch with values active and inactive. "Off hold" and "on hold" are unambiguous synonyms for "active" and "inactive", respectively. A player may flip eir activity, unless e has done so within the past week. A player may, with Support and without 2 Objections, flip the activity of another player to inactive, if that other player has not made a public post in the last 30 days. A player made inactive by this method becomes active immediately upon eir next public post. Inactive players may not vote, make proposals, hold office, or be a judge of a CFJ. An inactive player may not be required by the rules to perform any duty or action, unless the rules explicitly state that they can require inactive players to perform that duty or action. This rule takes precedence over all other rules that regulate activity, or the powers or duties that a player may have because of eir activity. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1016 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 367 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 367 history: ... [orphaned text: When Judgment has been called for, a Judge is randomly selected by the Benevolent Speaker from among the players, excluding - the player who called for Judgment - any player who is "involved" by the statement Involvement of a Voter or the Mighty Speaker implied, if the statement to be judged makes mention of one of the following: - an action or inaction of that Voter or the Mighty Speaker - a Rule mentioning the Mighty Speaker - a Rule proposed by that voter The player selected has 3 days in which to accept or refuse the appointment by posting to the listserver. Any player who does not respond to selection in 3 days shall be penalized 10 points, and is deemed to have refused appointment. If a selected player refuses appointment, then a further random selection is made from the remaining pool of players. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 374 history: Created as Power=1 Rule text: Players may trade points to other Players, for the purpose of "buying" Votes, Proposals, Judgements, or any other Commodity explicitly outlined by future rules, within the following limits: (a) the trade being made must be posted to the listserv (b) a Player may only trade a positive number of points (c) a Player may not trade more points than e currently has Commodities not explicitly declared as such via legislation (eg "future considerations" at the time of this Proposal) may not be bought or sold. history: Amended by Proposal 374 text: A Player may voluntarily transfer points to any other Player for any purpose, within the following limits: (a) the transfer must be posted to the listserv (b) a Player may only transfer a positive number of points (c) a Player may not transfer more points than e currently has (d) a Player may not transfer points if the recipient would as a result have more than 90% of the points required to win. If any agreement among Players includes any transfer of points between two Players then each such transfer shall be in accordance with the above. But this Rule shall not be construed as having any bearing on the legality or legal enforeceability of any terms of said agreement which do not involve such a transfer. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 377 history: Created as Power=1 Rule text: No Player may have more than three Proposals up for vote at any given time. history: Amended text: Any Player who may make a Proposal may have up to four Proposals up for vote at any given time. history: Amended by Proposal 377 text: There shall be no limit on the number of Proposals a Player may have up for vote at any given time. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 381 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 381 by Proposal 381 text: There shall be four classes of Crimes: Class A, Class B, Class C, and Class D. Each Class is more vile than the last, with Class A being the least vile and Class D being the most vile. Future legislation shall determine the punishments for each Class, as well as which actions would be classified as each Class. New classes more vile than Class D Crimes may be created by future legislation. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 384,690,911 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 384 by Proposal 384 (Alexx), 16 August 1993 text: At any time in the week following the posting of a Judgement, any Player who believes that Judgement to be in error may Appeal that Judgement. "In error" includes, but is not limited to, being in violation of the Rules. Once a judgement has been Appealed, it may not be Appealed again. When a Judgement is Appealed, an Appeal Court is set up. An Appeal Court shall consist of an odd number of Justices greater than one. Unless another Rule specifies otherwise, that number shall be three. The Justices shall be selected in the same manner that the Rules provide for selecting Judges, with the following restrictions: 1) no Player may be selected more than once for any particular Appeal Court. 2) the Player who made the Appeal shall not be selected for that Appeal Court. 3) The Player who made the original Call For judgement which is being Appealed shall not be selected for that Appeal Court. After a Justice has accepted appointment, he has one week in which to return a Decision. If the Justice does not return a Decision in that time, he shall be penalized 10 points and another Player shall be chosen to take his place as Justice, unless a Verdict has been reached on that Appeal, in which case there shall be no replacement and he shall not be penalized. A Decision must be one of the following: (1) TO OVERRULE JUDGEMENT, (2) TO SUSTAIN JUDGEMENT, or (3) UNDECIDED. A Decision may be accompanied by reasons and arguments, but any such reasons and arguements form no part of the official Decision itself. A Verdict is reached based on the Decisions of the Justices. If a majority of the Justices return the Decision TO OVERRULE JUDGEMENT, then the Verdict is JUDGEMENT OVERRULED. Otherwise the Verdict is JUDGEMENT SUSTAINED. If enough Decisions have been returned to ensure one of these two Verdicts, then the Verdict is reached immediately; it does not wait for the remaining Justices to return a Decision. If the Verdict is JUDGEMENT SUSTAINED, then the Judgement in question stands, and the Player who Appealed the Judgement is penalized 10 points. If the Verdict is JUDGEMENT OVERRULED, then the Judgement in question is changed to UNDECIDED. At any time in the week following the return of a Verdict, any Player may submit a Proposal that the Verdict be Reversed, i.e. JUDGEMENT SUSTAINED changed to JUDGEMENT OVERRULED or vice versa. In order to pass, such a Proposal must receive 2/3 of the Votes legally cast within the prescribed Voting Period; this Rule takes precedence over Rule 209. If the Proposal passes, the Verdict is Reversed and points are adjusted as if the new Verdict had been the original Verdict. history: Amended by Proposal 690 (Ronald Kunne), 11 November 1993 text: At any time in the week following the return of a Judgment on a Call for Judgment, any Player may submit a Proposal that the Judgment on that statement be changed (from FALSE to TRUE; from TRUE to FALSE; from UNDECIDED to either TRUE or FALSE). In order to pass, such a Proposal must receive 3/5 of the Votes legally cast within the prescribed Voting Period. If the Proposal passes, the Judgment is changed accordingly and points are adjusted in accordance with the new Judgment. history: Amended by Proposal 911 (Garth), 4 May 1994 text: A Judgement may be Appealed upon the insistence of any three Players to the Public Forum. If a Judgement is successfully Appealed, the Justices shall each Judge the Statement as if they were Judges. They may confer with each other on the case before delivering Judgement if they desire. If a Justice should fail to return Judgement in the allotted time, e shall be fined three Points for each day by which e missed the deadline. This fine shall be levied by the Scorekeepor. If a majority of the Justices' Judgements agree, the Statement shall be considered to have been Judged accordingly. Otherwise, it shall be considered to have been ruled UNDECIDED. The Justices' reasoning and arguments shall be recorded with the original CFJ. Once a Judgement has been made, the Justices may make Injunctions just as may Judges, provided a majority of them agree. The decision of the Justices is final; no further Appeal of that Statement may be made. If the decision of the original Judge of the Statement is changed by the Justices, the Judge shall return the compensation e received to the Point Reserve. history: Amended by Rule 750, 4 May 1994 text: A Judgement may be Appealed upon the insistence of any three Players to the Public Forum. If a Judgement is successfully Appealed, the Justices shall each Judge the Statement as if they were Judges. They may confer with each other on the case before delivering Judgement if they desire. If a Justice should fail to return Judgement in the allotted time, e shall be fined three Points for each day by which e missed the deadline. This fine shall be levied by the Scorekeepor. If a majority of the Justices' Judgements agree, the Statement shall be considered to have been Judged accordingly. Otherwise, it shall be considered to have been ruled UNDECIDED. The Justices' reasoning and arguments shall be recorded with the original CFJ. Once a Judgement has been made, the Justices may make Injunctions just as may Judges, provided a majority of them agree. The decision of the Justices is final; no further Appeal of that Statement may be made. If the decision of the original Judge of the Statement is changed by the Justices, the Judge shall return the compensation e received to the Point Reserve. (*Was: 690*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1345, 29 November 1994 text: A Judgement may be Appealed upon the insistence of any three Players to the Public Forum. If a Judgement is successfully Appealed, the Justices shall each Judge the Statement as if they were Judges. They may confer with each other on the case before delivering Judgement if they desire. If a Justice should fail to return Judgement in the allotted time, e shall be fined three Points for each day by which e missed the deadline. This fine shall be levied by the Scorekeepor. If a majority of the Justices' Judgements agree, the Statement shall be considered to have been Judged accordingly. Otherwise, it shall be considered to have been ruled UNDECIDED. The Justices' reasoning and arguments shall be recorded with the original CFJ. Once a Judgement has been made, the Justices may make Injunctions just as may Judges, provided a majority of them agree. The decision of the Justices is final; no further Appeal of that Statement may be made. If the decision of the original Judge of the Statement is changed by the Justices, the Judge shall forfeit the compensation e received for judging. (*Was: 690*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1487, 15 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1511, 24 March 1995 text: If within two weeks after a Judgement is distributed to the Public Forum, three players post to the Public Forum their insistence that it be appealed, then the judgement is Appealed. If a judgement is Appealed, the Clerk of the Courts shall within one week report this to the Public Forum, together with the statement of the CFJ. When this happens, the Speaker, CotC, and Justiciar shall serve as Justices, judging the statement as if they were Judges. The Justices may confer with each other on the case before delivering Judgement if they desire. A Justice may appoint another willing Player to act as Justice; the player so appointed becomes Justice in eir place. A Justice who was ineligible to serve as Judge of the CFJ, or who was Judge of the CFJ, may not deliver judgement as Justice, but must instead so appoint another player, as soon as possible. No Player may deliver judgement more than once on the same CFJ; rather than do so as Justice e must instead appoint another player to act as Justice, as soon as possible. If a Justice, A, is required by the Rules to appoint another Player as Justice, he may do so by declaring to the CotC that e is unable to find another willing player to so serve; in this case the CotC shall as soon as possible select an eligible player at random to serve as Justice in place of A. The Justices shall receive the same compensation as Judges for each Statement so Judged. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: Whenever an Appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be constituted to consider the Appeal and to reach a determination. A Board of Appeals shall consist of three distinct Players, called Justices. The Clerk of the Courts shall select the Justices for each Board of Appeals as follows, until three eligible Justices have been selected. First, the Speaker shall be selected, if eligible. Then, the Justiciar shall be selected, if eligible. Then, the Clerk of the Courts shall be selected, if eligible. All remaining positions on the Board (if any) shall then be filled by the random selection of the Clerk of the Courts from amongst all those Players eligible to be selected, as described below. A Player who has already been selected to serve on a given Board of Appeal is not eligible to be selected a second time for that Board; this does not in any way affect that Player's eligibility to serve in the first position, however. If a Board of Appeals is considering a question pertaining to a CFJ, then a Player shall only be eligible to be selected to serve on that Board of Appeals if e is eligible to be selected as a Judge of that CFJ. However, if this restriction would result in there being fewer than three Players who are eligible to serve on that Board of Appeals, it shall not have any effect for that Board. If a Board of Appeals is considering a question that does not pertain to any one CFJ, then all Active Players (except those already selected) shall be eligible to be selected for that Board. If this would result in there being fewer than three Players who are eligible to serve on that Board of Appeals, then all Players, whether or not active, shall be eligible. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2553, 22 March 1996 text: Whenever an Appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be constituted to consider the Appeal and to reach a determination. A Board of Appeals shall consist of three distinct Players, called Justices. The Clerk of the Courts shall select the Justices for each Board of Appeals as follows, until three eligible Justices have been selected. First, the Speaker shall be selected, if eligible. Then, the Justiciar shall be selected, if eligible. Then, the Clerk of the Courts shall be selected, if eligible. All remaining positions on the Board (if any) shall then be filled by the random selection of the Clerk of the Courts from amongst all those Players eligible to be selected, as described below. A Player who has already been selected to serve on a given Board of Appeal is not eligible to be selected a second time for that Board; this does not in any way affect that Player's eligibility to serve in the first position, however. If a Board of Appeals is considering a question pertaining to a CFJ, then a Player shall only be eligible to be selected to serve on that Board of Appeals if e was not a Judge of that CFJ, and is eligible to be selected as a Judge of that CFJ. However, if this restriction would result in there being fewer than three Players who are eligible to serve on that Board of Appeals, it shall not have any effect for that Board. If a Board of Appeals is considering a question that does not pertain to any one CFJ, then all Active Players (except those already selected) shall be eligible to be selected for that Board. If this would result in there being fewer than three Players who are eligible to serve on that Board of Appeals, then all Players, whether or not active, shall be eligible. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2685, 3 October 1996 text: When an appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be selected in order to reach a decision about the consideration mandated by the appeal. A Board of Appeals consists of three distinct Players, called Justices. The Clerk of the Courts selects the Justices for each Board, as follows, until three eligible Justices have been selected; The Speaker is selected, if eligible; The Justiciar is selected, if eligible; The CotC is selected, if eligible; Any remaining positions are then filled by random selection, by the CotC, from all remaining eligible Players. A Player is ineligible for selection if any of the following is true: i) E has already been selected to serve on that Board. ii) E has been dismissed as Justice from that Board. iii) E has been Judge in the matter the Board is to consider. iv) E was ineligible to Judge the CFJ that resulted in the matter under consideration, and this restriction does not prevent three eligible Players from being selected by the CotC for the Board. v) E is on Hold, and this restriction does not prevent three eligible Players from being selected by the CotC for the Board. A Justice is permitted to appoint another eligible Player to replace eim as Justice on a given Board, provided the Player consents. A Justice does this by notifying the Clerk of the Courts of the appointment. history: Amended(7) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: When an appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be selected in order to reach a decision about the consideration mandated by the appeal. A Board of Appeals consists of three distinct Players, called Justices. The Clerk of the Courts selects the Justices for each Board, as follows, until three eligible Justices have been selected; The Speaker is selected, if eligible; The Justiciar is selected, if eligible; The CotC is selected, if eligible; Any remaining positions are then filled by random selection, by the CotC, from all remaining eligible Players. A Player is ineligible for selection if any of the following is true: i) E has already been selected to serve on that Board. ii) E has been dismissed as Justice from that Board. iii) E has been Judge in the matter the Board is to consider. iv) E was ineligible to Judge the CFJ that resulted in the matter under consideration, and this restriction does not prevent three eligible Players from being selected by the CotC for the Board. v) E is on Hold, and this restriction does not prevent three eligible Players from being selected by the CotC for the Board. A Justice is permitted to appoint another eligible Player to replace em as Justice on a given Board, provided the Player consents. A Justice does this by notifying the Clerk of the Courts of the appointment. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3559 (Murphy), 24 October 1997 text: When an appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be selected in order to reach a decision about the consideration mandated by the appeal. A Board of Appeals consists of three distinct Players, called Justices. The Clerk of the Courts selects the Justices for each Board, as follows, until three eligible Justices have been selected; The Speaker is selected, if eligible; The Justiciar is selected, if eligible; The CotC is selected, if eligible; Any remaining positions are then filled by random selection, by the CotC, from all remaining eligible Players. A Player is ineligible for selection if any of the following is true: i) E has already been selected to serve on that Board. ii) E has been dismissed as Justice from that Board. iii) E has been Judge in the matter the Board is to consider. iv) E was not eligible to Judge the CFJ that resulted in the matter under consideration when it was called, and this restriction does not prevent three eligible Players from being selected by the CotC for the Board. v) E is on Hold, and this restriction does not prevent three eligible Players from being selected by the CotC for the Board. A Justice is permitted to appoint another eligible Player to replace em as Justice on a given Board, provided the Player consents. A Justice does this by notifying the Clerk of the Courts of the appointment. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4213 (Taral), 29 September 2001 text: When an appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be selected in order to reach a decision about the consideration mandated by the appeal. A Board of Appeals consists of three distinct Players, called Justices. The Clerk of the Courts selects the Justices for each Board, as follows, until three eligible Justices have been selected; The Speaker is selected, if eligible; The Justiciar is selected, if eligible; The CotC is selected, if eligible; Any remaining positions are then filled by random selection, by the CotC, from all remaining eligible Players. A Player is ineligible for selection if any of the following is true: i) E has already been selected to serve on that Board. ii) E has been dismissed as Justice from that Board. iii) E has been Judge in the matter the Board is to consider. iv) E is not eligible to Judge the CFJ that resulted in the matter under consideration, and this restriction does not prevent three eligible Players from being selected by the CotC for the Board. v) E is on Hold, and this restriction does not prevent three eligible Players from being selected by the CotC for the Board. A Justice is permitted to appoint another eligible Player to replace em as Justice on a given Board, provided the Player consents. A Justice does this by notifying the Clerk of the Courts of the appointment. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: When an appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be selected in order to reach a decision about the consideration mandated by the appeal. A Board of Appeals consists of three distinct Players, called Justices. The Clerk of the Courts selects the Justices for each Board, as follows, until three eligible Justices have been selected; The Speaker is selected, if eligible; The Justiciar is selected, if eligible; The CotC is selected, if eligible; Any remaining positions are then filled by random selection, by the CotC, from all remaining eligible Players. A Player is ineligible for selection if any of the following is true: i) E has already been selected to serve on that Board. ii) E has been dismissed as Justice from that Board. iii) E has been Judge in the matter the Board is to consider. iv) E is not eligible to Judge the CFJ that resulted in the matter under consideration, and this restriction does not prevent three eligible Players from being selected by the CotC for the Board. v) E is on Hold, and this restriction does not prevent three eligible Players from being selected by the CotC for the Board. vi) E is frozen. A Justice is permitted to appoint another eligible Player to replace em as Justice on a given Board, provided the Player consents. A Justice does this by notifying the Clerk of the Courts of the appointment. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: When an Appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be selected to reach a decision about the subject of the Appeal. A Board of Appeals consists of three Appelate Judges. Any Judge assigned according to this Rule is an Appelate Judge. A Board of Appeals is selected when the Clerk of the Courts correctly announces the identity of all Appelate Judges, determined as follows: a) The Speaker is selected, if eligible. b) The Clerk of the Courts is selected, if eligible. c) The Justiciar is selected, if eligible. d) Any remaining positions are filled by random selection by the Clerk of the Courts from all remaining eligible Players. A Player is ineligible for selection if any of the following is true: i) E has already been selected for that Board. ii) E has been dismissed from that Board. iii) E has been Trial Judge of the subject of the Appeal. iv) E is ineligible to Judge the CFJ at the time of selection. v) E is not Active. An Appelate Judge may appoint another eligible Player as eir replacement by informing the Clerk of the Courts, provided the Player consents. As soon as possible after an Appelate Judge is recused, the Clerk of the Courts shall randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. The last Appelate Judge selected is the Lead Judge for that Board. If the Lead Judge is replaced, then the replacement becomes Lead Judge. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4579 (Murphy), 15 June 2004 text: When an Appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be selected to reach a decision about the subject of the Appeal. A Board of Appeals consists of three Appelate Judges. Any Judge assigned according to this Rule is an Appelate Judge. A Board of Appeals is selected when the Clerk of the Courts correctly announces the identity of all Appelate Judges, determined as follows: a) The Speaker is selected, if eligible. b) The Clerk of the Courts is selected, if eligible. c) The Justiciar is selected, if eligible. d) Any remaining positions are filled by selection by the Clerk of the Courts from all remaining eligible Players. A Player is ineligible for selection if any of the following is true: i) E has already been selected for that Board. ii) E has been dismissed from that Board. iii) E has been Trial Judge of the subject of the Appeal. iv) E is ineligible to Judge the CFJ at the time of selection. v) E is not Active. An Appelate Judge may appoint another eligible Player as eir replacement by informing the Clerk of the Courts, provided the Player consents. As soon as possible after an Appelate Judge is recused, the Clerk of the Courts shall randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. The last Appelate Judge selected is the Lead Judge for that Board. If the Lead Judge is replaced, then the replacement becomes Lead Judge. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 text: When an Appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be selected to reach a decision about the subject of the Appeal. A Board of Appeals consists of three Appellate Judges. Any Judge assigned according to this Rule is an Appellate Judge. A Board of Appeals is selected when the Clerk of the Courts correctly announces the identity of all Appellate Judges, determined as follows: a) The Speaker is selected, if eligible. b) The Clerk of the Courts is selected, if eligible. c) The Justiciar is selected, if eligible. d) Any remaining positions are filled by selection by the Clerk of the Courts from all remaining eligible Players. A Player is ineligible for selection if any of the following is true: i) E has already been selected for that Board. ii) E has been dismissed from that Board. iii) E has been Trial Judge of the subject of the Appeal. iv) E is ineligible to Judge the CFJ at the time of selection. v) E is not Active. An Appellate Judge may appoint another eligible Player as eir replacement by informing the Clerk of the Courts, provided the Player consents. As soon as possible after an Appellate Judge is recused, the Clerk of the Courts shall randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. The last Appellate Judge selected is the Lead Judge for that Board. If the Lead Judge is replaced, then the replacement becomes Lead Judge. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: When an Appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be selected to reach a decision about the subject of the Appeal. A Board of Appeals consists of three Appellate Judges. Any Judge assigned according to this Rule is an Appellate Judge. A Board of Appeals is selected when the Clerk of the Courts correctly announces the identity of all Appellate Judges, determined as follows: a) The Speaker is selected, if eligible. b) The Clerk of the Courts is selected, if eligible. c) Any remaining positions are filled by selection by the Clerk of the Courts from all remaining eligible Players. A Player is ineligible for selection if any of the following is true: i) E has already been selected for that Board. ii) E has been dismissed from that Board. iii) E has been Trial Judge of the subject of the Appeal. iv) E is ineligible to Judge the CFJ at the time of selection. An Appellate Judge may appoint another eligible Player as eir replacement by informing the Clerk of the Courts, provided the Player consents. As soon as possible after an Appellate Judge is recused, the Clerk of the Courts shall randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. The last Appellate Judge selected is the Lead Judge for that Board. If the Lead Judge is replaced, then the replacement becomes Lead Judge. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5051 (Zefram), 5 July 2007 text: When an Appeal is initiated, a Board of Appeals shall be selected to reach a decision about the subject of the Appeal. A Board of Appeals consists of three Appellate Judges. Any Judge assigned according to this Rule is an Appellate Judge. A Board of Appeals is selected when the Clerk of the Courts correctly announces the identity of all Appellate Judges, determined as follows: a) The Speaker is selected, if eligible. b) The Clerk of the Courts is selected, if eligible. c) Any remaining positions are filled by selection by the Clerk of the Courts from all remaining eligible Players. A Player is ineligible for selection if any of the following is true: i) E has already been selected for that Board. ii) E has been dismissed from that Board. iii) E has been Trial Judge of the subject of the Appeal. iv) E is ineligible to Judge the CFJ at the time of selection. An Appellate Judge may appoint another eligible Player as eir replacement by informing the Clerk of the Courts, provided the Player consents. As soon as possible after an Appellate Judge is recused, the Clerk of the Courts shall select an eligible Player to replace em. The last Appellate Judge selected is the Lead Judge for that Board. If the Lead Judge is replaced, then the replacement becomes Lead Judge. history: Retitled by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Power changed from 1 to 1.7 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Amended(16) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an appeal case. An appeal case's purpose is to determine the appropriateness of a judgement that has been assigned to a judicial question, and make remedy if the judgement was poorly chosen. The assignment of judgement being questioned (appealed against, or appealed) is referred to as the prior assignment; the word "prior" in this rule is used to refer to the circumstances of the prior assignment. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a non-appeal case within the past two weeks, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by any player with 2 support. The entities qualified to be assigned as judge of an appeal case are the judicial panels consisting of three members, where each of the members is qualified to be assigned as judge of the prior case and none of the members is the prior judge. An appeal case has a judicial question on disposition, which is applicable if and only if the prior question is applicable. The valid judgements for the question on disposition are: * AFFIRM, appropriate if the prior judgement was appropriate for the prior question * REMAND, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement but the judge believes that the judge of the prior case can make a better judgement if given a new opportunity * REASSIGN, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the of the prior judgement * OVERRULE with a valid replacement judgement for the prior question, appropriate if the prior judgement was inappropriate in the prior question and the replacement judgement is appropriate for the prior question Initiation of an appeal case renders the prior question suspended. It remains suspended as long as the question on disposition in the appeal case has no judgement. When the question on disposition has a judgement, things happen according to that judgement: * if AFFIRM, the prior judgement is assigned to the prior question again * if REMAND, the prior question is rendered open again * if REASSIGN, the judge of the prior case (if any) is recused, and the prior question is rendered open again * if OVERRULE with a replacement judgement, the replacement judgement is assigned to the prior question history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5359 (Murphy), 20 December 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an appeal case. An appeal case's purpose is to determine the appropriateness of a judgement that has been assigned to a judicial question, and make remedy if the judgement was poorly chosen. The assignment of judgement being questioned (appealed against, or appealed) is referred to as the prior assignment; the word "prior" in this rule is used to refer to the circumstances of the prior assignment. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a non-appeal case within the past two weeks, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by any player with 2 support. The entities qualified to be assigned as judge of an appeal case are the judicial panels consisting of three members, where each of the members is qualified to be assigned as judge of the prior case and none of the members is the prior judge. An appeal case has a judicial question on disposition, which is applicable if and only if the prior question is applicable. The valid judgements for the question on disposition are: * AFFIRM, appropriate if the prior judgement was appropriate for the prior question * REMAND, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement but the judge believes that the judge of the prior case can make a better judgement if given a new opportunity * REASSIGN, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement * OVERRULE with a valid replacement judgement for the prior question, appropriate if the prior judgement was inappropriate in the prior question and the replacement judgement is appropriate for the prior question Initiation of an appeal case renders the prior question suspended. It remains suspended as long as the question on disposition in the appeal case has no judgement. When the question on disposition has a judgement, things happen according to that judgement: * if AFFIRM, the prior judgement is assigned to the prior question again * if REMAND, the prior question is rendered open again * if REASSIGN, the judge of the prior case (if any) is recused, and the prior question is rendered open again * if OVERRULE with a replacement judgement, the replacement judgement is assigned to the prior question A panel CAN publish a concurring opinion when judging AFFIRM, and SHALL do so if and only if the reasoning by which the prior judge reached eir judgement was incorrect in whole or part. Each concurring opinion SHALL explain the nature of the error(s) in the prior judge's reasoning. Each concurring opinion has an error rating, an integer from 1 to 99; it CAN be specified by the panel when the concurring opinion is published, or else defaults to 50. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5361 (Goethe), 20 December 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an appeal case. An appeal case's purpose is to determine the appropriateness of a judgement that has been assigned to a judicial question, and make remedy if the judgement was poorly chosen. The assignment of judgement being questioned (appealed against, or appealed) is referred to as the prior assignment; the word "prior" in this rule is used to refer to the circumstances of the prior assignment. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a non-appeal case within the past two weeks, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by any player with 2 support. The entities qualified to be assigned as judge of an appeal case are the judicial panels consisting of three members, where each of the members is qualified to be assigned as judge of the prior case and none of the members is the prior judge. An appeal case has a judicial question on disposition, which is applicable if and only if the prior question is applicable. The valid judgements for the question on disposition are: * AFFIRM, appropriate if the prior judgement was appropriate for the prior question * REMAND, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement but the judge believes that the judge of the prior case can make a better judgement if given a new opportunity * REASSIGN, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement * OVERRULE with a valid replacement judgement for the prior question, appropriate if the prior judgement was inappropriate in the prior question and the replacement judgement is appropriate for the prior question Initiation of an appeal case renders the prior question suspended. It remains suspended as long as the question on disposition in the appeal case has no judgement. When the question on disposition has a judgement, things happen according to that judgement: * if AFFIRM, the prior judgement is assigned to the prior question again * if REMAND, the prior question is rendered open again * if REASSIGN, the judge of the prior case (if any) is recused, and the prior question is rendered open again * if OVERRULE with a replacement judgement, the replacement judgement is assigned to the prior question A panel CAN publish a concurring opinion when judging AFFIRM, and SHALL do so if and only if the reasoning by which the prior judge reached eir judgement was incorrect in whole or part. Each concurring opinion SHALL explain the nature of the error(s) in the prior judge's reasoning. Each concurring opinion has an error rating, an integer from 1 to 99; it CAN be specified by the panel when the concurring opinion is published, or else defaults to 50. In the week after the panel publishes a valid judgement, any panel member may publish a formal Dissenting Opinion with Support. This Dissenting Opinion becomes a part of the record of the case, and SHOULD aid in interpreting the decision. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5436 (Murphy), 13 February 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an appeal case. An appeal case's purpose is to determine the appropriateness of a judgement that has been assigned to a judicial question, and make remedy if the judgement was poorly chosen. The assignment of judgement being questioned (appealed against, or appealed) is referred to as the prior assignment; the word "prior" in this rule is used to refer to the circumstances of the prior assignment. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a non-appeal case within the past two weeks CAN be initiated by any player with 2 support. However, rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an appeal CANNOT be initiated concerning an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, nor an assignment for which an appeal has already been initiated. The entities qualified to be assigned as judge of an appeal case are the judicial panels consisting of three members, where each of the members is qualified to be assigned as judge of the prior case and none of the members is the prior judge. An appeal case has a judicial question on disposition, which is applicable if and only if the prior question is applicable. The valid judgements for the question on disposition are: * AFFIRM, appropriate if the prior judgement was appropriate for the prior question * REMAND, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement but the judge believes that the judge of the prior case can make a better judgement if given a new opportunity * REASSIGN, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement * OVERRULE with a valid replacement judgement for the prior question, appropriate if the prior judgement was inappropriate in the prior question and the replacement judgement is appropriate for the prior question Initiation of an appeal case renders the prior question suspended. It remains suspended as long as the question on disposition in the appeal case has no judgement. When the question on disposition has a judgement, things happen according to that judgement: * if AFFIRM, the prior judgement is assigned to the prior question again * if REMAND, the prior question is rendered open again * if REASSIGN, the judge of the prior case (if any) is recused, and the prior question is rendered open again * if OVERRULE with a replacement judgement, the replacement judgement is assigned to the prior question A panel CAN publish a concurring opinion when judging AFFIRM, and SHALL do so if and only if the reasoning by which the prior judge reached eir judgement was incorrect in whole or part. Each concurring opinion SHALL explain the nature of the error(s) in the prior judge's reasoning. Each concurring opinion has an error rating, an integer from 1 to 99; it CAN be specified by the panel when the concurring opinion is published, or else defaults to 50. In the week after the panel publishes a valid judgement, any panel member may publish a formal Dissenting Opinion with Support. This Dissenting Opinion becomes a part of the record of the case, and SHOULD aid in interpreting the decision. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5466 (Murphy), 13 March 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an appeal case. An appeal case's purpose is to determine the appropriateness of a judgement that has been assigned to a judicial question, and make remedy if the judgement was poorly chosen. The assignment of judgement being questioned (appealed against, or appealed) is referred to as the prior assignment; the word "prior" in this rule is used to refer to the circumstances of the prior assignment. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a non-appeal case within the past two weeks CAN be initiated by any player with 2 support. However, rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an appeal CANNOT be initiated concerning an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, nor an assignment for which an appeal has already been initiated. The entities qualified to be assigned as judge of an appeal case are the judicial panels consisting of three members, where each of the members is qualified to be assigned as judge of the prior case and none of the members is the prior judge. An appeal case has a judicial question on disposition, which is applicable if and only if the prior question is applicable. The valid judgements for the question on disposition, and their effects, are as follows: * AFFIRM, appropriate if the prior judgement was appropriate for the prior question; the prior judgement is assigned to the prior question again * REMAND, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement but the judge believes that the judge of the prior case can make a better judgement if given a new opportunity; the prior question is rendered open again * REASSIGN, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement; the judge of the prior case (if any) is recused, and the prior question is rendered open again * OVERRULE with a valid replacement judgement for the prior question, appropriate if the prior judgement was inappropriate in the prior question and the replacement judgement is appropriate for the prior question; the replacement judgement is assigned to the prior question When an appeal case is initiated, the prior question is suspended, and remains so until the question on disposition in the appeal case is judged. A panel CAN publish a concurring opinion when judging AFFIRM, and SHALL do so if and only if the reasoning by which the prior judge reached eir judgement was incorrect in whole or part. Each concurring opinion SHALL explain the nature of the error(s) in the prior judge's reasoning. Each concurring opinion has an error rating, an integer from 1 to 99; it CAN be specified by the panel when the concurring opinion is published, or else defaults to 50. In the week after the panel publishes a valid judgement, any panel member may publish a formal Dissenting Opinion with Support. This Dissenting Opinion becomes a part of the record of the case, and SHOULD aid in interpreting the decision. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 385 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 385 by Proposal 385 text: At any time not less than 24 hours before the end of a Voting Period for a given Proposal, the originator of that Proposal (and no other Player) may issue a 'corrected' version of that Proposal to the Benevolent Speaker. This Proposal replaces the original Proposal. Any Votes cast on the original Proposal are discarded, as is the original Proposal itself; the voting for the original is never completed. The corrected version is issued as a new Proposal, with a new Number and a new Voting Period starting from its time of issuance. As a penalty for not getting things right the first time and bogging down the legislature, the correcting Player loses three Points upon the removal of the original Proposal. A Proposal may also simply be withdrawn by the originating Player during this time period, without any new Proposal replacing it, but the Player must still lose three Points. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 386,733,881,1006 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 386 by Proposal 386 (Alexx), 16 August 1993 text: An Incumbent Officer (or Official) is any Player who has been Appointed or Elected to an Office specified in the Rules. A Judge is not an Officer. An Incumbent Official may be replaced by another Player (the "Challenger") if that Player makes a Proposal to replace the Officer with him or herself, and that Proposal passes. The action of making this Proposal constitutes "Running For Office." The Proposal is treated normally, but requires at least a 2/3 affirmative Vote of all those Players casting legal Votes on that Proposal to pass. This Rule takes precedence over 209. An Officer may resign at any time, provided he or she appoints a successor. If an Officer resigns while a Challenger is running for his Office, the Officer may not appoint a successor, but instead the Challenger automatically becomes the new Officer. In such a case, the Vote for the appointment of the Challenger is rendered null and void. If an Office is vacant for any reason, a Player is selected randomly for that Office in the same way that Judges are selected. This Rule applies to general Offices, and therefore defers to Rules for specific Offices. history: Amended by Proposal 733 (Ronald Kunne), 24 November 1993 text: An Official is any Player who has been Appointed or Elected to an Office specified in the Rules. A Judge is not an Officer. An Officer may be replaced by another Player, by a Proposal stating so, and that Proposal passes. An Officer may resign at any time, provided e appoints a successor. If an Officer resigns while a Proposal is being voted upon to replace eim, the Player proposed will by eis Successor. This Rule applies to general Offices, and therefore defers to Rules for specific Offices. Running for office history: Amended by Proposal 881 (Garth), 13 April 1994 text: An Officer is any Player who has been Appointed or Elected to an Office specified in the Rules. A Judge is not an Officer. An Officer may be replaced by another Player if a Proposal to that effect passes. An Officer may resign at any time, provided e appoints a successor. If an Officer resigns while a Proposal is being voted upon to replace eim, the Player proposed will by eis Successor. This Rule applies to general Offices, and therefore defers to Rules for specific Offices. history: Amended by Rule 750, 13 April 1994 text: An Officer is any Player who has been Appointed or Elected to an Office specified in the Rules. A Judge is not an Officer. An Officer may be replaced by another Player if a Proposal to that effect passes. An Officer may resign at any time, provided e appoints a successor. If an Officer resigns while a Proposal is being voted upon to replace eim, the Player proposed will by eis Successor. This Rule applies to general Offices, and therefore defers to Rules for specific Offices. (*Was: 733*) history: Amended by Proposal 1006, ca. Aug. 25 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Aug. 25 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1336, 22 November 1994 text: An Officer is any Player who has been Appointed or Elected to an Office specified in the Rules. A Judge is not an Officer. An Officer may be replaced by another Player by a Directive to install that Player into the Office. The Proposal containing such a Directive shall have an Adoption Index of at least 1. An Officer may resign at any time, provided e appoints a successor. If an Officer resigns while a Referendum is being voted upon to replace eim, the Player thus proposed will by eis Successor. An Officer shall be appointed only if e consents. This Rule applies to general Offices, and therefore defers to Rules for specific Offices. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1582, 15 May 1995 text: Offices are a class of Nomic Entities, referring generically to a position of authority or responsibility in Agora Nomic. An Office may be created as specified by the Rules. A particular Office ceases to exist when there is no Rule specifying that Office. An Officer is any Player who fills an Office as specified in the Rules. No Player shall fill an Office without eir consent. When according to the Rules a Player fills an Office, any other Player previously filling that Office, if any, ceases to fill that Office. A Directive may be proposed to install a Player in an Office. A proposal containing such a Directive shall have an Adoption Index of at least 1. If the Directive takes effect, then the Player so proposed fills the Office, if e consents. This Rule applies to general Offices, and therefore defers to Rules for specific Offices. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1699, 1 September 1995 text: Offices are a class of Nomic Entities, referring generically to a position of authority or responsibility in Agora Nomic. Only those Offices specifically established by the Rules. If an Office ceases to be specified in the Rules, it ceases to exist. An Officer is any Player who fills an Office as specified in the Rules. No Player shall be required to fill an Office without giving consent. A Player indicates that e consents to fill an Office by posting to the Public Forum that e does so. To be binding, such a post must be made not more than one week before, nor more than one week after, the time that the Player is designated to fill the Office in question. It is forbidden for two or more Players to hold the same Office at the same time. If the Rules require that a specific Player fill an Office, any other Player who currently fills that Office ceases to do so simultaneously. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1763, 31 October 1995 text: Offices are a class of Nomic Entities, referring generically to a position of authority or responsibility in Agora Nomic. An Office exists only if it is specifically established by the Rules. If an Office ceases to be specified in the Rules, it ceases to exist. An Officer is any Player who fills an Office as specified in the Rules. No Player shall be required to fill an Office without giving consent. A Player indicates that e consents to fill an Office by posting to the Public Forum that e does so. To be binding, such a post must be made not more than one week before, nor more than one week after, the time that the Player is designated to fill the Office in question. It is forbidden for two or more Players to hold the same Office at the same time. If the Rules require that a specific Player fill an Office, any other Player who currently fills that Office ceases to do so simultaneously. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: An Office is a position of authority or responsibility established by the Rules and held by a Player, who is called an Officer. At any time, for each Office there shall be exactly one Officer who holds it. A position of responsibility or authority is only an Office if the Rules specifically designate it as such. An Office only exists as long as there is a Rule in force which specifies that it exists. If the Rule or Rules which mandated the existence of an Office are changed such that they no longer do so, that Office ceases to exist. A given Office has whatever duties, responsibilities, and privileges that the Rules assign to it. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2623, 19 June 1996 text: An Office is a position of authority or responsibility established by the Rules and held by a Player, who is called an Officer. At any time, an Office is held by exactly one Player; if no other Rule directly or indirectly specifies which Player holds an Office, it shall be held by the Speaker. A position of responsibility or authority is only an Office if the Rules specifically designate it as such. An Office only exists as long as there is a Rule in force which specifies that it exists. If the Rule or Rules which mandated the existence of an Office are changed such that they no longer do so, that Office ceases to exist. A given Office has whatever duties, responsibilities, and privileges that the Rules assign to it. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 text: An Office is a position defined as such by the Rules. At any time, an Office is held by exactly one Player (called an Officer). If no other Rule directly or indirectly specifies which Player holds an Office, it shall be held by the Speaker. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: An Office is a position so designated by the Rules. Each Office is always held by exactly one Player (called an Officer). Each Office shall be held by the Speaker unless otherwise specified. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. The Herald shall list the holder of each office, and the date upon which each holder last came to hold that office. Any Player may make an active Player the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided: (a) that office has not changed hands with this method in the previous 30 days, and (b) the potential officer consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If no attempt to acheive Agoran Consent for changing the holder of particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the Speaker shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is acheived. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, than the officer shall publish that information once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. If an Officer or the Speaker fails to satisfy a Timing Order to perform a certain offical duty, than the player who executed the order may perform the duty as if e were the officer. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. The Herald shall list the holder of each office, and the date upon which each holder last came to hold that office. Any Player may make an active Player the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided: (a) that office has not changed hands with this method in the previous 30 days, and (b) the potential officer consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If no attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the Speaker shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is achieved. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, than the officer shall publish that information once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. If an Officer or the Speaker fails to satisfy a Timing Order to perform a certain official duty, than the player who executed the order may perform the duty as if e were the officer. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4889 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. The Herald's Report shall list the holder of each office, and the date upon which each holder last came to hold that office. Any Player may make an active Player the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided: (a) that office has not changed hands with this method in the previous 30 days, and (b) the potential officer consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If no attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the Speaker shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is achieved. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, then the officer shall publish that information at least once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. If an Officer or the Speaker fails to satisfy a Timing Order to perform a certain official duty, than the player who executed the order may perform the duty as if e were the officer. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4939 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. The Herald's Report shall list the holder of each office, and the date upon which each holder last came to hold that office. Any Player may make an active Player the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided: (a) that office has not changed hands with this method in the previous 30 days, and (b) the potential officer consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If no attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of a particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the Director of Personnel shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is acheived. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, then the officer shall publish that information at least once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. If an Officer or the Speaker fails to satisfy a Timing Order to perform a certain official duty, than the player who executed the order may perform the duty as if e were the officer. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4956 (Murphy), 7 May 2007 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. Any Player may make an active Player the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided: (a) that office has not changed hands with this method in the previous 30 days, and (b) the potential officer consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If no attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of a particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the Director of Personnel shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is acheived. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, then the officer shall publish that information at least once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. If an Officer or the Speaker fails to satisfy a Timing Order to perform a certain official duty, than the player who executed the order may perform the duty as if e were the officer. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4980 (Murphy), 31 May 2007 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. Any Player may make an active Player the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided: (a) that office has not changed hands with this method in the previous 30 days, and (b) the potential officer consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If no attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of a particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the IADoP shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is achieved. This requirement is waived if another player changes the officeholder in this way during the following quarter. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, then the officer shall publish that information at least once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. If an Officer or the Speaker fails to satisfy a Timing Order to perform a certain official duty, than the player who executed the order may perform the duty as if e were the officer. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 5029 (Murphy), 28 June 2007 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. Any Player may make an active Player the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided: (a) that office has not changed hands with this method in the previous 30 days, and (b) the potential officer consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If no attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of a particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the IADoP shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is achieved. This requirement is waived if another player changes the officeholder in this way during the following quarter. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, then the officer shall publish that information at least once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. If an Officer or the Speaker fails to satisfy a Timing Order to perform a certain official duty, then the player who executed the order may perform the duty as if e were the officer. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5059 (Zefram, Goethe), 9 July 2007 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, then the officer shall publish that information at least once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. If an Officer or the Speaker fails to satisfy a Timing Order to perform a certain official duty, than the player who executed the order may perform the duty as if e were the officer. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5070 (Zefram), 11 July 2007 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, then the officer shall publish that information at least once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. If an officer fails to satisfy a Timing Order to perform a certain official duty, than the player who executed the order may perform the duty as if e were the officer. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5088 (Murphy), 25 July 2007 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, then the officer shall publish that information at least once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. If a Timing Order directed at an office is not satisfied on time, or if the office is vacant, then the player who executed the order may perform the duty as if e held that office. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5103 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: The Rules may designate positions to be offices. No office may be held by more than one player. Each office that would otherwise not be held by any player shall be held by the Speaker, unless it is not possible for the Speaker to hold that office. The holder of an office may be referred to by the name of the office. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, then the officer shall publish that information at least once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 5133 (Zefram), 13 August 2007 history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5133 (Zefram), 13 August 2007 text: A role is an office if and only if it is so defined by the rules. Each office at any time either is vacant (default) or is filled (held) by exactly one player. The holder of an office is an officer, and may be referred to by the name of the office. If the duty of an office is to maintain certain information, then the officer shall publish that information at least once a month, or as soon as possible after a substantial change occurs in the information or the officer receives a request for the information. A weekly report shall be sufficient to satisfy these last two requirements. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5239 (AFO), 3 October 2007 text: A role is an office if and only if it is so defined by the rules. Each office at any time either is vacant (default) or is filled (held) by exactly one player. The holder of an office is an officer, and may be referred to by the name of the office. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5407 (root), 22 January 2008 text: A role is an office if and only if it is so defined by the rules. Each office at any time either is vacant (default) or is filled (held) by exactly one player. The holder of an office is an officer, and may be referred to by the name of the office. An office is imposed if it is so described by the rule defining it; otherwise, it is elected. history: Amended(24) by Proposal 5519 (Murphy), 28 May 2008 text: A role is an office if and only if it is so defined by the rules. Each office at any time either is vacant (default) or is filled (held) by exactly one player. The holder of an office is an officer, and may be referred to by the name of the office. An office is imposed if it is so described by the rule defining it; otherwise, it is elected. The holder of an office CAN resign it by announcement, causing it to become vacant. As soon as possible after an office becomes (or is created) vacant, the IADoP SHALL make at least one nomination for the office; this requirement is waived if another player so makes a nomination. history: Amended(25) by Proposal 5534 (root; disi.), 7 June 2008 text: A role is an office if and only if it is so defined by the rules. Each office at any time either is vacant (default) or is filled (held) by exactly one player. The holder of an office is an officer, and may be referred to by the name of the office. An office is imposed if it is so described by the rule defining it; otherwise, it is elected. The holder of an elected office CAN resign it by announcement, causing it to become vacant. As soon as possible after an elected office becomes (or is created) vacant, the IADoP SHALL make at least one nomination for the office; this requirement is waived if another player so makes a nomination. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 388 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 388 by Proposal 388 text: Whenever a new game of Nomic is begun, the status of the new Game when it begins shall be the same as the status of the old Game when it ended, in all respects where the Rules do not decide otherwise. history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1734, 15 October 1995 text: Whenever a new game of Nomic is begun, the status of the new Game when it begins shall be the same as the status of the old Game when it ended, in all respects where the Rules do not specify otherwise. history: ... [orphaned text: Whenever a new game of Nomic is begun, the status of the new Game when it begins shall be the same as the status of the old Game when it ended, in all respects where the Rules do not decide otherwise. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 389 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 389 by Proposal 389 text: If at any time a Voter does not belong to one of the Groups of Rule 356, it shall become a member of the Group with the fewest members. If two or more Groups both have fewer members than all others, the Voter shall be randomly placed within one of these Groups. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 390 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 390 by Proposal 390 text: Let there be an Office for each of the Groups of Rule 356, known as the Vizier of that Group. If at any time a Group does not have a Vizier, one shall be chosen at random from the members of that Group. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 391 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 391 by Proposal 391 text: Let there be a new unit of currency defined for each of the Groups of Rule 356. These units shall be named the X Coins, where the name of the Group associated with the unit is substitued for X. Any Player may possess zero or more of each of these currencies. No Player may possess less than zero of any of these currencies. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 391 by Proposal 626 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 392 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 392 by Proposal 392 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: When a Player's Point total is adjusted by the Noble Speaker, or by another person given Point maintanence authority by future legislation, this change must be posted to the list by the point maintainer, as opposed to making the adjustment silently. Furthermore, requests by a Player, in a form other than a Call for Judgement to adjust the score of another Player must be posted directly to the list, not privately to the adjuster. If the request is in the form of a Call for Judgement, then the rules governing Calls for Judgement apply instead. Specifically: * At the beginning of the Game, the Point maintainer announces the starting Points of all Players. * When the announcement is made of Voting results, the Point maintainer must announce the number of Points gained or lost for each Proposal. The final score for each Voter must also be reported, but this may be done after a group of Voting results on the same day, rather than after each Vote at the discretion of the Point maintainer. * Even if a Player's score has not changed, all Players' scores must be announced at least once per week at minimum. * If the Point maintainer applies any Rule to adjust a Player's score, the change and the new Point total must be posted to the list. * Voluntary Point Trades are posted to the list by the giver, as provided for by Rule 327. The Point maintainer acknowledges this by verifying the amount of the Trade as well as the new Point totals for the relevant Players. * If a Player feels that a Player's Points should be adjusted (by applying some penalty or reward clause, say) he posts a message to the list stating the affected Player, the Point change, and the reason. The Point maintainter will acknowlege this to the list, stating the decision made, and if an adjustment is made, the Player's new score. If the request was in the form of a Call for Judgement, the Rules for Calls for Judgement apply instead. In general, all requests to the Point maintainer to adjust Points must be posted publicly to the list, not in private. And all decisions by the Point maintainer must be accompanied by the Player's name, the amount of the change, and the new Point total for the Player. text: When a Player's Point total is adjusted by the Noble Speaker, or by another person given Point maintanence authority by future legislation, this change must be posted to the list by the point maintainer, as opposed to making the adjustment silently. Furthermore, requests by a Player, in a form other than a call for Judgement to adjust the score of another Player must be posted directly to the list, not privately to the adjuster. If the request is in the form of a Call for Judgement, then the rules governing Calls for Judgement apply instead. Specifically: * At the beginning of the Game, the Point maintainer announces the starting Points of all Players. * When the announcement is made of Voting results, the Point maintainer must announce the number of Points gained or lost for each Proposal. The final score for each Voter must also be reported, but this may be done after a group of Voting results on the same day, rather than after each Vote at the discretion of the Point maintainer. * Even if a Player's score has not changed, all Players' scores must be announced at least once per week at minimum. * If the Point maintainer applies any Rule to adjust a Player's score, the change and the new Point total must be posted to the list. * Voluntary Point Trades are posted to the list by the giver, as provided for by Rule 327. The Point maintainer acknowledges this by verifying the amount of the Trade as well as the new Point totals for the relevant Players. * If a Player feels that a Player's Points should be adjusted (by applying some penalty or reward clause, say) he posts a message to the list stating the affected Player, the Point change, and the reason. The Point maintainter will acknowlege this to the list, stating the decision made, and if an adjustment is made, the Player's new score. If the request was in the form of a Call for Judgement, the Rules for Calls for Judgement apply instead. In general, all requests to the Point maintainer to adjust Points must be posted publicly to the list, not in private. And all decisions by the Point maintainer must be accompanied by the Player's name, the amount of the change, and the new Point total for the Player. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 394,659 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 394 by Proposal 394, 23 August 1993 text: Whenever a Proposal is made that is wider than 80 characters or longer than 25 lines, its proposer shall be penalized 2 extra Points. Whenever a Proposal passes that is no longer than 10 lines, its proposer shall be rewarded 1 extra Point. history: Amended by Proposal 659, 29 October 1993 text: Whenever a Proposal is submitted which contains more than 70 characters on a single line or longer than 25 lines, the Player to propose that Proposal shall lose two Points. Whenever a Proposal passes that is no longer than 10 lines, the Player to propose that Proposal shall recieve one Point. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1406, 29 January 1995 text: Whenever a Proposal is submitted which is longer than 25 lines, the Proposer (i.e., the Player to propose that Proposal) shall lose two Points. Whenever a Proposal passes that is no longer than 10 lines, the Proposer shall receive one Point. Whenever a Proposal is submitted which contains text intended to become part of a Rule, if any part of that text contains more than 72 characters on a single line (disregarding any leading whitespace which is common to all lines of that text), the Proposer shall lose two Points. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1692, 1 September 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1705, 4 September 1995 text: Whenever a Proposal is submitted which is longer than 25 lines, the Proposer (i.e., the Player to propose that Proposal) shall lose 2 Marks. Whenever a Proposal passes that is no longer than 10 lines, the Proposer shall receive 1 Mark. Whenever a Proposal is submitted which contains text intended to become part of a Rule, if any part of that text contains more than 72 characters on a single line (disregarding any leading whitespace which is common to all lines of that text), the Proposer shall lose 2 Marks. The Promotor shall detect and report any transfer of Currency which takes place under the authority of this Rule, and shall do so no later than the time e distributes the Proposals which caused such transfers. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1722, 6 October 1995 text: The act of submitting a Proposal which is longer than 25 lines is an Infraction, the penalty for which is 2 Marks. The act of submitting a Proposal containing text intended to become part of a Rule such that any part of that text contains more than 72 characters on a single line (disregarding any leading whitespace which is common to all lines of that text) is an Infraction, the penalty for which is 2 Marks. The Promotor shall detect and report these Infractions. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 399,1051 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 399 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1051 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1735, 15 October 1995 text: Let there be an Officer known as the Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and post this list to all Players at least once a week. So long as the Rulekeepor is in Office, the Speaker is not required to maintain or distribute the Rules. The Rulekeepor's salary shall be 5 points per week, if e is constrained by Rules defining the "Logical Rule Set Format". (*Was: 399*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: Let there be an Officer known as the Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and post this list to all Players at least once a week. So long as the Rulekeepor is in Office, the Speaker is not required to maintain or distribute the Rules. The Rulekeepor's salary shall be 5 points per week, if e is constrained by Rules defining the "Logical Rule Set Format". history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2048, 19 December 1995 text: Let there be an Officer known as the Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and post this list to all Players at least once a week. The Rulekeepor shall receive a weekly Salary of 5 Points. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: Let there be an Officer known as the Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and post this list to all Players at least once a week. The Rulekeepor shall receive a weekly Salary of 5 Mils. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall receive a weekly salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and post this list to all Players at least once a week. history: Null-Amended(6) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall receive a weekly salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and post this list to all Players at least once a week. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 2741 (Zefram), 7 November 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall receive a weekly Salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of all Rules. At least once a week, the Rulekeepor shall post the Logical Ruleset to the Public Forum. history: Infected and Amended(8) Substantially by Rule 1454, 27 November 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall receive a weekly Salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of all Rules. At least once a week, the Rulekeepor shall post the Logical Ruleset to the Public Forum. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Proposal 2783 (Chuck), 15 January 1997 text: There shall exist the Office of Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall receive a weekly Salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of all Rules. At least once a week, the Rulekeepor shall post the Short Logical Ruleset to the Public Forum. At least once a month, the Rulekeepor shall post the Full Logical Ruleset to the Public Forum. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(10) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: There shall exist the Office of Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall receive a weekly Salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of all Rules. At least once a week, the Rulekeepor shall post the Short Logical Ruleset to the Public Forum. At least once a month, the Rulekeepor shall post the Full Logical Ruleset to the Public Forum. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3675 (Michael), 30 January 1998 text: There shall exist the Office of Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall receive a weekly Salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of all Rules. The Short Logical Ruleset constitutes the Rulekeepor's Official Report. In addition, the Rulekeepor shall post the Full Logical Ruleset to the Public Forum at least once each month. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3827 (Kolja A.), 4 February 1999 text: There shall exist the Office of Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall receive a Salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of all Rules. The Short Logical Ruleset constitutes the Rulekeepor's Official Report. In addition, the Rulekeepor shall post the Full Logical Ruleset to the Public Forum at least once each month. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: The Office of the Rulekeepor There shall exist the Office of Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall receive a Salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of all Rules. The Short Logical Ruleset constitutes the Rulekeepor's Official Report. In addition, the Rulekeepor shall post the Full Logical Ruleset to the Public Forum at least once each month. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 3882 (harvel), 21 July 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(15) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 text: There exists the Office of Rulekeepor, whose responsibility it is to maintain a list of all Rules. The Rulekeepor's Report includes the Short Logical Ruleset. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: There exists the Office of Rulekeepor, whose responsibility it is to maintain a list of all the Rules of Agora. The Rulekeepor's Report includes the Short Logical Ruleset. Eir Monthly Report includes the Full Logical Ruleset. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Rulekeepor is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the text of the rules of Agora. The Rulekeepor's Weekly Report shall include the Short Logical Ruleset. The Rulekeepor's Monthly Report shall include the Full Logical Ruleset. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5237 (AFO; disi.), 3 October 2007 text: The Rulekeepor is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the text of the rules of Agora. The Rulekeepor's Weekly report includes the Short Logical Ruleset. The Rulekeepor's Monthly report includes the Full Logical Ruleset. history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be an Officer known as the Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and post this list to all Players at least once a week. So long as the Rulekeepor is in Office, the Speaker is not required to maintain or distribute the Rules. ] [orphaned text: Let there be an Officer known as the Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and post this list to all Players at least once a week. So long as the Rulekeepor is in Office, the Speaker is not required to maintain or distribute the Rules. The Rulekeepor's salary shall be 5 points per week, if e is contrained by Rules defining the "Logical Rule Set Format". (*Was: 399*) ] [orphaned text: Let there be an Officer known as the Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a complete list of the current Rules, and post this list to all Players at least once a week. So long as the Rulekeepor is in Office, the Speaker is not required to maintain or distribute the Rules. ] [orphaned text: There exists the Office of Rulekeepor, whose responsibility it is to maintain a list of all the Rules of Agora. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 402 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 402 by Proposal 402 (Alexx), ca. Sep. 3 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1421, 7 February 1995 text: There shall be a position known as the Speaker-Elect. Only Voters may be Speaker-Elect; whenever a Rule specifies that the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e shall cease to be Speaker-Elect. Only one Voter may be Speaker-Elect at any one time. A Voter may not become Speaker-Elect except as specified in the Rules. The position of Speaker-Elect is not an Office. Whenever there is a Speaker-Elect: 1) The Speaker shall forward copies of all necessary materials for the performance of his position, as soon as possible to the Speaker-Elect. 2) The Speaker-Elect shall acknowledge the receipt of said materials as soon as possible after step 1. 3) As soon as possible after step 2, the Speaker shall post a message to the Public Forum announcing that the Speaker-Elect has become the Speaker. At the "Date:" of the Speaker's posting, the old Speaker shall become a Voter and the Speaker-Elect shall become the Speaker. If the Speaker-Elect changes before the completion of this procedure, it must be begun again from step 1. If another Rule specifies that the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker before the completion of step 3, then this Rule defers to it, and the procedure above need not be completed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1700, 1 September 1995 text: There shall be a position known as the Speaker-Elect. Only Voters may be Speaker-Elect; whenever a Rule specifies that the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e shall cease to be Speaker-Elect. Only one Voter may be Speaker-Elect at any one time. A Voter may not become Speaker-Elect except as specified in the Rules. The position of Speaker-Elect is not an Office. Whenever there is a Speaker-Elect: 1) The Speaker shall forward copies of all necessary materials for the performance of eir position, as soon as possible to the Speaker-Elect. 2) The Speaker-Elect shall acknowledge the receipt of said materials as soon as possible after step 1. 3) As soon as possible after step 2, the Speaker shall post a message to the Public Forum announcing that the Speaker-Elect has become the Speaker. At the "Date:" of the Speaker's posting, the old Speaker shall become a Voter and the Speaker-Elect shall become the Speaker. If the Speaker-Elect changes before the completion of this procedure, it must be begun again from step 1. If another Rule specifies that the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker before the completion of step 3, then this Rule defers to it, and the procedure above need not be completed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2661, 7 September 1996 text: Whenever the Rules call for the Speaker-Elect to become Speaker: 1) The Speaker shall forward copies of all necessary materials for the performance of eir position, as soon as possible to the Speaker-Elect. 2) The Speaker-Elect shall acknowledge the receipt of said materials as soon as possible after step 1. 3) As soon as possible after step 2, the Speaker shall post a message to the Public Forum announcing that the Speaker-Elect has become the Speaker. At the "Date:" of the Speaker's posting, the old Speaker shall cease to be Speaker and the Speaker-Elect shall become the Speaker. If the Speaker-Elect changes before the completion of this procedure, it must be begun again from step 1. If another Rule specifies that the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker before the completion of step 3, such as the case when the Rules require an immediate Speaker transition, then this Rule defers to it, and the procedure above need not be completed. However, in any case where the above procedure is not completed before a transition of Speakers takes place, the new Speaker is still obliged to make a reasonable effort to obtain all materials necessary for the performance of eir duties from the former Speaker. If this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall make a reasonable attempt to recover this information from other sources. (The Players, the Officers, the Archivist etc.) history: Infected and Amended(4) Substantially by Rule 1454, 23 February 1997 text: Whenever the Rules call for the Speaker-Elect to become Speaker: 1) The Speaker shall forward copies of all necessary materials for the performance of eir position, as soon as possible to the Speaker-Elect. 2) The Speaker-Elect shall acknowledge the receipt of said materials as soon as possible after step 1. 3) As soon as possible after step 2, the Speaker shall post a message to the Public Forum announcing that the Speaker-Elect has become the Speaker. At the "Date:" of the Speaker's posting, the old Speaker shall cease to be Speaker and the Speaker-Elect shall become the Speaker. If the Speaker-Elect changes before the completion of this procedure, it must be begun again from step 1. If another Rule specifies that the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker before the completion of step 3, such as the case when the Rules require an immediate Speaker transition, then this Rule defers to it, and the procedure above need not be completed. However, in any case where the above procedure is not completed before a transition of Speakers takes place, the new Speaker is still obliged to make a reasonable effort to obtain all materials necessary for the performance of eir duties from the former Speaker. If this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall make a reasonable attempt to recover this information from other sources. (The Players, the Officers, the Archivist etc.) This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: Whenever the Rules call for the Speaker-Elect to become Speaker: 1) The Speaker shall forward copies of all necessary materials for the performance of eir position, as soon as possible to the Speaker-Elect. 2) The Speaker-Elect shall acknowledge the receipt of said materials as soon as possible after step 1. 3) As soon as possible after step 2, the Speaker shall post a message to the Public Forum announcing that the Speaker-Elect has become the Speaker. At the "Date:" of the Speaker's posting, the old Speaker shall cease to be Speaker and the Speaker-Elect shall become the Speaker. If the Speaker-Elect changes before the completion of this procedure, it must be begun again from step 1. If another Rule specifies that the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker before the completion of step 3, such as the case when the Rules require an immediate Speaker transition, then this Rule defers to it, and the procedure above need not be completed. However, in any case where the above procedure is not completed before a transition of Speakers takes place, the new Speaker is still obliged to make a reasonable effort to obtain all materials necessary for the performance of eir duties from the former Speaker. If this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall make a reasonable attempt to recover this information from other sources. (The Players, the Officers, the Archivist etc.) history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3703 (Steve), 9 March 1998 text: Speaker Transition is a process which commences at the time the Rules call for a Speaker Transition to occur, and which proceeds as follows: (i) when the Speaker Transition commences, the Speaker loses all special rights and privileges that accrue to em as a result of being Speaker; (ii) as soon as possible after the Speaker Transition commences, the Registrar shall post to the Public Forum a Notice of Speaker Transition, identifying the reason for the Transition and the Player who held the Office of Speaker-Elect at the time the Transition commenced; (iii) provided that the Notice of Speaker Transition is correct in its particulars, the posting of the Notice causes the Player identified in it to cease being the Speaker-Elect and to become the Speaker. This concludes the process of Speaker Transition. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3974 (Elysion), 14 February 2000 text: Speaker Transition is a process which commences at the time the Rules call for a Speaker Transition to occur, and which proceeds as follows: (i) when the Speaker Transition commences, the Speaker loses all special rights and privileges that accrue to em as a result of being Speaker; (ii) as soon as possible after the Speaker Transition commences, the Payroll Clerk shall post to the Public Forum a Notice of Speaker Transition, identifying the reason for the Transition and the Player who held the Office of Speaker-Elect at the time the Transition commenced; (iii) provided that the Notice of Speaker Transition is correct in its particulars, the posting of the Notice causes the Player identified in it to cease being the Speaker-Elect and to become the Speaker. This concludes the process of Speaker Transition. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4053 (harvel), 21 August 2000 text: Speaker Transition is a process which commences at the time the Rules call for a Speaker Transition to occur, and which proceeds as follows: (i) when the Speaker Transition commences, the Speaker loses all special rights and privileges that accrue to em as a result of being Speaker; (ii) as soon as possible after the Speaker Transition commences, the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy shall post to the Public Forum a Notice of Speaker Transition, identifying the reason for the Transition and the Player who held the Office of Speaker-Elect at the time the Transition commenced; (iii) provided that the Notice of Speaker Transition is correct in its particulars, the posting of the Notice causes the Player identified in it to cease being the Speaker-Elect and to become the Speaker. This concludes the process of Speaker Transition. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: Speaker Transition is a process which commences at the time the Rules call for a Speaker Transition to occur, and which proceeds as follows: (i) when the Speaker Transition commences, the Speaker loses all special rights and privileges that accrue to em as a result of being Speaker; (ii) as soon as possible after the Speaker Transition commences, the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy shall publish a Notice of Speaker Transition, identifying the reason for the Transition and the Player who held the Office of Speaker-Elect at the time the Transition commenced; (iii) provided that the Notice of Speaker Transition is correct in its particulars, the posting of the Notice causes the Player identified in it to cease being the Speaker-Elect and to become the Speaker. This concludes the process of Speaker Transition. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: Speaker Transition is a process which commences at the time the Rules call for a Speaker Transition to occur, and which proceeds as follows: (i) when the Speaker Transition commences, the Speaker loses all special rights and privileges that accrue to em as a result of being Speaker; (ii) as soon as possible after the Speaker Transition commences, the Assistant Director of Personnel shall publish a Notice of Speaker Transition, identifying the reason for the Transition and the Player who held the Office of Speaker-Elect at the time the Transition commenced; (iii) provided that the Notice of Speaker Transition is correct in its particulars, the posting of the Notice causes the Player identified in it to cease being the Speaker-Elect and to become the Speaker. This concludes the process of Speaker Transition. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4768 (root), 25 May 2005 text: Speaker Transition is a process which commences at the time the Rules call for a Speaker Transition to occur, and which proceeds as follows: (i) when the Speaker Transition commences, the Speaker loses all special rights and privileges that accrue to em as a result of being Speaker; (ii) as soon as possible after the Speaker Transition commences, the Associate Director of Personnel shall publish a Notice of Speaker Transition, identifying the reason for the Transition and the Player who held the Office of Speaker-Elect at the time the Transition commenced; (iii) provided that the Notice of Speaker Transition is correct in its particulars, the posting of the Notice causes the Player identified in it to cease being the Speaker-Elect and to become the Speaker. This concludes the process of Speaker Transition. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: A cardinal is an active, ready player who is neither the current Speaker nor the Associate Director of Personnel. While there is a pope, no other player may become a pope. Whenever a pope is not a cardinal, e ceases being a pope. A notice of papal succession declares that a specified player is a pope. The notice is valid only if it is published by the Associate Director of Personnel and the specified player is indeed a pope. Upon publication of a valid notice of papal succession, the current Speaker ceases to be Speaker, the pope becomes the new Speaker, and the pope ceases to be a pope. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4836 (Goethe, Maud), 2 October 2005 text: A cardinal is an active, ready player who is neither the current Speaker nor the Associate Director of Personnel. When a cardinal becomes a pope, any previous pope immediately ceases being a pope. Whenever a pope is not a cardinal, e immediately ceases being a pope. For seven days after a cardinal wins the game with no other players simultaneously winning, that cardinal may announce that e becomes a pope. Upon this announcement, that player becomes a pope, so please treat em right good forever. A notice of papal succession is a notice published by the Associate Director of Personnel, that declares that a specified player is a pope, and is valid if the named player is indeed a pope. Upon publication of a valid notice of papal succession, the current Speaker ceases to be Speaker, the pope becomes the new Speaker, and the pope ceases to be a pope. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4853 (Goethe), 18 March 2006 text: A cardinal is an active, ready player who is neither the current Speaker nor the Associate Director of Personnel. For seven days after a cardinal wins the game with no other players simultaneously winning, that cardinal may announce that e becomes a pope. Upon this announcement, that player becomes a pope, so please treat em right good forever. When a cardinal becomes a pope, any previous pope immediately ceases being a pope. Whenever a pope is not a cardinal, e immediately ceases being a pope. As soon as possible after a cardinal becomes a pope, the Associate Director of Personnel shall install that pope as Speaker, by announcement. Upon this announcement, if the player is still a pope, then the current Speaker ceases to be Speaker, and the pope is installed as the new Speaker and ceases to be a pope. This installation cannot be performed if there are unresolved challenges regarding the pope-ness of the player. If the legality of an installation is not challenged within seven days of it being attempted, then it shall be allowed to stand, even if is subsequently found to be illegal. If the office of ADoP is ever vacant, or the identity of its holder cannot be determined with reasonable certainty, then installation may be performed by any player by announcement. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4861 (Goethe), 30 May 2006 text: A cardinal is an active, ready player who is not the current Speaker. For seven days after a cardinal wins the game with no other players simultaneously winning, that cardinal may announce that e becomes a pope. Upon this announcement, that player becomes a pope, so please treat em right good forever. When a cardinal becomes a pope, any previous pope immediately ceases being a pope. Whenever a pope is not a cardinal, e immediately ceases being a pope. Any Player who is not a pope may install the pope as Speaker, by announcement. Upon this announcement, if the announced player is still a pope, then the current Speaker ceases to be Speaker, and the pope is installed as the new Speaker and ceases to be a pope. This installation cannot be performed if there are unresolved challenges regarding the pope-ness of the player. If the legality of an installation is not challenged within seven days of it being attempted, then it shall be allowed to stand, even if is subsequently found to be illegal. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: A cardinal is an active, ready player who is not the current Speaker. For seven days after a cardinal wins the game with no other players simultaneously winning, then any player may announce that the winning cardinal becomes a pope. Upon this announcement, that player becomes a pope, so please treat em right good forever. Also upon this announcement, the current Speaker ceases to be Speaker, and the new pope is installed as the new Speaker. If the legality of an installation is not challenged within seven days of it being attempted, then it shall be allowed to stand, even if is subsequently found to be illegal. Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, if a Player becomes Speaker via this method, e may not be removed from the Speakership for 90 days without eir own consent. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4878 (Goethe), 22 January 2007 text: A cardinal is an active, ready player who is not the current Speaker. For seven days after a cardinal wins the game with no other players simultaneously winning, then any player may announce that the winning cardinal becomes a pope. Upon this announcement, that player becomes a pope, so please treat em right good forever. Also upon this announcement, the current Speaker ceases to be Speaker, and the new pope is installed as the new Speaker. If the legality of an installation is not challenged within seven days of it being attempted, then it shall be allowed to stand, even if is subsequently found to be illegal. Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, if a Player becomes Speaker via this method, e may not be removed from the Speakership for 90 days without eir own consent. If no cardinal has become a pope in the past six months, or a judge finds that the current Speaker has been inactive, inattentive, unwilling, or unable to perform eir Agoran duties, then a cardinal may be named a pope (and therefore Speaker as above) by Agoran Consent. This is not considered winning. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: A cardinal is an active, ready player who is not the current Speaker. For seven days after a cardinal wins the game with no other players simultaneously winning, then any player may announce that the winning cardinal becomes a pope. Upon this announcement, that player becomes a pope, so please treat em right good forever. Also upon this announcement, the current Speaker ceases to be Speaker, and the new pope is installed as the new Speaker. If the legality of an installation is not challenged within seven days of it being attempted, then it shall be allowed to stand, even if is subsequently found to be illegal. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, if a Player becomes Speaker via this method, e may not be removed from the Speakership for 90 days without eir own consent. If no cardinal has become a pope in the past six months, or a judge finds that the current Speaker has been inactive, inattentive, unwilling, or unable to perform eir Agoran duties, then a cardinal may be named a pope (and therefore Speaker as above) by Agoran Consent. This is not considered winning. history: Retitled by Proposal 5070 (Zefram), 11 July 2007 history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5070 (Zefram), 11 July 2007 text: The speaker is an office. If an active player who is not the speaker has won the game within the past week, e may become the speaker, thus removing any previous speaker from the office, by announcement, unless someone else has become speaker within the preceding 90 days. If the legality of an attempted installation of this type is not challenged within a week, then it is effective even if later found to be illegal. A speaker who became speaker within the preceding 90 days cannot be replaced by Agoran Consent if e is one of those whose objections are counted in the Agoran Consent procedure. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5144 (Zefram), 19 August 2007 text: The speaker is an office. The speaker is the head of state of this nomic. The speaker embodies the spirit of Agora. Diplomatic missions from this nomic to foreign nomics operate on behalf of the speaker. If an active player who is not the speaker has won the game within the past week, e may become the speaker, thus removing any previous speaker from the office, by announcement, unless someone else has become speaker within the preceding 90 days. If the legality of an attempted installation of this type is not challenged within a week, then it is effective even if later found to be illegal. A speaker who became speaker within the preceding 90 days cannot be replaced by Agoran Consent if e is one of those whose objections are counted in the Agoran Consent procedure. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5182 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: The speaker is an office. The speaker is the head of state of this nomic. The speaker embodies the spirit of Agora. Diplomatic missions from this nomic to foreign nomics operate on behalf of the speaker. history: Retitled by Proposal 5257 (AFO), 27 October 2007 history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5257 (AFO), 27 October 2007 text: The Speaker is the player who has borne the Patent Title of Minister Without Portfolio the longest, with ties broken in favor of the player who has been registered the longest. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5270 (Murphy; disi.), 7 November 2007 text: The Speaker is the player who has borne the Patent Title of Minister Without Portfolio the longest, with ties broken in favor of the player who has been registered the longest. The Herald's report includes the date on which each Minister Without Portfolio most recently won the game. history: Amended(24) by Proposal 5430 (Goethe), 9 February 2008 text: The Speaker is the player who has borne the Patent Title of Minister Without Portfolio the longest, with ties broken in favor of the player who has been registered the longest. The Herald's report includes the date on which each Minister Without Portfolio most recently was awarded the title. history: ... [orphaned text: When one Mighty Speaker is yielding his Office to another, the following procedure shall be followed: 1) The Present Mighty Speaker shall forward copies of all necessary materials for the performance of his Office to the Prospective Mighty Speaker. 2) The Prospective Mighty Speaker shall acknowledge the receipt of said materials. 3) The Present Mighty Speaker shall post a message to the listserv announcing the official transfer of power, which occurs at the "Date:" of the Present Mighty Speaker's posting. The Present Mighty Speaker remains in Office until the successful completion of step 3. ] [orphaned text: When one Mighty Speaker is yielding his Office to another, the following procedure shall be followed: 1) The Present Mighty Speaker shall forward copies of all necessary materials for the performance of his Office to the Prospective Mighty Speaker. 2) The Prospective Mighty Speaker shall acknowledge the receipt of said materials. 3) The Present Mighty Speaker shall post a message to the listserv announcing the official transfer of power, which occurs at the "Date:" of the Present Mighty Speaker's posting. The Present Mighty Speaker remains in Office until the successful completion of step 3. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 403 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 403 history: ... [orphaned text: Any Proposal which Amends any Rule must: (i) explicitly state which Rule it is Amending, and (ii) fully state the Amended form of that Rule. A Proposal which claims to amend a Rule, but does not fully state the Amended form of that Rule is not a valid Proposal, and must not be accepted by the Mighty Speaker, nor voted upon. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 404 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 404 by Proposal 404 (Alexx), 3 September 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: As long as a Proposal satisfies all requirements in place at the time of its making for the proper making of Proposals, the act of making such a Proposal is legal regardless of its content. It is legal to propose a Rule which conflicts with other Rules or with itself, which is paradoxical, or which cannot be applied. text: As long as a Proposal satisfies all requirements in place at the time of its making for the proper making of Proposals, the act of making such a Proposal is legal regardless of its content. It is legal to propose a Rule which conflicts with other Rules or with itself, which is paradoxical, or which cannot be applied. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=2 by Proposal 2664, 12 September 1996 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2689, 3 October 1996 text: As long as a Proposal satisfies all requirements in place at the time of its making for the proper making of Proposals, the act of making such a Proposal is legal regardless of its content. It is legal to propose a Rule Change which cannot be applied, or which, if adopted, would result in there being Rules which conflict with other Rules or with themselves, which are paradoxical, or which cannot be applied. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 2832 (Steve), 11 March 1997 text: No Rule shall have any effect which seeks to make the legality of making a Proposal conditional upon its content. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 404 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 405,880 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 405 by Proposal 405 (Alexx), 3 September 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: No Officer may be 'On Hold' while holding an Office. If a current Officer should place himself On Hold, he is assumed to have resigned without appointing a successor, and the Office should be re-filled in the normal manner. This Rule takes precedence over Rule 386. text: No Officer may be 'On Hold' while holding an Office. If a current Officer should place himself On Hold, he is assumed to have resigned without appointing a successor, and the Office should be re-filled in the normal manner. This Rule takes precedence over Rule 386. history: Amended by Proposal 880 (Garth), 13 April 1994 text: No Officer may be 'On Hold' while holding an Office. If a current Officer should place himself On Hold, he is assumed to have resigned without appointing a successor, and the Office should be re-filled in the normal manner. history: Amended by Rule 750, 13 April 1994 text: No Officer may be 'On Hold' while holding an Office. If a current Officer should place himself On Hold, he is assumed to have resigned without appointing a successor, and the Office should be re-filled in the normal manner. (*Was: 405*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1582, 15 May 1995 text: An Officer may resign eir Office at any time either by a message to the Public Forum, or by going On Hold, or as otherwise specified in the Rules. When an Officer resigns eir Office, e ceases to fill that Office. If an Officer resigns during the Voting Period for a Proposal containing a Directive to install another player in that Office, then the Player thus proposed, if consenting, will fill the Office. Otherwise, if at the time e resigns e appoints a successor, then the designated successor, if consenting, will fill the Office. If there is no appointed or proposed successor, or if e does not consent to fill the Office, then the Office becomes vacant. No player who is "On Hold" may fill an Office. If an Officer goes On Hold then e automatically resigns all eir Offices. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1631, 17 July 1995 text: An Officer may resign eir Office at any time either by a message to the Public Forum, or by going On Hold, or as otherwise specified in the Rules. When an Officer resigns eir Office, e ceases to fill that Office. If an Officer resigns during the Voting Period for a Proposal containing a Directive to install another player in that Office, then the Player thus proposed, if consenting, will fill the Office. Otherwise, if at the time e resigns e appoints a successor, then the designated successor, if consenting, will fill the Office. If there is no appointed or proposed successor, or if e does not consent to fill the Office, then the Office becomes vacant. No player who is "On Hold" may fill an Office. If an Officer goes On Hold then e automatically resigns all eir Offices. This Rule applies to Offices in General, and thus defers to Rules regarding specific Offices. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: An Officer is permitted to, at any time, remove eirself from any Office e holds, provided e specifies another Player to succeed em, who then becomes the temporary holder of that Office. For this appointment to be valid, this Player must either explicitly and publically consent to becoming the new holder of that Office within seven days of such appointment, or be the Speaker. The Speaker can be appointed to hold an Office temporarily without consenting, and may not refuse such an appointment. A change in the identity of the Speaker does not automatically cause the transfer of any Offices being held by the former Speaker to the new Speaker. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 2781 (Steve), 15 January 1997 text: An Officer is always permitted to resign from any Office e holds, provided e specifies another Player to succeed em, who then becomes the temporary holder of that Office. For this appointment to be valid, this Player must either explicitly and publically consent to becoming the new holder of that Office within seven days of such appointment, or be the Speaker. The Speaker can be appointed to hold an Office temporarily without consenting, and may not refuse such an appointment. An Officer who resigns without appointing a successor is deemed to have appointed the Speaker to succeed em. A change in the identity of the Speaker does not automatically cause the transfer of any Offices being held by the former Speaker to the new Speaker. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3742 (Harlequin), 8 May 1998 text: A Player may, at any time, resign from any Office which e currently holds. An Electee to an Office who resigns from that Office may appoint a successor at the time e resigns. In this case, the resigning Player is retired from that Office; if the named successor agrees in the Public Forum to be successor to the Office, the named successor becomes holder of the Office. A non-Electee who resigns an Office, or an Electee who does not name a successor, is immediately removed from Office. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: A Player may, at any time, resign from any Office which e currently holds. An Electee to an Office who resigns from that Office may appoint a successor at the time e resigns. In this case, the resigning Player is retired from that Office; if the named successor agrees publicly to be successor to the Office, the named successor becomes holder of the Office. A non-Electee who resigns an Office, or an Electee who does not name a successor, is immediately removed from Office. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: An oligarch or the holder of an office may resign from eir position at any time by announcing that e does so. The electee to an office may appoint another player as a successor when e resigns. If so, the resigning player is retired from that office, and if within one week from the appointment the named succcessor publicly agrees to be successor to the office, that player becomes holder of the office. An oligarch may appoint another player as a successor when e resigns. If so, the resigning player is removed from the Oligarchy, and if within one week from the appointment the named successsor publicly agrees to be successor to the seat in the Oligarchy and pays a fee of 1 Voting Entitlement, that player becomes an Oligarch. A non-electee who resigns or an electee who does not name a successor is immediately removed from office. An oligarch who does not name a successor is immediately removed from the Oligarchy. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4271 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: The holder of an Office may resign from it by announcing that e does so. If the holder of an Office is its Electee, and appoints a successor when e resigns, then: (a) The resigning Player is retired from that Office. (b) If the successor consents within a week, then e becomes holder of that Office. (c) If the successor does not consent within a week, then the resigning Player is removed from that Office. Otherwise, the resigning Player is immediately removed from that Office. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 880 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 406,889 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 406 by Proposal 406 (Alexx), 3 September 1993 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: There shall exist an Office "Clerk of the Courts", who shall have general responsibility over administering Calls for Judgement, as outlined in the Rules. The active Clerk of the Court may never be selected as a Judge. As a salary for carrying out his duties, he will receive 5 points at the end of every seven days he is in Office, counting from his assumption of the Office. The initial holder of this Office shall be the Player who submitted this Proposal. text: There shall exist an Office "Clerk of the Courts", who shall have general responsibility over administering Calls for Judgement, as outlined in the Rules. The active Clerk of the Court may never be selected as a Judge. As a salary for carrying out his duties, he will receive 5 points at the end of every seven days he is in Office, counting from his assumption of the Office. The initial holder of this Office shall be the Player who submitted this Proposal. history: Amended by Proposal 889 (Garth), 13 April 1994 text: There shall exist an Office "Clerk of the Courts", who shall have general responsibility over administering Calls for Judgement, as outlined in the Rules. As a salary for carrying out his duties, he will receive 5 points at the end of every seven days he is in Office, counting from his assumption of the Office. The initial holder of this Office shall be the Player who submitted this Proposal. history: Amended by Rule 750, 13 April 1994 text: There shall exist an Office "Clerk of the Courts", who shall have general responsibility over administering Calls for Judgement, as outlined in the Rules. As a salary for carrying out his duties, he will receive 5 points at the end of every seven days he is in Office, counting from his assumption of the Office. The initial holder of this Office shall be the Player who submitted this Proposal. (*Was: 406*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1441, 21 February 1995 text: There shall exist an Office "Clerk of the Courts", who shall have general responsibility over administering Calls for Judgement, as outlined in the Rules. The Clerk's salary shall be five points. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of the Clerk of the Courts, with the general responsibility for the administration of the judicial process, as described elsewhere. The Salary of the Clerk of the Courts shall be five Points. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of the Clerk of the Courts, with the general responsibility for the administration of the judicial process, as described elsewhere. The Salary of the Clerk of the Courts shall be five Mils. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk of the Courts shall receive a weekly salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Null-Amended(5) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk of the Courts shall receive a weekly salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3827 (Kolja A.), 4 February 1999 text: There shall exist the Office of Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk of the Courts shall receive a salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: Clerk of the Courts There shall exist the Office of Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk of the Courts shall receive a salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 text: There exists the Office of Clerk of the Courts, whose responsibility it is to oversee the judicial system. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3978 (Blob), 23 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: There exists the Office of Clerk of the Courts, whose responsibility it is to oversee the judicial system. The Monthly Report of the Clerk of the Courts shall include the Stare Decisis, which is a list of past Calls for Judgement (CFJs). The following information shall be included for each CFJ: (i) its statement; (ii) the date on which it was called; (iii) its outcome (if any) on Judgement; and (iv) its outcome (if any) on Appeal. Whenever a CFJ is made, the Clerk shall add it to the list. E may, at eir discretion, add earlier CFJs. E may, Without Objection, remove any CFJ from the list that e deems no longer relevant. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Clerk of the Courts (CotC) is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing Calls for Judgement (CFJs) and Appeals. The CotC's Monthly Report shall include the Stare Decisis, which is a list of past CFJs. The following information shall be included for each CFJ: (i) its statement; (ii) the date on which it was called; (iii) its outcome (if any) on Judgement; and (iv) its outcome (if any) on Appeal. Whenever a CFJ is made, the CotC shall add it to the list. E may, at eir discretion, add earlier CFJs. E may Without Objection remove any CFJ e deems no longer relevant from the list. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4563 (OscarMeyr), 6 April 2004 text: The Clerk of the Courts (CotC) is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing Calls for Judgement (CFJs) and Appeals. The CotC's Weekly Report shall include the following: (i) Each Player's Orientation. The CotC's Monthly Report shall include the Stare Decisis, which is a list of past CFJs. The following information shall be included for each CFJ: (i) its statement; (ii) the date on which it was called; (iii) its outcome (if any) on Judgement; and (iv) its outcome (if any) on Appeal. Whenever a CFJ is made, the CotC shall add it to the list. E may, at eir discretion, add earlier CFJs. E may Without Objection remove any CFJ e deems no longer relevant from the list. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4769 (Sherlock), 25 May 2005 text: The Clerk of the Courts (CotC) is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing Calls for Judgement (CFJs) and Appeals. The CotC's Bi-Weekly Report shall include the following: (i) Each Player's Orientation. The CotC's Monthly Report shall include the Stare Decisis, which is a list of past CFJs. The following information shall be included for each CFJ: (i) its statement; (ii) the date on which it was called; (iii) its outcome (if any) on Judgement; and (iv) its outcome (if any) on Appeal. Whenever a CFJ is made, the CotC shall add it to the list. E may, at eir discretion, add earlier CFJs. E may Without Objection remove any CFJ e deems no longer relevant from the list. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4919 (Zefram), 2 April 2007 text: The Clerk of the Courts (CotC) is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing Calls for Judgement (CFJs) and Appeals. The CotC's Monthly Report shall include the Stare Decisis, which is a list of past CFJs. The following information shall be included for each CFJ: (i) its statement; (ii) the date on which it was called; (iii) its outcome (if any) on Judgement; and (iv) its outcome (if any) on Appeal. Whenever a CFJ is made, the CotC shall add it to the list. E may, at eir discretion, add earlier CFJs. E may Without Objection remove any CFJ e deems no longer relevant from the list. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5066 (Zefram; disi.), 11 July 2007 text: The Clerk of the Courts (CotC) is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing Calls for Judgement (CFJs) and Appeals. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 889 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 413 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 413 history: ... [orphaned text: If the Rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of some action cannot be determined with finality, or if some action appears equally legal and illegal, then a player may Call For Judgement on a Statement to that effect. If the Statement is judged TRUE, then the same Judge who judged the Statement TRUE must declare the most recent passed Proposal X such that the Statement was not TRUE before the passage of Proposal X, or declare that there is no such Proposal. (Until the Judge does this, the Judgment is not valid.) If the Judgement of TRUE is not overruled, then the Player who called for Judgement is declared the Winner of the game. When a Game ends by this manner and the Judge has declared that there is no such Proposal X, the game is ended, with no provisions for restarting it. When a Game ends by this manner and the Judge has declared such a Proposal X, the following actions are taken: - all Players remain active, - all Proposals curently being Voted upon are removed from consideration for Voting, - the scores for all Players are set to 0 (zero), - the Rules and explicit game custom are reverted to the state they were in before Proposal X was passed, - a Benevolent Speaker for the next Game is chosen: -If there is only one Winner, that Voter becomes the Benevolent Speaker, and the old Benevolent Speaker becomes a Voter, -If there is more than one Winner, the Benevolent Speaker randomly selects one of the Winners, who becomes the new Benevolent Speaker, and the old Benevolent Speaker becomes a Voter, - and a new Game is begun. ] [orphaned text: If the Rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of some action cannot be determined with finality, or if some action appears equally legal and illegal, then a player may Call For Judgement on a Statement to that effect. If the Statement is judged TRUE, then the same Judge who judged the Statement TRUE must declare the most recent passed Proposal X such that the Statement was not TRUE before the passage of Proposal X, or declare that there is no such Proposal. (Until the Judge does this, the Judgment is not valid.) If the Judgement of TRUE is not overruled, then the Player who called for Judgement is declared the Winner of the game. When a Game ends by this manner and the Judge has declared that there is no such Proposal X, the game is ended, with no provisions for restarting it. When a Game ends by this manner and the Judge has declared such a Proposal X, the following actions are taken: - all Players remain active, - all Proposals curently being Voted upon are removed from consideration for Voting, - the scores for all Players are set to 0 (zero), - the Rules and explicit game custom are reverted to the state they were in before Proposal X was passed, - a Benevolent Speaker for the next Game is chosen: -If there is only one Winner, that Voter becomes the Benevolent Speaker, and the old Benevolent Speaker becomes a Voter, -If there is more than one Winner, the Benevolent Speaker randomly selects one of the Winners, who becomes the new Benevolent Speaker, and the old Benevolent Speaker becomes a Voter, - and a new Game is begun. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 417 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 417 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1302, 4 November 1994 text: That there be established an office known as the Nomic Archivist, which shall be governed by the default Rules concerning official posts. The initial duties of the Nomic Archivist shall be to record the passage and failure of Proposals, to maintain a "historical record" (defined below) of the Ruleset, to maintain a list of Judgements and their case histories, and to maintain a list of game Winners in past games. The Archivist is free to comment on the historical records as they see fit, but such commentary must be clearly delimited from the historical material. Where the material being stored does not already admit a classification method, the Archivist is free to design one themselves. The "historical record" of the Ruleset maintained by the Archivist is one that includes all rules ever part of the nomic Ruleset, annotated with information as to their ultimate fate, whether Repealed or Amended etc. This record of the Ruleset has no legal force. The duties required of the Archivist may be changed with their consent and at the request of the Office's controlling body (whatsoever that may be). Initially, the controlling body of this Office shall be all Players, and any request to change the duties must therefore be supported by a majority of Players "speaking" to the request. Naturally, default Rules for Offices may establish a different controlling body for this Office. The salary of the Archivist office shall be determined by its controlling body. Eis salary shall be 5 points history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1700, 1 September 1995 text: That there be established an office known as the Nomic Archivist, which shall be governed by the default Rules concerning official posts. The initial duties of the Nomic Archivist shall be to record the passage and failure of Proposals, to maintain a "historical record" (defined below) of the Ruleset, to maintain a list of Judgements and their case histories, and to maintain a list of game Winners in past games. The Archivist is free to comment on the historical records as they see fit, but such commentary must be clearly delimited from the historical material. Where the material being stored does not already admit a classification method, the Archivist is free to design one themselves. The "historical record" of the Ruleset maintained by the Archivist is one that includes all rules ever part of the nomic Ruleset, annotated with information as to their ultimate fate, whether Repealed or Amended etc. This record of the Ruleset has no legal force. The duties required of the Archivist may be changed with eir consent and at the request of the Office's controlling body (whatsoever that may be). Initially, the controlling body of this Office shall be all Players, and any request to change the duties must therefore be supported by a majority of Players "speaking" to the request. Naturally, default Rules for Offices may establish a different controlling body for this Office. The salary of the Archivist office shall be determined by its controlling body. Eir salary shall be 5 points. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1735, 15 October 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1741, 15 October 1995 text: Let there be an office known as the Nomic Archivist, which shall be governed by the default Rules concerning official posts. The initial duties of the Nomic Archivist shall be to record the passage and failure of Proposals, to maintain a "historical record" (defined below) of the Ruleset, to maintain a list of Judgements and their case histories, and to maintain a list of game Winners in past games. The Archivist is free to comment on the historical records as they see fit, but such commentary must be clearly delimited from the historical material. Where the material being stored does not already admit a classification method, the Archivist is free to design one themselves. The "historical record" of the Ruleset maintained by the Archivist is one that includes all rules ever part of the nomic Ruleset, annotated with information as to their ultimate fate, whether Repealed or Amended etc. This record of the Ruleset has no legal force. The salary of the Archivist office shall be determined by its controlling body. Eir salary shall be 5 points. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2029, 28 November 1995 text: Let there be an office known as the Nomic Archivist, which shall be governed by the default Rules concerning Offices. The duties of the Archivist shall be as follows: * to record the passage and failure of Proposals, * to maintain the Historical Ruleset, a document which includes all rules ever to exist as part of the Agora Ruleset, annotated with the periods of time they were in effect, and what Proposals or Rules enacted them. * to maintain a list of Judgements and their case histories, * to maintain copies of prior Officer reports, and * to maintain a list of game Winners in past games. The Archivist is free to comment on the historical records as e sees fit, but such commentary must be clearly delimited from the historical material. The Archivist is free to design a classification method for the material e stores. The "historical record" of the Ruleset maintained by the Archivist is one that includes all rules ever part of the Agora Ruleset, annotated with information as to their ultimate fate, whether Repealed or Amended etc. This record of the Ruleset has no legal force. The salary of the Archivist shall be 5 points. history: Infected and Amended(6) by Rule 1454, 23 January 1996 text: Let there be an office known as the Nomic Archivist, which shall be governed by the default Rules concerning Offices. The duties of the Archivist shall be as follows: * to record the passage and failure of Proposals, * to maintain the Historical Ruleset, a document which includes all rules ever to exist as part of the Agora Ruleset, annotated with the periods of time they were in effect, and what Proposals or Rules enacted them. * to maintain a list of Judgements and their case histories, * to maintain copies of prior Officer reports, and * to maintain a list of game Winners in past games. The Archivist is free to comment on the historical records as e sees fit, but such commentary must be clearly delimited from the historical material. The Archivist is free to design a classification method for the material e stores. The "historical record" of the Ruleset maintained by the Archivist is one that includes all rules ever part of the Agora Ruleset, annotated with information as to their ultimate fate, whether Repealed or Amended etc. This record of the Ruleset has no legal force. The salary of the Archivist shall be 5 points. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: Let there be an office known as the Nomic Archivist, which shall be governed by the default Rules concerning Offices. The duties of the Archivist shall be as follows: * to record the passage and failure of Proposals, * to maintain the Historical Ruleset, a document which includes all rules ever to exist as part of the Agora Ruleset, annotated with the periods of time they were in effect, and what Proposals or Rules enacted them. * to maintain a list of Judgements and their case histories, * to maintain copies of prior Officer reports, and * to maintain a list of game Winners in past games. The Archivist is free to comment on the historical records as e sees fit, but such commentary must be clearly delimited from the historical material. The Archivist is free to design a classification method for the material e stores. The "historical record" of the Ruleset maintained by the Archivist is one that includes all rules ever part of the Agora Ruleset, annotated with information as to their ultimate fate, whether Repealed or Amended etc. This record of the Ruleset has no legal force. The salary of the Archivist shall be 5 Mils. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: The duties of the Nomic Archivist shall be as follows: i) to record the passage and failure of Proposals, ii) to maintain the Historical Ruleset, a document which includes all rules ever to exist as part of the Agora Ruleset, annotated with the periods of time they were in effect, and what Proposals or Rules enacted them. iii) to maintain a list of Judgements and their case histories, iv) to maintain copies of prior Officer reports, and v) to maintain a list of game Winners in past games. The Archivist is free to comment on the historical records as e sees fit, but such commentary must be clearly delimited from the historical material. The Archivist is free to design a classification method for the material e stores. The "historical record" of the Ruleset maintained by the Archivist is one that includes all rules ever part of the Agora Ruleset, annotated with information as to their ultimate fate, whether Repealed or Amended etc. This record of the Ruleset has no legal force. history: Null-Amended(9) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: The duties of the Nomic Archivist shall be as follows: i) to record the passage and failure of Proposals, ii) to maintain the Historical Ruleset, a document which includes all rules ever to exist as part of the Agora Ruleset, annotated with the periods of time they were in effect, and what Proposals or Rules enacted them. iii) to maintain a list of Judgements and their case histories, iv) to maintain copies of prior Officer reports, and v) to maintain a list of game Winners in past games. The Archivist is free to comment on the historical records as e sees fit, but such commentary must be clearly delimited from the historical material. The Archivist is free to design a classification method for the material e stores. The "historical record" of the Ruleset maintained by the Archivist is one that includes all rules ever part of the Agora Ruleset, annotated with information as to their ultimate fate, whether Repealed or Amended etc. This record of the Ruleset has no legal force. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 417 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 [orphaned text: That there be established an office known as the Nomic Archivist, which shall be governed by the default Rules concerning official posts. The initial duties of the Nomic Archivist shall be to record the passage and failure of Proposals, to maintain a "historical record" (defined below) of the Ruleset, to maintain a list of Judgements and their case histories, and to maintain a list of game Winners in past games. The Archivist is free to comment on the historical records as they see fit, but such commentary must be clearly delimited from the historical material. Where the material being stored does not already admit a classification method, the Archivist is free to design one themselves. The "historical record" of the Ruleset maintained by the Archivist is one that includes all rules ever part of the nomic Ruleset, annotated with information as to their ultimate fate, whether Repealed or Amended etc. This record of the Ruleset has no legal force. The duties required of the Archivist may be changed with their consent and at the request of the Office's controlling body (whatsoever that may be). Initially, the controlling body of this Office shall be all Players, and any request to change the duties must therefore be supported by a majority of Players "speaking" to the request. Naturally, default Rules for Offices may establish a different controlling body for this Office. The salary of the Archivist office shall be determined by its controlling body. Initially, its salary shall be 5 points and one coin of the office-holder's group per week. The initial office-holder for this post shall be Michael Norrish. ] [orphaned text: That there be established an office known as the Nomic Archivist, which shall be governed by the default Rules concerning official posts. The initial duties of the Nomic Archivist shall be to record the passage and failure of Proposals, to maintain a "historical record" (defined below) of the Ruleset, to maintain a list of Judgements and their case histories, and to maintain a list of game Winners in past games. The Archivist is free to comment on the historical records as they see fit, but such commentary must be clearly delimited from the historical material. Where the material being stored does not already admit a classification method, the Archivist is free to design one themselves. The "historical record" of the Ruleset maintained by the Archivist is one that includes all rules ever part of the nomic Ruleset, annotated with information as to their ultimate fate, whether Repealed or Amended etc. This record of the Ruleset has no legal force. The duties required of the Archivist may be changed with their consent and at the request of the Office's controlling body (whatsoever that may be). Initially, the controlling body of this Office shall be all Players, and any request to change the duties must therefore be supported by a majority of Players "speaking" to the request. Naturally, default Rules for Offices may establish a different controlling body for this Office. The salary of the Archivist office shall be determined by its controlling body. Initially, its salary shall be 5 points and one coin of the office-holder's group per week. The initial office-holder for this post shall be Michael Norrish. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 418 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 418 history: ... [orphaned text: Proposals are to be deemed Improper which would have the effect of Transmuting to Immutable a Rule which refers to one or more specific Mutable Rules. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 423 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 423 history: ... [orphaned text: When the Voting Period for a Proposal is over, the proposer gets F-A Points, where F is the Number of Votes For, and A is the Number of Votes Against. The total gain or loss to the proposer for a single Proposal outcome is limited to plus or minus 10. No Points are awarded to or taken from Voters by this Rule. This Rule takes precedence over and completely nullifies Rule 308, 302, and 211, should any of these still be valid Rules. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 425 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 425 history: ... [orphaned text: If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime because a Call for Judgement was returned which indicated so, e shall lose Points as follows according to the Class of Crime of which e is Guilty of: Class A = 2; Class B = 5; Class C = 8; Class D = 15. If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime because that Player publicly admitted such, e shall lose Points as follows according to the Class of Crime which e is Guilty of: Class A = 1; Class B = 3; Class C = 5; Class D = 10. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 426 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 426 history: ... [orphaned text: Each violation of Rule 357 or Rule 358 shall be known as a Class A Crime. All Point penalties indicated by this Rule shall be waived in favor of the system for Crimes indicated in other legislation. This Rule shall not take effect until such time as a punishment is determined for a Class A Crime which involves the loss of at least 1 Point. This Rule takes precedence over Rules 357 and 358 only in regards to the Point penalties to be assessed. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 427 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 427 history: ... [orphaned text: Failure to include a Title in a Proposal, as per Rule 319, shall be known as a Class B Crime. Each offense shall involve the penalties as described in other legislation as pertinent to Class B Crimes. In addition, any Proposal which is submitted without such a Title shall not be a valid Proposal and shall not be passed into a Rule. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 430,502 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 430 by Proposal 430 (Alexx), ca. Sep. 13 1993 text: A Judge who delivers a legal Judgement within the mandated time receives 3 Points. history: Amended by Proposal 502 (Ronald Kunne), 30 September 1993 text: A Judge who delivers a legal Judgment or Decision within the mandated time receives 3 Points. A Judge who delivers a legal Judgment or Decision within 72 hours receives 2 Points extra. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1501, 24 March 1995 text: A Judge who delivers a legal Judgment or Decision within the mandated time receives 3 Points and loses 1 Blot. A Judge who delivers a legal Judgment or Decision within 72 hours receives 2 Points extra, and loses 1 more Blot. Blot losses due to this rule do not apply if they would reduce the Judge's Blots below one. It is the Judge's responsibility to report eir Blot losses to the Tabulator. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1705, 4 September 1995 text: A Judge who delivers a legal Judgment or Decision within the mandated time receives 3 Points and loses 1 Blot. A Judge who delivers a legal Judgment or Decision within 72 hours receives 2 Points extra, and loses 1 more Blot. Blot losses due to this rule do not apply if they would reduce the Judge's Blots below one. It is the Judge's responsibility to report eir Blot losses to the Tabulator. The Clerk of the Courts shall report Point transfers wihch occur as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: All judicial salaries shall be paid by transfer from the Bank at the end of the Nomic Week. The Clerk of the Courts shall, whenever a Player has earned a judicial salary, make a report of this fact in the Public Forum. At the end of the Nomic Week, all judicial salaries earned during that week, except as noted below, shall be paid; transfers arising from such payment are to be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. The above notwithstanding, any judicial salary earned but not yet paid shall not be paid if the decision for which the salary was earned is currently subject to an appeal at the end of the Nomic Week in which it was earned. In this case, the salary shall be paid at the end of the Nomic Week in which the appeal is decided, and then only if the appeal upholds the original decision. If a decision is overturned in the same Nomic Week in which it was made, no salary shall be paid for the original decision. If a decision is not subject to an appeal at the end of the Nomic Week in which it is made, but is subsequently appealed in a later Nomic Week and overturned on appeal, the Player who made the original decision shall lose currency equal to the salary originally received for that decision. This shall be reported along with all other judicial salaries for that Nomic Week by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall, whenever a Player has earned a judicial salary, make a report of this fact in the Public Forum. At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Clerk of the Court shall pay out the judicial salaries earned during the preceding week, except as noted below. Any judicial salary earned but not yet paid shall not be paid if the decision for which the salary was earned is currently subject to an appeal at the end of the Nomic Week in which it was earned. In this case, the salary shall be paid at the end of the Nomic Week in which the appeal is decided, and then only if the appeal upholds the original decision. If a decision is overturned in the same Nomic Week in which it was made, no salary shall be paid for the original decision. If a decision is not subject to an appeal at the end of the Nomic Week in which it is made, but is subsequently appealed in a later Nomic Week and overturned on appeal, the Clerk of the Court shall vacate the Payment Order paying the salary originally received for that decision. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3635 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall, within one week of the time a Player earns a Judicial Salary, pay out that Judicial Salary to that Player. If a decision (or dismissal) which resulted in a Player earning a Judicial Salary is subsequently appealed and overturned on appeal, the Clerk of the Court shall vacate the Payment Order paying the salary originally received for that decision. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall, within one week of the time a Player earns a Judicial Salary, pay out that Judicial Salary to that Player. If a decision (or dismissal) which resulted in a Player earning a Judicial Salary is subsequently appealed and overturned on appeal, the Clerk of the Courts shall vacate the Payment Order paying the salary originally received for that decision. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall, within one week of the time a Player earns a Judicial Salary, pay out that Judicial Salary to that Player. If a decision (or dismissal) which resulted in a Player earning a Judicial Salary is subsequently appealed and overturned on appeal, the Clerk of the Courts shall bill that Player for an amount equal to the Judicial Salary paid to that Player. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: As soon as possible after a Judgement is delivered during the Deliberation Period, the Clerk of the Courts shall pay out the Judicial Salary to the Judge. As soon as possible after a Judgement is overturned on appeal, the Clerk of the Courts shall bill the Judge for the Judicial Salary (if any) that was paid out to em for that Judgement. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: As soon as possible after a Judgement is delivered during the Deliberation Period, the Clerk of the Courts shall award the Judge the Boon of Wisdom. As soon as possible after a Judgement is overturned on appeal, the Clerk of the Courts shall award the Judge the Albatross of Foolishness. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 502 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 434 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 434 history: ... history: Repealed as Mutable Rule by Proposal 948 (Stella?), 14 July 1994 [orphaned text: If a Player believes that he has won the Game, he may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is returned with the Judgement TRUE (and that Judgement is not Appealed), then he has won the Game as of the delivery of that Judgement. If the Judgement is TRUE, but is Appealed, but is sustained (and no Proposal to reverse the verdict is made), then he has won the Game as of the delivery of the Appeal verdict. If such a verdict is sustained, challenged by Proposal, but the Proposal does not pass, he has won the Game as of the completion of the Vote on that Proposal. Judgement on a CFJ to win the Game may *not* be delivered until at least 72 hours after its official announcement, in order to give time for the Judge to accept input from the community. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which specifies the exact moment at which a Game is won. ] [orphaned text: If a Player believes that he has won the Game, he may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is returned with the Judgement TRUE (and that Judgement is not Appealed), then he has won the Game as of the delivery of that Judgement. If the Judgement is TRUE, but is Appealed, but is sustained (and no Proposal to reverse the verdict is made), then he has won the Game as of the delivery of the Appeal verdict. If such a verdict is sustained, challenged by Proposal, but the Proposal does not pass, he has won the Game as of the completion of the Vote on that Proposal. Judgement on a CFJ to win the Game may *not* be delivered until at least 72 hours after its official announcement, in order to give time for the Judge to accept input from the community. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which specifies the exact moment at which a Game is won. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 435,754 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 435 by Proposal 435 (Alexx), 30 August 1993 text: Spelling errors do not invalidate Rules if there is no ambiguity in meaning. history: Amended by Proposal 754 (KoJen), 1 December 1993 text: Differences in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the substitution of a word or phrase by a synonym or abbreviation, are inconsequential in all forms of Nomic communication, as long as there is no ambiguity in meaning. In other words, the meaning or validity of such communication is not altered in any way by such discrepancies. history: Amended by Rule 750, 1 December 1993 text: Differences in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the substitution of a word or phrase by a synonym or abbreviation, are inconsequential in all forms of Nomic communication, as long as there is no ambiguity in meaning. In other words, the meaning or validity of such communication is not altered in any way by such discrepancies. (*Was: 435*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: Differences in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the substitution of a word or phrase by a synonym or abbreviation, are inconsequential in all forms of Nomic communication, as long as there is no ambiguity in meaning. In other words, the meaning or validity of such communication is not altered in any way by such discrepancies. history: Infected and Amended(2) by Rule 1454, 17 December 1995 text: Differences in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the substitution of a word or phrase by a synonym or abbreviation, are inconsequential in all forms of Nomic communication, as long as there is no ambiguity in meaning. In other words, the meaning or validity of such communication is not altered in any way by such discrepancies. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: Differences in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the substitution of a word or phrase by a synonym or abbreviation, are inconsequential in all forms of Nomic communication, as long as there is no ambiguity in meaning. In other words, the meaning or validity of such communication is not altered in any way by such discrepancies. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3915 (harvel), 27 September 1999 text: Differences in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the substitution of a word or phrase by a synonym or abbreviation, are inconsequential in all forms of Nomic communication, as long as there is no ambiguity in meaning. A Player shall not be penalised for accurately quoting a Rule, Proposal, Statement, Judgement, the words of another Player, or other reference. Except when the Rules explicitly state otherwise, any mathematical term in the Rules shall be construed to have its standard mathematical meaning. In particular, "number" shall mean "real number". This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which specifies terminology or grammar. history: Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4507 (Murphy), 20 June 2003 history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4507 (Murphy), 20 June 2003 text: Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved: (1) No Player shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora. (2) No Player shall be punished for accurately quoting a Rule, Proposal, Statement, Judgement, another Player, or another reference. Regularity of communication being essential for the healthy function of any nomic, it is hereby resolved: (3) A difference in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the use of a synonym or abbreviation in place of a word or phrase, is inconsequential in all forms of communication, as long as the difference does not create an ambiguity in meaning. (4) A term explicitly defined by the Rules shall be interpreted as having that meaning, as shall its ordinary-language synonyms not explicitly defined by the rules. In particular, the term "number" shall be interpreted as "real number". (5) Any term primarily used in mathematical or legal contexts, and not addressed by previous provisions of this Rule, shall be interpreted as having the meaning it has in those contexts. (6) Any term not addressed by previous provisions of this Rule shall be interpreted as having its ordinary-language meaning. This rule takes precedence over any other rules which dictate terminology or grammar. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Regularity of communication being essential for the healthy function of any nomic, it is hereby resolved: (1) A difference in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the use of a synonym or abbreviation in place of a word or phrase, is inconsequential in all forms of communication, as long as the difference does not create an ambiguity in meaning. (2) A term explicitly defined by the Rules shall be interpreted as having that meaning, as shall its ordinary-language synonyms not explicitly defined by the rules. (3) Any term primarily used in mathematical or legal contexts, and not addressed by previous provisions of this Rule, shall be interpreted as having the meaning it has in those contexts. (4) Any term not addressed by previous provisions of this Rule shall be interpreted as having its ordinary-language meaning. This rule takes precedence over any other rules which dictate terminology or grammar. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5038 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: Regularity of communication being essential for the healthy function of any nomic, it is hereby resolved: (1) A difference in spelling, grammar, or dialect, or the use of a synonym or abbreviation in place of a word or phrase, is inconsequential in all forms of communication, as long as the difference does not create an ambiguity in meaning. (2) A term explicitly defined by the Rules by default has that meaning, as do its ordinary-language synonyms not explicitly defined by the rules. (3) Any term primarily used in mathematical or legal contexts, and not addressed by previous provisions of this Rule, by default has the meaning it has in those contexts. (4) Any term not addressed by previous provisions of this Rule by default has its ordinary-language meaning. This rule takes precedence over any other rules which dictate terminology or grammar. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 436 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 436 history: ... [orphaned text: The Winner is the first Voter to achieve 200 (positive) Points. If more than one Voter achieves this condition simultaneously, all such Voters win. When a Game ends in this manner: -If there is only one Winner, that Voter becomes the Mighty Speaker and the old Venerated Speaker becomes a Voter. -If there is more than one Winner, the Voter with the highest Point total becomes the new Benevolent Speaker. If more than one Voter is tied for the highest score, the Diligent Speaker randomly selects one of them to become the new Overworked Speaker. The old Honored Speaker becomes a voter. -All Players' scores are reset to 0. -A new Game is begun. All Rules and proposed Rule Changes retain the status they had at the end of the old Game. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 450,1011 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 450 by Proposal 450 (Alexx), 10 September 1993 text: Any Entity which is created by the Nomic Rules, and which exists only within the context of the current Game of Nomic, such as Points, Votes, etc. may *not* be changed by any action other than those specified by the Rules. history: Amended by Proposal 1011, 5 September 1994 text: Any Entity which is created by the Nomic Rules, and which exists only within the context of Agora Nomic (such as Points, Votes, Currencies and any Official Records) may *not* be changed by any action other than those specified by the Rules. No two Nomic Entities (including Players) shall have the same name or nickname. history: Amended by Rule 750, 5 September 1994 text: Any Entity which is created by the Nomic Rules, and which exists only within the context of Agora Nomic (such as Points, Votes, Currencies and any Official Records) may *not* be changed by any action other than those specified by the Rules. No two Nomic Entities (including Players) shall have the same name or nickname. (*Was: 450*) history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=2 by Proposal 1593, 2 June 1995 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: Any Entity which is created by the Nomic Rules, and which exists only within the context of Agora Nomic (such as Points, Votes, Currencies and any Official Records) may *not* be changed by any action other than those specified by the Rules. No two Nomic Entities (including Players) shall have the same name or nickname. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2546, 22 March 1996 text: No property of any entity shall be changed except in accordance with procedures specified by the Rules, when that entity possesses that property solely by the virtue of the Rules defining that property. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2630, 4 July 1996 text: A "Nomic Property" is any property of any entity which that entity possesses solely by the virtue of the Rules defining that property. No Nomic Property shall be changed except in accordance with procedures specified by the Rules. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3900 (Elysion), 6 September 1999 text: A Nomic Property is any property of any entity the value of which is defined by the Rules. Other Rules may define procedures by which the value of a Nomic Property may be changed. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1011 by Proposal 4833 (Maud), 6 August 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 451 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 452 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 452 by Proposal 452, 10 September 1993 text: The Speaker may not use eis knowledge of the current status of a vote on a Proposal in an attempt to influence the result of the Vote on that Proposal. Violations of this Rule shall be considered a Class C Crime. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1446, 21 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1531, 24 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1534, 4 April 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1584, 15 May 1995 text: The Assessor may not use knowledge of the current status of the vote on a Proposal which has come into eir possession because e is the Assessor, in an attempt to influence the result of the vote on that Proposal. If a Call for Judgment alleging a violation of this rule is found to be TRUE, the Assessor violating this rule shall gain three (3) Blots. Reporting this gain to the Tabulator is the responsibility of the Player who called the CFJ. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 1686, 1 September 1995 text: The Assessor may not use knowledge of the current status of the vote on a Proposal which has come into eir possession because e is the Assessor, in an attempt to influence the result of the vote on that Proposal. However, the Assessor may at eir discretion post to the Public Forum a list of all Players who have already voted on a Proposal. If a Call for Judgment alleging a violation of this rule is found to be TRUE, the Assessor violating this rule shall gain three (3) Blots. Reporting this gain to the Tabulator is the responsibility of the Player who called the CFJ. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 1718, 19 September 1995 text: During the prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal, the Assessor may not use knowledge of the current status of the vote on that Proposal which e would not have were e not the Assessor, in an attempt to influence the result of the vote on the Proposal. However, the Assessor may at eir discretion post to the Public Forum a list of all Players who have already voted on the Proposal. If a Call for Judgment alleging a violation of this rule is found to be TRUE, the Assessor violating this rule shall gain three (3) Blots. Reporting this gain to the Tabulator is the responsibility of the Player who called the CFJ. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 1752, 21 October 1995 text: During the prescribed Voting Period of a Proposal, the Assessor is prohibited from making use of any knowledge of the current status of the vote on that Proposal which e would not have were e not the Assessor, in any attempt to influence the result of the vote on the Proposal. Doing so is a Class C Crime. This Rule shall in no way prohibit the Assessor from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Players who have already voted upon a given Proposal. Doing so is not a Crime, unless specified as such by another Rule. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 2588, 1 May 1996 text: For the purposes of this Rule, a Vote Collector is defined as any Player to whom the Rules give the responsibility of tallying votes on a Proposal, Referendum or Election. Hence this Rule explicitly regulates the behaviour of the Assessor with respect to Proposals, and the behaviour of any Player (generally the Registrar or the Speaker) who acts as Vote Collector in an Election or Referendum. During the prescribed Voting Period of a Proposal, Election or Referendum, the Vote Collector is prohibited from making use of any knowledge of the current status of the vote on that Proposal, Election or Referendum which e would not have were e not the Vote Collector, in any attempt to influence the result of the vote on the Proposal, Election or Referendum. Doing so is a Class C Crime. This Rule shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Players who have already voted upon a given Proposal, Election or Referendum. Doing so is not a Crime, unless specified as such by another Rule. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 2771 (elJefe), 19 December 1996 text: For the purposes of this Rule, a Vote Collector is defined as any Player to whom the Rules give the responsibility of tallying votes on a Proposal, Referendum or Election. Hence this Rule explicitly regulates the behaviour of the Assessor with respect to Proposals, and the behaviour of any Player (generally the Registrar or the Speaker) who acts as Vote Collector in an Election or Referendum. During the prescribed Voting Period of a Proposal, Election or Referendum, anyone who has served as Vote Collector for that Proposal, Election, or Referendum is prohibited from making use of any knowledge of the current status of the vote on that Proposal, Election or Referendum which e would not have had e not served as Vote Collector, in any attempt to influence the result of the vote on the Proposal, Election or Referendum. Doing so is a Class C Crime. This Rule shall in no way prevent a player from transferring voting records to the current Vote Collector. Doing so is not a Crime. This Rule shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Players who have already voted upon a given Proposal, Election or Referendum. Doing so is not a Crime, unless specified as such by another Rule. history: Amended(10) Cosmetically by Proposal 2831 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: For the purposes of this Rule, a Vote Collector is defined as any Player to whom the Rules give the responsibility of tallying votes on a Proposal, Referendum or Election. Hence this Rule explicitly regulates the behaviour of the Assessor with respect to Proposals, and the behaviour of any Player (generally the Registrar or the Speaker) who acts as Vote Collector in an Election or Referendum. During the prescribed Voting Period of a Proposal, Election or Referendum, anyone who has served as Vote Collector for that Proposal, Election, or Referendum is prohibited from making use of any knowledge of the current status of the vote on that Proposal, Election or Referendum which e would not have had e not served as Vote Collector, in any attempt to influence the result of the vote on the Proposal, Election or Referendum. Doing so is the Crime of Electioneering, a Class C Crime. This Rule shall in no way prevent a player from transferring voting records to the current Vote Collector. Doing so is not a Crime. This Rule shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Players who have already voted upon a given Proposal, Election or Referendum. Doing so is not a Crime, unless specified as such by another Rule. history: Amended(11) Substantially by Proposal 3519 (Steve), 23 June 1997 text: For the purposes of this Rule, a Vote Collector is defined as any Player to whom the Rules give the responsibility of tallying votes on a Proposal, Referendum or Election. Hence this Rule explicitly regulates the behaviour of the Assessor with respect to Proposals, and the behaviour of any Player (generally the Registrar or the Speaker) who acts as Vote Collector in an Election or Referendum. During the prescribed Voting Period of a Proposal, Election or Referendum, anyone who has served as Vote Collector for that Proposal, Election, or Referendum is prohibited from making use of any knowledge of the current status of the vote on that Proposal, Election or Referendum which e would not have had e not served as Vote Collector, in any attempt to influence the result of the vote on the Proposal, Election or Referendum. Doing so is the Crime of Electioneering, a Class C Crime. This Rule shall in no way prevent a player from transferring voting records to the current Vote Collector. Doing so is not a Crime. This Rule shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Voting Entities which have already voted or declared that they are Present on a given Proposal, Election or Referendum, as long as e does not indicate specifically whether the Voting Entity has voted or declared Presence. Doing so is not a Crime, unless specified as such by another Rule. history: Amended(12) Substantially by Proposal 3610 (Steve), 9 December 1997 text: For the purposes of this Rule, a Vote Collector is defined as any Player to whom the Rules give the responsibility of tallying votes on a Proposal, Referendum or Election. Hence this Rule explicitly regulates the behaviour of the Assessor with respect to Proposals, and the behaviour of any Player (generally the Registrar or the Speaker) who acts as Vote Collector in an Election or Referendum. During the prescribed Voting Period of a Proposal, Election or Referendum, anyone who has served as Vote Collector for that Proposal, Election, or Referendum is prohibited from making use of any knowledge of the current status of the vote on that Proposal, Election or Referendum which e would not have had e not served as Vote Collector, in any attempt to influence the result of the vote on the Proposal, Election or Referendum. Doing so is the Crime of Electioneering, a Class C Crime. This Rule shall in no way prevent a player from transferring voting records to the current Vote Collector. Doing so is not a Crime. This Rule shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Voting Entities which have already voted or declared that they are Present on a given Proposal, Election or Referendum. If a vote or declaration of Presence has already appeared in the Public Forum prior to the publication of such a list, then the Vote Collector is permitted to indicate how the Voting Entity has voted, or whether it has declared itself Present. Otherwise, the Vote Collector is prohibited from specifically indicating whether the Voting Entity has voted, or declared Presence. The publication of a list as described in this Rule is not a Crime, unless specified as such by another Rule. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 3758 (Steve), 19 June 1998 text: For the purposes of this Rule, a Vote Collector is defined as any Player to whom the Rules give the responsibility of tallying votes on a Proposal, Referendum or Election. Hence this Rule explicitly regulates the behaviour of the Assessor with respect to Proposals, and the behaviour of any Player (generally the Registrar or the Speaker) who acts as Vote Collector in an Election or Referendum. During the prescribed Voting Period of a Proposal, Election or Referendum, anyone who has served as Vote Collector for that Proposal, Election, or Referendum is prohibited from making use of any knowledge of the current status of the vote on that Proposal, Election or Referendum which e would not have had e not served as Vote Collector, in any attempt to influence the result of the vote on the Proposal, Election or Referendum. Doing so is the Crime of Electioneering, a Class C Crime. This Rule shall in no way prevent a player from transferring voting records to the current Vote Collector. Doing so is not a Crime. This Rule shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Voting Entities which have already voted or declared that they are Present on a given Proposal, Election or Referendum. If a vote or declaration of Presence has already appeared in the Public Forum prior to the publication of such a list, then the Vote Collector is permitted to indicate how the Voting Entity has voted, or whether it has declared itself Present. Otherwise, the Vote Collector is prohibited from specifically indicating whether the Voting Entity has voted, or declared Presence. The publication of a list as described in this Rule is not a Crime, unless specified as such by another Rule. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, has no effect. Two months after this paragraph is added to this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(14) by Rule 452, 19 August 1998 text: For the purposes of this Rule, a Vote Collector is defined as any Player to whom the Rules give the responsibility of tallying votes on a Proposal, Referendum or Election. Hence this Rule explicitly regulates the behaviour of the Assessor with respect to Proposals, and the behaviour of any Player (generally the Registrar or the Speaker) who acts as Vote Collector in an Election or Referendum. During the prescribed Voting Period of a Proposal, Election or Referendum, anyone who has served as Vote Collector for that Proposal, Election, or Referendum is prohibited from making use of any knowledge of the current status of the vote on that Proposal, Election or Referendum which e would not have had e not served as Vote Collector, in any attempt to influence the result of the vote on the Proposal, Election or Referendum. Doing so is the Crime of Electioneering, a Class C Crime. This Rule shall in no way prevent a player from transferring voting records to the current Vote Collector. Doing so is not a Crime. This Rule shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Voting Entities which have already voted or declared that they are Present on a given Proposal, Election or Referendum. If a vote or declaration of Presence has already appeared in the Public Forum prior to the publication of such a list, then the Vote Collector is permitted to indicate how the Voting Entity has voted, or whether it has declared itself Present. Otherwise, the Vote Collector is prohibited from specifically indicating whether the Voting Entity has voted, or declared Presence. The publication of a list as described in this Rule is not a Crime, unless specified as such by another Rule. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, has no effect. Two months after this paragraph is added to this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, has no effect. Two months after this paragraph is added to this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 452 by Proposal 3785 (Steve), 2 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 454,884 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 454 history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 884 (Ian), 13 April 1994 text: All Proposals must declare what effect that Proposal will have on the Rule Set. If said Proposal has a Title, this Declaration shall appear on the line immediately below that Title. In any case, the Declaration shall appear in parentheses. A Player who submits a proposal which does not include a Declaration, as described here and in other legislation, shall be guilty of a Class C Crime. Any Player who submits a proposal which includes a Declaration that has not been approved by legislation shall be guilty of a Class A Crime. The Declarations shall be as follows: (Creates a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes a new Rule to come into existance. (Amends a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes an existing Rule to change wording or form. (Repeals a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes an existing Rule to cease to exist. (Transmutes a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes a Mutable Rule to become Immutable, or vice versa. (Other) shall be used if no other Declaration has been defined which describes the Proposal. Additional legislation may define additional legal Declarations or change the presentation of the Declaration, but this Rule shall take precedence in all other cases. history: Amended by Rule 750, 13 April 1994 text: All Proposals must declare what effect that Proposal will have on the Rule Set. If said Proposal has a Title, this Declaration shall appear on the line immediately below that Title. In any case, the Declaration shall appear in parentheses. A Player who submits a proposal which does not include a Declaration, as described here and in other legislation, shall be guilty of a Class C Crime. Any Player who submits a proposal which includes a Declaration that has not been approved by legislation shall be guilty of a Class A Crime. The Declarations shall be as follows: (Creates a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes a new Rule to come into existance. (Amends a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes an existing Rule to change wording or form. (Repeals a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes an existing Rule to cease to exist. (Transmutes a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes a Mutable Rule to become Immutable, or vice versa. (Other) shall be used if no other Declaration has been defined which describes the Proposal. Additional legislation may define additional legal Declarations or change the presentation of the Declaration, but this Rule shall take precedence in all other cases. (*Was: 454*) history: ... [orphaned text: All Proposals must declare what effect that Proposal will have on the Rule Set. If said Proposal has a Title, this Declaration shall appear on the line immediately below that Title. In any case, the Declaration shall appear in parentheses. The Declarations shall be as follows: (Creates a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes a new Rule to come into existance. (Amends a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes an existing Rule to change wording or form. (Repeals a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes an existing Rule to cease to exist. (Transmutes a Rule) shall be used if the Proposal causes a Mutable Rule to become Immutable, or vice versa. (Other) shall be used if no other Declaration has been defined which describes the Proposal. Additional legislation may define additional legal Declarations or change the presentation of the Declaration, but this Rule shall take precedence in all other cases. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 455 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 455 history: ... history: Repealed as Mutable Rule by Proposal 885 (Ian), 13 April 1994 [orphaned text: Any Player who submits a Proposal which does not include a Declaration, as described in other legislation, shall be guilty of a Class C Crime. Any Player who submits a Proposal which includes a Declaration which has not been approved by legislation shall be guilty of a Class A Crime. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 457 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 457 history: ... [orphaned text: If a Player ceases to be the Speaker, and then becomes a Voter, that Player may not Vote on any Proposal whose Voting Period began while that Player was still the Speaker. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which indicates who may or may not Vote. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 459 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 459 by Proposal 459 (Jim Shea), 15 September 1993 text: The Nomic Week begins at midnight, GMT, each Monday. Any automatic change in the state of the Game which must occur weekly occurs at the beginning of the Nomic Week unless otherwise stated in the Rules. Any activity which must occur at least weekly must occur at least once each Nomic Week. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: The Nomic Week begins at midnight, GMT, each Monday. Any automatic change in the state of the Game which must occur weekly occurs at the beginning of the Nomic Week. Any automatic change which must occur monthly occurs at midnight, GMT, on the first of the month. Any automatic change which must occur quarterly occurs at midnight, GMT, on the first day of each calendar quarter. This Rule defers to any Rule that defines another explicit schedule for events. Any activity that must be performed at least weekly, monthly, or quarterly, must occur at least once in the given period. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3950 (harvel), 8 December 1999 text: The Nomic Week begins at midnight, GMT, each Monday. Any automatic change in the state of the Game which must occur weekly occurs at the beginning of the Nomic Week. Any automatic change which must occur monthly occurs at midnight, GMT, on the first of the month. Any automatic change which must occur quarterly occurs at midnight, GMT, on the first day of each calendar quarter. Other Rules may explicitly define alternate schedules for events or classes of events. Any activity that must be performed at least weekly, monthly, or quarterly, must occur at least once in the given period. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4114 (Elysion), 2 March 2001 text: The Nomic Week begins at the midnight, GMT, that begins each Monday. Any automatic change in the state of the Game which must occur weekly occurs at the beginning of the Nomic Week. Any automatic change which must occur monthly occurs at the midnight, GMT, which begins the first day of the month. Any automatic change which must occur quarterly occurs at the midnight, GMT, which begins the first day of each calendar quarter. Other Rules may explicitly define alternate schedules for events or classes of events. Any activity that must be performed at least weekly, monthly, or quarterly, must occur at least once in the given period. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: Weeks, months, quarters and years are epochs. The corresponding Agoran epochs, which constitute the four types of Agoran epochs, are Agoran weeks, Agoran months, Agoran quarters, and Agoran years, respectively. Agoran weeks begin at midnight GMT on Monday. Agoran months begin at midnight GMT on the first day of each Gregorian month. Agoran quarters begin when the Agoran months of January, April, July, and October begin. Agoran years begin when the Agoran month of January begins. An Agoran epoch lasts until the next Agoran epoch of the same type begins. Except in this Rule, when the Rules refer to an epoch, they shall be interpreted to refer to the corresponding Agoran epoch. Automatic events that happen weekly, monthly, quarterly, or yearly happen at the beginning of the corresponding Agoran epoch. Any activity that must be performed weekly, monthly, quarterly, or yearly must be performed at least once during each corresponding Agoran epoch. Other Rules may explicitly define alternate schedules for events or classes of events. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4505 (Murphy), 20 June 2003 text: Days, weeks, months, quarters, and years are epochs. The corresponding Agoran epochs are Agoran days, Agoran weeks, Agoran months, Agoran quarters, and Agoran years, respectively. Agoran days begin at midnight GMT. Agoran weeks begin at midnight GMT on Monday. Agoran months begin at midnight GMT on the first day of each Gregorian month. Agoran quarters begin when the Agoran months of January, April, July, and October begin. Agoran years begin when the Agoran month of January begins. An Agoran epoch lasts until the next Agoran epoch of the same type begins. Except in this Rule, when the Rules refer to an epoch as an independent entity (e.g. "each month"), they shall be interpreted as referring to the corresponding Agoran epoch. However, when the Rules refer to an epoch as a relative duration (e.g. "one month after", "within one month", "for one month"), they shall be interpreted as referring to the ordinary-language meaning of that duration. Automatic events that happen daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, or yearly happen at the beginning of the corresponding Agoran epoch. Any activity that must be performed daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, or yearly must be performed at least once during each corresponding Agoran epoch. Other Rules may explicitly define alternate schedules for events or classes of events. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 459 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 460,1004,1012,1042 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 460 by Proposal 460 (Jim Shea), 15 September 1993 text: A Player not On Hold who fails to post a message to the listserv, cast a Vote, or submit a Proposal or CFJ for 14 consecutive calendar days is deemed to have left the Game and shall be removed from the list of Players. If the former Player re-enters the same Game, it shall be with the same score as when e left and e shall not be considered a new Player. Otherwise, e shall enter on the same terms as a new Player. history: Amended by Proposal 1004, ca. Aug. 25 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Aug. 25 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Proposal 1012, 4 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, 4 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Proposal 1042, 21 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, 21 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1338, 24 November 1994 text: A Voter is deregistered when one of the following conditions applies: (i) E is not On Hold, has not previously asked the Registrar to remain registered, and has not, for 14 consecutive calendar days, either sent a message to the Public Forum, or sent a message to another Player of a kind which the Rules require to be recorded in a Report which becomes publically available. (ii) E is On Hold for a period exceeding 2 months. However, the above conditions do not cause deregistration until the condition which would cause deregistration is brought to the attention of the Registrar in a message to the Public Forum, correctly noting that the Voter is subject to deregistration. The Registrar must publicly verify the correctness of the claim to the best of eir ability, as soon as possible. The Voter is deregistered at the time the message correctly claiming deregistration appears on the Public Forum. If the Registrar does not respond within one Week, then e is considered negligent and the Speaker shall make the verification and announcement instead. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule leaving deregistration of a Player entirely in the hands of that Player. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1466, 1 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1597, 2 June 1995 text: A Voter shall be deregistered when any Player correctly reports to the Public Forum that one of the two conditions exists: a. The Voter in question is not On Hold and has not sent a message to the Public Forum or to any Player of a nature which must be recorded in a Report which then becomes publically available during the fourteen day period immediately preceding the posting of a message which announces that fact, or b. The Voter in question has been On Hold for the entire two month period immediately preceding the posting of a message which annnounces that fact. Upon the posting of any such message, the Registrar, or, in eir absence, the Speaker, shall, as soon as possible, determine if the claim is correct or not, and announce eir determinations to the Public Forum. If the Registrar fails to make a report within seven days, the Speaker shall make the required verification and announcement instead. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which might prevent a Player from being deregistered against eir own will. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2506, 3 March 1996 text: A Voter shall be deregistered when any Player correctly reports to the Public Forum that one of the two conditions exists: a. The Voter in question is not On Hold and has not sent a message to the Public Forum or to any Player of a nature which must be recorded in a Report which then becomes publically available during the fourteen day period immediately preceding the posting of a message which announces that fact, or b. The Voter in question has been On Hold for the entire two month period immediately preceding the posting of a message which announces that fact. Upon the posting of any such message, the Registrar, or, in eir absence, the Speaker, shall, as soon as possible, determine if the claim is correct or not, and announce eir determinations to the Public Forum. If the Registrar fails to make a report within seven days, the Speaker shall make the required verification and announcement instead. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which might prevent a Player from being deregistered against eir own will. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2568, 12 April 1996 text: A Player is Absent if either of the following is true: * e is not On Hold and, for the period of fourteen days immediately preceding, has neither sent a message to the Public Forum, nor sent, to any other Player, a message of a nature such the Rules required the receiving Player to record the receipt of the message; or * e is presently on Hold and has been On Hold without interruption for the entire period of sixty days immediately preceding. An Absent Voter is deregistered when any other Player correctly alleges the Absence of that Player in an announcement to the Public Forum. Whenever a Player publically alleges the Absence of a Voter, the Registrar shall determine the correctness of the allegation (unless the Voter alleged to be absent is the Registrar, in which case the Speaker shall do so), and announce that determination as soon as possible. However, the failure of the Registrar (or Speaker, as appropriate) to post a timely determination does not in any way invalidate the deregistration of a Voter correctly alleged to be Absent. This Rule in no way precludes a Player from being deregistered by other means, and takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent a Player from being deregistered by this Rule. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3522 (Zefram), 23 June 1997 text: Each Player is exactly one of Not Absent, Maybe Absent, Absent or Abandoning. Whenever a Player posts to the Public Forum, or a new Player registers, e becomes Not Absent. If a Player posts to the Public Forum clearly identifying a particular Active Player, and alleging that that Player has Abandoned the game, then the Player alleged to have Abandoned becomes Maybe Absent. If a Player has been Maybe Absent continuously for two weeks, e becomes Absent. If a Player has been On Hold continuously for sixty days, e becomes Absent. Any Player can cause any Absent Player to become Abandoning by stating that e is doing so in the Public Forum. If the Speaker ever becomes Abandoning, e commits the Class A Crime of Speaker Abandonment, e ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker. If any Player becomes Abandoning, e is deregistered, and the Registrar shall As Soon As Possible announce such in the Public Forum. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3578 (Steve), 6 November 1997 text: Each Player is either Noisy, Quiet or Silent. Whenever a Player posts to the Public Forum, or a new Player registers, that Player is Noisy. Any Player can cause another Active Noisy Player to become Quiet by stating that e is doing so, and clearly identifying that Player, in the Public Forum. If a Player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks, e becomes Silent. If a Player has been Inactive continuously for two months, e becomes Silent. Any Player can cause a Silent Player to be deregistered by stating in the Public Forum that the Silent Player has Abandoned the game. If the Speaker is Silent, and it is alleged in the Public Forum that e has Abandoned the Game, e commits the Class A Crime of Speaker Abandonment. E ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker. E is then deregistered. In either case, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after an allegation in the Public Forum that a Player has Abandoned the game, confirm or deny in the Public Forum that the deregistration has actually occurred. The Registrar shall include in eir Report the most recent date on which each Player changed from being Noisy, Quiet or Silent to any of the others. history: Infected and Amended(8) Substantially by Rule 1454, 23 December 1997 text: Each Player is either Noisy, Quiet or Silent. Whenever a Player posts to the Public Forum, or a new Player registers, that Player is Noisy. Any Player can cause another Active Noisy Player to become Quiet by stating that e is doing so, and clearly identifying that Player, in the Public Forum. If a Player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks, e becomes Silent. If a Player has been Inactive continuously for two months, e becomes Silent. Any Player can cause a Silent Player to be deregistered by stating in the Public Forum that the Silent Player has Abandoned the game. If the Speaker is Silent, and it is alleged in the Public Forum that e has Abandoned the Game, e commits the Class A Crime of Speaker Abandonment. E ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker. E is then deregistered. In either case, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after an allegation in the Public Forum that a Player has Abandoned the game, confirm or deny in the Public Forum that the deregistration has actually occurred. The Registrar shall include in eir Report the most recent date on which each Player changed from being Noisy, Quiet or Silent to any of the others. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(9) by Rule 1042, 6 January 1998 text: Each Player is either Noisy, Quiet or Silent. Whenever a Player posts to the Public Forum, or a new Player registers, that Player is Noisy. Any Player can cause another Active Noisy Player to become Quiet by stating that e is doing so, and clearly identifying that Player, in the Public Forum. If a Player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks, e becomes Silent. If a Player has been Inactive continuously for two months, e becomes Silent. Any Player can cause a Silent Player to be deregistered by stating in the Public Forum that the Silent Player has Abandoned the game. If the Speaker is Silent, and it is alleged in the Public Forum that e has Abandoned the Game, e commits the Class A Crime of Speaker Abandonment. E ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker. E is then deregistered. In either case, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after an allegation in the Public Forum that a Player has Abandoned the game, confirm or deny in the Public Forum that the deregistration has actually occurred. The Registrar shall include in eir Report the most recent date on which each Player changed from being Noisy, Quiet or Silent to any of the others. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3853 (Blob), 19 April 1999 text: Each Player is either Noisy, Quiet or Silent. Whenever a Player posts to the Public Forum, or a new Player registers, that Player is Noisy. Any Player can cause another Active Noisy Player to become Quiet by stating that e is doing so, and clearly identifying that Player, in the Public Forum. If a Player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks, e becomes Silent. If a Player has been Inactive continuously for two months, e becomes Silent. Any Player can cause a Silent Player to become a Zombie by stating in the Public Forum that the Silent Player has Abandoned the game. If the Speaker is Silent, and it is alleged in the Public Forum that e has Abandoned the Game, e commits the Class A Crime of Speaker Abandonment. E ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker. E then becomes a Zombie. In either case, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after an allegation in the Public Forum that a Player has Abandoned the game, confirm or deny in the Public Forum that the Player has become a Zombie. The Registrar shall include in eir Report the most recent date on which each Player changed from being Noisy, Quiet or Silent to any of the others. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: Each Player is either Noisy, Quiet or Silent. Whenever a Player posts to the Public Forum, or a new Player registers, that Player is Noisy. Any Player can cause another Active Noisy Player to become Quiet by stating that e is doing so, and clearly identifying that Player, in the Public Forum. If a Player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks, e becomes Silent. If a Player has been Inactive continuously for two months, e becomes Silent. Any Player can cause a Silent Player to become a Zombie by stating in the Public Forum that the Silent Player has Abandoned the game. If the Speaker is Silent, and it is alleged in the Public Forum that e has Abandoned the Game, e commits the Class 20 Crime of Speaker Abandonment. E ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker. E then becomes a Zombie. In either case, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after an allegation in the Public Forum that a Player has Abandoned the game, confirm or deny in the Public Forum that the Player has become a Zombie. The Registrar shall include in eir Report the most recent date on which each Player changed from being Noisy, Quiet or Silent to any of the others. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3990, "Harsher Blot Penalties", (Elysion), 30 March 2000 text: Each Player is either Noisy, Quiet or Silent. Whenever a Player posts to the Public Forum, or a new Player registers, that Player is Noisy. Any Player can cause another Active Noisy Player to become Quiet by stating that e is doing so, and clearly identifying that Player, in the Public Forum. If a Player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks, e becomes Silent. If a Player has been Inactive continuously for two months, e becomes Silent. Any Player can cause a Silent Player to become a Zombie by stating in the Public Forum that the Silent Player has Abandoned the game. If the Speaker is Silent, and it is alleged in the Public Forum that e has Abandoned the Game, e commits the Class 15 Crime of Speaker Abandonment. E ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker. E then becomes a Zombie. In either case, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after an allegation in the Public Forum that a Player has Abandoned the game, confirm or deny in the Public Forum that the Player has become a Zombie. The Registrar shall include in eir Report the most recent date on which each Player changed from being Noisy, Quiet or Silent to any of the others. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4133 (Tim), 5 April 2001 text: Each Player is either Noisy, Quiet or Silent. Whenever a Player posts to the Public Forum, or a new Player registers, that Player is Noisy. Any Player who has not caused another Player to become Quiet within the last 24 hours can cause another Active Noisy Player to become Quiet by stating that e is doing so, and clearly identifying that Player, in the Public Forum. If a Player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks, e becomes Silent. If a Player has been Inactive continuously for two months, e becomes Silent. Any Player can cause a Silent Player to become a Zombie by stating in the Public Forum that the Silent Player has Abandoned the game. If the Speaker is Silent, and it is alleged in the Public Forum that e has Abandoned the Game, e commits the Class 15 Crime of Speaker Abandonment. E ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker. E then becomes a Zombie. In either case, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after an allegation in the Public Forum that a Player has Abandoned the game, confirm or deny in the Public Forum that the Player has become a Zombie. The Registrar shall include in eir Report the most recent date on which each Player changed from being Noisy, Quiet or Silent to any of the others. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: Each Player is either Noisy, Quiet or Silent. Whenever a Player posts to the Public Forum, or a new Player registers, that Player is Noisy. Any Player can cause another Active Noisy Player to become Quiet by stating publicly that e is doing so, and clearly identifying that Player. If a Player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks, e becomes Silent. If a Player has been Inactive continuously for two months, e becomes Silent. Any Player can cause a Silent Player to become a Zombie by stating publicly that the Silent Player has Abandoned the game. If the Speaker is Silent, and it is alleged publicly that e has Abandoned the Game, e commits the Class 15 Crime of Speaker Abandonment. E ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker. E then becomes a Zombie. In either case, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after an public allegation that a Player has Abandoned the game, confirm or deny publicly that the Player has become a Zombie. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4154 (harvel), 18 May 2001 text: Each Player is always Noisy, Quiet, or Silent, but never more than one of these. Whenever a Player posts to a Public Forum, or a new Player registers, that Player is Noisy. Any Player who has not caused another Player to become Quiet within the last 24 hours can cause another Active Noisy Player to become Quiet by stating that e is doing so, and clearly identifying that Player, in a Public Forum. If a Player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks, e becomes Silent. If a Player has been Inactive continuously for two months, e becomes Silent. Any Player can make a Silent Player a Zombie by publicly alleging that the Silent Player has abandoned the game. A Player has abandoned the game if and only if e is Silent. As soon as possible after a public allegation that a Player has abandoned the game, the Registrar shall publicly confirm or deny that the Player is a Zombie. If a Speaker has abandoned the game, e commits the Class 15 Crime of Speaker Abandonment, to be detected and reported by any Player. E ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker. The previous Speaker then becomes a Zombie. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 text: Each player is always Noisy, Quiet, or Silent, but never more than one of these. Whenever a player registers or posts to a public forum, that player is Noisy. A player who has not within the most recent 24 hours caused another player to become Quiet may cause another Active Noisy player to become Quiet by sending a message to a public forum in which e identifies the player and states that e causes that player to become Quiet. Whenever a player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks or has been Inactive continuously for two months, e becomes Silent. Any player may publicly allege that some other player has abandoned the game. A player has abandoned the game if and only if e is Silent. As soon as possible after a public allegation that a player has abandoned the game, the Registrar shall publicly confirm or deny the allegation. If the allegation is confirmed, then the following events shall occur in order: (i) if the Silent player is the Speaker, e commits the Class 15 Crime of Speaker Abandonment and ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker; (ii) the Silent player is deregistered. The Silent player shall be deemed to have been deregistered as of the timestamp of the message from the Registrar confirming the allegation. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: Each player is always Noisy, Quiet, or Silent, but never more than one of these. Whenever a player registers or posts to a public forum, that player is Noisy. A player who has not within the most recent 24 hours caused another player to become Quiet may cause another Active Noisy player to become Quiet by sending a message to a public forum in which e identifies the player and states that e causes that player to become Quiet. Whenever a player has been Quiet continuously for two weeks, Inactive continuously for two months, or Frozen continuously for two years, e becomes Silent. Any player may publicly allege that some other player has abandoned the game. A player has abandoned the game if and only if e is Silent. As soon as possible after a public allegation that a player has abandoned the game, the Registrar shall publicly confirm or deny the allegation. If the allegation is confirmed, then the following events shall occur in order: (i) if the Silent player is the Speaker, e commits the Class 15 Crime of Speaker Abandonment and ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker; (ii) the Silent player is deregistered. The Silent player shall be deemed to have been deregistered as of the timestamp of the message from the Registrar confirming the allegation. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4407 (Steve), 30 October 2002 text: (a) Each player is always noisy, quiet, or silent, but never more than one of these. Whenever a player registers or posts to a public forum, that player is noisy. (b) A player who has not quietened another player in the past 24 hours may do so by publically identifying the player and stating that e causes that player to become quiet. (c) If a player has been quiet continuously for one month, or inactive continuously for three months, e becomes silent. (d) Any player may publish a Notice of Abandonment, identifying another player and alleging that that player has abandoned the game. A Notice of Abandonment is or becomes invalid if the player identified in it is not, or ceases to be, silent. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 4424 (Steve), 16 December 2002 text: (a) Each player is always noisy, quiet, or silent, but never more than one of these. Whenever a player registers or posts to a public forum, that player is noisy. (b) A player who has not quietened another active, noisy player in the past 24 hours may cause another active, noisy player to become quiet by publically identifying the player and stating that e causes that player to become quiet. (c) If a player has been quiet continuously for one month, or inactive continuously for three months, e becomes silent. (d) Any player may publish a Notice of Abandonment, identifying another player and alleging that that player has abandoned the game. A Notice of Abandonment is or becomes invalid if the player identified in it is not, or ceases to be, silent. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 4523 (Murphy), 28 August 2003 text: Noisiness is a stuck player switch with values noisy, quiet, and silent. A non-noisy player becomes noisy whenever e posts to a public forum. A player may flip another player's noisiness from noisy to quiet, unless e has done so for another player within the past 24 hours. If a player has been quiet continuously for one month, or inactive continuously for three months, e becomes silent. Any player may publish a Notice of Abandonment, identifying another player and alleging that that player has abandoned the game. A Notice of Abandonment is or becomes invalid if the player identified in it is not, or ceases to be, silent. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 4758 (Quazie), 15 May 2005 text: Noisiness is a stuck player switch with values noisy, quiet, and silent. A non-noisy player becomes noisy whenever e posts to a public forum. An active player may flip another active player's noisiness from noisy to quiet, unless e has done so for another player within the past 24 hours. If a player has been quiet continuously for one month, or inactive continuously for three months, e becomes silent. Any player may publish a Notice of Abandonment, identifying another player and alleging that that player has abandoned the game. A Notice of Abandonment is or becomes invalid if the player identified in it is not, or ceases to be, silent. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 4791 (Quazie), 6 June 2005 text: Noisiness is a stuck player switch with values noisy, quiet, and silent. The noisiness of an active player may not be changed if e has posted to a public forum in the past 120 hours. A non-noisy player becomes noisy whenever e posts to a public forum. An active player may flip another active player's noisiness from noisy to quiet, unless e has done so for another player within the past 24 hours. If a player has been quiet continuously for one month, or inactive continuously for three months, e becomes silent. Any player may publish a Notice of Abandonment, identifying another player and alleging that that player has abandoned the game. A Notice of Abandonment is or becomes invalid if the player identified in it is not, or ceases to be, silent. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1042 by Proposal 4820 (Goethe), 10 July 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 462,957 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 462 by Proposal 462, 17 September 1993 text: Any Vote of YES shall be treated as a Vote of FOR. Any Vote of NO shall be treated as a Vote of AGAINST. history: Amended by Proposal 957 (Garth), 25 July 1994 text: Votes of FOR or YES are to be considered Votes in favor of a Proposal. Votes of AGAINST or NO are to be considered Votes opposed to a Proposal. Other Votes are not to be considered as in favor or opposition. history: Amended by Rule 750, 25 July 1994 text: Votes of FOR or YES are to be considered Votes in favor of a Proposal. Votes of AGAINST or NO are to be considered Votes opposed to a Proposal. Other Votes are not to be considered as in favor or opposition. (*Was: 462*) history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 463,925 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 463 history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 925 (Stella?), 27 June 1994 text: At least once in any seven day period, the designated scorekeeper shall distribute the scores of all Players, updated at least up to and including the previous complete Nomic Week. If a Player feels that the posted scores are in error, e shall send a public message pointing out the error. If the Scorekeepor agrees e shall correct the error and send out the corrected score report within 72 hours. If the Scorekeepor disagrees or does not correct the error, the Player who pointed out the error, may make a Call for Judgement, stating the error and its correction. If the resulting Judgement is TRUE, then -the Scorekeepor shall correct the error and send out the corrected score report within 72 hours; -the Scorekeepor shall not receive eis salary in the Nomic week following the Judgment of the CFJ. If no errors are pointed out in this way within seven days of the posting of the scores, then those scores shall be considered to be the accurate and actual scores for the Game. history: Amended by Rule 750, 27 June 1994 text: At least once in any seven day period, the designated scorekeeper shall distribute the scores of all Players, updated at least up to and including the previous complete Nomic Week. If a Player feels that the posted scores are in error, e shall send a public message pointing out the error. If the Scorekeepor agrees e shall correct the error and send out the corrected score report within 72 hours. If the Scorekeepor disagrees or does not correct the error, the Player who pointed out the error, may make a Call for Judgement, stating the error and its correction. If the resulting Judgement is TRUE, then -the Scorekeepor shall correct the error and send out the corrected score report within 72 hours; -the Scorekeepor shall not receive eis salary in the Nomic week following the Judgment of the CFJ. If no errors are pointed out in this way within seven days of the posting of the scores, then those scores shall be considered to be the accurate and actual scores for the Game. (*Was: 463*) history: ... [orphaned text: At least once in any seven day period, the designated scorekeeper shall send the current scores of all Players to all Players, making eir best efforts to determine the correct scores. If a Player feels that the posted scores are in error, e may make a Call for Judgement, stating what e believes to be the correct scores. If the resulting Judgement is TRUE, then the scores shall be adjusted to the scores set forth in the Call for Judgement, modified further by any score changes which took place since the time the Call for Judgement was made. If such a Call for Judgement is not made within seven days of the posting of the scores, then those scores shall be considered to be the accurate and actual scores for the Game. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 468 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 468 history: ... [orphaned text: Penal system framework: There shall be several classes of Crimes, including Class A, Class B, Class C, and Class D. Each of these aforementioned Classes is more vile than the last, with Class A being the least vile and Class D being the most vile. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 470 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 470 history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 470 by Proposal 673 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 474,1043 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 474 by Proposal 474 (Alexx), 17 September 1993 text: A player may not be deregistered from the game, except by that player (or the Registrar, as specified elsewhere) announcing that he forfeits. When a player forfeits, he remains registered for a length of time equal to the longest possible voting period on a proposal. At the end of this time, he is deregistered. During the time between forfeiting and being deregistered, the player may not vote or make a proposal. The player automatically refuses any selection for judgement, or any other voluntary appointed duties. If, at any time during this period, the player announces that they have changed their mind about forfeiting, then these restrictions are instantly revoked, and the deregistration does not take place. history: Amended by Proposal 1043, 21 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, 21 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1305, 4 November 1994 text: A Voter may deregister from Agora by sending a message to the Public Forum announcing eir deregistration. A Voter who deregisters in this fashion ceases to be a Player effective at the time date-stamped on that message, and e may not reregister as a Player until a new Game has begun. Other Rules may define other conditions under which Voters may be deregistered. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2599, 11 May 1996 text: A Voter may deregister from Agora by sending a message to the Public Forum announcing eir deregistration. A Voter who deregisters in this fashion ceases to be a Player effective at the time date-stamped on that message, and any attempts by em to reregister before a new Game has begun are without effect; this Rule takes precedence over Rules which would cause em to be reregistered before a new Game has begun. Other Rules may define other conditions under which Voters may be deregistered. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: A Voter may deregister from Agora by sending a message to the Public Forum announcing eir deregistration. A Voter who deregisters in this fashion ceases to be a Player effective at the time date-stamped on that message, and any attempts by em to reregister before the beginning of the next month are without effect; this Rule takes precedence over Rules which would cause em to be reregistered before the beginning of the next month. Other Rules may define other conditions under which Voters may be deregistered. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3829 (Steve), 8 February 1999 text: A Player other than the Speaker may deregister from Agora by sending a message to the Public Forum announcing eir deregistration. A Player who deregisters in this fashion ceases to be a Player effective at the time date-stamped on that message, and any attempts by em to reregister before thirty days have passed are without effect. This Rule takes precedence over Rules which would cause em to be reregistered before thirty days have passed after eir deregistration. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: A Player other than the Speaker may deregister from Agora by sending a public message announcing eir deregistration. A Player who deregisters in this fashion ceases to be a Player effective at the time date-stamped on that message, and any attempts by em to reregister before thirty days have passed are without effect. This Rule takes precedence over Rules which would cause em to be reregistered before thirty days have passed after eir deregistration. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1043 by Proposal 4833 (Maud), 6 August 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 478 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 478 by Proposal 478 (Jim Shea), 20 September 1993 text: The Public Forum is hereby defined as any medium by which one player sends or posts a message which, to the best of the sender's intent, knowledge, belief, and ability, is simultaneously sent to all active players and accurately dated to within 5 minutes. The terms "listserv" and "listserver" are synonymous with "Public Forum". history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1477, 8 March 1995 text: The Public Forum is any medium defined by the Distributor as such. If a Rule requires that a message is send to the Public Forum, then a message send to all Active Players fulfills this requirement as well" history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1576, 28 April 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1610, 10 July 1995 text: The Public Forum is any medium defined by the Distributor as such. If a Rule requires that a message is send to the Public Forum, then a message send to all Active Players fulfills this requirement as well. The Distributor may only define a medium to be the Public Forum, if to the best of eis knowledge and in normal circumstances messages posted to it are received by all Players. Subscription may be necessary to be able to receive the Public Forum, in which case such a subscription is mandatory to all Players. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1700, 1 September 1995 text: The Public Forum is any medium defined by the Distributor as such. If a Rule requires that a message is send to the Public Forum, then a message send to all Active Players fulfills this requirement as well. The Distributor may only define a medium to be the Public Forum, if to the best of eir knowledge and in normal circumstances messages posted to it are received by all Players. Subscription may be necessary to be able to receive the Public Forum, in which case such a subscription is mandatory to all Players. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2052, 19 December 1995 text: The Public Forum is any medium defined by the Distributor as such. If a Rule requires that a message is sent to the Public Forum, then a message send to all Active Players fulfills this requirement as well. The Distributor may only define a medium to be the Public Forum, if to the best of eir knowledge and in normal circumstances messages posted to it are received by all Players. It is the Player's responsibility to receive all media which comprise the Public Forum. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2400, 20 January 1996 text: The "Public Forum" is any medium legally designated as such by the Distributor. The Distributor is permitted to designate a medium as a Public Forum only if, to the best of the Distributor's knowledge and under normal circumstances, any message transmitted via that medium will be received by all Players. In addition, sending a message, by any medium or combination of media, to every Active Player, is equivalent to sending it to the Public Forum, provided that the message bears a clear indication that it is intended to be a message to the Public Forum, and it is verifiable that the message was in fact sent to every Active Player. It is the responsibility of each Active Player to ensure that e is able to receive messages sent to every medium which the Distributor has designated as a Public Forum. The temporary inability of a Player to receive a Public Forum does not deprive that medium of any legal significance as a Public Forum. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 2739 (Swann), 7 November 1996 text: The "Public Forum" is any medium legally designated as such by the Registrar. The Registrar is permitted to designate a medium as a Public Forum only if, to the best of the Registrar's knowledge and under normal circumstances, any message transmitted via that medium will be received by all Players. In addition, sending a message, by any medium or combination of media, to every Active Player, is equivalent to sending it to the Public Forum, provided that the message bears a clear indication that it is intended to be a message to the Public Forum, and it is verifiable that the message was in fact sent to every Active Player. It is the responsibility of each Active Player to ensure that e is able to receive messages sent to every medium which the Registrar has designated as a Public Forum. The temporary inability of a Player to receive a Public Forum does not deprive that medium of any legal significance as a Public Forum. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 2791 (Andre), 30 January 1997 text: The "Public Forum" is any medium legally designated as such by the Registrar. The Registrar is permitted to designate a medium as a Public Forum only if, to the best of the Registrar's knowledge and under normal circumstances, any message transmitted via that medium will be received by all Players. It is the responsibility of each Active Player to ensure that e is able to receive messages sent to every medium which the Registrar has designated as a Public Forum. The temporary inability of a Player to receive a Public Forum does not deprive that medium of any legal significance as a Public Forum. Sending a message, by any medium or combination of media, to every Active Player, is equivalent to sending it to the Public Forum, provided that the message bears a clear indication that it is intended to be a message to the Public Forum, and it is verifiable that the message was in fact sent to every Active Player. Whenever the Rules calls upon some Player to "announce", "post", or "distribute" some communication or notification, this shall be accomplished by posting the communication or notification to the Public Forum, unless another rule specifies otherwise history: Amended(9) Substantially by Proposal 3521 (Chuck), 23 June 1997 text: Whether a given medium is a Public Forum or not is a Nomic Property. The Registrar is authorized to change whether a given medium is a Public Forum or not Without Objection. When such a change is made, in order to be effective, the message annoucing the change must be sent to both a medium that was a Public Forum before the change, and a medium that is a Public Forum after the change. (If a single medium is a Public Forum both before and after the change, a single message to that medium satisfies this requirement.) It is the responsibility of each Active Player to ensure that e is able to receive messages sent to every medium which the Registrar has designated as a Public Forum. The temporary inability of a Player to receive a Public Forum does not deprive that medium of any legal significance as a Public Forum. Sending a message, by any medium or combination of media, to every Active Player, is equivalent to sending it to the Public Forum, provided that the message bears a clear indication that it is intended to be a message to the Public Forum, and it is verifiable that the message was in fact sent to every Active Player. Whenever the Rules calls upon some Player to "announce", "post", or "distribute" some communication or notification, this shall be accomplished by posting the communication or notification to the Public Forum, unless another rule specifies otherwise history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3823 (oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Whether a given medium is a Public Forum or not is a Nomic Property. The Registrar is authorized to change whether a given medium is a Public Forum or not Without Objection. When such a change is made, in order to be effective, the message announcing the change must be sent to both a medium that was a Public Forum before the change, and a medium that is a Public Forum after the change. (If a single medium is a Public Forum both before and after the change, a single message to that medium satisfies this requirement.) It is the responsibility of each Active Player to ensure that e is able to receive messages sent to every medium which the Registrar has designated as a Public Forum. The temporary inability of a Player to receive a Public Forum does not deprive that medium of any legal significance as a Public Forum. Sending a message, by any medium or combination of media, to every Active Player, is equivalent to sending it to the Public Forum, provided that the message bears a clear indication that it is intended to be a message to the Public Forum, and it is verifiable that the message was in fact sent to every Active Player. Whenever the Rules call upon some Player to "announce", "post", or "distribute" some communication or notification, this shall be accomplished by posting the communication or notification to the Public Forum, unless another rule specifies otherwise. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: A Public Forum is a medium of communication so designated by the Registrar. Sending a message to a Public Forum shall be considered the equivalent of sending that message to all Players. A Discussion Forum is a medium of communication so designated by the Registrar. A Discussion Forum shall never be a Public Forum and messages sent to a Discussion Forum are never considered to have been sent to all Players. The Registrar may designate a given medium of communication to be (or cease to be) a Public Forum or a Discussion Forum Without Objection. An announcement of such a designation shall be made via the medium whose designation is being changed. Any designation of a medium as a Public Forum shall also be announced via all existing Public Fora in addition to any other requirements. It is the responsibility of every Active Player to ensure that e is able to receive messages via each and every Public Forum. Any inability of a Player to receive messages via a particular Public Forum does not deprive that medium of its legal status as a Public Forum. Players are in no way required to receive messages via any particular Discussion Forum. The Registrar shall include as part of eir Report all media which are currently Public or Discussion Fora and sufficient data regarding each medium to allow new Players to receive messages via that medium. Any communication which has been sent via a Public Forum shall be considered to have been made publicly. Any communication which has been sent to all Players via some other medium, or combination of mediums, shall be considered to have been made publicly, provided it contains some clear designation that it is intended to be public. If the Rules require a Player to publish certain information, then e is considered to have satisfied that requirement at the time e publicly sends a message containing the information e is required to publish. If the Rules require a Player to announce certain information, that announcement must be made publicly. text: Whether a given medium is a Public Forum or not is a Nomic Property. The Registrar is authorized to change whether a given medium is a Public Forum or not Without Objection. When such a change is made, in order to be effective, the message announcing the change must be sent to both a medium that was a Public Forum before the change, and a medium that is a Public Forum after the change. (If a single medium is a Public Forum both before and after the change, a single message to that medium satisfies this requirement.) It is the responsibility of each Active Player to ensure that e is able to receive messages sent to every medium which the Registrar has designated as a Public Forum. The temporary inability of a Player to receive a Public Forum does not deprive that medium of any legal significance as a Public Forum. Sending a message, by any medium or combination of media, to every Active Player, is equivalent to sending it to the Public Forum, provided that the message bears a clear indication that it is intended to be a message to the Public Forum, and it is verifiable that the message was in fact sent to every Active Player. Whenever a Player is required to make any communication publicly, this shall be accomplished by sending that communication to a Public Forum. Whenever the Rules require a Player to "announce" something, said announcement shall be made publicly. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4248 (Murphy), 19 February 2002 text: A Public Forum is a medium of communication so designated by the Registrar. Sending a message to a Public Forum shall be considered the equivalent of sending that message to all Players. A Discussion Forum is a medium of communication so designated by the Registrar. A Discussion Forum shall never be a Public Forum, and a message is not considered to have been sent to all Players solely because it was sent to a Discussion Forum. The Registrar may designate a given medium of communication to be (or cease to be) a Public Forum or a Discussion Forum Without Objection. An announcement of such a designation shall be made via the medium whose designation is being changed. Any designation of a medium as a Public Forum shall also be announced via all existing Public Fora in addition to any other requirements. It is the responsibility of every Active Player to ensure that e is able to receive messages via each and every Public Forum. Any inability of a Player to receive messages via a particular Public Forum does not deprive that medium of its legal status as a Public Forum. Players are in no way required to receive messages via any particular Discussion Forum. The Registrar shall include as part of eir Report all media which are currently Public or Discussion Fora and sufficient data regarding each medium to allow new Players to receive messages via that medium. Any communication which has been sent via a Public Forum shall be considered to have been made publicly. Any communication which has been sent to all Players via some other medium, or combination of mediums, shall be considered to have been made publicly, provided it contains some clear designation that it is intended to be public. If the Rules require a Player to publish certain information, then e is considered to have satisfied that requirement at the time e publicly sends a message containing the information e is required to publish. If the Rules require a Player to announce certain information, that announcement must be made publicly. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4456 (Maud), 22 February 2003 text: Publicity is a stuck forum switch with values null, Discussion, and Public. The Registrar may, without objection, flip the publicity of a forum. In addition to any other requirements the rules place on this action, the Registrar's announcement of intent must be sent to that forum, and if the forum is being made Public, then the announcement by which the Registrar performs the modification must be sent to all existing Public fora. It is the responsibility of each active player to ensure that e can receive messages via each Public forum. The Registrar shall include as part of eir Report all Public or Discussion fora and sufficient data regarding each such forum to allow players to receive messages via that medium. The Registrar need not keep track of fora with null state. A message is not public unless some rule states that it is public. A message is public if it is sent via a Public forum, or if it is sent to all players via a combination of fora and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A player publishes information by publicly sending a message containing that information, and announces something by publishing it. If the rules state that a player may perform an action by announcement, then that player may perform that action by announcing that e performs it. If the rules state that a player may perform an action by private message to some player, then that player may perform that action by sending a message privately to the specified player indicating that e performs it. In either case, such a message must unambiguously describe the action to be performed. history: Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4690 (root), 18 April 2005 history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4690 (root), 18 April 2005 text: Publicity is a stuck forum switch with values null, Discussion, and Public. A forum's Publicity may not be changed except as described in this rule. The Registrar may, without objection, flip the publicity of a forum. In addition to any other requirements the rules place on this action, the Registrar's announcement of intent must be sent to that forum, and if the forum is being made Public, then the announcement by which the Registrar performs the modification must be sent to all existing Public fora. It is the responsibility of each active player to ensure that e can receive messages via each Public forum. The Registrar shall include as part of eir Report all Public or Discussion fora and sufficient data regarding each such forum to allow players to receive messages via that medium. The Registrar need not keep track of fora with null state. A message is not public unless some rule states that it is public. A message is public if it is sent via a Public forum, or if it is sent to all players via a combination of fora and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A player publishes information by publicly sending a message containing that information, and announces something by publishing it. If the rules state that a player may perform an action by announcement, then that player may perform that action by announcing that e performs it. If the rules state that a player may perform an action by private message to some player, then that player may perform that action by sending a message privately to the specified player indicating that e performs it. In either case, such a message must unambiguously describe the action to be performed. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4833 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: Publicity is a stuck forum switch with values null, Discussion, and Public. A forum's publicity may not be changed except as described in this rule. The Registrar may flip the publicity of a forum without objection as long as: (a) e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and (b) if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which the Registrar makes that forum public is sent to all existing public fora. Each active player should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum. The Registrar's report shall include a list of all public or discussion fora and sufficient data regarding each to allow players to receive messages via that medium. The Registrar need not keep track of null fora. A message is public if and only if it is sent via a public forum or is sent to all players and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A player "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message. A player performs an action "by announcement" by announcing that e performs it. A player performs an action "by private message" to some player by sending an appropriate private message to the specified player. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved that No Player shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora. A Forum's Publicity may be either null, Discussion, or Public (default null). A forum's publicity may not be changed except as described in this rule. The Herald may change the publicity of a forum without objection as long as: (a) e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and (b) if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which the Herald makes that forum public is sent to all existing public fora. Each active player should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum. The Herald's report shall include a list of all public or discussion fora and sufficient data regarding each to allow players to receive messages via that medium. The Herald need not keep track of null fora. A message is public if and only if it is sent via a public forum or is sent to all players and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A player "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message. A player performs an action "by announcement" by announcing that e performs it. A player performs an action "by private message" to some player by sending an appropriate private message to the specified player. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4939 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved that No Player shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora. A Forum's Publicity may be either null, Discussion, or Public (default null). A forum's publicity may not be changed except as described in this rule. The Registrar may change the publicity of a forum without objection as long as: (a) e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and (b) if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which the Registrar makes that forum public is sent to all existing public fora. Each active player should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum. A message is public if and only if it is sent via a public forum or is sent to all players and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A player "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message. A player performs an action "by announcement" by announcing that e performs it. A player performs an action "by private message" to some player by sending an appropriate private message to the specified player. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5014 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 text: Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved that No Player shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora. A Forum's Publicity may be either null, Discussion, or Public (default null). A forum's publicity may not be changed except as described in this rule. The Registrar may change the publicity of a forum without objection as long as: (a) e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and (b) if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which the Registrar makes that forum public is sent to all existing public fora. Each active player should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum. A message is public if and only if it is sent via a public forum or is sent to all players and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A player "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message. A player performs an action "by announcement" by announcing that e performs it. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5111 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved that No Player shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora. Publicity is a forum switch with values Public, Discussion, and Null (default), tracked by the Registrar. The Registrar may change the publicity of a forum without objection as long as: (a) e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and (b) if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which the Registrar makes that forum public is sent to all existing public fora. Each active player should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum. A message is public if and only if it is sent via a public forum or is sent to all players and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A player "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message. A player performs an action "by announcement" by announcing that e performs it. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5172 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 text: Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved that No Player shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora. Publicity is a forum switch with values Public, Discussion, and Null (default), tracked by the Registrar. The Registrar's report includes, for each forum with non-null publicity, sufficient instructions for players to receive messages there. The Registrar may change the publicity of a forum without objection as long as: (a) e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and (b) if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which the Registrar makes that forum public is sent to all existing public fora. Each active player should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum. A message is public if and only if it is sent via a public forum or is sent to all players and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A player "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message. A player performs an action "by announcement" by announcing that e performs it. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5272 (Murphy; disi.), 7 November 2007 text: Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved that No Player shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora. Publicity is a forum switch with values Public, Discussion, and Foreign (default), tracked by the Registrar. The Registrar's report includes, for each forum with non-Foreign publicity, sufficient instructions for players to receive messages there. The Registrar may change the publicity of a forum without objection as long as: (a) e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and (b) if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which the Registrar makes that forum public is sent to all existing public fora. Each active player should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum. A message is public if and only if it is sent via a public forum or is sent to all players and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A player "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message. A player performs an action "by announcement" by announcing that e performs it. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5291 (root), 14 November 2007 text: Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved that No Player shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora. Publicity is a forum switch with values Public, Discussion, and Foreign (default), tracked by the Registrar. The Registrar's report includes, for each forum with non-Foreign publicity, sufficient instructions for players to receive messages there. The Registrar may change the publicity of a forum without objection as long as: (a) e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and (b) if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which the Registrar makes that forum public is sent to all existing public fora. Each active player should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum. A message is public if and only if it is sent via a public forum or is sent to all players and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A player "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message. Where the rules define an action that CAN be performed "by announcement", a player performs that action by announcing that e performs it. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5535 (Murphy), 7 June 2008 text: Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved that No Player shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora. Publicity is a forum switch with values Public, Discussion, and Foreign (default), tracked by the Registrar. The Registrar's report includes, for each forum with non-Foreign publicity, sufficient instructions for players to receive messages there. The Registrar may change the publicity of a forum without objection as long as: (a) e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and (b) if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which the Registrar makes that forum public is sent to all existing public fora. Each active player should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum. A message is public if and only if it is sent via a public forum or is sent to all players and contains a clear designation of intent to be public. A person "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message. Where the rules define an action that CAN be performed "by announcement", a person performs that action by announcing that e performs it. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 482,698 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 482 by Proposal 482 (Alexx), 30 September 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Proposal 698 (Wes), 12 November 1993 text: If there are no other Players Eligible to be chosen as Judge for a certain Statement, then a randomly selected Player shall be chosen to be Eligible to act as Judge. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules pertaining to the selection of Judges. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1385, 17 January 1995 text: If there are no other Players Eligible to be chosen as Judge for a certain Statement, then the CotC shall choose a Player randomly from among all Active Players other than the Caller and those Players Barred from judging the CFJ, to be Eligible to act as Judge. If there are no Active Players other than the Caller and those Players Barred from judging the CFJ, then the CotC shall choose a Player randomly from among all players other than the Caller and those Players Barred from judging the CFJ, to be Eligible to act as Judge. If there are no Players other than the caller and those Player Barred from judging the CFJ, then the CotC shall choose a Player randomly from among all Players, to be Eligible to act as Judge. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules pertaining to the selection of Judges. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1734, 15 October 1995 text: If there are no other Players Eligible to be chosen as Judge for a certain Statement, then the CotC shall choose a Player randomly from among all Active Players other than the Caller and those Players Barred from judging the CFJ, to be Eligible to act as Judge. If there are no Active Players other than the Caller and those Players Barred from judging the CFJ, then the CotC shall choose a Player randomly from among all players other than the Caller and those Players Barred from judging the CFJ, to be Eligible to act as Judge. If there are no Players other than the caller and those Players Barred from judging the CFJ, then the CotC shall choose a Player randomly from among all Players, to be Eligible to act as Judge. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules pertaining to the selection of Judges. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2457, 26 February 1996 text: Every Active Player is eligible to Judge a a given CFJ unless specifically made ineligible by some Rule. The Caller of a given CFJ is never eligible to Judge that CFJ. If there would otherwise be no Players eligible to Judge a CFJ, then all Active Players, excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible, any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to Judge, then all Players (Active or not), excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to Judge, then all Players, excluding the Caller, shall be eligible. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule or combination of Rules which would result in there being no Players eligible to Judge a given CFJ. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3821 (Blob), 12 January 1999 text: Every Active Player is eligible to Judge a a given CFJ unless specifically made ineligible by some Rule. The Caller of a given CFJ is never eligible to Judge that CFJ. If, after taking all other rules affecting eligibility into account, there are no Players eligible to Judge a CFJ, then all Active Players, excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible, any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to Judge, then all Players (Active or not), excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to Judge, then all Players, excluding the Caller, shall be eligible. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule or combination of Rules which would result in there being no Players eligible to Judge a given CFJ. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Every Active Player is eligible to Judge a given CFJ unless specifically made ineligible by some Rule. The Caller of a given CFJ is never eligible to Judge that CFJ. If, after taking all other rules affecting eligibility into account, there are no Players eligible to Judge a CFJ, then all Active Players, excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible, any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to Judge, then all Players (Active or not), excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to Judge, then all Players, excluding the Caller, shall be eligible. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule or combination of Rules which would result in there being no Players eligible to Judge a given CFJ. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4155 (harvel), 18 May 2001 text: Every Active Player is eligible to judge a given Call for Judgement (CFJ) unless specifically made ineligible by some Rule. Whenever a Player becomes subject to a Grace Period, e becomes ineligible to judge CFJs. The Caller of a given CFJ is never eligible to judge that CFJ. If, after taking all other Rules affecting eligibility into account, there are no Players eligible to judge a CFJ, then all Active Players, excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible, any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to judge, then all Players (Active or not), excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to judge, then all Players, excluding the Caller, shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to judge, and the Caller is a Player, then the Caller shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to judge, then the Caller has happened across an Agora without any Players. The Rules suggest that the Caller try calling at a later date. This Rule can require On Hold Players to perform actions. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule or combination of Rules which would result in there being no Players eligible to Judge a given CFJs. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4178 (root), 7 July 2001 text: Every Active Player is eligible to judge a given Call for Judgement (CFJ) unless specifically made ineligible by some Rule. Whenever a Player becomes subject to a Grace Period, e shall be considered to have made emself ineligible to judge CFJs, as described in other Rules. The Caller of a given CFJ is never eligible to judge that CFJ. If, after taking all other Rules affecting eligibility into account, there are no Players eligible to judge a CFJ, then all Active Players, excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible, any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to judge, then all Players (Active or not), excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to judge, then all Players, excluding the Caller, shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to judge, and the Caller is a Player, then the Caller shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any Players eligible to judge, then the Caller has happened across an Agora without any Players. The Rules suggest that the Caller try calling at a later date. This Rule can require On Hold Players to perform actions. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule or combination of Rules which would result in there being no Players eligible to Judge a given CFJs. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: Every Active Player is eligible to judge a given Call for Judgement (CFJ) unless specifically made ineligible by some Rule. Whenever a Player becomes subject to a Grace Period, e shall be considered to have made emself ineligible to judge CFJs, as described in other Rules. The Caller of a given CFJ is never eligible to judge that CFJ. If, after taking all other Rules affecting eligibility into account, there are no Players eligible to judge a CFJ, then all Active Players, excluding the Caller and those Players Barred by the Caller, shall be eligible, any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. If this still does not result in there being any players eligible to judge, then all non-frozen players, excluding the Caller and those players barred by the Caller, shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any players eligible to judge, then all non-frozen players, excluding the Caller, shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any players eligible to judge, and the Caller is a player, then the Caller shall be eligible. If this still does not result in there being any players eligible to judge, then the Caller has happened across an Agora that is a generational ship whose members are in suspended animation. The Rules suggest that the Caller try calling when we arrive at our destination and begin to thaw out. This Rule can require On Hold Players to perform actions. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule or combination of Rules which would result in there being no Players eligible to Judge a given CFJs. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: Each Active Player is eligible to Judge a given CFJ, unless a Rule specifically makes em ineligible. If the Clerk of the Courts is required to select a Judge, but - after taking all other Rules affecting eligibility into account - no Player is eligible to Judge that CFJ, then: a) All Active non-Barred Players become eligible to Judge that CFJ. b) If there is still no eligible Judge, then all non-frozen non-Barred Players become eligible to Judge that CFJ. c) If there is still no eligible Judge, then all non-frozen Players Barred by the Caller become eligible to Judge that CFJ. d) If there is still no eligible Judge, then all non-frozen Barred Players, other than the Caller emself, become eligible to Judge that CFJ. e) If there is still no eligible Judge, then the Caller has happened upon a generational ship whose members are in suspended animation. The Rules suggest that the Caller try calling when we arrive at our destination and thaw out. This Rule can require Inactive Players to perform actions. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4385 (Steve), 17 September 2002 text: Each Active Player is eligible to Judge a given CFJ, unless a Rule specifically makes em ineligible. Non-active Players are ineligible to Judge CFJs. If the Clerk of the Courts is required to select a Judge, but - after taking all other Rules affecting eligibility into account - no Player is eligible to Judge that CFJ, then: a) All Active non-Barred Players become eligible to Judge that CFJ. b) If there is still no eligible Judge, then all non-frozen non-Barred Players become eligible to Judge that CFJ. c) If there is still no eligible Judge, then all non-frozen Players Barred by the Caller become eligible to Judge that CFJ. d) If there is still no eligible Judge, then all non-frozen Barred Players, other than the Caller emself, become eligible to Judge that CFJ. e) If there is still no eligible Judge, then the Caller has happened upon a generational ship whose members are in suspended animation. The Rules suggest that the Caller try calling when we arrive at our destination and thaw out. This Rule can require Inactive Players to perform actions. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4424 (Steve), 16 December 2002 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: (a) Each active player is eligible to judge a given CFJ, unless a rule specifically makes em ineligible. Inactive players are ineligible to judge CFJs. (b) If the Clerk of the Courts is required to select a Judge, but after taking all other rules affecting eligibility into account, no player is eligible to judge that CFJ, then: (1) All active non-barred players become eligible to judge that CFJ. (2) If there is still no player eligible to judge, then all active barred players, other than the caller emself, become eligible to judge that CFJ. (3) If there is still no eligible Judge, then the game is in serious trouble. My usual advice in such situations is to panic, and run screaming for the hills. (c) This Rule takes precedence over other Rules concerning who is and is not eligible to judge CFJs. text: (a) Each active player is eligible to judge a given CFJ, unless a rule specifically makes em ineligible. Inactive players are ineligible to judge CFJs. (b) If the Clerk of the Courts is required to select a Judge, but after taking all other rules affecting eligibility into account, no player is eligible to judge that CFJ, then: (1) All active non-barred players become eligible to judge that CFJ. (2) If there is still no player eligible to judge, then all active barred players, other than the caller emself, become eligible to judge that CFJ. (3) If there is still no eligible Judge, then the game is in serious trouble. My usual advice in such situations is to panic, and run screaming for the hills. (c) This Rule takes precedence over other Rules concerning who is and is not eligible to judge CFJs. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: (a) Each active player is eligible to judge a given Call for Judgement (CFJ), unless a rule specifically makes em ineligible. A player who is inactive, unready, or silent is ineligible to judge CFJs. (b) If the Clerk of the Courts is required to select a Judge, but after taking all other rules affecting eligibility into account, no player is eligible to judge that CFJ, then: (1) all ready, active, non-barred, non-silent players become eligible to judge that CFJ; then (2) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then all ready, active, barred, non-silent players, other than the caller emself, become eligible to judge that CFJ; (3) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then all active, non-silent players, other than the caller emself, become eligible to judge that increasingly annoying CFJ; (4) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then don't panic. Somebody's bound to register someday; let em deal with it. (c) This rule takes precedence over other rules concerning who is and is not eligible to judge CFJs. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4820 (Goethe), 10 July 2005 text: (a) Each active player is eligible to judge a given Call for Judgement (CFJ), unless a rule specifically makes em ineligible. A player who is inactive, unready, or is ineligible to judge CFJs. (b) If the Clerk of the Courts is required to select a Judge, but after taking all other rules affecting eligibility into account, no player is eligible to judge that CFJ, then: (1) all ready, active, non-barred, players become eligible to judge that CFJ; then (2) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then all ready, active, barred, players, other than the caller emself, become eligible to judge that CFJ; (3) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then all active, players, other than the caller emself, become eligible to judge that increasingly annoying CFJ; (4) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then don't panic. Somebody's bound to register someday; let em deal with it. (c) This rule takes precedence over other rules concerning who is and is not eligible to judge CFJs. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4835 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: (a) Each active player is eligible to judge a given Call for Judgement (CFJ), unless a rule specifically makes em ineligible. A player who is inactive or unready is ineligible to judge CFJs. (b) If the Clerk of the Courts is required to select a Judge, but after taking all other rules affecting eligibility into account, no player is eligible to judge that CFJ, then: (1) all ready, active, non-barred players become eligible to judge that CFJ; then (2) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then all ready, active, barred players, other than the caller emself, become eligible to judge that CFJ; (3) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then all active, players other than the caller emself, become eligible to judge that increasingly annoying CFJ; (4) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then don't panic. Somebody's bound to register someday; let em deal with it. (c) This rule takes precedence over other rules concerning who is and is not eligible to judge CFJs. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: (a) Each active player is eligible to judge a given Call for Judgement (CFJ), unless a rule specifically makes em ineligible. (b) If the Clerk of the Courts is required to select a Judge, but after taking all other rules affecting eligibility into account, no player is eligible to judge that CFJ, then: (1) all non-barred players become eligible to judge that CFJ; then (2) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then all barred players, other than the caller emself, become eligible to judge that increasingly annoying CFJ; then (3) if there is still no player eligible to judge, then don't panic. Somebody's bound to register someday; let em deal with it. (c) This rule takes precedence over other rules concerning who is and is not eligible to judge CFJs. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 698 by Proposal 5069 (Zefram), 11 July 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 488,1064 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 488 by Proposal 488 (Alexx), 29 September 1993 text: If an officer is mandated to maintain a set of records, then unless those records are explicitly stated in the rules to be private, then they must be available for public perusal. If a player asks the officer for a copy of any or all of those records, the officer must comply as soon as he reasonably can. For an officer not to respond to a publically-stated request for a copy of the records in his keeping within 7 days is a Class B crime. history: Amended by Proposal 1064, ca. Oct. 11 1994 text: If an Officer is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for public perusal, unless such records are designated by the Rules as private. An Officer who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records to any other Player upon request within one week, or pay a penalty to the Point Reserve equal to three times eir weekly Salary, or 10 points, whichever is greater. The penalty does not apply if the Records are unavailable for reasons beyond the Officer's control and the Officer reports this fact, with explanation, within one week. For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under consideration, are designated as private until the end of the Voting Period. The Speaker shall, within the context of this Rule, be treated exactly as if e were an Officer. history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Oct. 11 1994 text: If an Officer is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for public perusal, unless such records are designated by the Rules as private. An Officer who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records to any other Player upon request within one week, or pay a penalty to the Point Reserve equal to three times eir weekly Salary, or 10 points, whichever is greater. The penalty does not apply if the Records are unavailable for reasons beyond the Officer's control and the Officer reports this fact, with explanation, within one week. For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under consideration, are designated as private until the end of the Voting Period. The Speaker shall, within the context of this Rule, be treated exactly as if e were an Officer. (*Was: 488*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1344, 29 November 1994 text: If an Officer is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for public perusal, unless such records are designated by the Rules as private. An Officer who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records to any other Player upon request within one week. If e fails to so provide a copy of the requested records within one week, e shall lose a number of Points equal to three times eir weekly Salary, or 10 points, whichever is greater. The penalty does not apply if the Records are unavailable for reasons beyond the Officer's control and the Officer reports this fact, with explanation, within one week. For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under consideration, are designated as private until the end of the Voting Period. The Speaker shall, within the context of this Rule, be treated exactly as if e were an Officer. (*Was: 488*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1672, 22 August 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1682, 22 August 1995 text: If a Player is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for public perusal, unless such records are designated by the Rules as private. A Player who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records to any other Player upon request within one week. If e fails to so provide a copy of the requested records within one week, e commits a Class D Crime, unless the Records are unavailable for reasons beyond eir control and e reports this fact, with explanation, within one week. For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under consideration, are designated as private until the end of the Voting Period. (*Was: 488*) history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: If a Player is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for public perusal, unless such records are designated by the Rules as private. A Player who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records to any other Player upon request within one week. If e fails to so provide a copy of the requested records within one week, e commits a Class D Crime, unless the Records are unavailable for reasons beyond eir control and e reports this fact, with explanation, within one week. For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under consideration, are designated as private until the end of the Voting Period. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2631, 4 July 1996 text: If a Player is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for public perusal, unless such records are designated by the Rules as private. A Player who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records to any other Player upon request within one week. If e fails to so provide a copy of the requested records within one week, e commits Unlawful Nondisclosure, a Class D Crime, unless the Records are unavailable for reasons beyond eir control and e reports this fact, with explanation, within one week. For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under consideration, are designated as private until the end of the Voting Period. history: Infected and Amended(6) by Rule 1454, 7 September 1996 text: If a Player is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for public perusal, unless such records are designated by the Rules as private. A Player who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records to any other Player upon request within one week. If e fails to so provide a copy of the requested records within one week, e commits Unlawful Nondisclosure, a Class D Crime, unless the Records are unavailable for reasons beyond eir control and e reports this fact, with explanation, within one week. For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under consideration, are designated as private until the end of the Voting Period. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: If a Player is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for public perusal, unless such records are designated by the Rules as private. A Player who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records to any other Player upon request within one week. If e fails to so provide a copy of the requested records within one week, e commits Unlawful Nondisclosure, a Class D Crime, unless the Records are unavailable for reasons beyond eir control and e reports this fact, with explanation, within one week. For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under consideration, are designated as private until the end of the Voting Period. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: If a Player is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for public perusal, unless such records are designated by the Rules as private. A Player who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records to any other Player upon request within one week. If e fails to so provide a copy of the requested records within one week, e commits Unlawful Nondisclosure, a Class 2 Crime, unless the Records are unavailable for reasons beyond eir control and e reports this fact, with explanation, within one week. For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under consideration, are designated as private until the end of the Voting Period. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: If a Player is mandated by the Rules to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for perusal, unless such records are designated by the Rules as private. A Player who maintains such records must provide a copy of these Records to any other Player upon request within one week. If e fails to so provide a copy of the requested records within one week, e commits Unlawful Nondisclosure, a Class 2 Crime, unless the Records are unavailable for reasons beyond eir control and e reports this fact, with explanation, within one week. For the purpose of this Rule, all records pertaining to Votes currently in progress, excluding the text of the Proposals under consideration, are designated as private until the end of the Voting Period. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1064 by Proposal 4759 (Manu, Sherlock), 15 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 493,901 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 493 history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 901 (KoJen), 22 April 1994 text: There shall exist an Office known as Scorekeepor. The Scorekeepor is responsible for maintaining a list of the Point Scores of all current Players and other Game Entities, making such a list available on request as well as posting it at least once a Week, and for notifying Players in the event of a Win on Points. E must abide by all Rules governing Scoring, but in cases where the Rules are unclear or contradictory is to use eir best judgement in determining Scores. The Scorekeepor is chiefly a tabulator of Point changes posted by others. E is only Legally Responsible for tabulating those classes of Point changes where Rules specifically bestow Legal Responsibility upon the Scorekeepor. history: Amended by Rule 750, 22 April 1994 text: There shall exist an Office known as Scorekeepor. The Scorekeepor is responsible for maintaining a list of the Point Scores of all current Players and other Game Entities, making such a list available on request as well as posting it at least once a Week, and for notifying Players in the event of a Win on Points. E must abide by all Rules governing Scoring, but in cases where the Rules are unclear or contradictory is to use eir best judgement in determining Scores. The Scorekeepor is chiefly a tabulator of Point changes posted by others. E is only Legally Responsible for tabulating those classes of Point changes where Rules specifically bestow Legal Responsibility upon the Scorekeepor. (*Was: 493*) history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1328, 22 November 1994 text: There shall exist an Office known as Scorekeepor. The Scorekeepor is responsible for maintaining a list of the Point Scores of all current Players and other Game Entities, making such a list available on request as well as posting it to the Public Forum at least once a Week, and for notifying Players in the event of a Win on Points. E must abide by all Rules governing Scoring, but in cases where the Rules are unclear or contradictory is to use eir best judgement in determining Scores. The Scorekeepor is chiefly a tabulator of Point changes posted by others. E is only Legally Responsible for tabulating those classes of Point changes where Rules specifically bestow Legal Responsibility upon the Scorekeepor. (*Was: 493*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: There shall be an Office called the Scorekeepor. The Scorekeepor shall, in addition to eir other duties, detect and report as soon as possible whenever a Player has Won the Game due to a Win by Points. The Salary of the Scorekeepor shall be 5 Points per Week. history: Null-Amended(3) by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: There shall be an Office called the Scorekeepor. The Scorekeepor shall, in addition to eir other duties, detect and report as soon as possible whenever a Player has Won the Game due to a Win by Points. The Salary of the Scorekeepor shall be 5 Points per Week. history: ... [orphaned text: There shall exist an Office known as Scorekeeper. The Scorekeeper is responsible for maintaining a list of the scores of all current players, making such a list available on request, and for notifying players in the event of a win on points. He must abide by all rules governing scoring, but in cases where the rules are unclear or contradictory is to use his best judgement in determining scores. Salary: The salary of the Scorekeeper is two points per week. Initial officeholder: On passage of this proposal the Mighty Speaker becomes Scorekeeper. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 498,869 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 498 by Proposal 498 (Alexx), 30 September 1993 text: A player is any person who is registered as a player. No person may register as a player more than once concurrently. Anyone is allowed to observe the game and participate in discussion of any issue, but no person who is not a player may take official Nomic actions or interact in any way with any entities which are created by the Rules of Nomic and which do not exist outside of Nomic. history: Amended by Proposal 869 (Garth), 4 April 1994 text: A Player is any person who is registered as a Player. No person may be registered as a Player more than once concurrently. history: Amended by Rule 750, 4 April 1994 text: A Player is any person who is registered as a Player. No person may be registered as a Player more than once concurrently. (*Was: 498*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1313, 12 November 1994 text: A Player is any person who is registered as a Player. No person may be registered as a Player more than once concurrently. If a Player has to be identified for whatever purpose, then the use of that Player's Agora nickname is prefered, but not obligatory: *any* unambiguous way of identification is allowed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1437, 21 February 1995 text: A Player is any person who is registered as a Player. Registration occurs when a person who is not a Player sends a message to the Public Forum requesting to be Registered. No person may be registered as a Player more than once concurrently. If a Player has to be identified for whatever purpose, then the use of that Player's Agora nickname is preferred, but not obligatory: *any* unambiguous way of identification is allowed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2040, 11 December 1995 text: A Player is any person who is registered as a Player. A person is Registered to play when e sends a message to the Public Forum requesting Registration, unless another Rule forbids that person from Registering. No person may be registered as a Player more than once concurrently. If a Player has to be identified for whatever purpose, then the use of that Player's Agora nickname is preferred, but not obligatory: *any* unambiguous way of identification is allowed. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2599, 11 May 1996 text: A Player is any person who is registered as a Player. A person is Registered to play when e sends a message to the Public Forum requesting Registration; this Rule defers to Rules which would prevent such a Registration. No person may be registered as a Player more than once concurrently. If a Player has to be identified for whatever purpose, then the use of that Player's Agora nickname is preferred, but not obligatory: *any* unambiguous way of identification is allowed. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2718, 23 October 1996 text: A Player is any person who is registered as a Player. A person is Registered to play when e sends a message to the Public Forum requesting Registration; this Rule defers to Rules which would prevent such a Registration. If a Player has to be identified for whatever purpose, then the use of that Player's Agora nickname is preferred, but not obligatory: *any* unambiguous way of identification is allowed. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), 11 May 1997 text: A Player is any person who is registered as a Player. A person is Registered to play when e sends a message to the Public Forum requesting Registration; this Rule defers to Rules which would prevent such a Registration. If a Player has to be identified for whatever purpose, then the use of that Player's Agora nickname is preferred, but not obligatory: *any* unambiguous way of identification is allowed. When a Player registers, eir Location is the Welcoming Center. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3740 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 May 1998 text: A Player is any person who is registered as a Player. A person is Registered to play when e sends a message to the Public Forum requesting Registration; this Rule defers to Rules which would prevent such a Registration. If a Player has to be identified for whatever purpose, then the use of that Player's Agora nickname is preferred, but not obligatory: *any* unambiguous way of identification is allowed. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3923 (harvel), 10 October 1999 text: Any non-Player person may register by sending a message to a Public Forum requesting registration. The person immediately becomes a registered Player, unless other Rules provide additional necessary conditions for registration which have not been fulfilled. If that person had ever previously been registered as at least one Player (not necessarily concurrently if more than one), then e shall become the Player e had been most recently. A Player may select a nickname for emself at any time by sending a message to that effect to the Public Forum, but e need not do so. A Player should be identified by eir nickname, if e has one. However, any unambiguous method of identification is allowed. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: Any non-Player person may register by sending a message to a Public Forum requesting registration. The person immediately becomes a registered Player, unless other Rules provide additional necessary conditions for registration which have not been fulfilled. If that person had ever previously been registered as at least one Player (not necessarily concurrently if more than one), then e shall become the Player e had been most recently. A Player may select a nickname for emself at any time by sending a public message to that effect, but e need not do so. A Player should be identified by eir nickname, if e has one. However, any unambiguous method of identification is allowed. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: Any non-Player person may register by publicly requesting registration. The person immediately becomes a registered Player, unless other Rules provide additional necessary conditions for registration which have not been fulfilled. If that person had ever previously been registered as at least one Player (not necessarily concurrently if more than one), then e shall become the Player e had been most recently. A Player may select a nickname for emself at any time by sending a public message to that effect, but e need not do so. A Player should be identified by eir nickname, if e has one. However, any unambiguous method of identification is allowed. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4155 (harvel), 18 May 2001 text: Any person who is not registered as a Player may do so by sending a message to a Public Forum stating that e registers as a Player. Unless other Rules provide additional necessary conditions for registration that have not been fulfilled or the Rules otherwise prohibit the person from registering, e immediately becomes a registered Player. Each Player is always either Ready or Unready, but not both. A Player is Ready unless the Rules state otherwise. If a Player is Unready, e may become Ready by announcing that e does so. Whenever a person registers as a Player in Agora, and that person has not been registered as a Player in Agora at any time within the 12 previous months, e becomes Unready and is subject to a Grace Period that begins at the time of eir registration and ends two months afterwards. A Player is only subject to the Grace Period resulting from eir own registration. Whenever a Player's Grace Period ends, e becomes Ready. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4430 (Cecilius), 16 January 2003 text: Any person who is not registered as a Player may do so by sending a message to a Public Forum stating that e registers as a Player. Unless other Rules provide additional necessary conditions for registration that have not been fulfilled or the Rules otherwise prohibit the person from registering, e immediately becomes a registered Player. Each Player is always either Ready or Unready, but not both. A Player is Ready unless the Rules state otherwise. If a Player is Unready, e may become Ready by announcing that e does so. Whenever a person registers as a Player in Agora, and that person has not been registered as a Player in Agora at any time within the 365 previous days, e becomes Unready and is subject to a Grace Period that begins at the time of eir registration and ends sixty days afterwards, unless otherwise provided by this Rule. A Player is only subject to the Grace Period resulting from eir own registration. Whenever: (i) any Holiday occurs completely between the start of any Player's Grace Period and its scheduled conclusion, or (ii) any Player's Grace Period is scheduled to conclude during any Holiday, eir Grace Period shall be extended by a period of time equal in length to that Holiday. For the purposes of determining when a Player's Grace Period is scheduled to conclude, where more than one Holiday falls fully or partially within that Grace Period, the calculation shall be made separately for each Holiday. Whenever a Player's Grace Period concludes, e becomes Ready. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4451 (Cecilius), 22 February 2003 text: Any person who is not registered as a Player may do so by sending a message to a Public Forum stating that e registers as a Player. Unless other Rules provide additional necessary conditions for registration that have not been fulfilled or the Rules otherwise prohibit the person from registering, e immediately becomes a registered Player. Each Player is always either Ready or Unready, but not both. A Player is Ready unless the Rules state otherwise. If a Player is Unready, e may become Ready by announcing that e does so. Whenever a person registers as a Player in Agora, and that person has not been registered as a Player in Agora at any time within the 365 previous days, e becomes Unready and is subject to a Grace Period that begins at the time of eir registration and ends sixty days afterwards, unless otherwise provided by this Rule. A Player is only subject to the Grace Period resulting from eir own registration. Whenever: (i) any Holiday occurs completely between the start of any Player's Grace Period and its scheduled conclusion, or (ii) any Player's Grace Period is scheduled to conclude during any Holiday, eir Grace Period shall be extended by a period of time equal in length to that Holiday. Whenever a Player registers during a Holiday, eir Grace Period shall be extended by a period of time equal to the time which elapses between eir registration and the conclusion of that Holiday, provided that no other Rule extends eir Grace Period by reason of that Holiday. For the purposes of determining when a Player's Grace Period is scheduled to conclude, where more than one Holiday falls fully or partially within that Grace Period, the calculation shall be made separately for each Holiday. Whenever a Player's Grace Period concludes, e becomes Ready. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4523 (Murphy), 28 August 2003 text: Any person who is not registered as a Player may do so by sending a message to a Public Forum stating that e registers as a Player. Unless other Rules provide additional necessary conditions for registration that have not been fulfilled or the Rules otherwise prohibit the person from registering, e immediately becomes a registered Player. Readiness is a stuck player switch with values ready and unready. An unready player may flip eir readiness to ready. Whenever a person registers as a Player in Agora, and that person has not been registered as a Player in Agora at any time within the 365 previous days, e becomes Unready and is subject to a Grace Period that begins at the time of eir registration and ends sixty days afterwards, unless otherwise provided by this Rule. A Player is only subject to the Grace Period resulting from eir own registration. Whenever: (i) any Holiday occurs completely between the start of any Player's Grace Period and its scheduled conclusion, or (ii) any Player's Grace Period is scheduled to conclude during any Holiday, eir Grace Period shall be extended by a period of time equal in length to that Holiday. Whenever a Player registers during a Holiday, eir Grace Period shall be extended by a period of time equal to the time which elapses between eir registration and the conclusion of that Holiday, provided that no other Rule extends eir Grace Period by reason of that Holiday. For the purposes of determining when a Player's Grace Period is scheduled to conclude, where more than one Holiday falls fully or partially within that Grace Period, the calculation shall be made separately for each Holiday. Whenever a Player's Grace Period concludes, e becomes Ready. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4693 (Maud), 18 April 2005 text: Any person who is not registered as a player may do so by sending a message to a public forum announcing that e registers as a player. Unless other rules provide additional necessary conditions for registration that have not been fulfilled or the rules otherwise prohibit the person from registering, e immediately becomes a registered player. Readiness is a stuck player switch with values ready and unready. An unready player may flip eir readiness to ready. Whenever a player registers, and that player has not previously been registered as a player in Agora at any time within the 365 previous days, e becomes unready and is subject to a Grace Period that begins at the time of eir registration and lasts sixty days, not including Holidays. A player is only subject to the Grace Period resulting from eir own registration. Whenever a Player's Grace Period concludes, e becomes Ready. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4802 (Maud), 15 June 2005 text: A person who is not currently registered as a player and is not prohibited from registering may become a registered player by sending a message to a public forum which sets forth eir intent to register. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4833 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: A person who is not currently registered as a player and is not prohibited from registering is permitted to register. A person registers or deregisters by announcement. Whenever a person registers, e becomes a player. Whenever a player deregisters or is deregistered, e ceases to be a player and is prohibited from registering for the next thirty days. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4989 (Zefram), 6 June 2007 text: A person who is not currently registered as a player and is not prohibited from registering is permitted to register. A person registers or deregisters by announcement. Whenever a person registers, e becomes a player. Whenever a player deregisters or is deregistered, e ceases to be a player and is prohibited from registering for the next thirty days. A player who is not a person and has never been a natural person can be deregistered by any player by announcement. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5007 (Zefram), 18 June 2007 text: A person who is not currently registered as a player and is not prohibited from registering is permitted to register. A person registers or deregisters by announcement. Whenever a person registers, e becomes a player. Whenever a player deregisters or is deregistered, e ceases to be a player and is prohibited from registering for the next thirty days. A player who is not a person and has never been a first-class person can be deregistered by any player by announcement. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5011 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 text: Each entity at any time either is or is not a player. The verb "to be registered" means to become a player, and the verb "to be deregistered" means to cease to be a player. Where the verb "to register" or "to deregister" is used without an explicit direct object, the action is implicitly reflexive. The adjective "registered", or its fuller form "registered as a player", describes those who are players. A person is permitted to register or deregister unless specifically prohibited. A person registers or deregisters by announcement. Whenever a player is deregistered, e is prohibited from registering for the next thirty days. A player who is not a person and has never been a first-class person can be deregistered by any player by announcement. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: Each entity at any time either is or is not a player. The verb "to be registered" means to become a player, and the verb "to be deregistered" means to cease to be a player. Where the verb "to register" or "to deregister" is used without an explicit direct object, the action is implicitly reflexive. The adjective "registered", or its fuller form "registered as a player", describes those who are players. A person is permitted to register or deregister unless specifically prohibited. A person registers or deregisters by announcement. Whenever a player deregisters, e is prohibited from registering for the next thirty days. A player who is not a person and has never been a first-class person can be deregistered by any player by announcement. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5111 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: Citizenship is an entity switch with values Null (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar. A player is an entity whose citizenship is Registered. "To register" and "to become a player" are synonymous with "to flip one's citizenship to Registered"; "to deregister" and "to be deregistered" are synonymous with "to flip the subject's citizenship to Null". A person may register (unless prevented by the rules) by announcing that e registers, wishes to register, requests registration, or requests permission to register. A player may deregister by announcement. E CANNOT register within thirty days after doing so. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5117 (Zefram; disi.), 8 August 2007 text: Citizenship is an entity switch with values Null (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar. A player is an entity whose citizenship is Registered. "To register" and "to become a player" are synonymous with "to flip one's citizenship to Registered"; "to deregister" and "to be deregistered" are synonymous with "to flip the subject's citizenship to Null". A person may register (unless prevented by the rules) by announcing that e registers, wishes to register, requests registration, or requests permission to register. A player may deregister by announcement. E CANNOT register within thirty days after doing so. A player who is not a person and has never been a first-class person can be deregistered by any player by announcement. history: Amended(24) by Proposal 5156 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Citizenship is an entity switch with values Null (default) and Registered, tracked by the registrar. A player is an entity whose citizenship is Registered. The verb "to be registered" means to become a player (i.e., to have one's citizenship changed from Null to Registered), and the verb "to be deregistered" means to cease to be a player (i.e., to have one's citizenship changed from Registered to Null). Where the verb "to register" or "to deregister" is used without an explicit direct object, the action is implicitly reflexive. A person CAN register, unless prevented by the rules, by announcing that e registers, wishes to register, requests registration, or requests permission to register. A player CAN deregister by announcement. E CANNOT register within thirty days after doing so. A player who is not a person and has never been a first-class person CAN be deregistered by any player by announcement. history: Amended(25) by Proposal 5271 (Murphy), 7 November 2007 text: Citizenship is an entity switch with values Unregistered (default) and Registered, tracked by the registrar. A player is an entity whose citizenship is Registered. The verb "to be registered" means to become a player (i.e., to have one's citizenship changed from Unregistered to Registered), and the verb "to be deregistered" means to cease to be a player (i.e., to have one's citizenship changed from Registered to Unregistered). Where the verb "to register" or "to deregister" is used without an explicit direct object, the action is implicitly reflexive. A person CAN register, unless prevented by the rules, by announcing that e registers, wishes to register, requests registration, or requests permission to register. A player CAN deregister by announcement. E CANNOT register within thirty days after doing so. A player who is not a person and has never been a first-class person CAN be deregistered by any player by announcement. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 503,1005 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 503 by Proposal 503, 30 September 1993 text: Any Player who does not responds in the allotted time to a request to be Judge, can not be selected again as a Judge, before he/she specifically asks for it in a message to the Clerk. history: Amended by Proposal 1005, ca. Aug. 25 1994 text: Any Player who does not responds in the allotted time to a request to be Judge, can not be selected again as a Judge, before he/she specifically asks for it in a message to the Clerk. Any Player who goes On Hold while a CFJ is pending, for which that Player was selected as Judge before e went On Hold and which is not yet Judged, will loose 2 Points per pending CFJ. The CFJ will be reassigned to another eligible Player. history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Aug. 25 1994 text: Any Player who does not responds in the allotted time to a request to be Judge, can not be selected again as a Judge, before he/she specifically asks for it in a message to the Clerk. Any Player who goes On Hold while a CFJ is pending, for which that Player was selected as Judge before e went On Hold and which is not yet Judged, will loose 2 Points per pending CFJ. The CFJ will be reassigned to another eligible Player. (*Was: 503*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1705, 4 September 1995 text: Any Player who does not responds in the allotted time to a request to be Judge, can not be selected again as a Judge, before he/she specifically asks for it in a message to the Clerk. Any Player who goes On Hold while a CFJ is pending, for which that Player was selected as Judge before e went On Hold and which is not yet Judged, will loose 2 Points per pending CFJ. The Clerk of the Courts shall report Point transfers wihch occur as a result of this Rule. The CFJ will be reassigned to another eligible Player. (*Was: 503*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1734, 15 October 1995 text: Any Player who does not respond in the allotted time to a request to be Judge, can not be selected again as a Judge, before he/she specifically asks for it in a message to the Clerk. Any Player who goes On Hold while a CFJ is pending, for which that Player was selected as Judge before e went On Hold and which is not yet Judged, will loose 2 Points per pending CFJ. The Clerk of the Courts shall report Point transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. The CFJ will be reassigned to another eligible Player. (*Was: 503*) history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: Any Player who does not respond in the allotted time to a request to be Judge, can not be selected again as a Judge, before he/she specifically asks for it in a message to the Clerk. Any Player who goes On Hold while a CFJ is pending, for which that Player was selected as Judge before e went On Hold and which is not yet Judged, will loose 2 Points per pending CFJ. The Clerk of the Courts shall report Point transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. The CFJ will be reassigned to another eligible Player. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2403, 20 January 1996 text: Any Player who does not respond in the allotted time to a request to be Judge, can not be selected again as a Judge, before he/she specifically asks for it in a message to the Clerk. Any Player who goes On Hold while a CFJ is pending, for which that Player was selected as Judge before e went On Hold and which is not yet Judged, will lose 2 Points per pending CFJ. The Clerk of the Courts shall report Point transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. The CFJ will be reassigned to another eligible Player. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 510,796 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 510 by Proposal 510, 5 October 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Proposal 796, ca. Jan. 31 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Jan. 31 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: There shall be an Office known as the Distributor. Whenever the Rules state that anything must be sent to all Players, they may instead be sent to the Distributor with some indication that they should be forwarded to all Players. The Distributor shall then send this message to all Players as soon as possible and in the order received. The first Distributor shall be Wes. This Rule shall take precedence over all Rules which require a Player to send something to all Players. (*Was: 510*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: There shall be an Office known as the Distributor. Whenever the Rules state that anything must be sent to all Players, they may instead be sent to the Distributor with some indication that they should be forwarded to all Players. The Distributor shall then send this message to all Players as soon as possible and in the order received. The first Distributor shall be Wes. This Rule shall take precedence over all Rules which require a Player to send something to all Players. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 2739 (Swann), 7 November 1996 text: Whenever a Player is required to post something to the Public Forum (or to send it to all Players) e is permitted, instead, to send the message to the Registrar with some indication that it should be forwarded to all Players. The Registrar shall send such messages to all Players as soon as possible and in the order received. This Rule shall take precedence over all Rules which require a Player to send something to all Players or to the Public Forum. history: ... history: Amended(4) text: Whenever a Player is required to post something to the Public Forum (or to send it to all Players) e is permitted, instead, to send the message to the Registrar with some indication that it should be forwarded to all Players. The Registrar shall send such messages to all Players as soon as possible and in the order received. This Rule shall take precedence over all Rules which require a Player to send something to all Players or to the Public Forum. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: ... [orphaned text: There shall be an Office known as the Distributor. Whenever the Rules state that anything must be sent to all Players, they may instead be sent to the Distributor with some indication that they should be forwarded to all Players. The Distributor shall then send this message to all Players as soon as possible and in the order recieved. The first Distributor shall be Wes. This Rule shall take precedence over all Rules which require a Player to send something to all Players. (*Was: 510*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 511 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 511 history: ... [orphaned text: If the Distributor fails to send a Player a message which e was required to send to that Player, then the Distributor shall be guilty of a Class B Crime. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 512 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 512 by Proposal 512, 5 October 1993 text: In the case that the Distributor cannot reach a particular Player, because of computer error, bounced mail, or other problem, a total of three attempts shall be made to contact that Player and notify the Player of this error. These attempts shall be at least 24 hours apart. Should all three attempts fail, the Distributor shall not be required to send that message to that Player. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 513 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 513 by Proposal 513, 5 October 1993 text: The Distributor shall keep all messages which he forwards to all Players for a minimum period of ten days. If a Player request these messages to be resent at any time during these ten days, the Distributor shall resend the requested messages. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 514 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 514 by Proposal 514 (Wes), 5 October 1993 text: All Players shall notify the Distributor of their preferred email address(es). Should this address change, that Player shall notify the Distributor of this change. If a Player fails to notify the Distributor of a change of address, the Distributor shall not be responsible for any mail which did not reach that Player. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2739 (Swann), 5 November 1996 text: All Players shall notify the Registrar of their preferred email address(es). Should this address change, that Player shall notify the Registrar of this change. If a Player fails to notify the Registrar of a change of address, the Registrar shall not be responsible for any mail which did not reach that Player. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4435 (Murphy), 28 January 2003 text: Each Player may list or unlist an e-mail address by informing the Registrar that e is doing so. When a Player registers, the address used to send eir registration becomes listed. A listing is only valid if the Player sends a public message from the listed address within one week of the listing. (This message may be the listing itself.) An unlisting is only valid if the Player keeps at least one address listed. If a Player fails to notify the Registrar of a change of address, then the Registrar is not responsible for any e-mail that fails to reach that Player. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 514 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 516,1040 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 516 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1040 history: ... [orphaned text: There shall be a new unit of currency known as Marks. Any Player may possess zero or more Marks, but not less than zero. Any Player may give any number of Marks to any other Player, as long as that Player will not possess less than zero Marks at the end of the trade. There shall also be an entity known as the Bank, which shall possess Marks exactly like a Player. There shall also be an Office known as the Banker. The Banker shall keep an accurate record of how many Marks each Player possesses, and how many Marks are possessed by the Bank. The Banker shall recieve a salary of 3 Points after every seven days in Office. ] [orphaned text: There shall be a new unit of currency known as Marks. Any Player may possess zero or more Marks, but not less than zero. Any Player may give any number of Marks to any other Player, as long as that Player will not possess less than zero Marks at the end of the trade. There shall also be an entity known as the Bank, which shall possess Marks exactly like a Player. There shall also be an Office known as the Banker. The Banker shall keep an accurate record of how many Marks each Player possesses, and how many Marks are possessed by the Bank. The Banker shall recieve a salary of 5 Points after every seven days in Office. All Mark transfers shall be requested by a message to the server. The Banker shall send to the Public Forum at least once per Nomic week a report containing the balance and all changes in the Mark accounts of all Players and all Nomic Entities that may possess Marks. (*Was: 516*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 517 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 517 history: ... [orphaned text: There shall be a limited number of Marks. No Marks shall be created or destroyed except as explicitly allowed for in legislation. If a Rule states that Marks are to be transfered, but there is no source for those Marks, then the Rule shall have no legal force. If the Rule does state a source for the Marks, but that source does not Possess enough Marks, then all the Marks possessed by the source shall be transfered, and the remainder of the Marks shall be transfered as the source receives them. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 518 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 518 history: ... [orphaned text: Upon the passage of this Rule, 3 Marks shall be created for every Player in the Game, and given to those Players. If a new Player joins the Game, 3 Marks are created and given to that Player. If a Player leaves the Game, whatever Marks are in their possession are destroyed. If that same Player later joins the Game again, they shall not recieve any Marks. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 520 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 520 history: ... [orphaned text: On Monday, at noon in the time zone in which the Banker resides, each Player shall be given 1 Points for every 2 Marks which they possess, rounded down. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 521 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 521 history: ... [orphaned text: If all the Votes on a particular Proposal are FOR Votes, then the Player who proposed that Proposal shall recieve 3 Marks from the Bank. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 522 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 522 history: ... [orphaned text: At the end of each Game, the Speaker for the previous Game shall recieve 3 Marks, which are taken from the Bank. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 523 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 523 history: ... [orphaned text: The Banker shall not reveal how many Marks are in any other Player's possession to any other Player, except as allowed for in the Rules. The Banker shall reveal the number of Marks in the Bank to any Player who requests the information. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 525 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 525 history: ... [orphaned text: If a Player trades one Mark to the Bank, and trades 10 Points to the Point Reserve, then that Player may Lock another Player's Marks account for a period of five days. To do so, that Player must notify the Banker, who shall then notify the Player whose account has been Locked that the account has been locked, but not who has Locked it. If a Player's Marks account has been Locked, then that Player shall not trade Marks to any other Player or to the Bank until his account is no longer Locked. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 533,1034 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 533 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1034 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1347, 29 November 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: The Bank shall tender Marks to any Entity which transfers Points to the Bank with the intent to receive Marks in exchange. Upon the receipt of Points from any Entity, accompanied by a message to the Banker from the Executor of that Entity indicating intent to purchase Marks, the Bank shall transfer to that Entity 1 Mark for each 25 Points thus transferred. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1691, 1 September 1995 text: An Entity which possesses Points is permitted to convert any or all of those Points to Marks by transferring those Points to the Bank, and by also informing the Banker that the transfer is for the purpose of purchasing Marks. Whenever the Bank receives Points from any Entity which are accompanied by a message from the Executor of that Entity to the Banker indicating that those Points are to be used to purchase Marks, the Bank shall transfer a commensurate number of Marks computed using the primary Mark Exchange Rate to that Entity's Treasury. This transfer shall be detected and reported by the Banker. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1743, 15 October 1995 text: An Entity which possesses Points in any of its Treasuries is permitted to convert any or all of those Points to Marks. E does so by sending a message to the Scorekeepor indicating that e wishes to do so, also specifying how many Points e wishes to convert, and the Treasury from which this Points are to be removed (if the Entity possess more than one Treasury). When such a message is sent, if the Treasury specified is owned by the Entity requesting the exchange and contains at least as many Points as are to be converted, then that many Points are transferred from that Treasury to the Bank, and, simultaneously, a commensurate number of Marks computed using the primary Mark Exchange Rate are transferred from the Bank to that Treasury. All these transfers shall be detected and reported by the Scorekeepor, as soon as possible after they take place. history: ... [orphaned text: If a Player wishes, e may buy Marks from the Bank. The Player must trade 25 Points to the Point Reserve. Then e shall send a message to the Banker notifying that Banker that such a Trade has been made for the purpose of buying Marks. When the Trade has been verified by the Banker, the above Player shall recieve 1 Mark from the Bank. ] [orphaned text: If a Player wishes, e may buy Marks from the Bank. The Player must trade 25 Points to the Point Reserve. Then e shall send a message to the Banker notifying that Banker that such a Trade has been made for the purpose of buying Marks. When the Trade has been verified by the Banker, the above Player shall recieve 1 Mark from the Bank. The Banker shall verify the Trade as soon as possible. (*Was: 533*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 534 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 534 history: ... [orphaned text: If a transfer indicated by the Rules is not made due to an insufficient number of Marks being possessed by the Entity which is losing Marks, the transfer shall be delayed as per other legislation. If a single Entity has more than one transfer which is being delayed for such a reason, these transfers shall be made in the order in which they became required by legislation. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 538 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 538 history: ... [orphaned text: If a Player is convicted of breaking a rule, then the Player who first formally accused him of breaking that rule shall receive back any points which the accusing Player may have lost as a direct result of that accusation. In addition, he shall receive a reward of three additional points, or the number of points which the convicted player loses as a result of his conviction, whichever is less. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 542 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 542 history: ... [orphaned text: Whenever any quantity of Points mentioned in a Rule changes, the Designated Scorekeeper shall notify all other players of said Point change and the reasons for it. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 544,833 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 544 history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 833 (Garth), 1 March 1994 text: When the voting period for a proposal is over, the proposer gets F-A points, where F is the number of votes FOR, and A is the number of votes AGAINST. However, only the Votes of Voters shall be counted for this determination. history: Amended by Rule 750, 1 March 1994 text: When the voting period for a proposal is over, the proposer gets F-A points, where F is the number of votes FOR, and A is the number of votes AGAINST. However, only the Votes of Voters shall be counted for this determination. (*Was: 544*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1554, 17 April 1995 text: When the voting period for a proposal is over, the proposer gets F-A points, where F is the number of votes FOR, and A is the number of votes AGAINST. However, only the Votes of Players shall be counted for this determination. (*Was: 544*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1702, 1 September 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1705, 4 September 1995 text: At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, if a Proposal has received more FOR Votes than AGAINST Votes, the Proposer of that Proposal gains a number of Points equal to the number of FOR Votes less the number of AGAINST Votes. If, however, a Proposal has received more AGAINST Votes than FOR Votes, the Proposer loses a number of Points equal to the number of AGAINST Votes less the number of FOR Votes. If the number of FOR Votes and AGAINST Votes are equal, the Proposer neither gains nor loses Points as a result of this Rule. For the purpose of this Rule, Votes by Voting Entities which are not Players do not count, nor does any tiebreaking Vote cast by the Assessor. The Assessor shall report the transfers required by this Rule, and shall do so no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal in question. history: Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, 24 April 1996 text: At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, if a Proposal has received more FOR Votes than AGAINST Votes, the Proposer of that Proposal gains a number of Points equal to the number of FOR Votes less the number of AGAINST Votes. If, however, a Proposal has received more AGAINST Votes than FOR Votes, the Proposer loses a number of Points equal to the number of AGAINST Votes less the number of FOR Votes. If the number of FOR Votes and AGAINST Votes are equal, the Proposer neither gains nor loses Points as a result of this Rule. For the purpose of this Rule, Votes by Voting Entities which are not Players do not count, nor does any tiebreaking Vote cast by the Assessor. The Assessor shall report the transfers required by this Rule, and shall do so no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal in question. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2636, 12 July 1996 text: At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, if a Proposal has received more FOR Votes than AGAINST Votes, the Proposer of that Proposal gains a number of Points equal to the number of FOR Votes less the number of AGAINST Votes. If, however, a Proposal has received more AGAINST Votes than FOR Votes, the Proposer loses a number of Points equal to the number of AGAINST Votes less the number of FOR Votes. If the number of FOR Votes and AGAINST Votes are equal, the Proposer neither gains nor loses Points as a result of this Rule. The loss of points (but not the gain of points) described in this Rule applies even to a Disinterested Proposal. For the purpose of this Rule, Votes by Voting Entities which are not Players do not count, nor does any tiebreaking Vote cast by the Assessor. The Assessor shall report the transfers required by this Rule, and shall do so no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal in question. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, if a Proposal has received more FOR Votes than AGAINST Votes, the Proposer of that Proposal gains a number of Mils equal to the number of FOR Votes less the number of AGAINST Votes. If, however, a Proposal has received more AGAINST Votes than FOR Votes, the Proposer loses a number of Mils equal to the number of AGAINST Votes less the number of FOR Votes. If the number of FOR Votes and AGAINST Votes are equal, the Proposer neither gains nor loses Marks as a result of this Rule. The loss of Marks (but not the gain of Marks) described in this Rule applies even to a Disinterested Proposal. For the purpose of this Rule, Votes by Voting Entities which are not Players do not count. The Assessor shall report the transfers required by this Rule, and shall do so no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal in question. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, if a Proposal has received more FOR Votes than AGAINST Votes, the Proposer of that Proposal gains a number of Mil equal to the number of FOR Votes less the number of AGAINST Votes. If, however, a Proposal has received more AGAINST Votes than FOR Votes, the Proposer loses a number of Mil equal to the number of AGAINST Votes less the number of FOR Votes. If the number of FOR Votes and AGAINST Votes are equal, the Proposer neither gains nor loses Marks as a result of this Rule. The loss of Marks (but not the gain of Marks) described in this Rule applies even to a Disinterested Proposal. For the purpose of this Rule, Votes by Voting Entities which are not Players do not count. The Assessor shall report the transfers required by this Rule, and shall do so no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal in question. history: ... history: Amended(8) [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... [orphaned text: At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, if the Proposal has received more AGAINST Votes than FOR Votes, the Proposer of that Proposal loses a number of Mil equal to difference of the number of AGAINST Votes and the number of FOR Votes. At the end of the Voting Period for an Interested Proposal, if the Proposal has received more FOR Votes than AGAINST Votes, the Proposer of that Proposal gains a number of Mil equal to difference of the number of FOR Votes and the number of AGAINST Votes. For the purpose of this Rule, Votes by Voting Entities which are not Players do not count. The Assessor shall report the transfers required by this Rule, and shall do so no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal in question. ] [orphaned text: When the voting period for a proposal is over, the proposer gets F-A points, where F is the number of votes FOR, and A is the number of votes AGAINST. No points are awarded to or taken from Voters by this rule. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 548 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 548 history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 548 by Proposal 772 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 557 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 557 history: ... [orphaned text: Points shall be computed according to the Rules then in effect, then shall be rounded to one decimal place. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 559 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 559 by Proposal 559 (Wes), ca. Oct. 7 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1325, 22 November 1994 text: There shall exist an Office called the Registrar. The Registrar has responsibility over maintaining the list of registered Players. Any person who is not currently a Player may register as one by sending a message to the Registrar requesting that they be registered. The Registrar shall post a list of all currently registered Players whenever a new Player or Players are added to the list. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1436, 21 February 1995 text: There shall exist an Office called the Registrar. The Registrar has responsibility over maintaining the list of Registered Players. The Registrar shall post a list of all currently registered Players within one Week following any change to this list. Other duties may be assigned by other Rules. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1660, 14 August 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: There shall exist an Office called the Registrar. The Registrar has responsibility over maintaining the list of Registered Players. The Registrar shall post a list of all currently registered Players within one Week following any change to this list. Other duties may be assigned by other Rules. The Registrar's salary shall be 5 points per week. text: There shall exist an Office called the Registrar. The Registrar has responsibility over maintaining the list of Registered Players. The Registrar shall post a list of all currently registered Players within one Week following any change to this list. Other duties may be assigned by other Rules. The Registrar's salary shall be 5 points per week. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1681, 22 August 1995 text: There shall exist an Office called the Registrar. The Registrar has responsibility over maintaining the list of Registered Players. The Registrar shall include a list of all currently registered Players in the Registrar's Report. Other duties may be assigned by other Rules. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2451, 6 February 1996 text: There shall exist an Office called the Registrar. The Registrar has responsibility over maintaining the list of Registered Players. The Registrar shall include a list of all currently registered Players in the Registrar's Report. Other duties may be assigned by other Rules. The Registrar shall receive a Salary of 4 Points. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2532, 10 March 1996 text: There shall exist an Office called the Registrar. The Registrar's Salary is 4 Points. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: There shall exist an Office called the Registrar. The Registrar's Salary is 4 Mils. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Registrar. The Registrar shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Null-Amended(9) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Registrar. The Registrar shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3827 (Kolja A.), 4 February 1999 text: There shall exist the Office of Registrar. The Registrar shall receive a salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: The Registrar There shall exist the Office of Registrar. The Registrar shall receive a salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 text: There exists the Office of Registrar, whose responsibility it is to maintain a list of Players and titles held by Players. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: There exists the Office of Registrar, whose responsibility it is to maintain a list of Players. The Registrar's Report shall include the following: (i) A list of all Registered Players, with their Nomic nickname (if any), preferred email address, current Active/Inactive status. (ii) A list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the Player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end. (iii) A list of Players who are Zombies, and who their Masters are. (iv) The most recent date on which each Player registered. (v) Each Player's Active/Inactive status, and the most recent date on which that Player became Active or Inactive. (vi) Each Player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that Player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent. (vii) The identities of the Distributor and the Speaker (and eir Term of Service). history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4057 (harvel), 29 August 2000 text: There exists the Office of Registrar, whose responsibility it is to maintain a list of Players. The Registrar's Report shall include the following: (i) A list of all Registered Players, with their Nomic nickname (if any) and preferred email address. (ii) A list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the Player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end. (iii) A list of Players who are Zombies, and who their Masters are. (iv) The most recent date on which each Player registered. (v) Each Player's Active/Inactive status, and the most recent date on which that Player became Active or Inactive. (vi) Each Player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that Player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent. (vii) The identities of the Distributor and the Speaker (and eir Term of Service). history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4155 (harvel), 18 May 2001 text: There exists the Office of Registrar, whose responsibility it is to maintain a list of Players. The Registrar's Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered Players, with their nicknames, if any, and preferred email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the Player subject to the Grace Period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready Players; (iv) a list of Players who are Zombies, and who their Masters are; (v) the most recent date on which each Player registered; (vi) each Player's Active/Inactive status, and the most recent date on which that Player became Active or Inactive; (vii) each Player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that Player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent; and (viii) the identities of the Distributor and the Speaker (and eir Term of Service). history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4195 (Syllepsis), 26 July 2001 text: There exists the Office of Registrar, whose responsibility it is to maintain a list of Players. The Registrar's Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered Players, with their nicknames, if any, and preferred email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the Player subject to the Grace Period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready Players; (iv) a list of Players who are Zombies, and who their Masters are; (v) the most recent date on which each Player registered; (vi) each Player's Active/Inactive status, and the most recent date on which that Player became Active or Inactive; (vii) each Player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that Player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent; and (viii) the identities of the Distributor and the Speaker (and eir Term of Service). (viii) A list of Players who are Monks. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 text: There exists the Office of Registrar, whose responsibility it is to maintain a list of players. The Registrar's Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered players, with their nicknames, if any, and preferred email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready players; (iv) the most recent date on which each registered player registered; (v) each player's Active/Inactive status, and the most recent date on which that player became Active or Inactive; (vi) each player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent; (vii) the identities of the Distributor and the Speaker (and eir Term of Service); and (viii) a list of players who are Monks. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the register of players. The Registrar's Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered players, with their nicknames, if any, and preferred email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready players; (iv) the most recent date on which each registered player registered; (v) each player's Active/Inactive status, and the most recent date on which that player became Active or Inactive; (vi) each player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent; (vii) the identities of the Distributor and the Speaker (and eir Term of Service); and (viii) a list of players who are Monks. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 4259 (root), 21 February 2002 text: The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the register of players. The Registrar's Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered players, with their nicknames, if any, and preferred email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready players; (iv) the most recent date on which each registered player registered; (v) each player's Active/Inactive status, and the most recent date on which that player became Active or Inactive; (vi) each player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent; (vii) the identity of the Distributor; and (viii) a list of players who are Monks. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the register of players. The Registrar's Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered players, with their nicknames, if any, and preferred email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready players; (iv) the most recent date on which each registered player registered; (v) each player's activity level, and the most recent date on which that player's activity level changed; (vi) each player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent; (vii) the identity of the Distributor; and (viii) a list of players who are Monks. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 4435 (Murphy), 28 January 2003 text: The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the register of players. The Registrar's Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered players, with their nicknames, if any, and listed email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready players; (iv) the most recent date on which each registered player registered; (v) each player's activity level, and the most recent date on which that player's activity level changed; (vi) each player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent; (vii) the identity of the Distributor; and (viii) a list of players who are Monks. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 4563 (OscarMeyr), 6 April 2004 text: The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the register of players. The Registrar's Weekly Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered players, with their nicknames, if any, and listed email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready players; (iv) the most recent date on which each registered player registered; (v) each player's activity level, and the most recent date on which that player's activity level changed; (vi) each player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent; (vii) the identity of the Distributor; and (viii) a list of players who are Monks. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 4616 (OscarMeyr), 1 October 2004 text: The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the register of players. The Registrar's Weekly Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered players, with their nicknames, if any, and listed email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready players; (iv) the most recent date on which each registered player registered; (v) each player's activity level, and the most recent date on which that player's activity level changed; (vi) each player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent; and (vii) the identity of the Distributor. history: Amended(24) by Proposal 4769 (Sherlock), 25 May 2005 text: The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the register of players. The Registrar's Bi-Weekly Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered players, with their nicknames, if any, and listed email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready players; (iv) the most recent date on which each registered player registered; (v) each player's activity level, and the most recent date on which that player's activity level changed; (vi) each player's Noisy/Quiet/Silent status, and the most recent date on which that player became Noisy, Quiet, or Silent; and (vii) the identity of the Distributor. history: Amended(25) by Proposal 4820 (Goethe), 10 July 2005 text: The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the register of players. The Registrar's Bi-Weekly Report shall include all of the following information: (i) a list of all registered players, with their nicknames, if any, and listed email addresses; (ii) a list of all Grace Periods in progress, including the player subject to the Grace period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end; (iii) a list of all Unready players; (iv) the most recent date on which each registered player registered; (v) each player's activity level, and the most recent date and method by which that player's activity level changed; (vi) the identity of the Distributor. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 559 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 [orphaned text: There shall exist an Office called the Registrar. The Registrar has responsibility over maintaining the list of registered Players. Any person who is not currently a Player may register as one by sending a message to the Registrar requesting that they be registered. The Registrar shall post a list of all currently registered Players whenever a new Player or Players are added to the list. Upon initial passage of this Rule, the Registrar shall be the Mighty Speaker, and all previously established Players of this Game shall be considered to be registered. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 560,791 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 560 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 791 history: ... history: Repealed as Mutable Rule by Proposal 934 (Chuck), 14 July 1994 [orphaned text: There may be no more than PL Proposals up for Vote at any given time. "PL" is the Proposal Limit, which is defined to be 15. The Speaker shall enforce this by delaying the distribution of Proposals in excess of this number. This Rule takes precedence, when permitted, over other Rules which require sooner distribution. If Proposal "Schemes" exist, then for the purpose of the Proposal limit, a Scheme shall count as a single Proposal. (*Was: 560*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 568 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 568 history: ... history: Repealed as Mutable Rule by Proposal 904 (KoJen), 22 April 1994 [orphaned text: There shall be an Official known as the Auditor. The Auditor shall maintain a list of the scores of the Players, independently from the Scorekeepor. In doing so the Auditor must abide by all Rules governing scores and use his/her best judgment in determining these scores. Before the Scorekeepor publishes the list of scores, the Scorekeepor and the Auditor shall compare records, and reach agreement on the scores to be published by the Scorekeepor. The salary of the Auditor shall be equal to that of the Scorekeepor. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 574 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 574 history: ... [orphaned text: There shall be an Entity known as the Vototron. The Vototron has three Votes for each Proposal. The Vototron holds two Point Caches per Proposal. These are known as the For Cache and the Against Cache for that Proposal. Any Player may give any number of Points to any of the Vototron's Point Caches, by sending a message to the Speaker stating the amount of Points and the Cache which these shall be given to. Immediately before the Voting Period of a Proposal expires, if one of the Vototron's Point Caches for that Proposal contains more Points than the other, the Vototron shall cast three Votes according to the name of that Cache. After the end of the Voting Period the Points given to the two Vototron Caches are transferred to the Point Reserve. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 592 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 592 history: ... [orphaned text: The validity of any Call for Judgement which has been submitted and accepted for judgement prior to passage of this rule may not be challenged by CFJ after passage of this rule. This rule takes precedence over any rule specifying whether any particular CFJ is valid. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 594 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 594 by Proposal 594 (KoJen), 21 October 1993 text: A Proposal may contain one or more Rule Changes. If the Proposal is Adopted, then the Rule Change(s) contained within that Proposal shall take effect. All Proposals are Voted upon and treated exactly like Rule Changes, and shall be Numbered exactly like Rule Changes. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules. At the moment that Rule 105 is Transmuted, this Rule shall be Amended to read: A Proposal may contain one or more Rule Changes. If the Proposal is Adopted, then the Rule Change(s) contained within that Proposal shall take effect. No Proposal may Enact or Amend more than one Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1323, 21 November 1994 text: A Proposal may contain one or more Rule Changes. If a Proposal containing Rule Changes is adopted, the Rule Changes contained in the Proposal shall take effect in the order they appear in the Proposal. The Adoption Index of a Proposal shall be the least Index which is not less than the minimum Adoption Index which would allow all the Rule Changes within the Proposal to take effect. This paragraph yields to any Rule which may require a higher Adoption Index for a given Proposal. In no case may a Proposal have an Adoption Index of less than 1. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2399, 20 January 1996 text: A Proposal may contain one or more Rule Changes. If a Proposal containing Rule Changes is adopted, the Rule Changes contained in the Proposal shall take effect in the order they appear in the Proposal. Unless another Rule states otherwise, the Adoption Index of a Proposal shall be the minimum Adoption Index which would allow all Rule Changes and Directives within the Proposal to take effect, or 1, whichever is greater. In no case may a Proposal have an Adoption Index of less than 1. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: When a Proposal is adopted, its Power becomes equal to its Adoption Index, and the provisions contained in the text of the Proposal are implemented to the maximal extent permitted by the Rules. Provisions which are unclear, ambiguous, or inapplicable are ignored. In a Proposal containing more than one provision, each provision is severable from the others, unless the Proposal states otherwise. For the purpose of the Rules, the application of an adopted Proposal is a legal procedure for changing Nomic Properties. The Adoption Index of a Proposal is the maximum of 1, the value requested by its Proposer (if any), and the value required for that Proposal by the Rules (if any). history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4111 (Elysion), 20 February 2001 history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4327 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 text: When a Proposal takes effect: (a) if the Proposer is a Member of The Cabal (as explicitly defined by the Rules) when the Proposal takes effect, the Proposal's Power is set equal to its Voting Index; (b) otherwise, its power is set equal to 1; and the provisions contained in the text of the Proposal are implemented to the maximal extent permitted by the Rules. Provisions which are unclear, ambiguous, or inapplicable are ignored. In a Proposal containing more than one provision, each provision is severable from the others, unless the Proposal states otherwise. For the purpose of the Rules, the application of an adopted Proposal is a legal procedure for changing Nomic Properties. The Adoption Index of a Proposal is the maximum of 1, the value requested by its Proposer (if any), and the value required for that Proposal by the Rules (if any). history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4328 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 text: When a Proposal takes effect: (a) if the Proposer is a Member of The Cabal (as explicitly defined by the Rules) when the Proposal takes effect, the Proposal's power is set equal to 4; (b) otherwise, its power is set equal to 1; and the provisions contained in the text of the Proposal are implemented to the maximal extent permitted by the Rules. Provisions which are unclear, ambiguous, or inapplicable are ignored. In a Proposal containing more than one provision, each provision is severable from the others, unless the Proposal states otherwise. For the purpose of the Rules, the application of an adopted Proposal is a legal procedure for changing Nomic Properties. The Adoption Index of a Proposal is the maximum of 1, the value requested by its Proposer (if any), and the value required for that Proposal by the Rules (if any). history: Power changed from 2 to 3 by Proposal 4329 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4329 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 text: No Rule may have Power less than 1 or greater than 4. Except as described in this Rule, no entity can set the Power of another entity to exceed the Power of the entity causing the Power to be so set. No entity may destroy or repeal an entity with Power greater than its own. When a Proposal takes effect, its Power shall be set equal to its Adoption Index, and the provisions contained in the text of the Proposal are implemented to the maximal extent permitted by the Rules. The Adoption Index of a Proposal is the maximum of 1, the value requested by its Proposer (if any), and the value required for that Proposal by the Rules (if any). Provisions which are unclear, ambiguous, or inapplicable are ignored. In a Proposal containing more than one provision, each provision is severable from the others, unless the Proposal states otherwise. For the purpose of the Rules, the application of an adopted Proposal is a legal procedure for changing Nomic Properties. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4349 (root), 20 July 2002 text: No Rule may have Power less than 1 or greater than 4. Except as described in this Rule, no entity can set the Power of any entity to exceed the Power of the entity causing the Power to be so set. No entity may destroy or repeal an entity with Power greater than its own. When a Proposal takes effect, its Power shall be set equal to its Adoption Index, and the provisions contained in the text of the Proposal are implemented to the maximal extent permitted by the Rules. The Adoption Index of a Proposal is the maximum of 1, the value requested by its Proposer (if any), and the value required for that Proposal by the Rules (if any). Provisions which are unclear, ambiguous, or inapplicable are ignored. In a Proposal containing more than one provision, each provision is severable from the others, unless the Proposal states otherwise. For the purpose of the Rules, the application of an adopted Proposal is a legal procedure for changing Nomic Properties. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4464 (root), 17 March 2003 text: No Rule may have Power less than 1 or greater than 4. Except as described in this Rule, no entity can set the Power of any entity to exceed the Power of the entity causing the Power to be so set. No entity may destroy or repeal an entity with Power greater than its own. When a Proposal takes effect, its Power shall be set equal to its Adoption Index, and the provisions contained in the text of the Proposal are implemented to the maximal extent permitted by the Rules. Provisions which are unclear, ambiguous, or inapplicable are ignored. In a Proposal containing more than one provision, each provision is severable from the others, unless the Proposal states otherwise. For the purpose of the Rules, the application of an adopted Proposal is a legal procedure for changing Nomic Properties. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: A proposal can, as part of its effect, enact a rule, specifying its content and optionally specifying its power and title. If the proposal does not specify the power, the rule shall have power equal to one. If the proposal specifies the power, then the rule shall have power equal to the minimum of four, the power of the proposal, and the power specified by the proposal. If the title is not specified, the Rulekeepor may select any title e sees fit. When a rule is enacted, the Rulekeepor shall assign it a number, which must be greater than any number previously assigned, and shall assign it a revision number of zero. This rule provides the only mechanism by which rules can be enacted. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 594 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 597 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 597 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1327, 22 November 1994 text: Every Proposal shall be headed with a Title. This Title shall not actually be a part of the Proposal itself and therefore shall not become a part of any Rule Enacted or Amended by that Proposal. If a Proposal is not headed with a Title, then the proposal is not properly submitted, and shall not be Voted upon. history: ... [orphaned text: Every Proposal shall be headed with a Title. This Title shall not actually be a part of the Proposal itself and therefore shall not become a part of any Rule Enacted or Amended by that Proposal. If a Proposal is not headed with a Title, then the Player who submitted that Proposal shall be guilty of a Class B Crime. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 600 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 600 history: ... history: Repealed as Mutable Rule by Proposal 844 (Garth), 3 March 1994 [orphaned text: To formally Accuse a Player of committing a Crime, the Accusing Player must send a message to the Public Forum stating the Accused Player, the Class of Crime which e is being Accused of, and why e believes that the Accused Player is GUILTY. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 602 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 602 history: ... history: Repealed as Mutable Rule by Proposal 845 (Garth), 3 March 1994 [orphaned text: No Call for Judgement may cause a Player to be punished for a Crime, or to be declared GUILTY of a Crime. Such Judgements should instead be done through a Criminal Court. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 604 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 604 history: ... [orphaned text: Criminal Court may not be called for in regards to any Crime which has taken place more than ten days previously. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 605,846 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 605 history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 846 (Garth), 3 March 1994 text: A Player may only be found Guilty once for a particular instance of a particular Crime. If a Player admits to being Guilty while a Criminal Court is in session to find that Player Guilty, e shall suffer the penalties as if e had been found Guilty by a Criminal Court. If a Player admits to being Guilty before Criminal Court has been called, then a Criminal Court shall not be called for that instance of that Crime, and the Player shall suffer any penalties for committing the Crime. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules that define when a Criminal Court should be called. history: Amended by Rule 750, 3 March 1994 text: A Player may only be found Guilty once for a particular instance of a particular Crime. If a Player admits to being Guilty while a Criminal Court is in session to find that Player Guilty, e shall suffer the penalties as if e had been found Guilty by a Criminal Court. If a Player admits to being Guilty before Criminal Court has been called, then a Criminal Court shall not be called for that instance of that Crime, and the Player shall suffer any penalties for committing the Crime. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules that define when a Criminal Court should be called. (*Was: 605*) history: ... [orphaned text: A Player may only be found GUILTY once for a particular instance of a particular Crime. If a Player admits to being GUILTY while a Criminal Court is in session to find that Player GUILTY, e shall suffer the penalties as if e had been found GUILTY by a Criminal Court. If a Player admits to being GUILTY before Criminal Court has been called, then a Criminal Court shall not be called for that instance of that Crime. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 608,941 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 608 history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 941 (KoJen), 14 July 1994 text: If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime because a Criminal Court has indicated so, e shall lose Points as follows according to the Class of Crime of which e is Guilty of: Class A = 2; Class B = 5; Class C = 8; Class D = 15. If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime because that Player publicly admitted such, e shall lose Points as follows according to the Class of Crime which e is Guilty of: Class A = 1; Class B = 3; Class C = 5; Class D = 10. Responsibility for notifying the Scorekeepor of these penalties is given to the Clerk of the Courts, who must notify the Scorekeepor as soon as possible following the publication of the judgement finding em guilty; preferably at the same time as this publication, and absolutely no later than one Week. history: Amended by Rule 750, 14 July 1994 text: If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime because a Criminal Court has indicated so, e shall lose Points as follows according to the Class of Crime of which e is Guilty of: Class A = 2; Class B = 5; Class C = 8; Class D = 15. If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime because that Player publicly admitted such, e shall lose Points as follows according to the Class of Crime which e is Guilty of: Class A = 1; Class B = 3; Class C = 5; Class D = 10. Responsibility for notifying the Scorekeepor of these penalties is given to the Clerk of the Courts, who must notify the Scorekeepor as soon as possible following the publication of the judgement finding em guilty; preferably at the same time as this publication, and absolutely no later than one Week. (*Was: 608*) history: ... [orphaned text: If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime because a Criminal Court has indicated so, e shall lose Points as follows according to the Class of Crime of which e is Guilty of: Class A = 2; Class B = 5; Class C = 8; Class D = 15. If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime because that Player publicly admitted such, e shall lose Points as follows according to the Class of Crime which e is Guilty of: Class A = 1; Class B = 3; Class C = 5; Class D = 10. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 610 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 610 history: ... [orphaned text: Marks and Coins are Currencies. Each type of Coin is a separate Currency. Other rules may define other Currencies, but nothing is a Currency unless explicitly defined as such by a rule. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 611 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 611 history: ... [orphaned text: Players may own any type of Currency. No non-player Nomic entity may own Currencies except as provided for in the Rules. The number of each type of Currency owned by each player or other Nomic entity must be non-negative, and must be an integer. This rule applies to Currencies in general, and thus defers to rules for specific Currencies. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 612 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 612 history: ... [orphaned text: A Player is defined as the Recordkeepor for a Currency if e is required to keep an accurate record of the number of that Currency owned by each player and non-player Nomic entity which is permitted to own that Currency. The Recordkeepor for each type of Coin shall be the Vizier of the Group corresponding to that type of Coin. Other rules may establish Recordkeepors for other Currencies. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 613 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 613 history: ... [orphaned text: If a Currency exists and no rule (other than this one) exists which specifies a Recordkeepor for that Currency, then the Banker shall be the Recordkeepor for that Currency. This rule applies to Currencies in general, and thus defers to rules for specific Currencies. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 614 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 614 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1470, 8 March 1995 text: A player may voluntarily transfer any Currency in eir possession to any other player for any purpose by sending such a message to the Recordkeepor for that Currency, within the following limits: a) a player may only transfer a positive number of a Currency b) a player may not transfer more of a Currency than e currently has. This rule applies to Currencies in general, and thus defers to rules for specific Currencies. history: ... [orphaned text: A player may voluntarily transfer any Currency to any other player for any purpose by sending such a message to the Recordkeepor for that Currency, within the following limits: a) a player may only transfer a positive number of a Currency b) a player may not transfer more of a Currency than e currently has. This rule applies to Currencies in general, and thus defers to rules for specific Currencies. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 615 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 615 history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 615 by Proposal 752 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 627 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 627 history: ... history: Repealed as Mutable Rule by Proposal 949 (Stella?), 14 July 1994 [orphaned text: Upon passage of this Rule 20 Marks will be created as starting capital of the Bank. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 628 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 628 history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be a quantity of Points known as the Point Reserve. Any action which causes Points to be taken from any Entity, but does not specify where these Points are to be given, shall give these Points to the Point Reserve. The Scorekeepor shall keep score of the number of Points in the Point Reserve. On adoption of this Rule, the Point Reserve will contain 100 Points. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 637 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 637 history: ... [orphaned text: If a Proposal seeks to Amend or Repeal a Rule, that Proposal must refer to that Rule either by that Rule's number or by its Title as given in the latest distributed Current Rule Set. If a Proposal seeks to Amend a Rule, that Proposal must explicitly state how in one of two ways: Either the Proposal must restate the entire Rule, or the Proposal must quote the phrases or words to be deleted (if any) and the phrases or words to be inserted (as well as the location of such insertion) or appended (if any). If a Proposal attempts to Ammend a Rule without following these guidelines, it shall not be considered to have been properly submitted, and shall not be Voted upon. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 640 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 640 history: ... [orphaned text: If for any reason, the post of Speaker becomes vacant during a Game, it will be filled in the same way as a vacant Office. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 643 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 643 history: ... [orphaned text: Any time X Stock (where X is a Player) change owner, Player X will receive 3 Points from the selling Player. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 646,767 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 646 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 767 history: ... [orphaned text: If a Group has N Members then it has N Votes for each Proposal in addition to those of its Membership. The Ordinances of a Group may determine how and when the Group casts its Votes; if the Ordinances are silent on this issue then the Group may not cast its Votes. The Votes of the Group are cast when the Vizier sends a message to the Speaker to that effect during the Voting Period and this action is legitimate insofar as the Ordinances are concerned. (*Was: 646*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 649 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 649 by Proposal 649 (Wes), ca. Oct. 22 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1334, 22 November 1994 text: Let there be a Nomic Entity known as a Patent Title. A Player may nominate a person for a Patent Title by means of a Directive awarding the Title to that Person. Such a Directive must clearly specify the Patent Title, and the person to whom it is to be awarded. A Proposal containing a Directive to Award a Patent Title must have an Adoption Index of at least 1. If the Directive is adopted, the person in question shall be known to all Players by that Patent Title. If the Directive fails, that person may not be nominated for the same Patent Title for a period of 4 weeks. If the Rule which creates the Patent Title specifies another method of assigning the Patent Title, then that Rule shall take precedence over this Rule. The Registrar shall keep track of all Patent Titles which have been granted. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1681, 22 August 1995 text: Let there be a Nomic Entity known as a Patent Title. A Player may nominate a person for a Patent Title by means of a Directive awarding the Title to that Person. Such a Directive must clearly specify the Patent Title, and the person to whom it is to be awarded. A Proposal containing a Directive to Award a Patent Title must have an Adoption Index of at least 1. If the Directive is adopted, the person in question shall be known to all Players by that Patent Title. If the Directive fails, that person may not be nominated for the same Patent Title for a period of 4 weeks. If the Rule which creates the Patent Title specifies another method of assigning the Patent Title, then that Rule shall take precedence over this Rule. The Registrar shall keep track of which Patent Titles have been awarded, and to whom they have been awarded, and shall publish this information in the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2532, 10 March 1996 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Let there be a Nomic Entity known as a Patent Title. A Player may nominate a person for a Patent Title by means of a Directive awarding the Title to that Person. Such a Directive must clearly specify the Patent Title, and the person to whom it is to be awarded. A Proposal containing a Directive to Award a Patent Title must have an Adoption Index of at least 1. If the Directive is adopted, the person in question shall be known to all Players by that Patent Title. If the Directive fails, that person may not be nominated for the same Patent Title for a period of 4 weeks. If the Rule which creates the Patent Title specifies another method of assigning the Patent Title, then that Rule shall take precedence over this Rule. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Patent Titles that have been awarded, and to whom they have been awarded. This list is known as the Gold Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. text: Let there be a Nomic Entity known as a Patent Title. A Player may nominate a person for a Patent Title by means of a Directive awarding the Title to that Person. Such a Directive must clearly specify the Patent Title, and the person to whom it is to be awarded. A Proposal containing a Directive to Award a Patent Title must have an Adoption Index of at least 1. If the Directive is adopted, the person in question shall be known to all Players by that Patent Title. If the Directive fails, that person may not be nominated for the same Patent Title for a period of 4 weeks. If the Rule which creates the Patent Title specifies another method of assigning the Patent Title, then that Rule shall take precedence over this Rule. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Patent Titles that have been awarded, and to whom they have been awarded. This list is known as the Gold Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2693, 3 October 1996 text: Let there be a Nomic Entity known as a Patent Title. A Player may nominate a person for a Patent Title by means of a Directive awarding the Title to that Person. Such a Directive must clearly specify the Patent Title, and the person to whom it is to be awarded. A Proposal containing a Directive to Award a Patent Title must have an Adoption Index of at least 1. If the Directive is adopted, the person in question shall be known to all Players by that Patent Title. If the Directive fails, that person may not be nominated for the same Patent Title for a period of 4 weeks. If the Rule which creates the Patent Title specifies another method of assigning the Patent Title, then that Rule shall take precedence over this Rule. history: Amended(5) Cosmetically by Proposal 2807 (Andre), 8 February 1997 text: Let there be a Nomic Entity known as a Patent Title. A Player may nominate a person for a Patent Title by means of a Directive awarding the Title to that Person. Such a Directive must clearly specify the Patent Title, and the person to whom it is to be awarded. If the Directive is adopted, the person in question shall be known to all Players by that Patent Title. If the Directive fails, that person may not be nominated for the same Patent Title for a period of 4 weeks. If the Rule which creates the Patent Title specifies another method of assigning the Patent Title, then that Rule shall take precedence over this Rule. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: Let there exist a class of entities known as Patent Titles. Patent Titles may be possessed only by persons. The awarding of Patent Titles will generally be by Proposal, but this should not be taken to preclude any other means of award. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Patent Titles that have been awarded, and to whom they have been awarded. This list is known as the Gold Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3488 (Zefram; disi.), 19 May 1997 text: There is a class of entities known as Patent Titles. Patent Titles can be possessed only by persons. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Patent Titles that have been awarded, and to whom they have been awarded, with the exception of any such events of which the Rules state that they have no Historical Significance. This list is known as the Gold Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3849 (Vlad), 6 April 1999 text: There is a class of entities known as Patent Titles. Patent Titles can be possessed only by persons. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Patent Titles that have been awarded, and to whom they have been awarded, with the exception of any such Titles which have no Historical Significance. For the purposes of this Rule, any Title defined by the Rules to have no Historical SIgnificance has none. In addition, the Registrar may Act to declare any Title not referred to in th Rules to be without Historical Significance Without Objection. If such an action successfully occurs, then that Title also has no Historical Significance. This list is known as the Gold Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3860 (Peekee), 12 May 1999 text: There is a class of entities known as Patent Titles. Patent Titles can be possessed only by persons. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Patent Titles that have been awarded, and to whom they have been awarded, with the exception of any such Titles which have no Historical Significance. For the purposes of this Rule, any Title defined by the Rules to have no Historical Significance has none. In addition, the Registrar may Act to declare any Title not referred to in th Rules to be without Historical Significance Without Objection. If such an action successfully occurs, then that Title also has no Historical Significance. This list is known as the Gold Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3914 (Elysion), 19 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3916 (harvel), 27 September 1999 text: There is a class of entities known as Patent Titles. Patent Titles can be possessed only by persons. As soon as possible after a Patent Title award or revocation which occurs automatically occurs, the Herald shall announce in a Public Forum that such an award or revocation has occurred, and which Title has been awarded to or revoked from which person or persons. Unless otherwise specified, each Patent Title has Historical Significance, but the Herald may, Without Objection, cause that Title to lose its Historical Significance. That Title immediately gains Hysterical Significance. As part of eir Report, the Herald shall maintain a list of each Patent Title with Historical Significance that has been awarded and not subsequently revoked, and to whom it has been awarded. history: Amended(???) by Proposal 3968 (harvel), 4 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. Only persons may possess Patent Titles. As soon as possible after a Patent Title award or revocation which occurs automatically occurs, the Herald shall announce in a Public Forum that such an award or revocation has occurred, and which Title has been awarded to or revoked from which person or persons. Unless otherwise specified, each Patent Title has Historical Significance. The Herald may, Without Objection, cause that Title to lose its Historical Significance. That Title immediately gains Hysterical Significance. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title; the Patent Title is Borne by the person, and the person is its Bearor. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. Only persons may Bear Patent Titles. As soon as possible after a Patent Title award or revocation which occurs automatically occurs, the Herald shall announce in a Public Forum that such an award or revocation has occurred, and which Title has been awarded to or revoked from which person or persons. Unless otherwise specified, each Patent Title has Historical Significance. The Herald may, Without Objection, cause that Title to lose its Historical Significance. That Title immediately gains Hysterical Significance. text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. Only persons may possess Patent Titles. As soon as possible after a Patent Title award or revocation which occurs automatically occurs, the Herald shall announce in a Public Forum that such an award or revocation has occurred, and which Title has been awarded to or revoked from which person or persons. Unless otherwise specified, each Patent Title has Historical Significance. The Herald may, Without Objection, cause that Title to lose its Historical Significance. That Title immediately gains Hysterical Significance. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title; the Patent Title is Borne by the person, and the person is its Bearor. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. Only persons may Bear Patent Titles. As soon as possible after a Patent Title award or revocation which occurs automatically occurs, the Herald shall publicly announce that such an award or revocation has occurred, and which Title has been awarded to or revoked from which person or persons. Unless otherwise specified, each Patent Title has Historical Significance. The Herald may, Without Objection, cause that Title to lose its Historical Significance. That Title immediately gains Hysterical Significance. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4497 (Steve), 13 May 2003 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title; the Patent Title is Borne by the person, and the person is its Bearor. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. Only persons may Bear Patent Titles. As soon as possible after a Patent Title award or revocation which occurs automatically occurs, the Herald shall publicly announce that such an award or revocation has occurred, and which Title has been awarded to or revoked from which person or persons. Significance is a stuck switch for Patent Titles with states Historical, Hysterical, and Ephemeral. The Herald may, Without Objection, cause a Title be switched from Historical Significance to Hysterical Significance. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4691 (root), 18 April 2005 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title; the Patent Title is Borne by the person, and the person is its Bearor. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. Only persons may Bear Patent Titles. As soon as possible after a Patent Title award or revocation which occurs automatically occurs, the Herald shall publicly announce that such an award or revocation has occurred, and which Title has been awarded to or revoked from which person or persons. Significance is a stuck switch for Patent Titles with states Historical, Hysterical, and Ephemeral. The Herald may, Without Objection, flip a Title from Historical Significance to Hysterical Significance. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4824 (Maud, Manu), 17 July 2005 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title; the Patent Title is Borne by the person, and the person is its Bearor. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. Only persons may Bear Patent Titles. As soon as possible after the Rules state that a Patent title shall be awarded or revoked, the Herald shall publicly award or revoke that Patent Title. Significance is a stuck switch for Patent Titles with states Historical, Hysterical, and Ephemeral. The Herald may, Without Objection, flip a Title from Historical Significance to Hysterical Significance. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. As soon as possible after the Rules state that a Patent title shall be awarded or revoked, the Herald shall publicly award or revoke that Patent Title. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5036 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. The Herald's report shall include a list of each Patent Title that at least one person Bears, with a list of which persons Bear it. As soon as possible after the Rules state that a Patent title shall be awarded or revoked, the Herald shall publicly award or revoke that Patent Title. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5084 (Zefram; disi.), 1 August 2007 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. The Herald's report shall include a list of each Patent Title that at least one person Bears, with a list of which persons Bear it. As soon as possible after a patent title is awarded or revoked, the herald SHALL announce the award or revocation. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5112 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. The Herald's monthly report shall include a list of each Patent Title that at least one person Bears, with a list of which persons Bear it. As soon as possible after a patent title is awarded or revoked, the herald SHALL announce the award or revocation. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5123 (Zefram; disi.), 13 August 2007 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. The herald is an office; its holder is responsible for tracking patent titles. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. The Herald's monthly report shall include a list of each Patent Title that at least one person Bears, with a list of which persons Bear it. As soon as possible after a patent title is awarded or revoked, the herald SHALL announce the award or revocation. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5237 (AFO; disi.), 3 October 2007 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. The herald is an office; its holder is responsible for tracking patent titles. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. The Herald's monthly report includes a list of each Patent Title that at least one person Bears, with a list of which persons Bear it. As soon as possible after a patent title is awarded or revoked, the herald SHALL announce the award or revocation. history: Amended(24) by Proposal 5239 (AFO), 3 October 2007 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. The herald is a low-priority office; its holder is responsible for tracking patent titles. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. The Herald's report includes a list of each Patent Title that at least one person Bears, with a list of which persons Bear it. As soon as possible after a patent title is awarded or revoked, the herald SHALL announce the award or revocation. history: Amended(25) by Proposal 5341 (Goethe), 8 December 2007 text: A Patent Title is a legal item of recognition of a person's distinction. The herald is a low-priority office; its holder is responsible for tracking patent titles. A Patent Title CAN only be awarded by a proposal, or by the announcement of a person specifically authorized by the Rules to make that award. A person so authorized SHALL make the award as soon as possible as the conditions authorizing em to make the award are posted publicly, unless there is an open judicial question contesting the validity of the conditions. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title. When a Patent Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. The Herald's report includes a list of each Patent Title that at least one person Bears, with a list of which persons Bear it. As soon as possible after a patent title is awarded or revoked, the herald SHALL announce the award or revocation. history: Amended(26) by Proposal 5412 (woggle), 26 January 2008 text: A Patent Title is a legal item given in recognition of a person's distinction. The herald is a low-priority office; its holder is responsible for tracking patent titles. A Patent Title CAN only be awarded by a proposal, or by the announcement of a person specifically authorized by the Rules to make that award. A person so authorized SHALL make the award as soon as possible as the conditions authorizing em to make the award are posted publicly, unless there is an open judicial question contesting the validity of the conditions. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title. When a Patent Title is revoked from an entity, that entity ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. The Herald's report includes a list of each Patent Title that at least one entity Bears, with a list of which entities Bear it. As soon as possible after a patent title is awarded or revoked, the herald SHALL announce the award or revocation. When a patent title is used as a noun to refer to bearers of the patent title, it is assumed to refer only to persons who Bear that patent title unless context clearly indicates otherwise. history: Power changed from 1 to 1.5 by Proposal 5437 (Goethe), 13 February 2008 history: Amended(27) by Proposal 5437 (Goethe), 13 February 2008 text: A Patent Title is a legal item given in recognition of a person's distinction. The herald is a low-priority office; its holder is responsible for tracking patent titles. A Patent Title CAN only be awarded by a proposal, or by the announcement of a person specifically authorized by the Rules to make that award. A person so authorized SHALL make the award as soon as possible as the conditions authorizing em to make the award are posted publicly, unless there is an open judicial question contesting the validity of the conditions. Awarding or revoking a Patent Title by Proposal is a secured change. When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person is said to Bear that Patent Title. When a Patent Title is revoked from an entity, that entity ceases to Bear that Patent Title. The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. The Herald's report includes a list of each Patent Title that at least one entity Bears, with a list of which entities Bear it. As soon as possible after a patent title is awarded or revoked, the herald SHALL announce the award or revocation. When a patent title is used as a noun to refer to bearers of the patent title, it is assumed to refer only to persons who Bear that patent title unless context clearly indicates otherwise. history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be a new Nomic Entity known as a Patent Title. A Player may nominate a person for a Patent Title by submitting a Proposal to that effect. If this Proposal passes, the person in question shall be known to all Players by that Patent Title. If the Proposal fails, that person may not be nominated for the same Patent Title for a period of 4 weeks. If the Rule which creates the Patent Title specifies another method of assigning the Patent Title, then that Rule shall take precedence over this Rule. The Registrar shall keep track of all Patent Titles which have been granted. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 650,799,912 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 650 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 799 history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 912 (Garth), 4 May 1994 text: There shall be additional legal Declarations which are as follows: (Award a Patent Title) shall be used if the Proposal does not Enact a Rule, but awards an existing Patent Title to a person. (Run for Office) shall be used if a Proposal seeks to place a Player in Office, according to the Rules for Offices. (*Was: 650*) history: Amended by Rule 750, 4 May 1994 text: There shall be additional legal Declarations which are as follows: (Award a Patent Title) shall be used if the Proposal does not Enact a Rule, but awards an existing Patent Title to a person. (Run for Office) shall be used if a Proposal seeks to place a Player in Office, according to the Rules for Offices. (*Was: 650/799*) history: ... [orphaned text: There shall be additional legal Declarations which are as follows: (Award a Patent Title) shall be used if the Proposal does not Enact a Rule, but awards an existing Patent Title to a person. (Appeal by Proposal) shall be used for Proposals which seek to overturn a Judgement. (Run for Office) shall be used if a Proposal seeks to place a Player in Office, according to the Rules for Offices. (*Was: 650*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 651 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 651 by Proposal 651 (Wes), ca. Oct. 22 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 text: Let there be the Patent Title known as Hero, which shall be awarded to those persons who gave outstanding service to Agora Nomic or Nomics as a whole, but who are no longer Players or who never were Players. No Player may Bear the Patent Title of Hero. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4173 (Goethe), 26 June 2001 text: Let there be the Patent Title known as Hero, which shall be awarded to those persons who gave outstanding service to Agora Nomic or Nomics as a whole, but who are no longer Players or who never were Players. If a person Bearing the Patent Title of Hero is registered as a Player, e shall cease to Bear that Patent Title. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 651 by Proposal 4759 (Manu, Sherlock), 15 May 2005 [orphaned text: Let there be the Patent Title known as Hero, which shall be given to those persons who gave outstanding service to eNomic, but who are no longer Players or who never were Players. No Player may hold the Patent Title of Hero. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 652 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 652 history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be known the Patent Title of First Speaker. This Patent Title shall be given to Michael Norrish. No other person may hold this Patent Title at any time. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 653 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 653 history: ... [orphaned text: Any Player who holds a Patent Title may refer to themselves by that Patent Title. Any Player who refers to themselves with a Patent Title which they do not possess, or claims to possess a Patent Title which they do not posses, shall be guilty of a Class B Crime. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 654,755 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 654 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 755 (KoJen), 30 November 1993 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: Let there be known the Patent Title known as Champion. This Patent Title shall be given to every Player who Wins a Game of eNomic, or who has Won a Game of eNomic. This Patent Title shall be awarded automatically, without need for a Proposal. If a Player Wins a Game despite a handicap factor X, then that Player shall instead receive the Patent Title "Champion*X", substituting for X the ratio of the Points required for that Player to Win, over the Points required for an unhandicapped Player to Win. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2433, 30 January 1996 text: Let there be known the Patent Title known as Champion. This Patent Title shall be given to every Player who Wins a Game of Agora Nomic, or who has Won a Game of Agora Nomic. This Patent Title shall be awarded automatically, without need for a Proposal. If a Player Wins a Game despite a handicap factor X, then that Player shall instead receive the Patent Title "Champion*X", substituting for X the ratio of the Points required for that Player to Win, over the Points required for an unhandicapped Player to Win. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: Let there be known the Patent Title known as Champion. This Patent Title shall be given to every Player who Wins a Game of Agora Nomic, or who has Won a Game of Agora Nomic. This Patent Title shall be awarded automatically, without need for a Proposal. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2693, 3 October 1996 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Rule 755, 3 October 1996 text: There is a class of Patent Titles known as Winners' Cups. There are 16 different Cups, ranked in ascending order, the full list of which is defined in this Rule. Whenever a Player Wins a Game, e shall be awarded the lowest Cup, if e has never been awarded a Cup previously; if e already is the holder of a Cup, e shall be awarded the Cup immediately above the one e already holds, if it exists. Any other Cups previously held shall be immediately revoked and lose any Historical Significance. The Cups are : * (1) Paper Cup, (2) Tin Cup, (3) Glass Cup, (4) Crystal Cup * (5) Bronze Cup, (6) Silver Cup, (7) Gold Cup, (8) Platinum Cup * (9) Amber Cup, (10) Ruby Cup, (11) Emerald Cup, (12) Diamond Cup * (13) Supreme Cup The first three groups are know, respectively, as the Plain Cups, the Noble Cups and the Extravagant Cups. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2721, 23 October 1996 text: There is a class of Patent Titles known as Winners' Cups. There are 13 different Cups, ranked in ascending order, the full list of which is defined in this Rule. Whenever a Player Wins a Game, e shall be awarded the lowest Cup, if e has never been awarded a Cup previously; if e already is the holder of a Cup, e shall be awarded the Cup immediately above the one e already holds, if it exists. Any other Cups previously held shall be immediately revoked and lose any Historical Significance. The Cups are : * (1) Paper Cup, (2) Tin Cup, (3) Glass Cup, (4) Crystal Cup * (5) Bronze Cup, (6) Silver Cup, (7) Gold Cup, (8) Platinum Cup * (9) Amber Cup, (10) Ruby Cup, (11) Emerald Cup, (12) Diamond Cup * (13) Supreme Cup The first three groups are know, respectively, as the Plain Cups, the Noble Cups and the Extravagant Cups. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: There is a class of Patent Titles known as Winners' Cups. There are 13 different Cups, ranked in ascending order, the full list of which is defined in this Rule. Whenever a Player Wins a Game, e shall be awarded the lowest Cup, if e has never been awarded a Cup previously; if e already is the holder of a Cup, e shall be awarded the Cup immediately above the one e already holds, if it exists. Any other Cups previously held shall be immediately revoked and lose any Historical Significance. The Cups are : * (1) Paper Cup, (2) Tin Cup, (3) Glass Cup, (4) Crystal Cup * (5) Bronze Cup, (6) Silver Cup, (7) Gold Cup, (8) Platinum Cup * (9) Amber Cup, (10) Ruby Cup, (11) Emerald Cup, (12) Diamond Cup * (13) Supreme Cup The first three groups are known, respectively, as the Plain Cups, the Noble Cups and the Extravagant Cups. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 755 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 [orphaned text: Let there be known the Patent Title known as Champion. This Patent Title shall be given to every Player who Wins a Game of eNomic, or who has Won a Game of eNomic. This Patent Title shall be awarded automatically, without need for a Proposal. If a Player Wins a Game despite a handicap factor X, then that Player shall instead receive the Patent Title "Champion*X", substituting for X the ratio of the Points required for that Player to Win, over the Points required for an unhandicapped Player to Win. (*Was: 654*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 655 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 655 history: ... [orphaned text: There shall be an Office known as the Sweepstakes Officer. The Sweepstakes Officer shall be responsible for the weekly Lottery and for the secret Word Sweepstakes, as well as any other duties which are determined by future legislation. The Sweepstakes Officer shall receive 2 Points at the end of each seven days of holding Office, starting from the date which e took Office. The Sweepstakes Officer shall be chosen as defined in other legislation. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 657 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 657 history: ... [orphaned text: No Rule which contains a reference to another Rule by Number may be Transmuted into an Immutable Rule. Any Propsal which attempts to do this shall be invalid and shall not be Voted upon. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 662 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 662 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1486, 15 March 1995 text: A "Move" refers to any specific action taken by a Player or group of Players in the context of the game. Any invocation of Judgement must satisfy one or more of the following conditions: - clearly allege that a specific Move is illegal; - clearly allege that a specific Rule is illegal or lacking in legal force, in whole or in part; - clearly allege that a specific Rule ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege, either implicitly or explicitly, that the Rules generally ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege that the current published game state is incorrect, and in what respects. A CFJ which does not satisfy at least one of the above conditions shall be deemed invalid and shall not be accepted for Judgement by the Clerk of the Courts. However, this Rule shall defer to rules which explictly permit CFJs that do not necessarily meet the above conditions. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1677, 22 August 1995 text: A "Move" refers to any specific action taken by a Player or group of Players in the context of the game. Any invocation of Judgement must satisfy one or more of the following conditions: - clearly allege that a specific Move is illegal; - clearly allege that a specific Rule is illegal or lacking in legal force, in whole or in part; - clearly allege that a specific Rule ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege, either implicitly or explicitly, that the Rules generally ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege that a specific Ordinance, Regulation, or Contract ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege, either implicitly or explicitly, that the Ordinances of a specific Group or the Regulations of a specific Contract ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege that the current published game state is incorrect, and in what respects. A CFJ which does not satisfy at least one of the above conditions shall be deemed invalid and shall not be accepted for Judgement by the Clerk of the Courts. However, this Rule shall defer to rules which explictly permit CFJs that do not necessarily meet the above conditions. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: A "Move" refers to any specific action taken by a Player or group of Players in the context of the game. Any invocation of Judgement must satisfy one or more of the following conditions: - clearly allege that a specific Move is illegal; - clearly allege that a specific Rule is illegal or lacking in legal force, in whole or in part; - clearly allege that a specific Rule ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege, either implicitly or explicitly, that the Rules generally ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege that a specific Ordinance, Regulation, or Contract ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege, either implicitly or explicitly, that the Ordinances of a specific Group or the Regulations of a specific Contract ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege that the current published game state is incorrect, and in what respects. A CFJ which does not satisfy at least one of the above conditions shall be deemed invalid and shall not be accepted for Judgement by the Clerk of the Courts. However, this Rule shall defer to rules which explicitly permit CFJs that do not necessarily meet the above conditions. history: Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, 14 January 1996 text: A "Move" refers to any specific action taken by a Player or group of Players in the context of the game. Any invocation of Judgement must satisfy one or more of the following conditions: - clearly allege that a specific Move is illegal; - clearly allege that a specific Rule is illegal or lacking in legal force, in whole or in part; - clearly allege that a specific Rule ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege, either implicitly or explicitly, that the Rules generally ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege that a specific Ordinance, Regulation, or Contract ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege, either implicitly or explicitly, that the Ordinances of a specific Group or the Regulations of a specific Contract ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege that the current published game state is incorrect, and in what respects. A CFJ which does not satisfy at least one of the above conditions shall be deemed invalid and shall not be accepted for Judgement by the Clerk of the Courts. However, this Rule shall defer to rules which explicitly permit CFJs that do not necessarily meet the above conditions. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: ... [orphaned text: A "Move" refers to any specific action taken by a Player or group of Players in the context of the game. Any invocation of Judgement must satisfy one or more of the following conditions: - clearly allege that a specific Move is illegal; - clearly allege that a specific Rule is illegal or lacking in legal force, in whole or in part; - clearly allege that a specific Rule ought to be interpreted in a certain way. - clearly allege that the current published game state is incorrect, and in what respects. A CFJ which does not satisfy at least one of the above conditions shall be deemed invalid and shall not be accepted for Judgement by the Clerk of the Courts. However, this Rule shall defer to rules which explictly permit CFJs that do not necessarily meet the above conditions. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 663 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 663 by Proposal 663, 2 November 1993 text: There shall be an entity known as an Injunction, which may accompany certain Judgements of TRUE or FALSE as provided in the rules. An Injunction is a statement or series of statements specifying an action or actions which must take place. If a Judgement is is accompanied by an Injunction, that Injunction must be published with the Judgement. All players must abide by the Injunction beginning no later than 72 hours after its publication unless one of the following conditions then apply: - The Judgement which the Injunction accompanies is undergoing appeal, currently UNDECIDED as a consequence of the appeal process, or, has been appealed and SUSTAINED, but a proposal has been published which would overturn that decision if passed, and said proposal has not failed. - The validity of the Injunction itself is questioned by a pending CFJ. - A Judgement upholding the validity of the Injunction is undergoing appeal, currently UNDECIDED as a consequence of the appeal process, or, has been appealed and SUSTAINED, but a proposal has been published which would overturn that decision if passed, and said proposal has not failed. A Judgement may not be accompanied by an Injunction unless it is specifically permitted elsewhere in the rules. An Injunction must be completely consistent with all rules in effect at the time of issuance, and must be completely relevant to the matter addressed in the corresponding judgement. If any Player believes that an Injunction or any part of it does not meet the criteria for a valid Injunction, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If the resulting Judgement supports the contention that the criteria are not met, the Injunction shall be considered illegal and shall have no legal force. This rule takes precedence over all rules governing Injunctions. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1487, 15 March 1995 text: There shall be an entity known as an Injunction, which may accompany certain Judgements of TRUE, FALSE, or UNDECIDABLE as provided in the rules. An Injunction is a statement or series of statements specifying an action or actions which must take place. If a Judgement is is accompanied by an Injunction, that Injunction must be published with the Judgement. All players must abide by the Injunction beginning no later than 72 hours after its publication unless one of the following conditions then apply: - The Judgement which the Injunction accompanies is undergoing appeal, currently UNKNOWN as a consequence of the appeal process, or, has been appealed and SUSTAINED, but a proposal has been published which would overturn that decision if passed, and said proposal has not failed. - The validity of the Injunction itself is questioned by a pending CFJ. - A Judgement upholding the validity of the Injunction is undergoing appeal, currently UNKNOWN as a consequence of the appeal process, or, has been appealed and SUSTAINED, but a proposal has been published which would overturn that decision if passed, and said proposal has not failed. A Judgement may not be accompanied by an Injunction unless it is specifically permitted elsewhere in the rules. An Injunction must be completely consistent with all rules in effect at the time of issuance, and must be completely relevant to the matter addressed in the corresponding judgement. If any Player believes that an Injunction or any part of it does not meet the criteria for a valid Injunction, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If the resulting Judgement supports the contention that the criteria are not met, the Injunction shall be considered illegal and shall have no legal force. This rule takes precedence over all rules governing Injunctions. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1734, 15 October 1995 text: There shall be an entity known as an Injunction, which may accompany certain Judgements of TRUE, FALSE, or UNDECIDABLE as provided in the rules. An Injunction is a statement or series of statements specifying an action or actions which must take place. If a Judgement is accompanied by an Injunction, that Injunction must be published with the Judgement. All players must abide by the Injunction beginning no later than 72 hours after its publication unless one of the following conditions then apply: - The Judgement which the Injunction accompanies is undergoing appeal, currently UNKNOWN as a consequence of the appeal process, or, has been appealed and SUSTAINED, but a proposal has been published which would overturn that decision if passed, and said proposal has not failed. - The validity of the Injunction itself is questioned by a pending CFJ. - A Judgement upholding the validity of the Injunction is undergoing appeal, currently UNKNOWN as a consequence of the appeal process, or, has been appealed and SUSTAINED, but a proposal has been published which would overturn that decision if passed, and said proposal has not failed. A Judgement may not be accompanied by an Injunction unless it is specifically permitted elsewhere in the rules. An Injunction must be completely consistent with all rules in effect at the time of issuance, and must be completely relevant to the matter addressed in the corresponding judgement. If any Player believes that an Injunction or any part of it does not meet the criteria for a valid Injunction, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If the resulting Judgement supports the contention that the criteria are not met, the Injunction shall be considered illegal and shall have no legal force. This rule takes precedence over all rules governing Injunctions. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: Judges shall, in certain situations when specifically authorized by the Rules, have the power to issue orders requiring one or more Players to perform (or refrain from performing) one or more Actions. Such an order is called an Injunction. An Injunction, in order to be legally made, must: * specify the Player or Players to whom it applies and the Action or Actions that Player or Players are required to perform (or refrain from performing). * accompany the Judgement of a Call for Judgement, of which the Player issuing the Injunction is the Judge; and * be an Injunction issued in a situation where the Rules specifically permit the Judge an Injunction to restrain a Player or Players in the manner specified. An Injunction which does not meet these criteria, or which has otherwise been issued in a manner which is not consistent with the Rules, has no legal effect. A Judge issues an Injunction by transmitting it to the Clerk of the Courts simultaneously with the Judgement it accompanies. history: Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, 18 June 1996 text: Judges shall, in certain situations when specifically authorized by the Rules, have the power to issue orders requiring one or more Players to perform (or refrain from performing) one or more Actions. Such an order is called an Injunction. An Injunction, in order to be legally made, must: * specify the Player or Players to whom it applies and the Action or Actions that Player or Players are required to perform (or refrain from performing). * accompany the Judgement of a Call for Judgement, of which the Player issuing the Injunction is the Judge; and * be an Injunction issued in a situation where the Rules specifically permit the Judge an Injunction to restrain a Player or Players in the manner specified. An Injunction which does not meet these criteria, or which has otherwise been issued in a manner which is not consistent with the Rules, has no legal effect. A Judge issues an Injunction by transmitting it to the Clerk of the Courts simultaneously with the Judgement it accompanies. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2684, 3 October 1996 text: A Judge is permitted to issue orders requiring one or more Players to perform, or refrain from performing, one or more actions. Such an order is called an Injunction. To be legally made, an Injunction must: i) Specify the Player(s) to whom it applies. ii) Specify the action(s) the Player(s) are required to perform or refrain from performing. iii) Be sent to the CotC simultaneously with a Judgement which has been legally made by the Judge. iv) Be of a type explicitly defined in the Rules. v) Be issued in a manner consistent with the Rules. An Injunction which does not meet these criteria has no effect. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3509 (Harlequin), 16 June 1997 text: A Judge is permitted to issue orders requiring one or more Players to perform, or refrain from performing, one or more actions. Such an order is called an Injunction. To be legally made, an Injunction must: i) Specify the Player(s) to whom it applies. ii) Specify the action(s) the Player(s) are required to perform or refrain from performing. iii) Either be attached to a legally made Judgement at the time that Judgement is originally delivered to the Cotc, or be legally made by the Board of Appeals in an Appeal of an Injunction. iv) Be of a type explicitly defined in the Rules. v) Be issued in a manner consistent with the Rules. An Injunction which does not meet these criteria has no effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 663 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 664 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 664 history: ... [orphaned text: If a Judge hands down an Injunction which is determined illegal by a CFJ, then a Criminal Court may find em GUILTY of a Class C crime. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 665 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 665 by Proposal 665, 2 November 1993 text: If a CFJ alleges that a specific Move is illegal, and the Judgement supports the allegation, the Judge may include with the Judgement an Injunction specifying that the move is to be retracted, and any resulting adjustments to the published game state. The adjustments to the game state must have been unambiguously specified within the CFJ, and these adjustments must only undo actions which were a direct or indirect result of that Move. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1642, 1 August 1995 text: If a CFJ alleges that a specific Move is illegal, and the Judgement supports the allegation, the Judge may include with the Judgement an Injunction specifying that the move is to be retracted, if the Judge thinks it is appropriate to do so. The Judge may also issue an Injunction specifying any adjustments to the published game state which result from the allegation being supported. These adjustments to the game state must have been unambiguously specified within the CFJ, and they must be adjustments which occur as a direct or indirect result of the allegation being supported. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 669 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 669 history: ... [orphaned text: If the rules require a Player to obey an Injunction and e fails to do so, then a Criminal Court may find that Player GUILTY of a Class C crime. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 675 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 675 history: ... [orphaned text: If the Office of Clerk of the Courts becomes vacant, then a replacement shall be appointed randomly by the Speaker from the list of Active Players, excluding the Speaker and the most recent Clerk of the Courts. A tentative replacement shall be asked if e wants the Office, and if not, a new one shall be selected in the same manner. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which may seem to require the Clerk of the Courts to fill a vacant Office of Clerk of the Courts. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 676 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 676 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1315, 12 November 1994 text: Add to the Registrar's duties the following: Responsibility for maintaining the two following "phone books": Nomic White Pages: List of all Players; their Nomic nickname, preferred email address, and (only if desired by the Player) their real name. Each entry is annotated with one of these codes that indicate the current status of the Player: (A) - active player; (H) - on hold; (L) - left the Game; as well as the date the last change in status occurred." Nomic Blue Pages: "Government Listing". List of each Officer and other official Nomic positions (like Speaker), and the Nomic nickname and email address of the Player in that position. May also include other special official information like the address of the Nomic listserver, etc. Some latitude is granted to the Registrar in the formatting of these Directories. If necessary, restrictions will be imposed. The Registrar shall post them whenever e is required to post a list of Players. Additionally, e shall provide this information to any Player upon request. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1681, 22 August 1995 text: Add to the Registrar's duties the following: Responsibility for maintaining the two following "phone books": Nomic White Pages: List of all Players; their Nomic nickname, preferred email address, and (only if desired by the Player) their real name. Each entry is annotated with one of these codes that indicate the current status of the Player: (A) - active player; (H) - on hold; (L) - left the Game; as well as the date the last change in status occurred." Nomic Blue Pages: "Government Listing". List of each Officer and other official Nomic positions (like Speaker), and the Nomic nickname and email address of the Player in that position. May also include other special official information like the address of the Nomic listserver, etc. The Registrar shall publish the Blue Pages in the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1739, 15 October 1995 text: The Registrar is responsible for maintaining the following information: Nomic White Pages: List of all Players; their Nomic nickname, preferred email address, and (only if desired by the Player) their real name. Each entry is annotated with one of these codes that indicate the current status of the Player: (A) - active player; (H) - on hold; (L) - left the Game; as well as the date the last change in status occurred. Nomic Blue Pages: "Government Listing". List of each Officer and other official Nomic positions (like Speaker), and the Nomic nickname and email address of the Player in that position. May also include other special official information like the address of the Nomic listserver, etc. The Registrar shall publish the Blue Pages in the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2532, 10 March 1996 text: The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Registered Players, with their Nomic nickname, preferred email address, current On/Off Hold status, and the date the Player last Registered or went On or Off Hold. This list is known as the White Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Offices and other official positions within Agora (such as Speaker), with the Nomic nickname of the holder of each position, and (in the case of Offices) when the last Election for that Office was and whether the Office is held temporarily. This list is known as the Blue Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: ... [orphaned text: Add to the Registrar's duties the following: Responsibility for maintaining the two following "phone books": Nomic White Pages: List of all Players; their Nomic nickname, preferred email address, and (only if desired by the Player) their real name. Each entry is annotated with one of these codes: (A) - active player; (H) - on hold; (L) - left the Game. Nomic Blue Pages: "Government Listing". List of each Officer and other official Nomic positions (like Speaker), and the Nomic nickname and email address of the Player in that position. May also include other special official information like the address of the Nomic listserver, etc. Some latitude is granted to the Registrar in the formatting of these Directories. If necessary, restrictions will be imposed. The Registrar shall post them whenever e is required to post a list of Players. Additionally, e shall provide this information to any Player upon request. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 677,785 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 677 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 785 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1424, 7 February 1995 text: If any Player suspects that the Speaker has Abandoned, e may send a message to all Players calling on the Speaker to announce eir presence. The Speaker must reply to all Players within one week; if e does not, and the Speaker has not changed in that week, e is defined to have Abandoned. If the Speaker has Abandoned, then if there is already a Speaker-Elect e immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker becomes a Voter. If not, a new Speaker shall be chosen according to the Order of Succession, defined elsewhere, with the first Player who called for the Speaker to announce eir Presence as the Arbiter of Succession. The new Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc. but if this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. If a Speaker is replaced in this manner, e has eir score set to minus 2N Points upon becoming a Voter, where N is the number of points required for that player to win at the moment e becomes a Voter. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1682, 22 August 1995 text: If any Player suspects that the Speaker has Abandoned, e may send a message to all Players calling on the Speaker to announce eir presence. The Speaker must reply to all Players within one week; if e does not, and the Speaker has not changed in that week, e is defined to have Abandoned. If the Speaker has Abandoned, then if there is already a Speaker-Elect e immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker becomes a Voter. If not, a new Speaker shall be chosen according to the Order of Succession, defined elsewhere, with the first Player who called for the Speaker to announce eir Presence as the Arbiter of Succession. The new Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc. but if this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. A Speaker who Abandons commits a Class A Crime history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2533, 13 March 1996 text: If any Player suspects that the Speaker has Abandoned, e may send a message to all Players calling on the Speaker to announce eir presence. The Speaker must reply to all Players within one week; if no communication from the Speaker is sent to all Players or to the Public Forum within that period, and the Speaker has not changed in that week, e is defined to have Abandoned. If the Speaker has Abandoned, then if there is already a Speaker-Elect e immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker becomes a Voter. If not, a new Speaker shall be chosen according to the Order of Succession, defined elsewhere, with the first Player who called for the Speaker to announce eir Presence as the Arbiter of Succession. The new Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc. but if this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. A Speaker who Abandons commits a Class A Crime history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2661, 7 September 1996 text: If any Player suspects that the Speaker has Abandoned, e may send a message to all Players calling on the Speaker to announce eir presence. The Speaker must reply to all Players within one week; if no communication from the Speaker is sent to all Players or to the Public Forum within that period, and the Speaker has not changed in that week, e is defined to have Abandoned. If the Speaker has Abandoned, then the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. A Speaker who Abandons commits a Class A Crime. history: ... history: Amended(5) text: If any Player suspects that the Speaker has Abandoned, e may send a message to all Players calling on the Speaker to announce eir presence. The Speaker must reply to all Players within one week; if no communication from the Speaker is sent to all Players or to the Public Forum within that period, and the Speaker has not changed in that week, e is defined to have Abandoned. If the Speaker has Abandoned, then the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. A Speaker who Abandons commits the Crime of Speaker Abandonment, a Class A Crime. history: ... [orphaned text: If the Speaker has abandoned eir post, another new, Temporary Speaker is selected according to the "Rules of Succession", or if no such rules are defined, the other Player not on hold with the highest Score becomes the temporary Speaker. This does not force the Game to be over in this case, and Scores are not reset to 0. The Game continues until a Player Wins, at which time a new Game is begun and the Winner becomes the real Speaker. The Temporary Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc. but if this is not possible, then the Temporary Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. If a Speaker is replaced in this manner, e has eir score set to minus 2N Points immediately, where N is the number of Points required for a Player to Win the Game. Abandonment is determined as follows: If any Player suspects that the Speaker has Abandoned, e sends a message to all Players calling on the Speaker to announce eir presence. The Speaker must reply to all Players within one week; if e does not, e is considered to have Abandoned. (*Was: 677*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 679 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 679 history: ... [orphaned text: If a Player is selected to perform the role of Temporary Speaker, and e accepts, then e shall be compensated exactly as the Speaker would have been at the end of the Game, instead of the Speaker, who is not compensated. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which would provide a reward to the Speaker at the end of the Game. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 680,786 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 680 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 786 (Chuck), ca. Dec. 20 1993 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1426, 7 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1539, 4 April 1995 text: When a Speaker or Speaker-Elect is to be filled according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: Promotor Assessor Justiciar Clerk of the Courts Assistant Rulekeepor Registrar Archivist with the order determined at the time the Call for Volunteers is made. Any Rule which requires a Speaker or Speaker-Elect to be filled according to the Order of Succession must specify an Arbiter of Succession; if it does not, a Speaker or Speaker-Elect shall not be chosen according to that Rule, and this Rule takes precedence over such Rules. When the position of Speaker or Speaker-Elect is to be filled, the Arbiter of Succession shall, as soon as possible, announce that fact to the Public Forum in a Call for Volunteers. All Voters who are willing to fill the position shall indicate such in a message to the Arbiter of Succession, within three days of the Call for Volunteers. If there are no volunteers, the Arbiter of Succession shall make another Call for Volunteers. As soon as possible after the end of the three-day period, and within four days after the end of that three-day period, the Arbiter of Succession shall announce which Voter, of those who indicated a willingness to fill the position, is highest on the order of succession. That Voter shall immediately become Speaker or Speaker-Elect, whichever position was to be filled. If e becomes Speaker, the old Speaker shall become a Voter. The Arbitration Period is defined as the period in the Order of Succession starting with the Call for Volunteers and ending with: 1) the announcement by the Arbiter of Succession of the new Speaker or Speaker-Elect; 2) the filling of the position to be filled by another method; 3) the time when it becomes no longer necessary to complete the Order of Succession, according to other Rules; 4) or seven days after the Call for Volunteers is issued; whichever comes first. If the Arbitration Period ends without any of the first three criteria for the end of the Arbitration Period being fulfilled, then a new Order of Succession shall begin to fill the required position, with the first Voter to post eir willingness to the Public Forum as Arbiter of Succession, excluding any Voters who have already served as Arbiter of Succession for this particular requirement to fill the position. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2500, 3 March 1996 text: When a Speaker or Speaker-Elect is to be filled according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: Promotor Assessor Justiciar Clerk of the Courts Rulekeepor Registrar Archivist with the order determined at the time the Call for Volunteers is made. Any Rule which requires a Speaker or Speaker-Elect to be filled according to the Order of Succession must specify an Arbiter of Succession; if it does not, a Speaker or Speaker-Elect shall not be chosen according to that Rule, and this Rule takes precedence over such Rules. When the position of Speaker or Speaker-Elect is to be filled, the Arbiter of Succession shall, as soon as possible, announce that fact to the Public Forum in a Call for Volunteers. All Voters who are willing to fill the position shall indicate such in a message to the Arbiter of Succession, within three days of the Call for Volunteers. If there are no volunteers, the Arbiter of Succession shall make another Call for Volunteers. As soon as possible after the end of the three-day period, and within four days after the end of that three-day period, the Arbiter of Succession shall announce which Voter, of those who indicated a willingness to fill the position, is highest on the order of succession. That Voter shall immediately become Speaker or Speaker-Elect, whichever position was to be filled. If e becomes Speaker, the old Speaker shall become a Voter. The Arbitration Period is defined as the period in the Order of Succession starting with the Call for Volunteers and ending with: 1) the announcement by the Arbiter of Succession of the new Speaker or Speaker-Elect; 2) the filling of the position to be filled by another method; 3) the time when it becomes no longer necessary to complete the Order of Succession, according to other Rules; 4) or seven days after the Call for Volunteers is issued; whichever comes first. If the Arbitration Period ends without any of the first three criteria for the end of the Arbitration Period being fulfilled, then a new Order of Succession shall begin to fill the required position, with the first Voter to post eir willingness to the Public Forum as Arbiter of Succession, excluding any Voters who have already served as Arbiter of Succession for this particular requirement to fill the position. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2661, 7 September 1996 text: When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled temporarily according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: Promotor Assessor Justiciar Clerk of the Courts Rulekeepor Registrar Archivist This list shall specifically exclude the Speaker, and Players who are On Hold. Its order is determined at the time the Office is to be filled. Any Rule which requires the Office of Speaker-Elect to be filled according to the Order of Succession must specify an Arbiter of Succession; if it does not, the Speaker-Elect shall not be chosen according to that Rule. This Rule takes precedence over such Rules. (If this would ever result in the Speaker filling the Office of Speaker-Elect, then the Speaker-Elect shall instead be filled by the Order of Succession, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession.) When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled, the Arbiter of Succession shall, as soon as possible, announce in the Public Forum that the Office of Speaker-Elect is being temporarily filled by this Rule. Once this announcement has been made, each Player has three days to decline to fill the Office by sending a message to the Arbiter stating e does so. During this three day period, the Office of Speaker-Elect is held by that Active Player highest in the order of succession who has not yet declined to the Arbiter. If there is only one Active Player in the order of succession who has not declined, that Player may not decline. At the end of the three days, the Office is filled by the Active Player highest on the list of succession who did not decline the Office, and that player may no longer decline. As soon as possible after, and within four days of, the filling the Office of Speaker-Elect, the Arbiter of Succession shall announce which Active Player is now the Speaker-Elect. Announcements by the Arbiter have no effect on the identity of the Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled temporarily according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: Promotor Assessor Justiciar Clerk of the Courts Rulekeepor Registrar Archivist This list shall specifically exclude the Speaker, and Players who are On Hold. Its order is determined at the time the Office is to be filled. Any Rule which requires the Office of Speaker-Elect to be filled according to the Order of Succession must specify an Arbiter of Succession; if it does not, the Speaker-Elect shall not be chosen according to that Rule. This Rule takes precedence over such Rules. (If this would ever result in the Speaker filling the Office of Speaker-Elect, then the Speaker-Elect shall instead be filled by the Order of Succession, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession.) When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled, the Arbiter of Succession shall, as soon as possible, announce in the Public Forum that the Office of Speaker-Elect is being temporarily filled by this Rule. Once this announcement has been made, each Player has three days to decline to fill the Office by sending a message to the Arbiter stating e does so. During this three day period, the Office of Speaker-Elect is held by that Active Player highest in the order of succession who has not yet declined to the Arbiter. If there is only one Active Player in the order of succession who has not declined, that Player may not decline. At the end of the three days, the Office is filled by the Active Player highest on the list of succession who did not decline the Office, and that player may no longer decline. As soon as possible after, and within four days of, the filling the Office of Speaker-Elect, the Arbiter of Succession shall announce which Active Player is now the Speaker-Elect. Announcements by the Arbiter have no effect on the identity of the Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 2828 (Zefram), 7 March 1997 text: When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled temporarily according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: the Promotor the Assessor the Justiciar the Clerk of the Courts the Rulekeepor the Registrar the Archivist all Officers in order of most recent registration all Active Players in order of most recent registration except that the Speaker does not appear in the Order. The Order of Succession is determined at the time the Office is to be filled. Any Rule which requires the Office of Speaker-Elect to be filled according to the Order of Succession must specify an Arbiter of Succession; if it does not, the Speaker-Elect shall not be chosen according to that Rule. This Rule takes precedence over such Rules. (If this would ever result in the Speaker filling the Office of Speaker-Elect, then the Speaker-Elect shall instead be filled by the Order of Succession, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession.) When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled, the Arbiter of Succession shall, as soon as possible, announce in the Public Forum that the Office of Speaker-Elect is being temporarily filled by this Rule. Once this announcement has been made, each Player has three days to decline to fill the Office by sending a message to the Arbiter stating e does so. During this three day period, the Office of Speaker-Elect is held by that Active Player highest in the order of succession who has not yet declined to the Arbiter. If there is only one Active Player in the order of succession who has not declined, that Player may not decline. At the end of the three days, the Office is filled by the Active Player highest on the list of succession who did not decline the Office, and that player may no longer decline. As soon as possible after, and within four days of, the filling the Office of Speaker-Elect, the Arbiter of Succession shall announce which Active Player is now the Speaker-Elect. Announcements by the Arbiter have no effect on the identity of the Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 text: When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled temporarily according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: the Promotor the Assessor the Justiciar the Clerk of the Courts the Rulekeepor the Registrar all Officers in order of most recent registration all Active Players in order of most recent registration except that the Speaker does not appear in the Order. The Order of Succession is determined at the time the Office is to be filled. Any Rule which requires the Office of Speaker-Elect to be filled according to the Order of Succession must specify an Arbiter of Succession; if it does not, the Speaker-Elect shall not be chosen according to that Rule. This Rule takes precedence over such Rules. (If this would ever result in the Speaker filling the Office of Speaker-Elect, then the Speaker-Elect shall instead be filled by the Order of Succession, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession.) When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled, the Arbiter of Succession shall, as soon as possible, announce in the Public Forum that the Office of Speaker-Elect is being temporarily filled by this Rule. Once this announcement has been made, each Player has three days to decline to fill the Office by sending a message to the Arbiter stating e does so. During this three day period, the Office of Speaker-Elect is held by that Active Player highest in the order of succession who has not yet declined to the Arbiter. If there is only one Active Player in the order of succession who has not declined, that Player may not decline. At the end of the three days, the Office is filled by the Active Player highest on the list of succession who did not decline the Office, and that player may no longer decline. As soon as possible after, and within four days of, the filling the Office of Speaker-Elect, the Arbiter of Succession shall announce which Active Player is now the Speaker-Elect. Announcements by the Arbiter have no effect on the identity of the Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled temporarily according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: the Promotor the Assessor the Justiciar the Clerk of the Courts the Rulekeepor the Registrar all Officers in order of most recent registration all Active Players in order of most recent registration except that the Speaker does not appear in the Order. The Order of Succession is determined at the time the Office is to be filled. Any Rule which requires the Office of Speaker-Elect to be filled according to the Order of Succession must specify an Arbiter of Succession; if it does not, the Speaker-Elect shall not be chosen according to that Rule. This Rule takes precedence over such Rules. (If this would ever result in the Speaker filling the Office of Speaker-Elect, then the Speaker-Elect shall instead be filled by the Order of Succession, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession.) When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled, the Arbiter of Succession shall, as soon as possible, announce in the Public Forum that the Office of Speaker-Elect is being temporarily filled by this Rule. Once this announcement has been made, each Player has three days to decline to fill the Office by sending a message to the Arbiter stating e does so. During this three day period, the Office of Speaker-Elect is held by that Active Player highest in the order of succession who has not yet declined to the Arbiter. If there is only one Active Player in the order of succession who has not declined, that Player may not decline. At the end of the three days, the Office is filled by the Active Player highest on the list of succession who did not decline the Office, and that player may no longer decline. As soon as possible after, and within four days of, the filling of the Office of Speaker-Elect, the Arbiter of Succession shall announce which Active Player is now the Speaker-Elect. Announcements by the Arbiter have no effect on the identity of the Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3974 (Elysion), 14 February 2000 text: When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled temporarily according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: the Promotor the Assessor the Justiciar the Clerk of the Courts the Rulekeepor the Registrar all Officers in order of most recent registration all Active Players in order of most recent registration except that the Speaker does not appear in the Order. The Order of Succession is determined at the time the Office is to be filled. If there is ever no electee for the Office of Speaker-Elect, the Office shall be held by the Active Player highest in the order of succession who has not declined since there was last an electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect. A Player declines by sending a message to the Public Forum stating e does so. If there is only one Active Player in the order of succession who has not declined, that Player may not decline. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4049 (Elysion), 15 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4071 (Steve), 14 September 2000 text: When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: the Promotor the Registrar the Rulekeepor the Assessor the Justiciar the Clerk of the Courts all Officers in order of most recent registration all Active Players in order of most recent registration except that the Speaker does not appear in the Order. The Order of Succession is determined at the time the Office is to be filled. If there is ever no electee for the Office of Speaker-Elect, the Office shall be held by the Active Player highest in the order of succession who has not declined since there was last an electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect. A Player declines by sending a message to the Public Forum stating e does so. If there is only one Active Player in the order of succession who has not declined, that Player may not decline. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: the Promotor the Registrar the Rulekeepor the Assessor the Justiciar the Clerk of the Courts all Officers in order of most recent registration all Active Players in order of most recent registration except that the Speaker does not appear in the Order. The Order of Succession is determined at the time the Office is to be filled. If there is ever no Electee for the Office of Speaker-Elect, the Office shall be held by the Active Player highest in the order of succession who has not publicly declined since there was last an Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect. If there is only one Active Player in the order of succession who has not declined, that Player may not decline. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4155 (harvel), 18 May 2001 text: When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be filled according to the Order of Succession, that order is defined to be: the Promotor the Registrar the Rulekeepor the Assessor the Justiciar the Clerk of the Courts all Officers in order of most recent registration all Active Players in order of most recent registration except that neither the Speaker nor any Unready Player appears in the Order. The Order of Succession is determined at the time the Office is to be filled. If there is ever no Electee for the Office of Speaker-Elect, the Office shall be held by the Active Player highest in the order of succession who has not publicly declined since there was last an Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect. If there is only one Active Player in the order of succession who has not declined, that Player may not decline. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: When the rules require that a conclave be convened, and no competing conclave is currently convened, then as soon as possible, the Associate Director of Personnel (ADoP) shall announce that e convenes a conclave, specifying a collection of cardinals and indicating that those cardinals are to convene a conclave. Provided that: (a) the rules require that the conclave be convened; (b) no competing conclave is currently convened; and (c) the collection consists of qualified cardinals, then as of such an announcement, a conclave consisting of the qualified cardinals is convened. A cardinal is qualified for a conclave unless the rules specify otherwise. The first seven days following the convening of a conclave constitute the posturing period. During the posturing period, a qualified cardinal may announce eir intent to become a pope. Any other player may publicly support or revoke support for a cardinal's claim until the posturing period ends. As soon as possible after the posturing period ends, the ADoP shall perform the following actions in order: (a) E shall determine the cardinal club, which is the collection of qualified cardinals with positive support from the populace and at least as much unwithdrawn support as any other qualified cardinal. (b) If the cardinal club has no members, e shall announce this fact, and announce the conclave was inconclusive. (c) If the cardinal club has at least one member, e shall select one of its members to be pope, then publish the list of members of the cardinal club, indicating which member is to become a pope. That member becomes a pope as of this announcement. The ADoP's announcement in (b) or (c) concludes the conclave. If the conclave was inconclusive, eir announcement of this fact shall constitute a valid call to conclave. If the conclave has not concluded within a fortnight from the time it was convened, any player may announce that it is inconclusive; upon such an announcement, the conclave shall conclude with an inconclusive result, and a conclave must be convened. If the office of ADoP is ever vacant, or the identity of its holder cannot be determined with reasonable certainty, then the first player who announces that e convenes a conclave, with eir announcement adhering to the conditions for the ADoP's announcement, shall then be permitted and required to perform the actions that would have been required of the ADoP for that conclave. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4836 (Goethe, Maud), 2 October 2005 text: When the rules require that a conclave be convened and no competing conclave is currently convened, then as soon as possible, the Associate Director of Personnel (ADoP) shall convene a conclave by announcement, specifying the collection of qualified cardinals. A cardinal is qualified for a conclave unless the rules specify otherwise. The announcement is ineffective if the ADoP is not required to convene a conclave or eir announcement does not list all and only the cardinals qualified for that conclave. However, if errors are not announced until after 7 days after the conclave concludes, the results shall stand. The convening of a conclave initiates an Agoran Decision to determine the Pope, a decision in which quorum is zero, the voting period is 7 days, all Players are eligible voters, all qualified cardinals are valid options as long as they remain qualified cardinals, and the ADoP has the privilege of resolving ties as for elections. The ADoP's announcement of the cardinal chosen by Agora makes that cardinal the pope and concludes the conclave. If no cardinal may be legally chosen by Agora, the ADoP shall so announce, and the conclave concludes as a cliffhanger. If a conclave has not concluded within a fortnight from the time it was convened, any player may announce that it is inconclusive and thus conclude it as a cliffhanger. When an conclave concludes as a cliffhanger, this canon calls for a consecutive conclave to be convened to calculate the correct cardinal. If the office of ADoP is ever vacant, or the identity of its holder cannot be determined with reasonable certainty, then the first player who announces that e convenes a conclave, with eir announcement adhering to the conditions for the ADoP's announcement, shall then be permitted and required to perform the actions that would have been required of the ADoP for that conclave. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 786 by Proposal 4853 (Goethe), 18 March 2006 [orphaned text: When a Speaker is to be replaced according to the "Rules of Succession", that order is defined to be: Archivist Clerk of the Courts Rulekeepor Distributor When a replacement Speaker is required, all Players who are willing to become Speaker shall indicate such in a message, sent within three days of the Abandonment or resignation of the Speaker. The old Speaker may not send such a message. This message shall be sent to the Speaker, in the case of a Speaker voluntarily giving up his position; or to the first Player who called for the Speaker to announce his presence, in the case of an Abandoned Speaker. After three days, the Player ranking highest on the list of succession, out of those who indicated a willingness to become Speaker, shall become Speaker. (*Was: 680*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 681 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 681 by Proposal 681 (KoJen), ca. Oct. 29 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1423, 7 February 1995 text: The Speaker may voluntarily give up Speakership by announcing the fact to all Players. If there is already a Speaker-Elect, e remains Speaker-Elect. If not, a Speaker-Elect is chosen according to the Order of Succession, defined elsewhere in the Rules, with the Speaker as the Arbiter of Succession. If a Speaker-Elect chosen by this method ceases to be a Player, a new Speaker-Elect shall be chosen according to the Order of Succession with the Speaker as the Arbiter of Succession. If a Speaker is replaced in this manner, e loses 10 points upon becoming a Voter, and, if the resulting score is greater than the average score of all Players, eir score is reset to the average of all Players. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1695, 1 September 1995 text: The Speaker may voluntarily give up Speakership by announcing the fact to all Players. If there is already a Speaker-Elect, e remains Speaker-Elect. If not, a Speaker-Elect is chosen according to the Order of Succession, defined elsewhere in the Rules, with the Speaker as the Arbiter of Succession. If a Speaker-Elect chosen by this method ceases to be a Player, a new Speaker-Elect shall be chosen according to the Order of Succession with the Speaker as the Arbiter of Succession. When a Speaker voluntarily gives up Speakership in this manner, the former Speaker shall lose 25 Mark, and e shall further be prevented from Winning until the start of the next Game. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1734, 15 October 1995 text: The Speaker may voluntarily give up Speakership by announcing the fact to all Players. If there is already a Speaker-Elect, e remains Speaker-Elect. If not, a Speaker-Elect is chosen according to the Order of Succession, defined elsewhere in the Rules, with the Speaker as the Arbiter of Succession. If a Speaker-Elect chosen by this method ceases to be a Player, a new Speaker-Elect shall be chosen according to the Order of Succession with the Speaker as the Arbiter of Succession. When a Speaker voluntarily gives up Speakership in this manner, the former Speaker shall lose 25 Marks, and e shall further be prevented from Winning until the start of the next Game. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2604, 26 May 1996 text: The Speaker may voluntarily give up Speakership by announcing the fact to all Players. If there is already a Speaker-Elect, e remains Speaker-Elect. If not, a Speaker-Elect is chosen according to the Order of Succession, defined elsewhere in the Rules, with the Speaker as the Arbiter of Succession. If a Speaker-Elect chosen by this method ceases to be a Player, a new Speaker-Elect shall be chosen according to the Order of Succession with the Speaker as the Arbiter of Succession. When a Speaker voluntarily gives up Speakership in this manner, the former Speaker shall lose 5 Mil, and e shall further be prevented from Winning until the start of the next Game. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2661, 7 September 1996 text: The Speaker may voluntarily give up Speakership by announcing the fact to all Players, at which point the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect shall becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. When a Speaker voluntarily gives up Speakership in this manner, the former Speaker shall lose 5 Mil, and e shall further be prevented from Winning until the start of the next Game. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: The Speaker may voluntarily give up Speakership by announcing the fact to all Players, at which point the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect shall becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. When a Speaker voluntarily gives up Speakership in this manner, the former Speaker shall lose 5 Mil, and e shall further be prevented from nominating eimself for Speaker-Elect until the start of the next quarter. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: The Speaker may voluntarily give up Speakership by announcing the fact to all Players, at which point the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect shall becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. When a Speaker voluntarily gives up Speakership in this manner, the former Speaker shall lose 1 VT, and e shall further be prevented from nominating eimself for Speaker-Elect until the start of the next quarter. history: Amended(8) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The Speaker may voluntarily give up Speakership by announcing the fact to all Players, at which point the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect shall becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. When a Speaker voluntarily gives up Speakership in this manner, the former Speaker shall lose 1 VT, and e shall further be prevented from nominating emself for Speaker-Elect until the start of the next quarter. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3703 (Steve), 9 March 1998 text: If the Speaker announces in the Public Forum that e is giving up the Speakership voluntarily, a Speaker Transition occurs. As soon as possible after the Transition is completed, the new Speaker shall bill the former Speaker one Voting Token. When a Speaker voluntarily gives up the Speakership in this manner, e is prevented from nominating emself for the Office of Speaker-Elect for a period lasting two weeks, or until the start of the next quarter, whichever is longest. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: If the Speaker announces in the Public Forum that e is giving up the Speakership voluntarily, e commits the Class 0.2 Infraction of Resigning the Speakership, and a Speaker Transition occurs. This Infraction is to be reported by the new Speaker once the Transition is complete. When a Speaker voluntarily gives up the Speakership in this manner, e is prevented from nominating emself for the Office of Speaker-Elect for a period lasting two weeks, or until the start of the next quarter, whichever is longest. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: If the Speaker publicly announces that e is giving up the Speakership voluntarily, e commits the Class 0.2 Infraction of Resigning the Speakership, and a Speaker Transition occurs. This Infraction is to be reported by the new Speaker once the Transition is complete. When a Speaker voluntarily gives up the Speakership in this manner, e is prevented from nominating emself for the Office of Speaker-Elect for a period lasting two weeks, or until the start of the next quarter, whichever is longest. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: A conclave must be convened whenever any of the following events occur: (a) the Speaker resigns the Speakership; (b) the Speaker becomes inactive; (c) the Herald confirms an allegation that the Speaker is lawless; (d) a valid notice of deregistration naming the Speaker is published; (e) the success of a Call for Revolt is announced, and the Speaker was abiding at the time of the Call for Revolt, in which case the rebellious cardinals are the only qualified cardinals for the conclave; (f) two or more cardinals simultaneously win the game, in which case these cardinals are the only qualified cardinals for the conclave; (g) no pope has become Speaker in the past six months; (h) a pope ceases to be pope without becoming Speaker; or (i) a conclave has concluded with an inconclusive result. So there's always hope that you can be pope. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4853 (Goethe), 18 March 2006 text: Agora exits from Conclave whenever a player becomes a pope. Agora enters into Conclave whenever there is no pope and one of the following triggering events occurs: (a) the Speaker resigns the Speakership, becomes inactive, or otherwise ceases to be Speaker without another player being installed as Speaker; (b) the success of a Call for Revolt is announced, and the Speaker was abiding at the time of the Call for Revolt, in which case the rebellious cardinals are the only qualified cardinals; (c) two or more cardinals simultaneously win the game, in which case these cardinals are the only qualified cardinals; (d) no pope has become Speaker for the past six months; or (e) a pope ceases to be pope without becoming Speaker. As soon as possible after Agora enters into conclave, the Associate Director of Personnel must announce the fact and publish a list of qualified cardinals. All cardinals are considered qualified unless specifically restricted by the particular triggering event. If Agora is already in conclave when a triggering event occurs, Agora remains in conclave, but the qualification of each cardinal is modified to reflect the more recent event. While Agora is in conclave, any player may make a qualified Cardinal into a pope, with Agoran consent. If the legality of this action is not challenged within seven days of it being attempted, then it shall be allowed to stand, even if is subsequently found to be illegal. So there's always hope that you can be pope. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 681 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 [orphaned text: A Speaker may voluntarily give up Speakership, by announcing the fact to all Players and proceeding according to other Rules governing the orderly transfer of power of a Speaker. The Speaker is replaced by a temporary Speaker according to the Rules of Succession. The Game is not over in this case, and Scores are not reset to 0. The Game continues until a Player Wins, at which time a new Game is begin and the Winner becomes the real Speaker. Restrictions: The ex-Speaker loses 10 Points immediately, and if the resulting Score is greater than the average Score of all Players, then eir score is set to the average Score. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 684 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 684 history: ... [orphaned text: At the end of each Game the Point Reserve is reset to X. Let X be equal to the total number of Points that exists in the Point Reserve at the end of the Game divided by the number of Active Players that were Active at the end of the Game. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 688 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 688 history: ... history: Repealed as Mutable Rule by Proposal 954 (Ian), 25 July 1994 [orphaned text: The Speaker is not allowed to make use of the Vototron. This Rule takes precedence over Rule 574. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 689,790 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 689 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 790, ca. Dec. 20 1993 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: If, for any reason, an Office is vacant, that fact shall be announced by the Electioneer. The Electioneer shall be the Registrar; or in eir absence, the Speaker. All Players willing to hold the Office shall notify the Electioneer of that fact within three days of eir announcement of the vacancy. At the end of the three day period, the Electioneer shall randomly choose one player from those who indicated a willingness to hold the Office, and that Player shall become that Officer. This rule applies to Offices in general, and thus defers to Rules for specific Offices. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: An Office is "held in the normal fashion" if and only if the Officer holding that Office was elected to that Office and has neither resigned from it nor been retired or removed from it. An Office which is not held in the normal fashion is said to be held temporarily. As soon as possible after it occurs that there is an Office which is being held temporarily, and for which no Election is already being conducted, the Registrar shall initiate an Election to fill that Office, as described elsewhere. The winner of that Election shall then hold that Office until e resigns or is retired or removed from that Office. history: Null-Amended(3) by Proposal 2454, 6 February 1996 text: An Office is "held in the normal fashion" if and only if the Officer holding that Office was elected to that Office and has neither resigned from it nor been retired or removed from it. An Office which is not held in the normal fashion is said to be held temporarily. As soon as possible after it occurs that there is an Office which is being held temporarily, and for which no Election is already being conducted, the Registrar shall initiate an Election to fill that Office, as described elsewhere. The winner of that Election shall then hold that Office until e resigns or is retired or removed from that Office. history: Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, 28 February 1996 text: An Office is "held in the normal fashion" if and only if the Officer holding that Office was elected to that Office and has neither resigned from it nor been retired or removed from it. An Office which is not held in the normal fashion is said to be held temporarily. As soon as possible after it occurs that there is an Office which is being held temporarily, and for which no Election is already being conducted, the Registrar shall initiate an Election to fill that Office, as described elsewhere. The winner of that Election shall then hold that Office until e resigns or is retired or removed from that Office. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2564, 6 April 1996 text: An Office is "held in the normal fashion" if and only if the Officer holding that Office was elected to that Office and has neither resigned from it nor been retired or removed from it. An Office which is not held in the normal fashion is said to be held temporarily. As soon as possible after it occurs that there is an Office which is being held temporarily, and for which no Election is already being conducted, the Registrar shall initiate an Election to fill that Office, as described elsewhere. However, if the Office in question is that of the Registrar, the Speaker shall instead initiate the Election. The winner of that Election shall then hold that Office until e resigns or is retired or removed from that Office. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2639, 12 July 1996 text: An Office is "held in the normal fashion" if and only if the Officer holding that Office was elected to that Office and has neither resigned from it nor been retired or removed from it. An Office which is not held in the normal fashion is said to be held temporarily. As soon as possible after it occurs that there is an undelegated Office which is being held temporarily, and for which no Election is already being conducted, the Registrar shall initiate an Election to fill that Office, as described elsewhere. However, if the Office in question is that of the Registrar, the Speaker shall instead initiate the Election. The winner of that Election shall then hold that Office until e resigns or is retired or removed from that Office. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3742 (Harlequin), 8 May 1998 text: Whenever there is an Office with no current Electee, for which an Election is not currently being conducted, the Registrar shall initiate an Election for that Office, as described elsewhere, unless the Office is that of Registrar; in that case, the Speaker shall conduct the Election. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 text: Whenever there is an Office with no current Electee, for which an Election is not currently being conducted, the Payroll Clerk shall initiate an Election for that Office, as described elsewhere, unless the Office is that of Payroll Clerk; in that case, the Speaker shall conduct the Election. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4053 (harvel), 21 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4103 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: As soon as possible after an Office ceases to have an Electee (or is created without installing an Electee), the designated conductor of Office Elections shall initiate an Election for that Office, as described by other Rules. The designated conductor of Office Elections is the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy, unless the Office in question is that of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy; in that case, the designated conductor is the Speaker. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4142 (Murphy), 15 April 2001 text: As soon as possible after an Office ceases to have an Electee (or is created without installing an Electee), the designated conductor of Office Elections shall initiate an Election for that Office, as described by other Rules. The designated conductor of Office Elections is the Assistant Director of Personnel, unless the Office in question is that of Assistant Director of Personnel; in that case, the designated conductor is the Speaker. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4650 (Murphy), 22 March 2005 text: As soon as possible after a) an Office ceases to have an Electee; b) an Office is created without installing an Electee; or c) an Election for an Office without an Electee becomes Stale; the designated conductor of Office Elections shall initiate an Election for that Office, as described by other Rules. This requirement is cancelled if the Office comes to have an Electee. The designated conductor of Office Elections is the Assistant Director of Personnel, unless the Office in question is that of Assistant Director of Personnel; in that case, the designated conductor is the Speaker. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4768 (root), 25 May 2005 text: As soon as possible after a) an Office ceases to have an Electee; b) an Office is created without installing an Electee; or c) an Election for an Office without an Electee becomes Stale; the designated conductor of Office Elections shall initiate an Election for that Office, as described by other Rules. This requirement is cancelled if the Office comes to have an Electee. The designated conductor of Office Elections is the Associate Director of Personnel, unless the Office in question is that of Associate Director of Personnel; in that case, the designated conductor is the Speaker. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: An election to fill an office must be held whenever: (a) the office ceases to have an electee; (b) the office is created without installing an electee; or (c) an election to fill that office fails, and no election for that office is in progress. As long as an election to fill an office is in progress, no other election to fill that office may be initiated. An election is in progress from the time it is initiated until it is resolved. If a player required to initiate an election fails to do so as soon as possible, then any player may announce that the election has failed. Provided that this assertion is indeed correct, then upon this announcement the election fails. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 790 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 [orphaned text: If, for any reason, an Office is vacant, that fact shall be announced by the Electioneer. The Electioneer shall be the Registrar; or in eir absence, the Speaker. All Players willing to hold the Office shall notify the Electioneer of that fact within three days of eir announcement of the vacancy. At the end of the three day period, the Electioneer shall randomly choose one player from those who indicated a willingness to hold the Office, and that Player shall become that Officer. This rule applies to Offices in general, and thus defers to Rules for specific Offices. (*Was: 689*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 692 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 692 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1360, 13 December 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1477, 8 March 1995 text: A Player may voluntarily transfer Points to any other Player for any purpose, within the following limits: (a) the transfer must be posted to the Public Forum (b) a Player may only transfer a positive number of Points (c) a Player may not transfer more Points than e currently has (d) a Player may not transfer Points if the recipient has more than than 90% of the Points required to Win, or would pass this limit as a result of the transfer. If any agreement among Players includes any transfer of Points between two Players then each such transfer shall be in accordance with the above. But this Rule shall not be construed as having any bearing on the legality or legal enforceability of any terms of said agreement which do not involve such a transfer. All Nomic Entities shall abide by the above limits whenever Points are traded. If a Nomic Entity must trade Points by the current Rules but would end up breaking the above limits, then the Nomic Entity trades the maximum amount possible without breaking any of the above limits. This Rule shall have precedence over all other Rules pertaining to the Trading of Points. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1560, 17 April 1995 text: A Player may voluntarily transfer Points in eir possession to any other Player for any purpose, within the following limits: (a) the transfer must be posted to the Public Forum (b) a Player may only transfer a positive number of Points (c) a Player may not transfer more Points than e currently has (d) a Player may not transfer Points if the recipient has more than than 90% of the Points required to Win, or would pass this limit as a result of the transfer. If any agreement among Players includes any transfer of Points between two Players then each such transfer shall be in accordance with the above. But this Rule shall not be construed as having any bearing on the legality or legal enforceability of any terms of said agreement which do not involve such a transfer. All Nomic Entities shall abide by the above limits whenever Points are traded. If a Nomic Entity must trade Points by the current Rules but would end up breaking the above limits, then the Nomic Entity trades the maximum amount possible without breaking any of the above limits. This Rule shall have precedence over all other Rules pertaining to the Trading of Points. history: ... [orphaned text: A Player may voluntarily transfer Points to any other Player for any purpose, within the following limits: (a) the transfer must be posted to the listserv (b) a Player may only transfer a positive number of Points (c) a Player may not transfer more Points than e currently has (d) a Player may not transfer Points if the recipient would as a result have more than 90% of the Points required to Win. If any agreement among Players includes any transfer of Points between two Players then each such transfer shall be in accordance with the above. But this Rule shall not be construed as having any bearing on the legality or legal enforceability of any terms of said agreement which do not involve such a transfer. All Nomic Entities shall abide by the above limits whenever Points are traded. If a Nomic Entity must trade Points by the current Rules but would end up breaking the above limits, then the Nomic Entity trades the maximum amount possible without breaking any of the above limits. This Rule shall have precedence over all other Rules pertaining to the Trading of Points. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 710 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 710 history: ... history: Repealed as Mutable Rule by Proposal 847 (Garth), 3 March 1994 [orphaned text: If a Player has been formally Accused of a Crime and that Player denies that a Crime was committed, or the Accused Player does not respond to the Accusation within 72 hours, or within 72 hours of the time that the Accused Player ceases to be On Hold, should e be On Hold when the Accusation is made, then the Accusing Player may call for Criminal Court. To do so, the Accusing Player shall notify the Clerk of the Courts of the intent to begin Criminal Court and shall send a copy of the Accusation to the Clerk of the Courts. A Judge is then selected exactly as in the case of a call for Judgement, and Players are notified exactly as in the case of a call for Judgement, except that the reasons for the Guilt of the Accused need not be distributed to all Players, only the Accusing Player, the Accused, and the Crime. When a Judge has been finally selected, the Clerk of the Courts shall notify the Accusing and the Accused Player of the identity of the Judge. As soon as the Accused Player, who shall be known as the Defendant, and the Accusing Player, who shall be known as the Prosecuter, have been notified of the identity of the Judge who has accepted the appointment, they shall both send all pertinent information regarding this Crime to the Judge. When each party has sent all information, they shall indicate so by explicitly stating such in their last message to the Judge. The Judge then has one week from the time at which both such messgaes have been recieved to return a Verdict, following all Rules exactly as if returning a Judgement in the case of a call for Judgement. The Judge shall not return a Verdict until at least 72 hours after the identity of the Judge is announced so that other interested Players can also send information to the Judge. A Verdict may be GUILTY, NOT GUILTY, or UNDECIDED. If the Verdict is GUILTY, then the Defendant shall suffer all the penalties relevant to the Class of Crime of which e was found GUILTY. If the Verdict is NOT GUILTY, then there shall be no effect. If the Verdict is UNDECIDED, then it shall be as if there had been no Criminal Court. A Criminal Court may be Appealed exactly as a Call for Judgement may be Appealed, except that all information pertinent to the Court shall be given to all involved in the Appeal, and if the Appeal OVERRULES the Verdict, then the process of a Criminal Court shall occur again automatically. If other Rules designate another Appeals system for a Criminal Court, those Rules shall take precedence over this Rule. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 713 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 713 history: ... [orphaned text: There shall be a quantity known as the Poverty Line, which shall be equal to 20% of the average score of all Active Players. If any active Player's score is less than the Poverty Line at the beginning of the Nomic Week, then each such active Player's score shall be increased to the Poverty Line by transferring points from the Point Reserve, provided there are sufficient points therein to cover all such transfers. A Player shall not receive points under this rule if e voluntarily transferred points to another Player during the previous Nomic Week. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 714,766 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 714 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 766 (Waggie), ca. Dec. 8 1993 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1415, 1 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: A Group is initially formed by a set of Players which has registered with the Registrar to form a Group; other Players may join later. Each Group has a Name, a Membership, a Vizier, an Ordinancekeepor, a Treasury, an Initial Set of Ordinances, and an associated form of Currency, called the Coins, where is the Name of the Group. 1. The Name may not be the Name of another Group. 2. The Membership is a set of Players; these Players are Members of the Group, and all other Players are not. 3. Synchronously with the registration of a Group, two positions are created known as the Vizier and the Ordinancekeepor, where is the Name of the Group. These positions are not Offices, and they may only be held by members of the Group. These positions may never be vacant while the Group remains in existence. The Vizier shall inform the Registrar whenever the Membership of the Group or the Ordinancekeepor of the Group changes. When the Vizier of the Group changes, the new Vizier shall inform the Registrar of the change. The Ordinancekeepor shall keep an accurate and up to date record of the current Ordinances of the Group. 4. The Treasury is a repository for Points and Currencies and has the same capabilities for holding, trading, and spending Points and Currencies as does a Player. 5. The Ordinances are a description of the operation of the Group. text: A Group is initially formed by a set of Players which has registered with the Registrar to form a Group; other Players may join later. Each Group has a Name, a Membership, a Vizier, an Ordinancekeepor, a Treasury, an Initial Set of Ordinances, and an associated form of Currency, called the Coins, where is the Name of the Group. 1. The Name may not be the Name of another Group. 2. The Membership is a set of Players; these Players are Members of the Group, and all other Players are not. 3. Synchronously with the registration of a Group, two positions are created known as the Vizier and the Ordinancekeepor, where is the Name of the Group. These positions are not Offices, and they may only be held by members of the Group. These positions may never be vacant while the Group remains in existence. The Vizier shall inform the Registrar whenever the Membership of the Group or the Ordinancekeepor of the Group changes. When the Vizier of the Group changes, the new Vizier shall inform the Registrar of the change. The Ordinancekeepor shall keep an accurate and up to date record of the current Ordinances of the Group. 4. The Treasury is a repository for Points and Currencies and has the same capabilities for holding, trading, and spending Points and Currencies as does a Player. 5. The Ordinances are a description of the operation of the Group. (*Was: 714*) history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Let there be a Class of Organization known as a Group. A Group's Compact consists only of Statutes, and are known collectively as its Ordinances, an individual Statute of its Compact is known as an Ordinance. Its Administrator is known as the Group's Ordinancekeepor. A Group has one Treasury, and its Executor is known as the Group's Vizier. A Group has an associated form of Currency. The generic name of all Group Currencies is "Coins." The specific name of a Group's Currency is Coins, where is the Name of the Group. Players within the Ordinances' Jurisdiction are known as the Group's Membership. Both the Vizier and the Ordinancekeepor of the Group must be Members of the Group. At all times there must be a Vizier and Ordinancekeepor for every Group. text: Let there be a Class of Organization known as a Group. A Group's Compact consists only of Statutes, and are known collectively as its Ordinances, an individual Statute of its Compact is known as an Ordinance. Its Administrator is known as the Group's Ordinancekeepor. A Group has one Treasury, and its Executor is known as the Group's Vizier. A Group has an associated form of Currency. The generic name of all Group Currencies is "Coins." The specific name of a Group's Currency is Coins, where is the Name of the Group. Players within the Ordinances' Jurisdiction are known as the Group's Membership. Both the Vizier and the Ordinancekeepor of the Group must be Members of the Group. At all times there must be a Vizier and Ordinancekeepor for every Group. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2035, 4 December 1995 text: Let there be a Class of Organization known as a Group. A Group's Compact consists only of Statutes, and are known collectively as its Ordinances, an individual Statute of its Compact is known as an Ordinance. Its Administrator is known as the Group's Ordinancekeepor. A Group has one Treasury, and its Executor is known as the Group's Vizier. A Group is the Mintor of an associated form of Currency. The generic name of all Group Currencies is "Coins." The specific name of a Group's Currency is Coins, where is the Name of the Group. Players within the Ordinances' Jurisdiction are known as the Group's Membership. Both the Vizier and the Ordinancekeepor of the Group must be Members of the Group. At all times there must be a Vizier and Ordinancekeepor for every Group. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2470, 16 February 1996 text: Let there be a Class of Organization known as a Group. A Group's Compact consists only of Statutes, and are known collectively as its Ordinances, an individual Statute of its Compact is known as an Ordinance. Its Administrator is known as the Group's Ordinancekeepor. A Group has one Treasury, and its Executor is known as the Group's Vizier. A Group is the Mintor of an associated form of Currency. The generic name of all Group Currencies is "Coins." The specific name of a Group's Currency is Coins, where is the Name of the Group. Players within the Ordinances' Jurisdiction are known as the Group's Membership. Both the Vizier and the Ordinancekeepor of the Group must be Members of the Group. At all times there must be a Vizier and Ordinancekeepor for every Group. Each Group has Mint Authority. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2563, 6 April 1996 text: A "Group" is an Organization of Class Group; this Class is a valid Class of Organization. All Groups are Public Organizations. The Jurisdiction of a Group's Compact is permitted to contain any Player, but no Player is permitted to be part of the Jurisdictions of the Compacts of more than one Group simultaneously. Each Group shall possess exactly one Treasury. A Group must have exactly three Foundors, who constitute the Group's initial Jurisdiction. Both the Administrator and the Executor of a Group must be part of the Jurisdiction of that Group's Compact. The following definitions pertain to Groups: * Ordinances: a synonym for a Group's Compact. * Ordinancekeepor: a synonym for the Group's Administrator * Vizier: a synonym for the Group's Executor * Membership: the Jurisdiction of the Group's Compact. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2725 (Swann), 23 October 1996 text: There is a class of Organization known collectively as the class of Groups. Each single Organization within this class is a Group. An SLC associated with a Group is that Group's Ordinances. A Group's Administrator is that Group's Ordinancekeepor. A Group's Executor is that Group's Vizier. The set of Players within the Jurisdiction of that Group's SLC is that Group's Membership. A Group's Membership is permitted to contain any Player who is not a Member of any other Group. A Group must have at least three Foundors, who constitute the Group's initial Membership. Both the Ordinancekeepor and the Vizier of a Group must, at all times, be Members of the Group. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3502 (General Chaos), 8 June 1997 text: There is a class of Organization known collectively as the class of Groups. Each single Organization within this class is a Group. An SLC associated with a Group is that Group's Ordinances. A Group's Administrator is that Group's Ordinancekeepor. A Group's Executor is that Group's Vizier. The set of Players within the Jurisdiction of that Group's SLC is that Group's Membership. A Group's Membership is permitted to contain any Player who is not a Member of any other Group. A Group must have at least three Foundors, who constitute the Group's initial Membership. Both the Ordinancekeepor and the Vizier of a Group must, at all times, be Members of the Group. Each Group has Mint Authority. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Proposal 3606 (General Chaos), 9 December 1997 text: There is a class of Organization known collectively as the class of Groups. Each single Organization within this class is a Group. Each Group has associated with it an SLC called its Ordinances. A Group's Administrator is that Group's Ordinancekeepor. A Group's Executor is that Group's Vizier. The set of Players within the Jurisdiction of that Group's SLC is that Group's Membership. A Group's Membership is permitted to contain any Player who is not a Member of any other Group. A Group must have at least three Foundors, who constitute the Group's initial Membership. Both the Ordinancekeepor and the Vizier of a Group must, at all times, be Members of the Group. Each Group has Mint Authority. history: Amended(10) by Proposal "A Separation of Powers" (Steve, Without Objection), 20 April 1999 text: There is a class of Organization known collectively as the class of Groups. Each single Organization within this class is a Group. Each Group has associated with it an SLC called its Ordinances. A Group's Administrator is that Group's Ordinancekeepor. A Group's Executor is that Group's Vizier. The set of Players within the Jurisdiction of that Group's SLC is that Group's Membership. A Group's Membership is permitted to contain any Player who is not a Member of any other Group. A Group must have at least three Foundors, who constitute the Group's initial Membership. Both the Ordinancekeepor and the Vizier of a Group must, at all times, be Members of the Group. Each Group has Mint Authority. Each Group is a Voting Entity. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3937 (Wes), 31 October 1999 text: There is a class of Organization known collectively as the class of Groups. Each single Organization within this class is a Group. Each Group has associated with it an SLC called its Ordinances. A Group's Administrator is that Group's Ordinancekeepor. A Group's Executor is that Group's Vizier. The set of Players within the Jurisdiction of that Group's SLC is that Group's Membership. A Group's Membership is permitted to contain any Player who is not a Member of any other Group. A Group must have at least three Foundors, who constitute the Group's initial Membership. Both the Ordinancekeepor and the Vizier of a Group must, at all times, be Members of the Group. Each Group has Mint Authority. Each Group has a Legislative Status. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3968 (harvel), 4 February 2000 text: A Group is an Organization with an associated SLC called its Ordinances. The Administrator for each Group is that Group's Ordinancekeepor, the Executor is its Vizier, and the set of Players within the Jurisdiction of its SLC is its Membership. A Group's Membership may contain any Player who is not a Member of any other Group. Initially, the Group's Membership must contain at least three Foundors. The Ordinancekeepor and the Vizier of a Group must, at all times, be Members of the Group; if either ceases to be a Member of the Group, it dissolves. Each Group has Mint Authority and a Legislative Status. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4032 (t), 24 July 2000 text: A Group is an Organization with an associated SLC called its Ordinances. The Administrator for each Group is that Group's Ordinancekeepor, the Executor is its Vizier, and the set of Players within the Jurisdiction of its SLC is its Membership. A Group's Membership may contain any Player who is not a Member of any other Group. Initially, the Group's Membership must contain at least three Foundors. The Ordinancekeepor and the Vizier of a Group must, at all times, be Members of the Group; if either ceases to be a Member of the Group, it dissolves. Each Group has Mint Authority. A Group's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: (a) A Group containing fewer than three Members: zero; (b) A Group containing at least three Members: one plus the number of Voting Entitlements it possesses, with a maximum of three. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4153 (Michael), 13 May 2001 text: A Group is an Organization with an associated SLC called its Ordinances. The Administrator for each Group is that Group's Ordinancekeepor, the Executor is its Vizier, and the set of Players within the Jurisdiction of its SLC is its Membership. A Group's Membership may contain any Player who is not a Member of any other Group. Initially, the Group's Membership must contain at least three Foundors. The Ordinancekeepor and the Vizier of a Group must, at all times, be Members of the Group; if either ceases to be a Member of the Group, it dissolves. Each Group has Mint Authority. A Group's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: (a) A Group containing fewer than three members: zero; (b) A Group containing at least three members: the number of Players divided by the number of Groups with at least three members, rounded down. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 766 by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 [orphaned text: A Group is initially formed by a set of Players which has registered with the Registrar to form a Group; other Players may join later. Each Group has a Name, a Membership, a Vizier, an Ordinancekeepor, a Treasury, an Initial Set of Ordinances, and an associated form of Currency, called the Coins, where is the Name of the Group. 1. The Name may not be the Name of another Group. 2. The Membership is a set of Players; these Players are Members of the Group, and all other Players are not. 3. Synchronously with the registration of a Group, two Offices are created known as the Vizier, and the Ordinancekeepor, where is the Name of the Group. These Offices may never be empty, and the Vizier and Ordinancekeepor must both be a member of Group. The Vizier shall inform the Registrar whenever the Membership or the Ordinancekeepor of the group changes. When the Vizier changes, the new Vizier shall inform the Registrar of the change. The Ordinancekeepor shall keep an accurate and current record of the Ordinances of the Group. 4. The Treasury is a repository for Points and Currencies and has the same capabilities for holding, trading, and spending Points and Currencies as does a Player. 5. The Ordinances are a description of the operation of the Group. 6. The Coins are a form of Currency which is created synchronously with the registration of the Group. The Group may create Coins as it sees fit; these must be placed in the Treasury. The Group may destroy Coins as it sees fit; these must be removed from the Treasury. (*Was: 714*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 715 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 715 history: ... [orphaned text: The Registrar shall keep a record of all currently formed Groups, their Memberships, Viziers, and Ordinancekeepors; as well as a record of all unaffiliated Players; and such other data as are required in order to make the Group Report. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 716 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 717 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 717 by Proposal 717 (Chuck), ca. Nov. 4 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: Not less than once each Nomic Week, the Notary must post a report of all Public Organizations in the Public Forum. This report shall contain: i) The Name and Class of each Public Organization. ii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Public Organization's Compact. iii) The identity of the Administrator of each Public Organization. iv) The identity of the Executor of each Public Organization which has Treasuries. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: Not less than once each Nomic Week, the Notary must post a report of all Organizations in the Public Forum. This report shall contain: i) The Name and class of each Organization. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Organization. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Organization's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Organization's SLC. Also, as soon as possible after the creation of any Organization, the Notary shall publish, in the Public Forum, the above information for that Organization. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by Proposal 2839 (Zefram), 11 March 1997 text: The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Organization. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Organization. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Organization's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Organization's SLC. Also, as soon as possible after the creation of any Organization, the Notary shall publish, in the Public Forum, the above information for that Organization. history: ... [orphaned text: Not less than once each Nomic Week, the Registrar must post the Group Report in the Public Forum. This report shall contain: 1. A list of unaffiliated Players; 2. A list of currently formed Groups, and for each Group the following information: (a) the Name of the Group; (b) the Vizier of the Group; (c) the Ordinancekeepor of the Group; and (d) the Membership of the Group. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 718 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 718 by Proposal 718 (Chuck), ca. Nov. 4 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: A Player may resign from a Group of which e is a Member, at any time, by sending such a message to the Notary and the Group's Vizier. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules concerning Groups. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2563, 6 April 1996 text: A Player who is a Member of a Group shall be removed from the Jurisdiction of that Group's Compact when that Player sends a message to the Notary and the Vizier of that Group, indicating that e is resigning from that Group. The Ordinances of a Group are not permitted to prohibit a Player from sending such a message. This Rule does not in any way prevent a Player from being removed from the Jurisdiction of a Group's Compact by other means specified by the Rules or the Ordinances of that Group. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: A Player who is a Member of a Group shall be removed from the Jurisdiction of that Group's Ordinances when that Player sends a message to the Notary and the Vizier of that Group, indicating that e is resigning from that Group. The Ordinances of a Group are not permitted to prohibit a Player from sending such a message. This Rule does not in any way prevent a Player from being removed from the Jurisdiction of a Group's Ordinances by other means specified by the Rules or the Ordinances of that Group. history: Infected and Amended(4) Substantially by Rule 1454, 28 February 1997 text: A Player who is a Member of a Group shall be removed from the Jurisdiction of that Group's Ordinances when that Player sends a message to the Notary and the Vizier of that Group, indicating that e is resigning from that Group. The Ordinances of a Group are not permitted to prohibit a Player from sending such a message. This Rule does not in any way prevent a Player from being removed from the Jurisdiction of a Group's Ordinances by other means specified by the Rules or the Ordinances of that Group. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: A Player who is a Member of a Group shall be removed from the Jurisdiction of that Group's Ordinances when that Player sends a message to the Notary and the Vizier of that Group, indicating that e is resigning from that Group. The Ordinances of a Group are not permitted to prohibit a Player from sending such a message. This Rule does not in any way prevent a Player from being removed from the Jurisdiction of a Group's Ordinances by other means specified by the Rules or the Ordinances of that Group. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 718 by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 [orphaned text: A player may resign from a Group of which e is a Member, at any time, by sending such a message to the Registrar and the Vizier of that Group. This rule takes precedence over all other rules concerning Groups. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 719 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 719 by Proposal 719 (Chuck), ca. Nov. 4 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: A Player not affiliated with any Group may become a Member of a Group at any time after creation of the Group, subject to the following restrictions: i) Membership procedures in the Ordinances are void if they conflict with the Rules. ii) No Player shall become a Member of a Group without eir sending a request for Membership to the Vizier of that Group. iii) A Player may never be a Member of more than one Group. Other Rules, and the Ordinances, may Provide additional Restrictions on Membership. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2563, 6 April 1996 text: A Player shall be added to the Membership of a Group only when: a) the Player to be added is not already a Member of another Group; b) the Player to be added has sent the Vizier of the Group in question a message requesting to be added to the Membership of that Group; and c) the addition of that Player to that Group's Membership is otherwise permitted by that Group's Ordinances and the Rules. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 719 by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 [orphaned text: A Player not affiliated with any Group may become a Member of a Group at any time after Registration of the Group only as specified in that Group's Ordinances, so long as they do not conflict with the rules. However, other rules may establish other restrictions on Group Membership, and no Player shall become a Member of a Group without eir sending such a request to the Vizier of that Group. A Player may never be a Member of more than one Group. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 720,763 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 720 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 763 history: ... [orphaned text: If at any time a Group X has fewer than three members, or Group X does not have a Vizier, then Group X shall cease to exist. Immediately before Group X ceases to exist, a number of Points equal to two times the number of X Coins in existence at that moment shall be removed from the X Treasury, and then all of the X Coins shall be converted to Points, at the rate of two Points per Coin. (*Was: 720*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 721 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 721 by Proposal 721 (Chuck), ca. Nov. 4 1993 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1641, 1 August 1995 text: All Members of a Group must obey the Ordinances of that Group at all times, so long as the Ordinances do not conflict with the Rules. The Ordinances of a Group may specify: 1. how the Ordinances of that Group may be changed, or that they may not be changed. If the Ordinances do not so specify, then the Ordinances shall be changed only upon unanimous agreement of all Members of that Group. 2. the Vizier of the Group, so long as the Vizier is a Member of that Group. If the Ordinances of a Group do not so specify, the Vizier shall be the Player whose Application for that Group was received first by the Registrar, if e is still a Member of that Group. 3. the Ordinancekeepor of the Group, so long as the Ordinancekeepor is a Member of that Group. If the Ordinances do not so specify, then the Vizier of that Group shall also be its Ordinancekeepor. 4. How the Points or Currencies in the Group's Treasury shall be spent, so long as it does not conflict with the Rules. A Group may spend Points or Currencies in the same manner as a Player. When Points or Currencies are to be spent from the Group's Treasury, the Vizier of that Group shall inform the Scorekeepor or Recordkeepor for the Currency, as is appropriate. 5. How the Members of the Group shall determine the manner in which the Group shall cast its Group votes. If the Ordinances do not so specify, the Group is prohibited from casting Group votes. The Group is also prohibited from casting any votes on a Proposal if it was not in existence at the beginning of the Voting Period of that Proposal, or if it has less than three Members. The Group's Vizier is responsible for informing the Assessor of how the Group votes on a Proposal. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: No Member of any Group is bound to observe any Ordinance or set of Ordinances that conflict with the Rules. The Ordinances of a Group may specify the following: i) The Vizier of the Group, so long as the Vizier is a Member of that Group. If the Ordinances of a Group do not so specify, the Vizier shall be the Player whose Application for that Group was received first by the Notary, if e is still a Member of that Group. ii) The Ordinancekeepor of the Group, so long as the Ordinancekeepor is a Member of that Group. If the Ordinances do not so specify, then the Vizier of that Group shall also be its Ordinancekeepor. iii) How the Members of the Group shall determine the manner in which the Group shall cast its Group votes. If the Ordinances do not so specify, the Group is prohibited from casting Group votes. The Group is also prohibited from casting any votes on a Proposal if it was not in existence at the beginning of the Voting Period of that Proposal, or if it has less than three Members. The Group's Vizier is responsible for informing the Assessor of how the Group votes on a Proposal. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2563, 6 April 1996 text: Unless the Ordinances of a Group specify otherwise, the Vizier of a Group shall be that Founder of the Group whose Application was received first by the Notary. If this person is no longer a Member of the Group, then the Group shall be dissolved. Unless the Ordinances of a Group specify otherwise, the Ordinancekeepor of a Group shall be its Vizier. If a given Group is a Voting Entity, then it shall be entitled to cast Vote(s) only as specified by its Ordinances. If the Ordinances of the Group do not specify how the Group shall cast its Vote(s), it may not do so. A Group is not entitled to cast Votes on a Proposal if it did not exist at the beginning of the Voting Period of that Proposal. A Group with fewer than three Members is not entitled to cast Votes. The Vizier of a Group is responsible to communicate the Group's Votes to the Assessor. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2633, 4 July 1996 text: The Vizier of a Group shall be whoever the Ordinances of that Group specify; or if the Ordinances are silent, the Player who authored the Application to Create that Group (if the Group was not created by the Execution of a Application to Create a Group, the Player who was the Vizier of that Group when it was first created). In any of these cases, if this Player is no longer a Member of the Group or is no longer a Player, the Group shall be dissolved. Unless the Ordinances of a Group specify otherwise, the Ordinancekeepor of a Group shall be its Vizier. If a given Group is a Voting Entity, then it shall be entitled to cast Vote(s) only as specified by its Ordinances. If the Ordinances of the Group do not specify how the Group shall cast its Vote(s), it may not do so. A Group is not entitled to cast Votes on a Proposal if it did not exist at the beginning of the Voting Period of that Proposal. A Group with fewer than three Members is not entitled to cast Votes. The Vizier of a Group is responsible to communicate the Group's Votes to the Assessor. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: The Vizier of a Group shall be whoever the Ordinances of that Group specify. If the Ordinances are silent, the Player who authored the ACO that created that Group (if the Group was not created by the Execution of a ACO, the Player who was the Vizier of that Group when it was first created). A Group's Vizier must be a Member of that Group. Unless the Ordinances of a Group specify otherwise, the Ordinancekeepor of a Group shall be its Vizier. If a given Group is a Voting Entity, then it shall be entitled to cast Vote(s) only as specified by its Ordinances. If the Ordinances of the Group do not specify how the Group shall cast its Vote(s), it may not do so. A Group is not entitled to cast Votes on a Proposal if it did not exist at the beginning of the Voting Period of that Proposal. A Group with fewer than three Members is not entitled to cast Votes. The Vizier of a Group is responsible to communicate the Group's Votes to the Assessor. history: Infected and Amended(6) Substantially by Rule 1454, 8 June 1997 text: The Vizier of a Group shall be whoever the Ordinances of that Group specify. If the Ordinances are silent, the Player who authored the ACO that created that Group (if the Group was not created by the Execution of a ACO, the Player who was the Vizier of that Group when it was first created). A Group's Vizier must be a Member of that Group. Unless the Ordinances of a Group specify otherwise, the Ordinancekeepor of a Group shall be its Vizier. If a given Group is a Voting Entity, then it shall be entitled to cast Vote(s) only as specified by its Ordinances. If the Ordinances of the Group do not specify how the Group shall cast its Vote(s), it may not do so. A Group is not entitled to cast Votes on a Proposal if it did not exist at the beginning of the Voting Period of that Proposal. A Group with fewer than three Members is not entitled to cast Votes. The Vizier of a Group is responsible to communicate the Group's Votes to the Assessor. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Rule 721, 22 June 1997 text: The Vizier of a Group shall be whoever the Ordinances of that Group specify. If the Ordinances are silent, the Player who authored the ACO that created that Group (if the Group was not created by the Execution of a ACO, the Player who was the Vizier of that Group when it was first created). A Group's Vizier must be a Member of that Group. Unless the Ordinances of a Group specify otherwise, the Ordinancekeepor of a Group shall be its Vizier. If a given Group is a Voting Entity, then it shall be entitled to cast Vote(s) only as specified by its Ordinances. If the Ordinances of the Group do not specify how the Group shall cast its Vote(s), it may not do so. A Group is not entitled to cast Votes on a Proposal if it did not exist at the beginning of the Voting Period of that Proposal. A Group with fewer than three Members is not entitled to cast Votes. The Vizier of a Group is responsible to communicate the Group's Votes to the Assessor. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3608 (General Chaos), 9 December 1997 text: The Vizier of a Group shall be whoever the Ordinances of that Group specify. If the Ordinances are silent, the Vizier shall be the Player who authored the ACO that created that Group, if e is still a Member of that Group. If the Group was not created by the Execution of a ACO, the Vizier shall be whoever was the Vizier of that Group when it was first created. If the Vizier thus specified is not a Member of the Group, the Group shall be dissolved. Unless the Ordinances of a Group specify otherwise, the Ordinancekeepor of a Group shall be its Vizier. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The Vizier of a Group shall be whoever the Ordinances of that Group specify. If the Ordinances are silent, the Vizier shall be the Player who authored the ACO that created that Group, if e is still a Member of that Group. If the Group was not created by the Execution of an ACO, the Vizier shall be whoever was the Vizier of that Group when it was first created. If the Vizier thus specified is not a Member of the Group, the Group shall be dissolved. Unless the Ordinances of a Group specify otherwise, the Ordinancekeepor of a Group shall be its Vizier. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 721 by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 [orphaned text: All Members of a Group must obey the Ordinances of that Group at all times, so long as the Ordinances do not conflict with the Rules. The Ordinances of a Group may specify: 1. how the Ordinances of that Group may be changed, or that they may not be changed. If the Ordinances do not so specify, then the Ordinances shall be changed only upon unanimous agreement of all Members of that Group. 2. the Vizier of the Group, so long as the Vizier is a Member of that Group. If the Ordinances of a Group do not so specify, the Vizier shall be the Player whose Application for that Group was received first by the Registrar, if e is still a Member of that Group. 3. the Ordinancekeepor of the Group, so long as the Ordinancekeepor is a Member of that Group. If the Ordinances do not so specify, then the Vizier of that Group shall also be its Ordinancekeepor. 4. How the Points or Currencies in the Group's Treasury shall be spent, so long as it does not conflict with the Rules. A Group may spend Points or Currencies in the same manner as a Player. When Points or Currencies are to be spent from the Group's Treasury, the Vizier of that Group shall inform the Scorekeepor or Recordkeepor for the Currency, as is appropriate. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 724 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 724 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1403, 29 January 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1422, 7 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1449, 1 March 1995 text: The Winner is the first Active Voter to achieve sufficiently many Points. The minimum number of Points required for Player X to Win is 10*N*(1+G/6), where N is the number of Players currently registered in the Game, and G is the number of Games which Player X has already won. The value (1+G/6) is known as the "Handicap Factor". If more than one Voter achieves this condition simultaneously, then all such Voters Win. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2471, 16 February 1996 text: A Player Wins the Game if e is an Active Voter, and e possesses a number of Points greater than or equal to the number of currently registered Players times eir handicap factor times ten. A Player's handicap factor is equal to one, plus the number of Games that Player has previously won divided by six. history: ... [orphaned text: The Winner is the first Voter to achieve sufficiently many Points. The minimum number of Points required for Player X to win is 10*N*(1+G/6), where N is the number of Players currently registered in the Game, and G is the number of Games which Player X has already won. If more than one Voter achieves this condition simultaneously, then all such Voters win. When a Game ends in this manner: - If there is only one Winner, that Voter becomes the new Speaker and the old Speaker becomes a Voter. - If there is more than one Winner, the Voter with the highest Point total becomes the new Speaker. If more than one Voter is tied for the highest score, the old Speaker randomly selects one of them to become the new Speaker. The old Speaker becomes a voter. - All Player's scores are reset to 0. - A new Game is begun. All Rules and Proposals retain the status they had at the end of the old Game. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 725,931 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 725 history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 931 (Stella?), 27 June 1994 text: Let there be for each Player one Currency called X Stock, where X is the name of the Player. The Dividend on Stock X shall be 2 Points or 5% of the Points of Player X on Friday Noon GMT (whatever is more). The Dividend shall be transfered on Friday Noon GMT to the Player (or Players) who holds Stock X. At the passing of this Proposal the Bank has possession of all Stocks. During the following week the Banker shall collect the bids in Marks. Those bids have to be made by the Players (either alone or acting together on the same Stock) in a message to the server. No bid shall be made, which can not be covered by the Marks in he bidders Bank account (to be verified by the Banker.) After one week each of the Stocks shall be transfered from the Bank to the highest bidder. If two or more bids for Stock X are exactly equal, the Stock shall go to player X (if one of the highest bidders), or to the Player with the lowest score. If a given Stock X is bought by Player X, the Marks of the bid shall be transfered from Player X to the Bank. If a given Stock X is bought by another Player (or Players) then Player X, the Marks of the bid shall go from this Player(s) to Player X. The Banker shall keep track of the Stocks held by each Player. history: Amended by Rule 750, 27 June 1994 text: Let there be for each Player one Currency called X Stock, where X is the name of the Player. The Dividend on Stock X shall be 2 Points or 5% of the Points of Player X on Friday Noon GMT (whatever is more). The Dividend shall be transfered on Friday Noon GMT to the Player (or Players) who holds Stock X. At the passing of this Proposal the Bank has possession of all Stocks. During the following week the Banker shall collect the bids in Marks. Those bids have to be made by the Players (either alone or acting together on the same Stock) in a message to the server. No bid shall be made, which can not be covered by the Marks in he bidders Bank account (to be verified by the Banker.) After one week each of the Stocks shall be transfered from the Bank to the highest bidder. If two or more bids for Stock X are exactly equal, the Stock shall go to player X (if one of the highest bidders), or to the Player with the lowest score. If a given Stock X is bought by Player X, the Marks of the bid shall be transfered from Player X to the Bank. If a given Stock X is bought by another Player (or Players) then Player X, the Marks of the bid shall go from this Player(s) to Player X. The Banker shall keep track of the Stocks held by each Player. (*Was: 725*) history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be for each Player one Currency called X Stock, where X is the name of the Player. On Friday Noon GMT 5% of the Points of Player X (with a minimum of two Points) shall be transfered to the Player (or Players) who holds Stock X. At the passing of this Proposal the Bank has possession of all Stocks. During the following week the Banker shall collect the bids in Marks. Those bids have to be made by the Players (either alone or acting together on the same Stock) in a message to the server. No bid shall be made, which can not be covered by the Marks in he bidders Bank account (to be verified by the Banker.) After one week each of the Stocks shall be transfered from the Bank to the highest bidder. If two or more bids for Stock X are exactly equal, the Stock shall go to player X (if one of the highest bidders), or to the Player with the lowest score. If a given Stock X is bought by Player X, the Marks of the bid shall be transfered from Player X to the Bank. If a given Stock X is bought by another Player (or Players) then Player X, the Marks of the bid shall go from this Player(s) to Player X. The Banker shall keep track of the Stocks held by each Player. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 726 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 726 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: When a new Player enters the Game, e shall receive from the Bank a number of Points equal to the average of the number of Points held by all Active Players, excluding those Players with negative Point holdings, at the moment e entered the Game. If there are no Active Players who possess a non-negative number of Points, the new Player shall instead receive zero Points. history: Infected and Amended(2) by Rule 1454, 14 August 1995 text: When a new Player enters the Game, e shall receive from the Bank a number of Points equal to the average of the number of Points held by all Active Players, excluding those Players with negative Point holdings, at the moment e entered the Game. If there are no Active Players who possess a non-negative number of Points, the new Player shall instead receive zero Points. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1679, 22 August 1995 text: When a new Player enters the Game, e shall receive from the Bank a number of Points equal to the median of the number of Points held by all Active Players. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1705, 4 September 1995 text: When a new Player enters the Game, e shall receive from the Bank a number of Points equal to the median of the number of Points held by all Active Players. The Scorekeepor shall detect and report all transfers which occur under this Rule. history: ... [orphaned text: All Players begin with 0 Points, except that new Voters who enter part-way through a Game in progress shall be given the average of the scores of all active Players scores, not including those scores, which happen to be negative. Points may not be gained, lost, or traded except as explicitly stated in the Rules. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 728 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 728 history: ... [orphaned text: When Player X leaves the game, Stock X shall be destroyed. If Stock X was held at that time by another Player, this Player shall be compensated with half the price in Marks that this Player paid for the Stock X. These Marks shall come from the account of Player X, *before* those shall be destroyed, as required by other Rules. If there are not enough Marks available, the deficit shall be paid by the Bank. This Rule applies to the Stock of Players that have left the game before adoption of this Proposal. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 730 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 730 history: ... [orphaned text: When a Player leaves the game, any Stock they own shall be sold for Marks in an Auction, with the Banker as Auctioneer. The proceedings shall go to the Bank. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 731 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 731 history: ... [orphaned text: When there exists no Stock for Player X, one shall be created and sold for Marks in an Auction, with the Banker as Auctioneer. The proceedings shall go to Player X, unless they obtain their own Stock, in which case the proceedings shall go to the Bank. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 732,823 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 732 history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 823 (Jeffrey S.), 1 March 1994 text: At the end of each game let each Player that did not win have eir points be converted to Marks in a ratio of 50 points to 1 Mark. The winner's points shall be taken away and e shall not receive any Mark's compensation for eis points. Marks for these conversions shall be awarded from the bank as directed by the Ruleset history: Amended by Rule 750, 1 March 1994 text: At the end of each game let each Player that did not win have eir points be converted to Marks in a ratio of 50 points to 1 Mark. The winner's points shall be taken away and e shall not receive any Mark's compensation for eis points. Marks for these conversions shall be awarded from the bank as directed by the Ruleset (*Was: 732*) history: ... [orphaned text: When a Game ends the Points of all Players with a positive score shall be converted into Marks in a ratio of 25 Points for one Mark. The number of Marks necessary for this conversion shall be created. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 736 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 736 history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be the Patent Title known as "Marxist", which is awarded to the Player with the most Marks, or if tied, to the Players with the most Marks. Only the current richest Player or Players may hold this title. The determination and announcement of assignment and revoking of the Title is made by the Banker, who must use the most accurate means of determining this available to eim, and must make the announcement as soon as possible after becoming aware of a change in holder of the Title. However: To respect some Players' wish for privacy, and in view of the secret nature of Marks accounts, a prospective Marxist must first be asked if e wants the Title. If not, then instead of announcing, "Player x is granted the Patent Title of 'Marxist', e announces, "Patent Title of 'Marxist' is granted to an anonymous Player". ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 747 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 747 history: ... [orphaned text: An Entity is only a Conserved Quantity if a Rule explicitly states such. A Conserved Quantity may only be Created or Destroyed as explicitly stated by the Rules. If a Conserved Quantity is given to an Entity, and no Rule states where that Conserved Quantity is to be taken from, then the transfer shall not take place. If a Conserved Quantity is taken from an Entity, and no Rule states where that Conserved Quantity is to be transfered to, then the Conserved Quantity shall be transfered to the Bank. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 748 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 748 by Proposal 748, 1 December 1993 text: Whenever the length of a Proposal is determined, any blank lines within that Proposal shall not be counted towards the number of lines in that Proposal. In addition, any lines which are required by legislation, including a Title or a Declaration, shall likewise not be counted towards the number of lines in that Proposal. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 749 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 749 history: ... [orphaned text: Every time a Voter proposes a Proposal, that Voter shall gain one Entry into a weekly Lottery. Each week, a random Entry shall be selected by the designated Sweepstakes Officer, and the Voter who owns that Entry shall receive 1 Point per Entry by any other Player into the Lottery. For purposes of this Rule, a week shall begin on Monday at 12:00 am and shall last seven days, until Sunday at 11:59 pm, in the time zone in which the designated Sweepstakes Officer resides. The weekly drawing shall take place as soon as possible after the end of the week. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 750,1069 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 750 by Proposal 750 (Waggie), 1 December 1993 text: Whenever a Proposal is Passed which Amends a Rule, that Rule shall also be Amended as follows. 1. If the last line of text of the Rule begins with '(*' and ends with '*)' then the characters '/@' shall be inserted immediately before the final '*)'. 2. If the last line of text of the Rule does not begin with '(*' and end with '*)' then the following line of text shall be appended to the text of the Rule: '(*Was: @*)'. 3. After clauses 1. and 2. above have been applied, the '@' which appears in the last line of text of the Rule shall be replaced with the Number of the Rule which was Amended by the Amending Proposal. history: Amended by Proposal 1069 (Steve), 4 October 1994 text: Let there be a number known as the Amendment Index, which is appended to a Rule's Number, separated by a forward slash, and which is equal to the number of times a Rule with that Number has been Amended. The default Amendment Index is zero; this is the value of a Rule's Amendment Index when the Rule is Created, and it is the value of the Amendment Index of every Rule unless it is specified by the Rules to be otherwise. If the Amendment Index of a Rule is zero, the Amendment Index need not be displayed with the text of the Rule. Otherwise, the Amendment Index shall be displayed in Official copies of the Ruleset, along with the Number and text of the Rule. Responsibility is given to the Rulekeepor to accurately update the Amendment Index. In addition, when a Rule is Amended, the Rulekeepor shall append to the text of the Rule an annotation giving the number of the Amendment, the Number of the Proposal which Amended the Rule, and the date on which this Proposal passed. Amendment Indices may be used for Official purposes and in Official documents to distinguish between old versions of a Rule and the Rule's current text. history: Amended by Rule 750, 4 October 1994 text: Let there be a number known as the Amendment Index, which is appended to a Rule's Number, separated by a forward slash, and which is equal to the number of times a Rule with that Number has been Amended. The default Amendment Index is zero; this is the value of a Rule's Amendment Index when the Rule is Created, and it is the value of the Amendment Index of every Rule unless it is specified by the Rules to be otherwise. If the Amendment Index of a Rule is zero, the Amendment Index need not be displayed with the text of the Rule. Otherwise, the Amendment Index shall be displayed in Official copies of the Ruleset, along with the Number and text of the Rule. Responsibility is given to the Rulekeepor to accurately update the Amendment Index. In addition, when a Rule is Amended, the Rulekeepor shall append to the text of the Rule an annotation giving the number of the Amendment, the Number of the Proposal which Amended the Rule, and the date on which this Proposal passed. Amendment Indices may be used for Official purposes and in Official documents to distinguish between old versions of a Rule and the Rule's current text. (*Was: 750*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1502, 24 March 1995 text: A Rule's Amendment Number is equal to the number of times a Rule having that Rule Number has been amended. The default Amendment Number is zero; this is the value of a Rule's Amendment Number when the Rule is Created, and it is the value of the Amendment Number of every Rule unless it is specified by the Rules to be otherwise. A Rule's Amendment Number shall be displayed in Official copies of the Ruleset, appended to the Rule Number, and separated by a forward slash. Responsibility is given to the Rulekeepor to accurately update Amendment Numbers. Amendment Numbers may be used for Official purposes and in Official documents to distinguish between old versions of a Rule and the Rule's current text. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1069 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 758 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 758 history: ... [orphaned text: When, for any reason, the owner of a Nomic entity is to be determined by an Auction, this Auction shall be conducted by an Auctioneer, who shall be the Banker, the Banker's chosen willing delegate, or any other player as specified in other rules. Once the identity of the Auctioneer is determined, the Auction begins with the Auctioneer making an announcement to the game forum stating what Nomic entity is up for Auction, and that e is accepting bids. Players who wish to participate in the Auction then must indicate their interest by sending a bid to the Auctioneer. The list of players who have indicated an interest is not secret, and if it is not included as part of the Auctioneer's Announcements the Auctioneer must share it on demand. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 762 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 762 history: ... [orphaned text: If, for any reason, Player X ceases to be a Member of Group Y, then Player X shall recieve a share of the contents of the Y Treasury as specified in the Y Ordinances. If the Y Ordinances are silent on this issue, or if Group Y has ceased to exist, then 1/N times the contents of the Y Treasury, rounded downwards, shall be transferred to Player X, where N is the number of Members of Group Y immediately before Player X ceased to be a Member of Group Y. This transfer is not taxable, and may incude a negative number of Points. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules which determine which Point and Currency transfers are legal and/or taxable. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 764 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 764 history: ... [orphaned text: Any Player or Group X may perform an Act of Mischief directed at any Player or Group Y. The permissible forms of Mischief are defined in other Rules; such definitions must include a positive Price in Coins, or the form of Mischief is not permissible. This Rule explicitly takes precedence over all other Rules which purport to determine which forms of Mischief are permissible. To cause an Act of Mischief, X sends to the Public Forum a message containing: - the Name of the object, Y; - the effect of the Act of Mischief; - the Number of the Rule which permits the form of Mischief; - indication of which Coins in X's account will be used as payment for the Act of Mischief. Coins of Group Y, or the Group to which Player Y belongs, may not be used as payment. The effect of the Act of Mischief is applied immediately upon publication of the above message in the Forum. An additional effect of this Act of Mischief is that - for each Coin of Group Z spent as payment above, two Points are removed from the Z Treasury; - the Coins used as payment above are removed from X's account and destroyed. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 779 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 779 history: ... [orphaned text: When a Player submits a Proposal, e may pay one Mark to the Bank (if e has at least one Mark) and impose Sanity on that Proposal. E must inform both the Banker and the Speaker when doing so. A Proposal which has Sanity imposed upon it is known as a Sane Proposal. The Speaker shall, when e distributes a Sane Proposal, inform the Players that it is a Sane Proposal. No non-Voter Nomic entity may Vote on a Sane Proposal. Each Voter shall have exactly one Vote on a Sane Proposal, and each Voter's Vote shall be counted exactly once on a Sane Proposal. This rule takes precedence over any rule allowing a non-Voter Nomic entity to Vote; over any rule which gives any Voter more or less than one Vote on a proposal; and over any rule which would cause any Voter's Vote to be counted more or less than once. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 781,908 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 781 by Proposal 781, ca. Dec. 20 1993 text: If a Player (herein called the Squealer) makes a Call For Judgement alleging that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Judge must issue an Injunction that the Ninny submit a Formal Apology. This Injunction may also include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, containing all of the Prescribed Words, explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement, and posted in the Public Forum. Within 48 hours of the posting of this Formal Apology, the Squealer must either submit a Proposal that the Ninny's Apology be accepted, or submit a Proposal that the Ninny's Aplology be rejected, but not both. No other Player may submit such a Proposal, and the Squealer may submit only one. If a Proposal to accept the Apology fails, or if a Proposal to reject the Apology passes, then the Ninny loses 5 Points. history: Amended by Proposal 908 (Lance), 4 May 1994 text: If a Player (herein called the Squealer) makes a Call For Judgement alleging that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Judge must issue an Injunction that the Ninny submit a Formal Apology. This Injunction may also include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, containing all of the Prescribed Words, explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement, and posted in the Public Forum within 72 hours of the posting of the Injunction to the Public Forum. If the Ninny fails to meet these criteria e shall lose 10 points. Within 72 hours of the posting of this Formal Apology, the Squealer must either submit a Proposal that the Ninny's Apology be accepted, or submit a Proposal that the Ninny's Aplology be rejected, but not both. No other Player may submit such a Proposal, and the Squealer may submit only one. If a Proposal to accept the Apology fails, or if a Proposal to reject the Apology passes, then the Ninny loses 5 Points. history: Amended by Rule 750, 4 May 1994 text: If a Player (herein called the Squealer) makes a Call For Judgement alleging that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Judge must issue an Injunction that the Ninny submit a Formal Apology. This Injunction may also include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, containing all of the Prescribed Words, explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement, and posted in the Public Forum within 72 hours of the posting of the Injunction to the Public Forum. If the Ninny fails to meet these criteria e shall lose 10 points. Within 72 hours of the posting of this Formal Apology, the Squealer must either submit a Proposal that the Ninny's Apology be accepted, or submit a Proposal that the Ninny's Aplology be rejected, but not both. No other Player may submit such a Proposal, and the Squealer may submit only one. If a Proposal to accept the Apology fails, or if a Proposal to reject the Apology passes, then the Ninny loses 5 Points. (*Was: 781*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1362, 13 December 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1382, 17 January 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1500, 24 March 1995 text: If a Call for Judgement alleges that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Ninny must submit to the Public Forum a Formal Apology within 72 hours of the publication of Judgement, unless that Judgement is successfully appealed within 72 hours. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, con-taining all of the Prescribed Words (if any were prescribed) ex-plaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. A Judge deciding TRUE in such a CFJ may issue an Injunction including a list of up to ten Prescribed Words of the Judge's choice, and ordering that the Ninny's Formal Apology must include the Prescribed Words. If the Ninny fails to meet these criteria e shall gain 3 Blots. The Player who called the initial CFJ has the duty to report to the Tabulator any Blots gained through this rule. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1734, 15 October 1995 text: If a Call for Judgement alleges that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Ninny must submit to the Public Forum a Formal Apology within 72 hours of the publication of Judgement, unless that Judgement is successfully appealed within 72 hours. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, containing all of the Prescribed Words (if any were prescribed) explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. A Judge deciding TRUE in such a CFJ may issue an Injunction including a list of up to ten Prescribed Words of the Judge's choice, and ordering that the Ninny's Formal Apology must include the Prescribed Words. If the Ninny fails to meet these criteria e shall gain 3 Blots. The Player who called the initial CFJ has the duty to report to the Tabulator any Blots gained through this rule. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2432, 30 January 1996 text: If a Call for Judgement alleges that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, or to have committed one or more Crimes, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Ninny must submit to the Public Forum a Formal Apology within 72 hours of the publication of Judgement, unless that Judgement is successfully appealed within 72 hours. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, containing all of the Prescribed Words (if any were prescribed) explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. A Judge deciding TRUE in such a CFJ may issue an Injunction including a list of up to ten Prescribed Words of the Judge's choice, and ordering that the Ninny's Formal Apology must include the Prescribed Words. If the Ninny fails to meet these criteria e shall gain 3 Blots. The Player who called the initial CFJ has the duty to report to the Tabulator any Blots gained through this rule. history: Infected and Amended(6) by Rule 1454, 1 April 1996 text: If a Call for Judgement alleges that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, or to have committed one or more Crimes, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Ninny must submit to the Public Forum a Formal Apology within 72 hours of the publication of Judgement, unless that Judgement is successfully appealed within 72 hours. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, containing all of the Prescribed Words (if any were prescribed) explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. A Judge deciding TRUE in such a CFJ may issue an Injunction including a list of up to ten Prescribed Words of the Judge's choice, and ordering that the Ninny's Formal Apology must include the Prescribed Words. If the Ninny fails to meet these criteria e shall gain 3 Blots. The Player who called the initial CFJ has the duty to report to the Tabulator any Blots gained through this rule. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 2789 (favor), 25 January 1997 text: If a Call for Judgement alleges that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, or to have committed one or more Crimes, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Ninny must submit to the Public Forum a Formal Apology within 72 hours of the publication of Judgement, unless that Judgement is successfully appealed within 72 hours. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, containing all of the Prescribed Words (if any were prescribed) explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. A Judge deciding TRUE in such a CFJ may issue an Injunction including a list of up to ten Prescribed Words of the Judge's choice, and ordering that the Ninny's Formal Apology must include the Prescribed Words. If the Ninny fails to meet these criteria e shall gain 3 Blots. The Player who called the initial CFJ has the duty to report to the Herald any Blots gained through this rule. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: If a Call for Judgement alleges that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, or to have committed one or more Crimes, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Ninny must submit to the Public Forum a Formal Apology within 72 hours of the publication of Judgement, unless that Judgement is successfully appealed within 72 hours. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, containing all of the Prescribed Words (if any were prescribed) explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. A Judge deciding TRUE in such a CFJ may issue an Injunction including a list of up to ten Prescribed Words of the Judge's choice, and ordering that the Ninny's Formal Apology must include the Prescribed Words. If the Ninny fails to meet these criteria e shall gain 3 Blots. The Player who called the initial CFJ has the duty to report to the Herald any Blots gained through this rule. history: Infected and Amended(9) Substantially by Rule 1454, 11 November 1997 text: If a Call for Judgement alleges that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, or to have committed one or more Crimes, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Ninny must submit to the Public Forum a Formal Apology within 72 hours of the publication of Judgement, unless that Judgement is successfully appealed within 72 hours. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, containing all of the Prescribed Words (if any were prescribed) explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. A Judge deciding TRUE in such a CFJ may issue an Injunction including a list of up to ten Prescribed Words of the Judge's choice, and ordering that the Ninny's Formal Apology must include the Prescribed Words. If the Ninny fails to meet these criteria e shall gain 3 Blots. The Player who called the initial CFJ has the duty to report to the Herald any Blots gained through this rule. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(10) Substantially by Rule 908, 25 November 1997 text: If a Call for Judgement alleges that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, or to have committed one or more Crimes, and this CFJ is Judged TRUE, then the Ninny must submit to the Public Forum a Formal Apology within 72 hours of the publication of Judgement, unless that Judgement is successfully appealed within 72 hours. By a Formal Apology is meant a letter of at least 200 words, containing all of the Prescribed Words (if any were prescribed) explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. A Judge deciding TRUE in such a CFJ may issue an Injunction including a list of up to ten Prescribed Words of the Judge's choice, and ordering that the Ninny's Formal Apology must include the Prescribed Words. If the Ninny fails to meet these criteria e shall gain 3 Blots. The Player who called the initial CFJ has the duty to report to the Herald any Blots gained through this rule. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Upon a judicial finding that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, the Judge so finding shall Order that Player to submit, within 72 hours, a Formal Apology. However, when the action (or failure to act) is subject to penalties by virtue of being defined to be a Crime or an Infraction, the Order is optional and may be issued at the Judge's discretion. A Formal Apology shall consist of a letter of at least 200 words, to be published by the Ninny in the Public Forum, explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The Judge issuing such an Order may, at eir discretion, include in eir Order a list of up to ten Prescribed Words (to be chosen by the Judge) which must be included in the Formal Apology. If the Judge elects to include Prescribed Words, all of the Words required must appear within the Formal Apology. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: Upon a judicial finding that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules, the Judge so finding shall Order that Player to submit, within 72 hours, a Formal Apology. However, when the action (or failure to act) is subject to penalties by virtue of being defined to be a Crime or an Infraction, the Order is optional and may be issued at the Judge's discretion. A Formal Apology shall consist of a letter of at least 200 words, to be published by the Ninny, explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The Judge issuing such an Order may, at eir discretion, include in eir Order a list of up to ten Prescribed Words (to be chosen by the Judge) which must be included in the Formal Apology. If the Judge elects to include Prescribed Words, all of the Words required must appear within the Formal Apology. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4155 (harvel), 18 May 2001 text: If a Call for Judgement (CFJ) the Statement of which alleges that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules is judged TRUE, then the Judge so finding may Order that Player to submit, within 72 hours, a Formal Apology. If the Ninny is Ready and the act or failure to act is not subject to penalties by virtue of being defined to be a Crime or an Infraction, then the Judge must issue such an Order as soon as possible after the Clerk of the Courts publishes the judgement. A Formal Apology shall consist of a letter of at least 200 words, to be published by the Ninny, explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The Judge issuing such an Order may, at eir discretion, include in eir Order a list of up to ten Prescribed Words (to be chosen by the Judge) which must be included in the Formal Apology. If the Judge elects to include Prescribed Words, all of the Words required must appear within the Formal Apology. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: If a Call for Judgement (CFJ) the Statement of which alleges that a Player (herein called the Ninny) has acted or has failed to act in such a way as to be in violation of one or more Rules is judged TRUE, then the Judge so finding may Order that Player to submit, within 72 hours, a Formal Apology. If the Ninny is Ready and the act or failure to act is not subject to penalties by virtue of being defined to be a Crime or an Infraction, then the Judge must issue such an Order as soon as possible after the Clerk of the Courts publishes the judgement. A Formal Apology shall consist of a letter of at least 200 words, to be published by the Ninny, explaining the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The Judge issuing such an Order may, at eir discretion, include in eir Order a list of up to ten Prescribed Words (to be chosen by the Judge) which must be included in the Formal Apology. If the Judge elects to include Prescribed Words, all of the Words required must appear within the Formal Apology. The failure to abide by an Order to Submit a Formal Apology is the Class 3 Infraction of Failure to Apologize, to be reported by the Judge who issued the original Order. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: If a Player (hereafter the Ninny) is convicted of a Crime, then instead of executing Sentencing Orders, the Judge may (Without Objection) Order the Ninny to publish a Formal Apology. Such an Order is known as an Order to Apologize. A Formal Apology must be at least 200 words, and must explain the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. Furthermore, the Order to Apologize may include up to ten Prescribed Words of the Judge's choice, all of which must appear in the Formal Apology. Failure to obey an Order to Apologize within 72 hours is the Class 3 Infraction of Shamelessness, to be reported by the Judge who issued the Order. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: A sentencing order may require a defendant (hereafter the Ninny) to publish a Formal Apology. A Formal Apology must be at least 200 words, and must explain the Ninny's error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. Furthermore, the Order to Apologize may include up to ten Prescribed Words of the Judge's choice, all of which must appear in the Formal Apology. A defendant must obey an Order to Apologize within 72 hours of its execution. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 908 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 789 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 789 by Proposal 789 (Chuck), ca. Dec. 20 1993 text: When a player makes a CFJ alleging that a Rule should be interpreted in a certain way, e shall also submit a list of Rules relevant to that CFJ, which must include the Rule in question. If the statement is Judged TRUE, the Judge may include with the Judgement an Injuction requiring the Rulekeepor to annotate the Rule in question with the Statement in the CFJ and the list of relevant Rules. The annotation shall remain only until one of the Rules in the list of relevant Rules is amended, repealed, or transmuted; or until a CFJ determines that the injunction no longer applies, as described below. While it remains, it shall guide the application of that Rule. If a Player believes that the circumstances which led to the Judgement no longer prevail and the annotation is therefore no longer applicable, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is Judged TRUE, the annotation shall be stricken from the rule set. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1396, 29 January 1995 text: When a player makes a CFJ alleging that a Rule should be interpreted in a certain way, e shall also submit a list of Rules relevant to that CFJ, which must include the Rule in question. If the statement is Judged TRUE, the Judge may include with the Judgement an Injuction requiring the Rulekeepor to annotate the Rule in question with the Statement in the CFJ and the list of relevant Rules. The annotation shall remain only until one of the Rules in the list of relevant Rules is changed in any way; or until a CFJ determines that the injunction no longer applies, as described below. While it remains, it shall guide the application of that Rule. If a Player believes that the circumstances which led to the Judgement no longer prevail and the annotation is therefore no longer applicable, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is Judged TRUE, the annotation shall be stricken from the rule set. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: When a player makes a CFJ alleging that a Rule should be interpreted in a certain way, e shall also submit a list of Rules relevant to that CFJ, which must include the Rule in question. If the statement is Judged TRUE, the Judge may include with the Judgement an Injuction requiring the Rulekeepor to annotate the Rule in question with the Statement in the CFJ and the list of relevant Rules. The annotation shall remain only until one of the Rules in the list of relevant Rules is changed in any way; or until a CFJ determines that the injunction no longer applies, as described below. While it remains, it shall guide the application of that Rule. If a Player believes that the circumstances which led to the Judgement no longer prevail and the annotation is therefore no longer applicable, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is Judged TRUE, the annotation shall be stricken from the rule set. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2684, 3 October 1996 text: A CFJ alleging a Rule should be interpreted in a certain way must be accompanied by a list of relevant Rules, assembled by the Caller, which includes the Rule being interpreted. If the Judge finds this CFJ's Statement TRUE, e is permitted to issue an Injunction requiring the Rulekeepor to annotate the Rule in question with that Statement and the list of relevant Rules. This annotation, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The annotation is removed once any change occurs in a Rule from the list of relevant Rules. If a Player believes that the circumstances leading to the Judgement no longer prevail, rendering the annotation inapplicable, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is Judged TRUE, the annotation is removed. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The Judge of any CFJ, the Statement of which alleges that a Rule should be interpreted in a certain way, which is judged TRUE, may, at eir discretion, issue an Order requiring the Rulekeepor to annotate the Rule in question with the Statement of that CFJ. Such an annotation, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Rulekeepor may remove such an annotation only if that Rule is repealed, or when required to do so by a valid Order. Annotations to a Rule may not be modified in any way except as specified in this Rule. If a Player believes that an annotation is no longer pertinent, e may file, in the original CFJ from which the Order of Annotation arises, a Motion to Vacate the Order of Annotation. If such a Motion is granted, the Judge granting it shall Order the original Order Vacated and shall Order the Rulekeepor to remove the annotation in question. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3768 (Chuck), 22 July 1998 text: The Judge of any CFJ, the Statement of which alleges that a Rule should be interpreted in a certain way, which is judged TRUE, may, at eir discretion, issue an Order requiring the Rulekeepor to annotate the Rule in question with the Statement of that CFJ. Such an annotation, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Rulekeepor may remove such an annotation only if that Rule is repealed; if required to do so by a valid Order; or if the original Order to annotate is amended, stayed, or vacated. The Rulekeepor may vacate an Order to annotate a Rule Without Objection. Annotations to a Rule may not be modified in any way except as specified in this Rule. If a Player believes that an annotation is no longer pertinent, e may file, in the original CFJ from which the Order of Annotation arises, a Motion to Vacate the Order of Annotation. If such a Motion is granted, the Judge granting it shall Order the original Order Vacated and shall Order the Rulekeepor to remove the annotation in question. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The Judge of any CFJ, the Statement of which alleges that a Rule should be interpreted in a certain way, which is judged TRUE, may, at eir discretion, issue an Order requiring the Rulekeepor to annotate the Rule in question with the Statement of that CFJ. Such an annotation, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Rulekeepor may remove such an annotation only if that Rule is repealed; if required to do so by a valid Order; or if the original Order to annotate is amended, stayed, or vacated. The Rulekeepor may vacate an Order to annotate a Rule Without Objection. Annotations to a Rule may not be modified in any way except as specified in this Rule. If a Player believes that an annotation is no longer pertinent, e may file, in the original CFJ from which the Order of Annotation arises, a Motion to Vacate the Order of Annotation. If such a Motion is granted, the Judge granting it shall Order the original Order Vacated and shall Order the Rulekeepor to remove the annotation in question. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4917 (Zefram), 2 April 2007 text: The Judge of any CFJ, the Statement of which alleges that a Rule should be interpreted in a certain way, which is judged TRUE or FALSE, may, at eir discretion, issue an Order requiring the Rulekeepor to annotate the Rule in question accordingly. If the CFJ was judged TRUE then the annotation shall be the Statement of the CFJ, and if the CFJ was judged FALSE then the annotation shall be the contrary of the Statement of the CFJ. Such an annotation, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Rulekeepor may remove such an annotation only if that Rule is repealed; if required to do so by a valid Order; or if the original Order to annotate is amended, stayed, or vacated. The Rulekeepor may vacate an Order to annotate a Rule Without Objection. Annotations to a Rule may not be modified in any way except as specified in this Rule. If a Player believes that an annotation is no longer pertinent, e may file, in the original CFJ from which the Order of Annotation arises, a Motion to Vacate the Order of Annotation. If such a Motion is granted, the Judge granting it shall Order the original Order Vacated and shall Order the Rulekeepor to remove the annotation in question. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 789 by Proposal 5006 (Zefram), 18 June 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 792 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 792 history: ... history: Repealed as Mutable Rule by Proposal 935 (Chuck), 14 July 1994 [orphaned text: The Speaker shall notify all Players whenever the number of Proposals up for Vote is at the maximum and e has received at least PL/2 additional submitted Proposals. However, e may not do this until at least 24 hours after the Proposal queue was last closed. As soon as this notification appears on the Public Forum, Players are prohibited from submitting any more Proposals, and the Speaker shall refuse to accept any which are inadvertently submitted. When the number of Proposals up for Vote has dropped to PL/2 or below, the Speaker shall announce that Proposals are once again being accepted. After this appears on the Public Forum, Players may again submit Proposals. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 794 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 794 history: ... [orphaned text: The Electioneer shall receive one point for every office that e fills. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 803 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 803 history: ... [orphaned text: All Marks transfers between Game Entities must be in multiples of 0.01 Marks. Furthermore, whenever a quantity of Marks is changed, that quantity is immediately adjusted by rounding to the nearest .01 Mark. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which would permit a different granularity of Marks. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 804 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 804 history: ... [orphaned text: At the end of a Game, all Stocks will be returned to the Bank to be Auctioned upon the start of a new Game. Each Player that owned Stock (as of the end of the old Game) will be compensated to the amount of one half of the Marks paid by that Player for eis Stocks. The Marks for a given Stock shall be drawn from the account of the Player to which the Stock corresponds. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules governing ownership of Stocks. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 805,907,1023 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 805 by Proposal 805, ca. Jan. or Feb. 1994 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", e is required to perform this action before performing any other actions which have a less strictly defined time requirement. However, email correspondence of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which stipulate a less stringent ordering requirement for the performance of these actions. history: Amended by Proposal 907 (Nicol), 4 May 1994 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", e is required to perform this action before performing any other actions which have a less strictly defined time requirement. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which stipulate a less stringent ordering requirement for the performance of these actions. history: Amended by Rule 750, 4 May 1994 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", e is required to perform this action before performing any other actions which have a less strictly defined time requirement. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which stipulate a less stringent ordering requirement for the performance of these actions. (*Was: 805*) history: Amended by Proposal 1023, 5 September 1994 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", e is required to perform that action within a week, and no later than any other action e is subsequently required to perform. Failure to observe these time requirements is a Class C Crime. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold. (*Was: 805*) history: Amended by Rule 750, 5 September 1994 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", e is required to perform that action within a week, and no later than any other action e is subsequently required to perform. Failure to observe these time requirements is a Class C Crime. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold. (*Was: 805/907*) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1413, 1 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1434, 14 February 1995 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", e is required to perform that action within a week, and no later than any other action e is subsequently required to perform. Failure to observe these time requirements shall result at a minimum in the incursion of a 10 point penalty; other Rules may impose further penalties. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold. (*Was: 805/907*) history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1682, 22 August 1995 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", e is required to perform that action within a week, and no later than any other action e is subsequently required to perform. Failure to observe these time requirements shall be a Class D Crime. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold. (*Was: 805/907*) history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1727, 6 October 1995 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", then: (i) if the action is one that a Player is required to perform in the course of carrying out Official duties, then the Player is required to perform the action within a week, and no later than any other action which the performance of the duties of that Office subsequently requires em to perform; otherwise, (ii) e is required to perform that action within a week, and no later than any other action e is subsequently required to perform which is not an action performed in the course of carrying out Official duties. Failure to observe these time requirements is a Class D Crime. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold. (*Was: 805/907*) history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2042, 11 December 1995 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", then: (i) if the action is one that a Player is required to perform in the course of carrying out Official duties, then the Player is required to perform the action within a week, and no later than any other action which the performance of the duties of that Office subsequently requires em to perform; otherwise, (ii) e is required to perform that action within a week, and no later than any other action e is subsequently required to perform which is not an action performed in the course of carrying out Official duties. Failure to observe these time requirements is a Class D Crime. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2489, 16 February 1996 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", then: (i) if the action is one that a Player is required to perform in the course of carrying out Official duties, then the Player is required to perform the action within a week, and no earlier than any other action which the performance of the duties of that Office already requires em to perform as soon as possible; otherwise, (ii) e is required to perform that action within a week, and no earlier than any other action e is already required to perform as soon as possible which is not an action performed in the course of carrying out Official duties. Failure to observe these time requirements is a Class D Crime. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2567, 12 April 1996 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", then: (i) if the action is one that a Player is required to perform in the course of carrying out Official duties, then the Player is required to perform the action within a week, and no earlier than any other action which the performance of the duties of that Office already requires em to perform as soon as possible; otherwise, (ii) e is required to perform that action within a week, and no earlier than any other action e is already required to perform as soon as possible which is not an action performed in the course of carrying out Official duties. Failure to observe these time requirements is a Class D Crime. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold, and to any Rules which impose different requirements on the timing of Official Duties. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=2 by Proposal 2602, 26 May 1996 history: Amended(8) by Proposal 2629, 4 July 1996 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", then: (i) if the action is one that a Player is required to perform in the course of carrying out Official duties, then the Player is required to perform the action within a week, and no earlier than any other action which the performance of the duties of that Office already requires em to perform as soon as possible; otherwise, (ii) e is required to perform that action within a week, and no earlier than any other action e is already required to perform as soon as possible which is not an action performed in the course of carrying out Official duties. A Player who fails to observe these requirements commits the Crime of Tardiness, a Class D Crime. However, activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold, and to any Rules which impose different requirements on the timing of Official Duties. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 2770 (Steve), 19 December 1996 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", then: (i) if the action is one that a Player is required to perform in the course of carrying out Official duties, then the Player is required to perform the action within a week, and no earlier than any other action which the performance of the duties of that Office already requires em to perform as soon as possible; otherwise, (ii) e is required to perform that action within a week, and no earlier than any other action e is already required to perform as soon as possible which is not an action performed in the course of carrying out Official duties. A Player who fails to observe these requirements commits the the Infraction of Tardiness, the penalty for which shall be the same as that for a Class D Crime. All Players are authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Tardiness. Activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold, and to any Rules which impose different requirements on the timing of Official Duties. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", then: (i) if the action is one that a Player is required to perform in the course of carrying out Official duties, then the Player is required to perform the action within a week, and no earlier than any other action which the performance of the duties of that Office already requires em to perform as soon as possible; otherwise, (ii) e is required to perform that action within a week, and no earlier than any other action e is already required to perform as soon as possible which is not an action performed in the course of carrying out Official duties. A Player who fails to observe these requirements commits the Infraction of Tardiness, the penalty for which shall be the same as that for a Class D Crime. All Players are authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Tardiness. Activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold, and to any Rules which impose different requirements on the timing of Official Duties. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", then: if the action is one that a Player is required to perform in the course of carrying out Official duties, then the Player is required to perform the action within a week, and no earlier than any other action which the performance of the duties of that Office already requires em to perform as soon as possible; otherwise, e is required to perform that action within a week, and no earlier than any other action e is already required to perform as soon as possible which is not an action performed in the course of carrying out Official duties. A Player who fails to observe these requirements commits the Infraction of Tardiness, the penalty for which shall be the same as that for a Class D Crime. All Players are authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Tardiness. Activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times, and if so, this Rule defers to them. This Rule defers to Rules which describe the responsibilities of Players who are On Hold, and to any Rules which impose different requirements on the timing of Official Duties. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(13) by Proposal 3950 (harvel), 8 December 1999 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform a certain action "as soon as possible", then: if the action is one that a Player is required to perform in the course of carrying out Official duties, then the Player is required to perform the action within a week, and no earlier than any other action which the performance of the duties of that Office already requires em to perform as soon as possible; otherwise, e is required to perform that action within a week, and no earlier than any other action e is already required to perform as soon as possible which is not an action performed in the course of carrying out Official duties. A Player who fails to observe these requirements commits the Class 2 Infraction of Tardiness. All Players are authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Tardiness. Activity of a purely discussionary nature is excluded from the ordering requirement, and may be conducted at any time. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a Penalty. It takes precedence over other Rules which define a later latest time for the performance of these actions. Other Rules may impose earlier latest times. Other Rules may impose different requirements on the timing of Official Duties and on the responsibilities of On Hold Players. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4004 (Steve), 8 May 2000 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform an action "as soon as possible", then e is required to perform the action within a week. A Player who fails to observe this requirement commits the Class 1 Infraction of Tardiness. All Players are authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Tardiness. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a penalty. Other Rules may grant extensions of the penalty-free period to Inactive Players without conflicting with this Rule. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: Whenever a Player is required to perform an action "as soon as possible", then e is required to perform the action within a week. A Player who fails to observe this requirement commits the Class 1 Infraction of Tardiness. All Players are authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Tardiness. This Rule does not deprive actions which do not conform to its requirements of whatever effects they would otherwise have. Rather, this Rule defines the latest time at which actions to be performed "as soon as possible" may be performed without incurring a penalty. Other Rules may grant extensions of the penalty-free period to non-active Players without conflicting with this Rule. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: A requirement to perform an action "as soon as possible" is a requirement to perform the action within a week. If a Player fails to observe such a requirement, and no other Rule defines a penalty for the failure, then the Player commits the Class 1 Infraction of Tardiness, which may be reported by any Player. This Rule does not prevent late actions from taking effect, but merely penalizes the Player for being late. Other Rules may grant extensions of the penalty-free period to non-active Players without conflicting with this Rule. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The following terms are defined: - Agoran days begin at midnight GMT. Agoran weeks begin at midnight GMT on Monday. Agoran months begin at midnight GMT on the first day of each Gregorian month. Agoran quarters begin when the Agoran months of January, April, July, and October begin. Agoran years begin when the Agoran month of January begins. - A requirement to perform an action "as soon as possible" is a requirement to perform the action within seven days. - The term "number" shall be interpreted as "real number". - The term "random" shall mean a choice drawn with a process whose probability distribution among the possible outcomes is reasonably close to that required by the Rules, using a uniform distribution if not otherwise specified. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4938 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: The following terms are defined: (a) The term "number" shall mean "real number". (b) The phrase "as soon as possible" shall mean "within seven days". (c) The term "random" shall mean a choice drawn with a process whose probability distribution among the possible outcomes is reasonably close to that required by the Rules, using a uniform distribution if not otherwise specified. (d) The term "paragraph" shall mean a subset of text determined as follows: (1) Each bulleted section is a unit of text. (2) Any remaining text is divided into units at blank lines. (3) Units are considered in a tree hierarchy, interpreting the original body of text as a depth-first search. The root is empty, the unbulleted units are its children, and the bulleted units following an unbulleted unit are its descendants (with nested bullets corresponding to nested levels of the tree). (4) A "paragraph" identified by partial quotation is determined by the minimum sub-tree containing the entirety of that quotation. (e) Agoran epochs: (1) Agoran days begin at midnight UTC. (2) Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on Monday. (3) Agoran months begin at midnight UTC on the first day of each Gregorian month. (4) Agoran quarters begin when the Agoran months of January, April, July, and October begin. (5) Agoran years begin when the Agoran month of January begins. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5005 (root), 18 June 2007 text: The following terms are defined: (a) The term "number" shall mean "real number". (b) The phrase "as soon as possible" shall mean "within seven days". (c) The term "random" shall mean a choice drawn with a process whose probability distribution among the possible outcomes is reasonably close to that required by the Rules, using a uniform distribution if not otherwise specified. (d) The term "paragraph" shall mean a subset of text determined as follows: (1) Each bulleted or enumerated (hereafter simply "bulleted") section is a unit of text. (2) Any remaining text is divided into units at blank lines. (3) Each unit of a document has a level as follows. All unbulleted units have level 1. Each bulleted unit has level n+2, where n is the number of bulleted units it is nested inside. (4) A barrier between two units is a unit appearing between those units which has level no greater than that of the unit appearing first. (5) The units of a document form an ordered tree, with the hierarchy determined as follows. The root is an empty unit with level zero, which nominally appears at the beginning of the document. One unit is a descendant of another unit if it appears after the latter, has strictly greater level, and is not separated from the latter by a barrier. The tree's ordering follows the order of the units in the document. (6) A "paragraph" identified by partial quotation is determined by the minimum sub-tree containing the entirety of that quotation. (7) A "paragraph" identified by an ordinal n is determined by the nth unbulleted unit and its descendants. (8) A "paragraph" identified by enumerated section labels is determined by the sub-tree arrived at by traversal from the root, using the specified series of labels. (e) Agoran epochs: (1) Agoran days begin at midnight UTC. (2) Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on Monday. (3) Agoran months begin at midnight UTC on the first day of each Gregorian month. (4) Agoran quarters begin when the Agoran months of January, April, July, and October begin. (5) Agoran years begin when the Agoran month of January begins. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5077 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 text: The following terms are defined: (a) The term "number" means "real number". (b) The phrase "as soon as possible" means "within seven days". (c) The term "random" means a choice drawn with a process whose probability distribution among the possible outcomes is reasonably close to that required by the Rules, using a uniform distribution if not otherwise specified. (d) The term "paragraph" means a subset of text determined as follows: (1) Each bulleted or enumerated (hereafter simply "bulleted") section is a unit of text. (2) Any remaining text is divided into units at blank lines. (3) Each unit of a document has a level as follows. All unbulleted units have level 1. Each bulleted unit has level n+2, where n is the number of bulleted units it is nested inside. (4) A barrier between two units is a unit appearing between those units which has level no greater than that of the unit appearing first. (5) The units of a document form an ordered tree, with the hierarchy determined as follows. The root is an empty unit with level zero, which nominally appears at the beginning of the document. One unit is a descendant of another unit if it appears after the latter, has strictly greater level, and is not separated from the latter by a barrier. The tree's ordering follows the order of the units in the document. (6) A "paragraph" identified by partial quotation is determined by the minimum sub-tree containing the entirety of that quotation. (7) A "paragraph" identified by an ordinal n is determined by the nth unbulleted unit and its descendants. (8) A "paragraph" identified by enumerated section labels is determined by the sub-tree arrived at by traversal from the root, using the specified series of labels. (e) Agoran epochs: (1) Agoran days begin at midnight UTC. (2) Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on Monday. (3) Agoran months begin at midnight UTC on the first day of each Gregorian month. (4) Agoran quarters begin when the Agoran months of January, April, July, and October begin. (5) Agoran years begin when the Agoran month of January begins. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5102 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: The following terms are defined: (a) The term "number" means "real number". (b) The phrase "as soon as possible" means "within seven days". (c) The term "paragraph" means a subset of text determined as follows: (1) Each bulleted or enumerated (hereafter simply "bulleted") section is a unit of text. (2) Any remaining text is divided into units at blank lines. (3) Each unit of a document has a level as follows. All unbulleted units have level 1. Each bulleted unit has level n+2, where n is the number of bulleted units it is nested inside. (4) A barrier between two units is a unit appearing between those units which has level no greater than that of the unit appearing first. (5) The units of a document form an ordered tree, with the hierarchy determined as follows. The root is an empty unit with level zero, which nominally appears at the beginning of the document. One unit is a descendant of another unit if it appears after the latter, has strictly greater level, and is not separated from the latter by a barrier. The tree's ordering follows the order of the units in the document. (6) A "paragraph" identified by partial quotation is determined by the minimum sub-tree containing the entirety of that quotation. (7) A "paragraph" identified by an ordinal n is determined by the nth unbulleted unit and its descendants. (8) A "paragraph" identified by enumerated section labels is determined by the sub-tree arrived at by traversal from the root, using the specified series of labels. (d) Agoran epochs: (1) Agoran days begin at midnight UTC. (2) Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on Monday. (3) Agoran months begin at midnight UTC on the first day of each Gregorian month. (4) Agoran quarters begin when the Agoran months of January, April, July, and October begin. (5) Agoran years begin when the Agoran month of January begins. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5081 (Zefram; disi.), 1 August 2007 text: The following terms are defined: (a) The phrase "as soon as possible" means "within seven days". (b) The term "paragraph" means a subset of text determined as follows: (1) Each bulleted or enumerated (hereafter simply "bulleted") section is a unit of text. (2) Any remaining text is divided into units at blank lines. (3) Each unit of a document has a level as follows. All unbulleted units have level 1. Each bulleted unit has level n+2, where n is the number of bulleted units it is nested inside. (4) A barrier between two units is a unit appearing between those units which has level no greater than that of the unit appearing first. (5) The units of a document form an ordered tree, with the hierarchy determined as follows. The root is an empty unit with level zero, which nominally appears at the beginning of the document. One unit is a descendant of another unit if it appears after the latter, has strictly greater level, and is not separated from the latter by a barrier. The tree's ordering follows the order of the units in the document. (6) A "paragraph" identified by partial quotation is determined by the minimum sub-tree containing the entirety of that quotation. (7) A "paragraph" identified by an ordinal n is determined by the nth unbulleted unit and its descendants. (8) A "paragraph" identified by enumerated section labels is determined by the sub-tree arrived at by traversal from the root, using the specified series of labels. (c) Agoran epochs: (1) Agoran days begin at midnight UTC. (2) Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on Monday. (3) Agoran months begin at midnight UTC on the first day of each Gregorian month. (4) Agoran quarters begin when the Agoran months of January, April, July, and October begin. (5) Agoran years begin when the Agoran month of January begins. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5408 (root), 22 January 2008 text: The following terms are defined: (a) The phrases "in a timely fashion" and "as soon as possible" mean "within seven days". (b) The term "paragraph" means a subset of text determined as follows: (1) Each bulleted or enumerated (hereafter simply "bulleted") section is a unit of text. (2) Any remaining text is divided into units at blank lines. (3) Each unit of a document has a level as follows. All unbulleted units have level 1. Each bulleted unit has level n+2, where n is the number of bulleted units it is nested inside. (4) A barrier between two units is a unit appearing between those units which has level no greater than that of the unit appearing first. (5) The units of a document form an ordered tree, with the hierarchy determined as follows. The root is an empty unit with level zero, which nominally appears at the beginning of the document. One unit is a descendant of another unit if it appears after the latter, has strictly greater level, and is not separated from the latter by a barrier. The tree's ordering follows the order of the units in the document. (6) A "paragraph" identified by partial quotation is determined by the minimum sub-tree containing the entirety of that quotation. (7) A "paragraph" identified by an ordinal n is determined by the nth unbulleted unit and its descendants. (8) A "paragraph" identified by enumerated section labels is determined by the sub-tree arrived at by traversal from the root, using the specified series of labels. (c) Agoran epochs: (1) Agoran days begin at midnight UTC. (2) Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on Monday. (3) Agoran months begin at midnight UTC on the first day of each Gregorian month. (4) Agoran quarters begin when the Agoran months of January, April, July, and October begin. (5) Agoran years begin when the Agoran month of January begins. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 806 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 806 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1510, 24 March 1995 text: While an Office is vacant, and until it is filled as provided in other rules, the Speaker shall fulfill the duties of that Office. The Speaker may delegate those duties to a willing Player if e desires. The Player fulfilling the duties of that Office is compensated in the same manner as if e actually held that Office. This Rule applies to Offices in general, and defers to the Rules for specific Offices. history: ... [orphaned text: While an Office is vacant, and until it is filled as provided in other rules, the Speaker shall fulfill the duties of that Office. The Speaker may delegate those duties to a willing Player if e desires. This Rule applies to Offices in general, and defers to the Rules for specific Offices. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 807,891,993 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 807 by Proposal 807 text: Proposals may be made which do not contain Rule Changes. The permissible forms of Non-Rule-Change Proposals (or NRC Proposals), and the Declarations needed to propose them, shall be defined in other legislation. NRC Proposals are Voted upon and treated exactly like other Proposals, and shall be Numbered exactly like other Proposals. Upon the Adoption of a NRC Proposal, it shall take effect with results as described in the Rule or Rules that define the form of the Proposal in question. history: Amended by Proposal 891 (Chuck), 13 April 1994 text: Proposals may be made which do not contain Rule Changes. All proposals, except those which have one of the following declarations: (Creates a Rule) (Amends a Rule) (Repeals a Rule) (Transmutes a Rule) are Non-Rule-Change Proposals (or NRC Proposals). However, only those NRC Proposals defined in other Rules may be proposed. NRC Proposals are Voted upon and treated exactly like other Proposals, and shall be Numbered exactly like other Proposals. Upon the Adoption of a NRC Proposal, it shall take effect with results as described in the Rule or Rules that define the form of the Proposal in question. history: Amended by Rule 750, 13 April 1994 text: Proposals may be made which do not contain Rule Changes. All proposals, except those which have one of the following declarations: (Creates a Rule) (Amends a Rule) (Repeals a Rule) (Transmutes a Rule) are Non-Rule-Change Proposals (or NRC Proposals). However, only those NRC Proposals defined in other Rules may be proposed. NRC Proposals are Voted upon and treated exactly like other Proposals, and shall be Numbered exactly like other Proposals. Upon the Adoption of a NRC Proposal, it shall take effect with results as described in the Rule or Rules that define the form of the Proposal in question. (*Was: 807*) history: Amended by Proposal 993, ca. Aug. 18 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Aug. 18 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1330, 22 November 1994 text: A Proposal may contain one or more Directives. A Directive, if adopted, causes some change in the Game State other than changing a Rule. No Directive may change any Rule. Only those Directives which are defined by the Rules may be placed in a Proposal. If a Proposal containing Directives is adopted, the Directives shall take effect in the order that they appear in the Proposal, and according to the Rule or Rule which define the type of each Directive in question. The Adoption Index of a Proposal containing a Directive must be at least as great as that required by the Rule or Rules which define the type of Directive contained in the Proposal. Any Proposal for which this is not true is not properly made. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1620, 17 July 1995 text: A Proposal may contain one or more Directives. A Directive, if adopted, causes some change in the Game State other than changing a Rule. No Directive may change any Rule. Only those Directives which are defined by the Rules may be placed in a Proposal. If a Proposal containing Directives is adopted, the Directives shall take effect in the order that they appear in the Proposal, and according to the Rule or Rule which define the type of each Directive in question. The Adoption Index of a Proposal containing a Directive must be at least as great as that required by the Rule or Rules which define the type of Directive contained in the Proposal. If this is not true, then the Directive shall not take effect, even if the Proposal is adopted. history: Infected and Amended(3) by Rule 1454, 21 August 1995 text: A Proposal may contain one or more Directives. A Directive, if adopted, causes some change in the Game State other than changing a Rule. No Directive may change any Rule. Only those Directives which are defined by the Rules may be placed in a Proposal. If a Proposal containing Directives is adopted, the Directives shall take effect in the order that they appear in the Proposal, and according to the Rule or Rule which define the type of each Directive in question. The Adoption Index of a Proposal containing a Directive must be at least as great as that required by the Rule or Rules which define the type of Directive contained in the Proposal. If this is not true, then the Directive shall not take effect, even if the Proposal is adopted. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(???) by Proposal 2399, 20 January 1996 text: A Proposal is permitted to contain one or more Directives. A Directive, if it takes effect, causes some change in the Game State other than Changing a Rule. No Directive shall Change any Rule. A Directive takes effect if and only if: (i) the Proposal containing it is adopted; (ii) the Directive is of a type specifically defined by the Rules; and, (iii) the Adoption Index of the Proposal is at least the minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect. Unless another Rule states otherwise, the minimum Adoption Index necessary for a Directive to take effect is 1. If a Proposal containing Directives which take effect is adopted, those Directives shall take effect in the order that they appear in the Proposal, and according to the Rule or Rules which define the type of each Directive in question. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 809 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 809 history: ... [orphaned text: There shall be an Office known as the Ambassador. The Ambassador shall have the sole power to conduct Foreign Policy. Foreign Policy is defined as interacting with other Nomic Games in an official capacity, and/or participating on behalf of the Players of this Nomic Game in any Central Nomic Game to be created. The Ambassador shall report to the Public Forum once a Nomic Week on any new Foreign Policy developements of that Nomic Week or the previous one. In any Nomic Week in which Foreign Policy activity occurs, the Ambassador shall receive a salary of two (2) Points. Upon any change in the position of Speaker, the Office of Ambassador shall devolve to the new Speaker. Except for this provision, the Office is chosen as described in other Rules. Proposals may be submitted directing the Ambassador on how to conduct a single piece of Foreign Policy business. Such Proposals are automatically Sane, and if passed are binding upon the Ambassador. If the Ambassador acts contrary to such a Proposal, e may be charged with a Class C Crime. Such Proposals are submitted with the the following legal Declaration: (Foreign Policy Directive) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 815 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 815 history: ... [orphaned text: Let all messages, information, requests, statements, CFJs, answers, etc. that Rules indicate are to be sent or delivered to a specific Office or Officer be sent directly to them. Instances where a Player breaks this rule are to be ignored by said Office or Officer until e receives the message thru means not broadcast to the Public Forum. Further, it shall be considered a Class A crime to send such a message to the Public Forum without first sending it to the proper Office or Officer. It shall be a Class A crime for an Office/r to respond to such a message if it was not sent in the proper manner. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 816 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 816 history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be a Patent Title known as Originator. This Patent Title shall be given to Chuck. No other person shall hold this Patent Title at any time. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 818 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 818 by Proposal 818 (Waggie), 14 February 1994 text: Let there be a type of Nomic Entity called a Walrus. Walruses are not a form of Currency; they may be owned by Players or Groups, but they may not be bought, sold, traded, or owed. Walruses may be created or destroyed only in accordance with the Rules. Each Walrus is either Happy or Sad, but not both; a Happy Walrus nay never become a Sad Walrus, and a Sad Walrus may never become a Happy Walrus. It is the duty of the Registrar to keep a record of the number of Happy and/or Sad Walruses owned by each Player or Group. Immediately upon the passage of this Proposal the following shall take place: -for each Voter who Voted FOR both this Proposal and Proposal 819, a Happy Walrus will be created belonging to that Voter; -for each Voter who contributed at least 2 Points to each of the FOR Caches of the Vototron for both this Proposal and Proposal 819, one Happy Walrus will be created belonging to that Voter; -for each Member of PROSIRUP, one Happy Walrus will be created belonging to that Player; -three Happy Walruses will be created belonging to Waggie; -three Happy Walruses will be created belonging to the Abelian Group; -for each Voter who did not Vote on either this Proposal or Proposal 819 a Sad Walrus will be created belonging to that Voter; -for each Voter who Voted AGAINST or ABSTAIN on either this Proposal or Proposal 819 three Sad Walruses will be created belonging to that Voter; -for each Voter who contributed at least 0.1 Point to either of the AGAINST Caches of the Vototron for this Proposal and Proposal 819, one Sad Walrus will be created and given to that Voter for each tenth of a Point spent thusly; -for each Group which Voted on either this Proposal or Proposal 819, one Walrus will be created and given to that Group for each Vote which was cast; the Walrus will be Happy if the Vote was FOR, and the Walrus will be Sad if the Vote was AGAINST or ABSTAIN. At any time after the creation of at least one Walrus, if there cease to be any Walruses in existence then this Rule repeals itself and is removed from the RuleSet. history: Repealed as Mutable Rule 818 by Rule 818, 14 February 1994 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 819 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 819 by Proposal 819 (Waggie), 14 February 1994 text: 10^(-100) seconds after this Proposal is passed into Rule, the following shall take place: -for each Happy Walrus, 5 Marks will be created and given to the Player or Group which owns that Happy Walrus; -for each Sad Walrus, the Player or Group which owns that Sad Walrus will have 50 Points subtracted from their Score or Treasury; -after the above actions have taken place, all Walruses will be destroyed; -after the above actions have taken place, this Rule repeals itself and is removed from the RuleSet. history: Repealed as Mutable Rule 819 by Rule 819, 14 February 1994 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 822,1003 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 822 by Proposal 822 (KoJen), 14 February 1994 text: Proposals whose obvious and direct intent is to coerce a Player into voting against eir conscience are disallowed. For the purpose of Rule 106 or its successors, such a proposal is considered not to be "proposed in the proper way". This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which would otherwise allow such a shameful Proposal to be voted on. history: Amended by Proposal 1003, ca. Aug. 25 1994 text: Proposals whose obvious and direct intent is to coerce a Player into voting against eir conscience are disallowed. Such a proposal is considered not to be "proposed in the proper way". This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which would otherwise allow such a shameful Proposal to be voted on. history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Aug. 25 1994 text: Proposals whose obvious and direct intent is to coerce a Player into voting against eir conscience are disallowed. Such a proposal is considered not to be "proposed in the proper way". This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which would otherwise allow such a shameful Proposal to be voted on. (*Was: 822*) history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 4 June 1995 text: Proposals whose obvious and direct intent is to coerce a Player into voting against eir conscience are disallowed. Such a proposal is considered not to be "proposed in the proper way". This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which would otherwise allow such a shameful Proposal to be voted on. (*Was: 822*) This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1623, 17 July 1995 text: Proposals whose obvious and direct intent is to coerce a Player into voting against eir conscience shall not take effect even if adopted, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=2 by Proposal 2665, 12 September 1996 history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1003 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 824 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 824 by Proposal 824 (Jeffrey S.), 1 March 1994 text: Let all Players be able to buy points with eir Marks from the Bank in a ratio of 20 points to 1 Mark. Points will be received from the Point Reserve for such transactions. For such a transaction to be valid the Player must communicate to the Banker that a point purchase is desired. The player must transfer only whole Mark amounts for such a transfer. The Banker will inform the Scorekeepor of transfer and the amount of points the Player is to receive from the Point Reserve. The Scorekeepor shall make the transaction public knowledge. history: Repealed as Mutable Rule 824 by Proposal 959 (Garth), 25 July 1994 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 825 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 825 by Proposal 825 (Jeffrey S.), 1 March 1994 text: Proposals may affect the game when the effect/s is based on votes or activities before the passage of said Proposal only if said Proposal was passed unanimously. For the purpose of this Rule, Proposals that are passed without receiving any AGAINST votes are considered to be unanimous. history: Repealed as Mutable Rule 825 by Proposal 950 (Stella?), 14 July 1994 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 833,1704 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1704 by Proposal 3474 (Swann), 2 May 1997 text: The Player who paid the Petition fee for a given Proposal shall be known as the Payor for that Proposal. If a non-Player Entity paid the Petition fee for a given Proposal the Payor shall be the Executor of that Entity. At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, if a Proposal has received more FOR Votes than AGAINST Votes, the Payor for that Proposal gains a number of P-Notes equal to the number of FOR Votes less the number of AGAINST Votes. If, however, a Proposal has received more AGAINST Votes than FOR Votes, that Payor loses a number of P-Notes equal the number of AGAINST Votes less the number of FOR Votes. If the number of FOR Votes and AGAINST Votes are equal, the Payor neither gains nor loses P-Notes as a result of this Rule. If the Payor is not the same Player as the Player who made the Proposal, then the Player who made the Proposal shall receive 2 P-Notes if the Proposal passes, and lose 1 P-Note if the Proposal fails. This only happens in the given case, and occurs in addition to any other transfers mandated by this or other Rules. For the purpose of this Rule, Votes by Voting Entities which are not Players do not count. The Assessor shall report the transfers required by this Rule, and shall do so no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal in question. history: Renumbered from 1704/ to 833/8 by Proposal 3474 (Swann), 2 May 1997 history: Amended(9) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The entity which paid the Petition fee for a given Proposal shall be known as the Sponsor of that Proposal. At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, if a Proposal has received more FOR Votes than AGAINST Votes, the Assessor shall pay out to the Sponsor a number of P-Notes equal to the number of FOR Votes less the number of AGAINST Votes. If, however, a Proposal has received more AGAINST Votes than FOR Votes, the Assessor shall bill the Sponsor for a number of P-Notes equal the number of AGAINST Votes less the number of FOR Votes. If the Sponsor and the Proposer of a Proposal are not the same entity and the Proposal passes, the Assessor shall pay out 2 P-Notes to the Proposer. If the Sponsor and the Proposer of a Proposal are not the same and the Proposal fails, the Assessor shall bill the Proposer 1 P-Note. This is in addition to any other payments required by this or other Rules. For the purpose of this Rule, Votes by Voting Entities which are not Players do not count. The Assessor shall execute all Payment Orders required by this Rule no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal in question. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of the Nomic Week, the Assessor shall pay out two Voting Tokens to each Player who submitted an Interested Proposal which was adopted during the previous Week. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3720 (Steve), 16 April 1998 text: As soon as possible after an Interested Proposal submitted by a Player is adopted, the Assessor shall pay out two Voting Tokens to that Player, with the proviso that no more than one such payment shall be made to any Player under the authority of this Rule for adopted Proposals distributed at the same time. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3761 (Steve), 28 June 1998 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of the Nomic Week, the Assessor shall pay out two Proposal Notes to each Player who submitted an Interested Proposal which was adopted during the previous Week. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 839 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 839 by Proposal 839 (Jeffrey S.), 1 March 1994 text: Let there be an Office of the Assistant. Said Office shall be responsible for collecting those messages which are official in nature from the Speaker ad Officers. Messages are to be edited into a single digest post. The Assistant shall maintain previous digests and make them available upon request to any entity, including those Players on Hold. This Rule shall take precidence over all other Rules regarding commuication with Players on Hold. history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1644, 1 August 1995 text: Let there be an Office of the Assistant. Said Office shall be responsible for collecting those messages which are official in nature from the Speaker and Officers. Messages are to be edited into a single digest post. The Assistant shall maintain previous digests and make them available upon request to any entity, including those Players on Hold. This Rule shall take precidence over all other Rules regarding commuication with Players on Hold. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1735, 15 October 1995 text: Let there be an Office of the Assistant. Said Office shall be responsible for collecting those messages which are official in nature from the Speaker and Officers. Messages are to be edited into a single digest post. The Assistant shall maintain previous digests and make them available upon request to any entity, including those Players on Hold. This Rule shall take precedence over all other Rules regarding commuication with Players on Hold. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: Let there be an Office of the Assistant. Said Office shall be responsible for collecting those messages which are official in nature from the Speaker and Officers. Messages are to be edited into a single digest post. The Assistant shall maintain previous digests and make them available upon request to any entity, including those Players on Hold. This Rule shall take precedence over all other Rules regarding communication with Players on Hold. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 840 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 840 by Proposal 840 (KoJen), 1 March 1994 text: Let there be a Patent Title known as the "Scamster". This is awarded to a Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpretating of Scams. This title is awarded by Proposal and once awarded is permanent. A Scamster must pay a one-time fee of 1 Point to the Point Reserve upon receiving the Title. This fee is not optional, and the Patent Title may not be declined. history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1346, 29 November 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1372, 5 January 1995 text: Let there be a Patent Title known as the "Scamster". This is awarded to a Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpretating of Scams. This title is awarded by Proposal and once awarded is permanent. A Scamster loses 1 Point upon receiving the Title. The Patent Title may not be declined. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1688, 1 September 1995 text: Let there be a Patent Title known as the "Scamster". This is awarded to a Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpretating of Scams. This title is awarded by Proposal and once awarded is permanent. Upon receiving the title, 0.01 Mark shall be transferred from the Scamster to the Bank. The Patent Title of Scamster may not be declined. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1716, 12 September 1995 text: Let there be a Patent Title known as the "Scamster". This is awarded to a Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpretating of Scams. This title is awarded by Proposal and once awarded is permanent. Upon receiving the title, 1 Mark shall be transferred from the Scamster to the Bank. The Patent Title of Scamster may not be declined. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: Let there be a Patent Title known as the "Scamster". This is awarded to a Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of Scams. This title is awarded by Proposal and once awarded is permanent. Upon receiving the title, 1 Mark shall be transferred from the Scamster to the Bank. The Patent Title of Scamster may not be declined. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2494, 16 February 1996 text: Let there be a Patent Title known as the "Scamster". This is awarded to a Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of Scams. This Title is awarded in the normal manner for Patent Titles, and may never be retracted. At the time the Title is awarded, 1 Mark shall be transferred from the new Scamster to the Bank. This transfer shall be reported by the Registrar, as soon as possible after it occurs. The Patent Title of Scamster may not be declined. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: Let there be a Patent Title known as the "Scamster". This is awarded to a Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of Scams. This Title is awarded in the normal manner for Patent Titles, and may never be retracted. The Patent Title of Scamster may not be declined. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 842 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 842 by Proposal 842 (KoJen), 1 March 1994 text: Let there be a Patent Title known as "Most Titled". This Title is to be given to the Player who has the largest number of Patent Titles. The Registrar is charged with keeping track of this and announcing when the Most Titled Player changes. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 843,936,1065 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 843 by Proposal 843 (KoJen), 3 March 1994 text: No Player may send more than PL/2 Proposals to the Speaker during any given Week. Proposals in excess of this number are rejected by the Speaker, as they are not "made in the proper manner". A 2 Point penalty is assessed by the Speaker for every Proposal submitted in excess of this number; responsibility for enforcement is given to the Speaker. history: Amended by Proposal 936 (Chuck), 14 July 1994 text: When a player submits a Proposal to the Speaker, e shall lose 1 point for each Proposal proposed by em which either is currently up for Vote, or has been sent to the Speaker but not yet distributed. The Speaker is responsible for reporting this point change to the Scorekeepor, and the Speaker shall report it no later than the time at which the proposal is distributed. For the purposes of this Rule, multiple proposals in the same message shall be considered to have been sent to the Speaker separated by infinitesimal increments of time. If at any time after the adoption of this Rule there exists a Nomic entity known as the Point Sucker: --the "1 point" in the first paragraph shall be amended to "0.1 Marks" --the "Scorekeepor" in the second paragraph shall be amended to "Banker" --this paragraph shall then be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended by Rule 750, 14 July 1994 text: When a player submits a Proposal to the Speaker, e shall lose 1 point for each Proposal proposed by em which either is currently up for Vote, or has been sent to the Speaker but not yet distributed. The Speaker is responsible for reporting this point change to the Scorekeepor, and the Speaker shall report it no later than the time at which the proposal is distributed. For the purposes of this Rule, multiple proposals in the same message shall be considered to have been sent to the Speaker separated by infinitesimal increments of time. If at any time after the adoption of this Rule there exists a Nomic entity known as the Point Sucker: --the "1 point" in the first paragraph shall be amended to "0.1 Marks" --the "Scorekeepor" in the second paragraph shall be amended to "Banker" --this paragraph shall then be deleted from this Rule. (*Was: 843*) history: Amended by Proposal 1065, ca. Oct. 11 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Oct. 11 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1270, 24 October 1994 text: When a Player submits a Proposal, e shall lose one (1) point for each Proposal, in excess of two, previously submitted by that Player within the past seven (7) days. The Speaker is responsible for reporting this point change to the Scorekeepor, and the Speaker shall report it no later than the time at which the proposal is distributed. For the purposes of this Rule, multiple proposals in the same message shall be considered to have been sent to the Speaker separated by infinitesimal increments of time. (*Was: 843/936*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1405, 29 January 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1530, 24 March 1995 text: When a Player submits a Proposal, e shall lose one (1) point for each Proposal, in excess of two, previously submitted by that Player within the past seven (7) days. The Promotor is responsible for reporting this point change to the Scorekeepor, and the Promotor shall report it no later than the time at which the proposal is distributed. This Rule shall have no effect on Points whenever the number of Proposals currently up for Vote plus the number of Proposals received by the Speaker but not yet distributed is not more than 12. For the purposes of this Rule, multiple proposals in the same message shall be considered to have been sent to the Promotor separated by infinitesimal increments of time. (*Was: 843/936*) history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1693, 1 September 1995 text: When a Player submits a Proposal, e shall lose 1 Mark for each Proposal, in excess of two, previously submitted by that Player within the past seven (7) days. The Promotor is responsible for reporting this transfer to the Banker, and the Promotor shall report it no later than the time at which the Proposal is distributed. No Transfer shall occur as a result of this Rule whenever whenever the number of Proposals currently up for Vote plus the number of Proposals received by the Promotor but not yet distributed is not more than 12. For the purposes of this Rule, multiple Proposals in the same message shall be considered to have been sent to the Promotor separated by infinitesimal increments of time. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 1750, 21 October 1995 text: Whenever a Player submits a Proposal, e shall lose 1 Mark for each Proposal, in excess of two, previously submitted by that Player during the current Nomic Week. The Promotor shall detect and report this penalty, no later than the time the Proposal is distributed. history: Null-Amended(6) by Proposal 1763, 31 October 1995 text: Whenever a Player submits a Proposal, e shall lose 1 Mark for each Proposal, in excess of two, previously submitted by that Player during the current Nomic Week. The Promotor shall detect and report this penalty, no later than the time the Proposal is distributed. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2054, 19 December 1995 text: Whenever a Player submits a Proposal, e shall lose 1 Mark for each Proposal, in excess of five, previously submitted by that Player during the current Nomic Week. The Promotor shall detect and report this penalty, no later than the time the Proposal is distributed. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 2522, 10 March 1996 text: Whenever a Proposing Entity submits a Proposal, it shall lose 1 Mark for each Proposal, in excess of five, previously submitted by that Proposing Entity during the current Nomic Week. The Promotor shall detect and report this penalty, no later than the time the Proposal is distributed. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 2691, 3 October 1996 text: The submission of a Proposal by a Proposing Entity that has submitted more than five Proposals within the immediately preceding Week is an Infraction, the penalty for which is one Mil. This Infraction shall be reported by the Promotor. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 2712, 12 October 1996 text: The submission of a Proposal by a Proposing Entity that has submitted more than five Proposals within the immediately preceding Week is an Infraction, the penalty for which is one Mil. This Infraction shall be detected and reported by the Promotor. history: Amended(11) Cosmetically by Proposal 2830 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: The submission of a Proposal by a Proposing Entity that has submitted more than five Proposals within the immediately preceding Week is the Infraction of Excess Proposing, the penalty for which is one Mil. This Infraction shall be detected and reported by the Promotor. history: Amended(12) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: The submission of a Proposal by a Proposing Entity that has submitted more than five Proposals within the immediately preceding Week is the Infraction of Excess Proposing, the penalty for which is 0.5 VT. This Infraction shall be detected and reported by the Promotor. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1065 by Proposal 3724 (Chuck), 16 April 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 849,1007 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 849 by Proposal 849 (Garth), 17 March 1994 text: Officers (excluding Viziers, Ordinancekeepors, and any other Officers whose duties pertain only to a single Group) shall receive a salary of 3 Points per week. This Rule applies to Offices in general, and defers to the Rules for specific Offices. history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 1007, ca. Aug. 25 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, ca. Aug. 25 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1582, 15 May 1995 text: At the beginning of each Nomic week, each player filling an Office receives the designated weekly salary for each Office which e has filled continuously for the previous five days. The designated weekly salary for any particular Office is 3 Points, unless another Rule explicitly states another salary. history: Infected and Amended(2) by Rule 1454, 28 August 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: At the beginning of each Nomic week, each player filling an Office receives the designated weekly salary for each Office which e has filled continuously for the previous five days. The designated weekly salary for any particular Office is 3 Points, unless another Rule explicitly states another salary. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. text: At the beginning of each Nomic week, each player filling an Office receives the designated weekly salary for each Office which e has filled continuously for the previous five days. The designated weekly salary for any particular Office is 3 Points, unless another Rule explicitly states another salary. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1705, 4 September 1995 text: At the beginning of each Nomic week, each player filling an Office receives the designated weekly salary for each Office which e has filled continuously for the previous five days. The designated weekly salary for any particular Office is 3 Points, unless another Rule explicitly states another salary. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. The Scorekeepor shall detect and report all transfers resultng from the payment of fixed weekly Salaries. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: At the beginning of each Nomic week, each player filling an Office receives the designated weekly salary for each Office which e has filled continuously for the previous five days. The designated weekly salary for any particular Office is 3 Points, unless another Rule explicitly states another salary. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. The Scorekeepor shall detect and report all transfers resulting from the payment of fixed weekly Salaries. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, each Officer shall receive the designated salaries for the Office(s) e holds, provided that e has held them for the entire five days preceding without interruption. The Registrar shall detect and report all transfer resulting from the payment of fixed weekly Salaries. Unless otherwise specified, the salary for an Office is 3 Points. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2560, 6 April 1996 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, each Officer shall receive the designated salaries for the Office(s) e holds, provided that e has held them for the entire five days preceding without interruption. If the Rules pertaining to an Office require that Officer to publish a document at least once per Nomic Week, that Officer's Salary for a given Week shall be forfeited if that document has not been distributed in the previous Week. The Registrar shall detect and report all transfers resulting from the payment of fixed weekly Salaries. Unless otherwise specified, the salary for an Office is 3 Points. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2618, 9 June 1996 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, each Officer shall receive the designated Salary for each Office e has held without interruption for the entire five days preceding. If the Rules pertaining to an Office require that Officer to publish a document at least once per Nomic Week, that Officer's Salary for a given Week shall be forfeited if that document has not been distributed in the previous Week. The Registrar shall detect and report all transfers resulting from the payment of fixed weekly Salaries. Unless otherwise specified, the salary for an Office is 3 Points. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, each Officer shall receive the designated Salary for each Office e has held without interruption for the entire five days preceding. If the Rules pertaining to an Office require that Officer to publish a document at least once per Nomic Week, that Officer's Salary for a given Week shall be forfeited if that document has not been distributed in the previous Week. The Registrar shall detect and report all transfers resulting from the payment of fixed weekly Salaries. Unless otherwise specified, the salary for an Office is 3 Mils. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, each Officer shall receive the designated Salary for each Office e has held without interruption for the entire five days preceding. If the Rules pertaining to an Office require that Officer to publish a document at least once per Nomic Week, that Officer's Salary for a given Week shall be forfeited if that document has not been distributed in the previous Week. The Registrar shall detect and report all transfers resulting from the payment of fixed weekly Salaries. There shall be a Basic Officer Salary, which is equal to 10 Marks. Salaries are permitted to be expressed in terms of the Basic Salary. Unless otherwise specified, the Salary for an Office shall be equal to the Basic Salary. history: Null-Amended(10) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, each Officer shall receive the designated Salary for each Office e has held without interruption for the entire five days preceding. If the Rules pertaining to an Office require that Officer to publish a document at least once per Nomic Week, that Officer's Salary for a given Week shall be forfeited if that document has not been distributed in the previous Week. The Registrar shall detect and report all transfers resulting from the payment of fixed weekly Salaries. There shall be a Basic Officer Salary, which is equal to 10 Marks. Salaries are permitted to be expressed in terms of the Basic Salary. Unless otherwise specified, the Salary for an Office shall be equal to the Basic Salary. history: Amended(11) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, each Officer shall receive the designated Salary for each Office e has held without interruption for the entire five days preceding. If the Rules pertaining to an Office require that Officer to publish a document at least once per Nomic Week, that Officer's Salary for a given Week shall be forfeited if that document has not been distributed in the previous Week. The Registrar shall detect and report all transfers resulting from the payment of fixed weekly Salaries. There shall be a Basic Officer Salary, which is equal to 1 VT. Salaries are permitted to be expressed in terms of the Basic Salary. Unless otherwise specified, the Salary for an Office shall be equal to the Basic Salary. history: Amended(12) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Registrar shall pay out to each Officer the designated Salary for each Office that Officer has held without interruption for the entire five days preceding. If the Rules pertaining to an Office require that Officer to publish a document at least once per Nomic Week, then no payment of Salary shall be made in a given Nomic Week if that document was not distributed in the previous Week. There shall be a Basic Officer Salary, which is equal to 1 VT. Salaries are permitted to be expressed in terms of the Basic Salary. Unless otherwise specified, the Salary for an Office shall be equal to the Basic Salary. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 3642 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Registrar shall pay out to each Officer the designated Salary for each Office that Officer has held without interruption for the entire five days preceding. There shall be a Basic Officer Salary, which is equal to 1 VT. Salaries are permitted to be expressed in terms of the Basic Salary. Unless otherwise specified, the Salary for an Office shall be equal to the Basic Salary. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 3747 (Steve), 22 May 1998 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Registrar shall pay out to each Officer the designated Salary for each Office that Officer has held without interruption for the entire five days preceding. There is a Basic Officer Salary, equal to a number of Voting Tokens, the level of which is set by the Chancellor, as described in other Rules. Salaries are permitted to be expressed in terms of the Basic Salary. Unless otherwise specified, the Salary for an Office shall be equal to the Basic Salary. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 3802 (Kolja A.), 15 November 1998 text: At the beginning of each month, the Registrar shall pay out to each Player the designated Salary for each Office that Player has held for a total of at least 12 days in the preceding month. There is a Basic Officer Salary, equal to a number of Voting Tokens, the level of which is set by the Chancellor, as described in other Rules. Salaries are permitted to be expressed in terms of the Basic Salary. Unless otherwise specified, the Salary for an Office shall be equal to the Basic Salary. history: ... history: Amended(18) text: At the beginning of each month, the Payroll Clerk shall pay out to each Player for the designated Salary for each Office that Player has held for a total of at least 12 days in the preceding month. There is a Basic Officer Salary, equal to a number of Stems, the level of which is set by the Treasuror, as described in other Rules. Salaries are permitted to be expressed in terms of the Basic Salary. The Salary for an Office shall be specified in the Treasuror's Budget; if an Office's Salary is not so specified, it is equal to the Basic Salary. history: ... [orphaned text: Officers (excluding Viziers, Ordinancekeepors, and any other Officers whose duties pertain only to a single Group) shall receive a salary of 3 Points per week, unless another Rule explicitly states another salary. All salaries shall be paid at the beginning of each Nomic week, on condition that the Officer has been in Office for at least five days. The second paragraph of this Rule takes precedence over all Rules that determine payday differently. (*Was: 849*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 852 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 852 by Proposal 852 (Oerjan), 17 March 1994 text: It is never a Crime for any Player to perform an action which is required of em by the Rules. This Rule takes precedence over any Rules defining what is or is not a Crime. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 853 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 853 by Proposal 853 (Oerjan), 17 March 1994 text: In order to make an Oath, a Player must send a message to at least one other Player, stating the fact that they are making an Oath, and what the Oath is. If someone makes an Oath, e must do that which e has sworn to do, as long as it is legal for em to do so. E who defies this has broken this Rule, and shall also be guilty of a Class C Crime. No rule may force someone to make an Oath; this rule takes precedence over all rules that attempt to do so. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 855 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 855 by Proposal 855 (Garth), 17 March 1994 text: Marks are a Conserved Quantity. The total number of Marks is Public Information. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 856,924 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 856 by Proposal 856 (Garth), 17 March 1994 text: Any Proposal which introduces a new way to Create or Destroy a Conserved Quantity shall require at least three times as many FOR Votes as AGAINST Votes in order to pass. This restriction does not apply to Proposals which define new Conserved Quantities or Create the initial stock of a new Conserved Quantity. history: Amended by Proposal 924 (Jason), 27 June 1994 text: Any Proposal which introduces a new way to Create or Destroy a Conserved Quantity shall require at least three times as many FOR Votes as AGAINST Votes in order to pass. This restriction does not apply to Proposals which define new Conserved Quantities or Create the initial stock of a new Conserved Quantity. This rule takes precedence over any other rules regarding voting. history: Amended by Rule 750, 27 June 1994 text: Any Proposal which introduces a new way to Create or Destroy a Conserved Quantity shall require at least three times as many FOR Votes as AGAINST Votes in order to pass. This restriction does not apply to Proposals which define new Conserved Quantities or Create the initial stock of a new Conserved Quantity. This rule takes precedence over any other rules regarding voting. (*Was: 856*) history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 861,883 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 861 by Proposal 861 (Stella?), 17 March 1994 text: The Ambassador shall do eis best to locate other Nomic or Nomiclike Games taking place on the Internet. The find of any such Game will be rewarded by a bonus of five Points. If another Player than the Ambassador locates such a Game first, five Points will be transfered from the Ambassador to this Player. history: Amended by Proposal 883 (Stella?), 13 April 1994 text: The Ambassador shall do eis best to locate other Nomic or Nomiclike Games taking place on the Internet. The find of any such Game will be rewarded by a bonus of five Points. If another Player than the Ambassador locates such a Game first, five Points will be transfered from the Ambassador to this Player. To qualify for the reward, at least half the Players of such a Game should not play already in *this* Nomic Game. history: Amended by Rule 750, 13 April 1994 text: The Ambassador shall do eis best to locate other Nomic or Nomiclike Games taking place on the Internet. The find of any such Game will be rewarded by a bonus of five Points. If another Player than the Ambassador locates such a Game first, five Points will be transfered from the Ambassador to this Player. To qualify for the reward, at least half the Players of such a Game should not play already in *this* Nomic Game. (*Was: 861*) history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 862 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 862 by Proposal 862 (Stella?), 17 March 1994 text: Let there exist the Patent Title of Entrepreneur. This Title will be awarded to the most enterprizing Free Enterprizer. The Entrepreneur will be chosen by means of an election organized by the Banker, by any means he sees fit. Candidates for the Title are Chuck, KoJen, Oerjan and Waggie. This Rule can only be amended by a Proposal to award the Patent Title of Entrepreneur to another Player. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 864 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 864 by Proposal 864 (Dave Bowen), 4 April 1994 text: Any Marks created through the passage of the Walrus Rules (Rules 818 and 819) shall be destroyed. If any of these Marks have' been converted into points, those points earned shall be returned to the Point Reserve. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 865,928 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 865 by Proposal 865 (KoJen), 4 April 1994 text: Players are urged to "proto-Propose" an idea before submitting it as an official Proposal. This is done be posting the complete Proposal as it would be submitted, to the Public Forum, adding the prefix "proto-" to the word "PROPOSAL", at least one Week and no more than four Weeks before the Proposal is submitted to the Speaker. The submitter is encouraged but not required to take into account suggestions by the Nomic community, and modify the proto-proposal before submitting as an official Proposal. When proposed in this manner, the Proposer receives 2 Points. The Speaker must mention this payment when e distributes the Proposal. To be eligible for this, the submitter must indicate to the Speaker when the Proposal was proto-Proposed, and what changes were incorporated. A Proposal must be a "reasonably plausible evolution" of its proto-Proposal or this credit does not apply. In case of a violation, the submitter, and not the Speaker shall be the Guilty Party. history: Amended by Proposal 928 (Stella?), 27 June 1994 text: Players are urged to "proto-Propose" an idea before submitting it as an official Proposal. This is done be posting the complete Proposal as it would be submitted, to the Public Forum, adding the prefix "proto-" to the word "PROPOSAL", at least one Week and no more than four Weeks before the Proposal is submitted to the Speaker. The submitter is encouraged but not required to take into account suggestions by the Nomic community, and modify the proto-proposal before submitting as an official Proposal. When proposed in this manner, the Proposer receives 2 Points, at the end of the Voting Period on that Proposal. The Speaker must mention this payment when e distributes the Voting results. To be eligible for this, the submitter must indicate to the Speaker when the Proposal was proto-Proposed, and what changes were incorporated. A Proposal must be a "reasonably plausible evolution" of its proto-Proposal or this credit does not apply. In case of a violation, the submitter, and not the Speaker shall be the Guilty Party. history: Amended by Rule 750, 27 June 1994 text: Players are urged to "proto-Propose" an idea before submitting it as an official Proposal. This is done be posting the complete Proposal as it would be submitted, to the Public Forum, adding the prefix "proto-" to the word "PROPOSAL", at least one Week and no more than four Weeks before the Proposal is submitted to the Speaker. The submitter is encouraged but not required to take into account suggestions by the Nomic community, and modify the proto-proposal before submitting as an official Proposal. When proposed in this manner, the Proposer receives 2 Points, at the end of the Voting Period on that Proposal. The Speaker must mention this payment when e distributes the Voting results. To be eligible for this, the submitter must indicate to the Speaker when the Proposal was proto-Proposed, and what changes were incorporated. A Proposal must be a "reasonably plausible evolution" of its proto-Proposal or this credit does not apply. In case of a violation, the submitter, and not the Speaker shall be the Guilty Party. (*Was: 865*) history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 866,929 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 866 by Proposal 866 (KoJen), 4 April 1994 text: Players are urged to "proto-Propose" an idea before submitting it as an official Proposal. Should the Proposer desire, e may decide to proto-Propose it to eir own Group rather than to the Public Forum. This is done by Posting the complete Proposal as it would be submitted, to all Active members of eir Group, adding the prefix "proto-" to the word "PROPOSAL", at least one Week and no more then four Weeks before the Proposal is submitted to the Speaker. The submitter is encouraged but not required to take into account suggestions by the Group members, and modify the proto-proposal before submitting as an official Proposal. When proposed in this manner, the Proposer receives 2 Points. The Speaker must mention this payment when e distributes the Proposal. To be eligible for this, the submitter must indicate to the Speaker when and to whom the Proposal was proto-Proposed, and what changes were incorporated. A Proposal must be a "reasonably plausible evolution" of its proto-Proposal or this credit does not apply. In case of a violation, the submitter, and not the Speaker shall be the Guilty Party. history: Amended by Proposal 929 (Stella?), 27 June 1994 text: Players are urged to "proto-Propose" an idea before submitting it as an official Proposal. Should the Proposer desire, e may decide to proto-Propose it to eir own Group rather than to the Public Forum. This is done by Posting the complete Proposal as it would be submitted, to all Active members of eir Group, adding the prefix "proto-" to the word "PROPOSAL", at least one Week and no more then four Weeks before the Proposal is submitted to the Speaker. The submitter is encouraged but not required to take into account suggestions by the Group members, and modify the proto-proposal before submitting as an official Proposal. When proposed in this manner, the Proposer receives 2 Points, at the end of the Voting Period on that Proposal. The Speaker must mention this payment when e distributes the Voting results. To be eligible for this, the submitter must indicate to the Speaker when and to whom the Proposal was proto-Proposed, and what changes were incorporated. A Proposal must be a "reasonably plausible evolution" of its proto-Proposal or this credit does not apply. In case of a violation, the submitter, and not the Speaker shall be the Guilty Party. history: Amended by Rule 750, 27 June 1994 text: Players are urged to "proto-Propose" an idea before submitting it as an official Proposal. Should the Proposer desire, e may decide to proto-Propose it to eir own Group rather than to the Public Forum. This is done by Posting the complete Proposal as it would be submitted, to all Active members of eir Group, adding the prefix "proto-" to the word "PROPOSAL", at least one Week and no more then four Weeks before the Proposal is submitted to the Speaker. The submitter is encouraged but not required to take into account suggestions by the Group members, and modify the proto-proposal before submitting as an official Proposal. When proposed in this manner, the Proposer receives 2 Points, at the end of the Voting Period on that Proposal. The Speaker must mention this payment when e distributes the Voting results. To be eligible for this, the submitter must indicate to the Speaker when and to whom the Proposal was proto-Proposed, and what changes were incorporated. A Proposal must be a "reasonably plausible evolution" of its proto-Proposal or this credit does not apply. In case of a violation, the submitter, and not the Speaker shall be the Guilty Party. (*Was: 866*) history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 867 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 867 by Proposal 867 (KoJen), 4 April 1994 text: If there is currently a distributed Proposal X, or a submitted but not-yet-distributed Proposal-to-be X, whose effect includes the amending or repeal of Rule Y, then no additional Proposals whose effect includes the amending or repeal of the same Rule Y shall be accepted until the outcome of Proposal X is decided. Responsibility of enforcing this is given to the Speaker, who shall return such submissions to the sender, as they are not properly made proposals. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 893 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 893 by Proposal 893 (Nicol), 22 April 1994 text: Newer foreign policy directives take precedence over older ones. A foreign policy directive may be dropped from the records only after it has explicitly been superceded in another foreign policy directive. history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1467, 8 March 1995 text: Newer foreign policy directives take precedence over older ones. A foreign policy directive may be dropped from the records by Explicit Self-Repeal, or by being explicitly superceded by another directive, or by being repealed via another directive. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 894,895 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 894 by Proposal 894 (Garth), 22 April 1994 text: New kinds of Rule Changes may be defined by the Rules, so long as they Create, Amend, Repeal, Transmute, or otherwise change one or more Rules, without making any other direct changes to the Game State. All proposed Rule Changes are Proposals. Other kinds of Proposal may be defined by the Rules. They shall be treated as proposed Rule Changes in all respects, save that they shall not change any Rule in any way, and they shall not under any circumstances be incorporated into the Ruleset. A given class of such Proposals shall not be valid unless the Rules define which Player or Players must maintain a current record of that class of Proposals, or explicitly state that that class need not be recorded. The first paragraph of this Rule does not apply to Proposals that are not Rule Changes. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules describing the nature of Rule Changes and/or proposed Rule Changes. history: Transmuted from Mutable to Immutable by Proposal 895 (Garth), 22 April 1994 history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 897 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 897 by Proposal 897 (Garth), 22 April 1994 text: A Player that Calls For Judgement may Bar up to three Players from Judging that Statement. Players that have been Barred from a Statement are ineligible to render Judgement on that Statement. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: The Player who submits a Call for Judgement is permitted to specify up to three Players who are to be Barred from Judging that CFJ. Any Players that are so Barred are ineligible to Judge that CFJ. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3839 (Murphy), 8 March 1999 text: The Caller of a CFJ may Bar up to three Players from Judging that CFJ. Any Player whose Executor is the Caller of a CFJ is Barred from Judging that CFJ. Any Player Barred from Judging a CFJ is ineligible to Judge that CFJ. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: A Player Barred from Judging a CFJ is ineligible to Judge that CFJ. Any Player sharing an Executor with the Caller of a CFJ is automatically Barred from Judging that CFJ. When submitting a CFJ, the Caller may Bar up to three Players from Judging that CFJ. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall publish the text of a CFJ, along with any additional material submitted by the Caller and the Defendant if any (including but not limited to Arguments and Evidence), no later than the time e announces the identity of the first Judge assigned to that CFJ. When a Civil CFJ is submitted, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish the text of the CFJ and send a copy of the CFJ to the Defendant's registered e-mail address, if any, and inform the Defendant that e has one week to publish a defense and/or bar a Player from judging as described below. The CotC will not assign a Civil CFJ to a judge until one week has passed since after a publication. During this time, any evidence or arguments, published or submitted to the CotC by the Defendant with the clear intent of being part of a defense, will become part of the material of that CFJ. A Player Barred from Judging a CFJ is ineligible to Judge that CFJ. When submitting a general CFJ, the Caller may Bar up to three Players from Judging that CFJ. The defendant of a Civil CFJ is automatically barred from judging it. The Plantiff may bar one other Player when e submits the CFJ. The Defendant may bar one other Player from judging any time before the CFJ is assigned to a judge. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall publish the text of a CFJ, along with any additional material submitted by the Caller and the Defendant if any (including but not limited to Arguments and Evidence), no later than the time e announces the identity of the first Judge assigned to that CFJ. When a Civil CFJ is submitted, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish the text of the CFJ and send a copy of the CFJ to the Defendant's registered e-mail address, if any, and inform the Defendant that e has one week to publish a defense and/or bar a Player from judging as described below. The CotC will not assign a Civil CFJ to a judge until one week has passed since after a publication. During this time, any evidence or arguments, published or submitted to the CotC by the Defendant with the clear intent of being part of a defense, will become part of the material of that CFJ. A Player Barred from Judging a CFJ is ineligible to Judge that CFJ. When submitting a general CFJ, the Caller may Bar up to three Players from Judging that CFJ. The defendant of a Civil CFJ is automatically barred from judging it. The Plaintiff may bar one other Player when e submits the CFJ. The Defendant may bar one other Player from judging any time before the CFJ is assigned to a judge. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5001 (root, Quazie), 12 June 2007 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall publish the text of a CFJ, along with any additional material submitted by the Caller and the Defendant if any (including but not limited to Arguments and Evidence), no later than the time e announces the identity of the first Judge assigned to that CFJ. When a Civil CFJ is submitted, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish the text of the CFJ and send a copy of the CFJ to the Defendant's registered e-mail address, if any, and inform the Defendant that e has one week to publish a defense and/or bar a Player from judging as described below. The CotC will not assign a Civil CFJ to a judge until one week has passed since after a publication. During this time, any evidence or arguments, published or submitted to the CotC by the Defendant with the clear intent of being part of a defense, will become part of the material of that CFJ. A player barred from judging a CFJ is ineligible to judge that CFJ. The caller of a CFJ is automatically barred from judging it. When submitting a general CFJ, the Caller may Bar up to three Players from Judging that CFJ. The defendant of a Civil CFJ is automatically barred from judging it. The Plaintiff may bar one other Player when e submits the CFJ. The Defendant may bar one other Player from judging any time before the CFJ is assigned to a judge. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5015 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 text: When a Civil CFJ is submitted, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish the text of the CFJ and send a copy of the CFJ to the Defendant's registered e-mail address, if any, and inform the Defendant that e has one week to publish a defense and/or bar a Player from judging as described below. The CotC will not assign a Civil CFJ to a judge until one week has passed since after a publication. During this time, any evidence or arguments, published or submitted to the CotC by the Defendant with the clear intent of being part of a defense, will become part of the material of that CFJ. A player barred from judging a CFJ is ineligible to judge that CFJ. The caller of a CFJ is automatically barred from judging it. When submitting a general CFJ, the Caller may Bar up to three Players from Judging that CFJ. The defendant of a Civil CFJ is automatically barred from judging it. The Plaintiff may bar one other Player when e submits the CFJ. The Defendant may bar one other Player from judging any time before the CFJ is assigned to a judge. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5040 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: A player barred from judging a CFJ is ineligible to judge that CFJ. The caller of a CFJ is automatically barred from judging it. When submitting a CFJ, the caller may bar up to three players from judging that CFJ. history: Retitled by Proposal 5040 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 897 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 900 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 900 by Proposal 900 (Garth), 22 April 1994 text: Proposals that are not proposed Rule Changes are known as Decrees. The Clerk of the Courts shall maintain a current record of all Decrees to Appeal Judgements. The Ambassador shall maintain a current record of all Foreign Policy Directives. The Rulekeepor shall maintain a current record of all other Decrees that have a continuing legal effect. Decrees to Award Titles or Run for Offices need not be recorded. The Archivist shall maintain a record of all other Decrees. This Rule applies to Decrees in general, and defers to the Rules for specific types of Decrees. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 902 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 902 by Proposal 902 (KoJen), 22 April 1994 text: The Salary of the Scorekeepor is 5 Points per Week. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 903 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 903 by Proposal 903 (KoJen), 22 April 1994 text: Classes of Point changes which the Scorekeepor is Legally Responsible for detecting and tabulating without a specific request by another Player include, but are not necessarily limited to the following: * Salaries which consist of a fixed Point award per Week. * Transfers of Points specifically requested by the owner of the Points in a message received by the Scorekeepor. * Transfers of Points from a Group Treasury specifically requested by the Vizier of that Group in a message received by the Scorekeepor; however, the Vizier is legally responsible for ensuring that such a Point transfer is consistent with eir Group's Ordinances. * Point changes resulting from end of Game adjustments. * Point rounding, taxation and "Welfare", if mandated by other Rules. * Point changes resulting from a Player joining or leaving the Game. * Point changes resulting from dissolution of a Group. * Point changes resulting from a premature transfer of Speakership. The Scorekeepor is Legally Responsible for ensuring that the above Point changes are performed according to all Rules. Additional classes of Point changes which are the Scorekeepor's Legal Responsibility may be defined by other Rules. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 905 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 905 by Proposal 905 (KoJen), 22 April 1994 text: If a Rule mandates a change in Points, but no Rules exist which define the Player Legally Responsible for detecting and reporting the change to the Scorekeepor, then the Point change is cancelled. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules governing changes in Points, to the extent permitted. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 906,937 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 906 by Proposal 906 (KoJen), 22 April 1994 text: The Legal Responsibility for detecting the following classes of Point changes and reporting them to the Scorekeepor is bestowed upon another Player: * All Point changes directly related to the submission of Proposals: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All Point changes directly related to voting on Proposals: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All point changes resulting from Vototron contributions: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All point changes resulting from fees for judgements, salaries and penalties given to judges: responsibility of Clerk of the Courts, who must report these as soon as possible, and no later than the message announcing the outcome of the judgement. * Electioneer per-position-filled salary: responsibility of Electioneer to notify Scorekeepor within one Week. * Point changes regarding the "Squealer/Ninny" Rule: If the Ninny must lose Points, the responsibility lies with the Squealer for informing the Scorekeepor as soon as possible. * Marks interest: responsibility of Banker to nofify Scorekeepor as soon as possible following the mandated interst payment. * Proposal lottery: responsibility of Sweepstakes Officer, who must notify Scorekeepor as soon as possible after the drawing. * Ambassador salary: responsibility of Ambassador for notifying Scorekeepor no later than one Week following the time the payment is earned. * Stock dividends: responsibility of the Banker for notifying Scorekeepor no later than one Week following the time the dividends are earned. The Scorekeepor notification must be via the public forum or, if individually subscribable distribution lists are implemented, must be made on a distribution list which is potentially available to anyone who wishes to subscribe to it. This paragraph takes precendence over other Rules which would require a private Scorekeepor notification. The notification need not be on a separate message, as long as the Scorekeepor is mentioned, and the message is on a list which is received by the Scorekeepor. Other classes of Point changes whose legal responsibilty for reporting is other than the Scorekeepor may be defined by other Rules. history: Amended by Proposal 937 (Stella?), 14 July 1994 text: The Legal Responsibility for detecting the following classes of Point changes and reporting them to the Scorekeepor is bestowed upon another Player: * All Point changes directly related to the submission of Proposals: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All Point changes directly related to voting on Proposals: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All point changes resulting from Vototron contributions: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All point changes resulting from fees for judgements, salaries and penalties given to judges: responsibility of Clerk of the Courts, who must report these as soon as possible, and no later than the message announcing the outcome of the judgement. * Electioneer per-position-filled salary: responsibility of Electioneer to notify Scorekeepor within one Week. * Point changes regarding the "Squealer/Ninny" Rule: If the Ninny must lose Points, the responsibility lies with the Squealer for informing the Scorekeepor as soon as possible. * Marks interest: responsibility of Banker to nofify Scorekeepor as soon as possible following the mandated interst payment. * Proposal lottery: responsibility of Sweepstakes Officer, who must notify Scorekeepor as soon as possible after the drawing. * Ambassador salary: responsibility of Ambassador for notifying Scorekeepor no later than one Week following the time the payment is earned. * Stock dividends: responsibility of the Scorekeepor who calculates the dividends earned. However The Banker must notify the Scorekeepor of changes in the Stock ownership. The Scorekeepor notification must be via the public forum or, if individually subscribable distribution lists are implemented, must be made on a distribution list which is potentially available to anyone who wishes to subscribe to it. This paragraph takes precendence over other Rules which would require a private Scorekeepor notification. The notification need not be on a separate message, as long as the Scorekeepor is mentioned, and the message is on a list which is received by the Scorekeepor. Other classes of Point changes whose legal responsibilty for reporting is other than the Scorekeepor may be defined by other Rules. history: Amended by Rule 750, 14 July 1994 text: The Legal Responsibility for detecting the following classes of Point changes and reporting them to the Scorekeepor is bestowed upon another Player: * All Point changes directly related to the submission of Proposals: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All Point changes directly related to voting on Proposals: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All point changes resulting from Vototron contributions: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All point changes resulting from fees for judgements, salaries and penalties given to judges: responsibility of Clerk of the Courts, who must report these as soon as possible, and no later than the message announcing the outcome of the judgement. * Electioneer per-position-filled salary: responsibility of Electioneer to notify Scorekeepor within one Week. * Point changes regarding the "Squealer/Ninny" Rule: If the Ninny must lose Points, the responsibility lies with the Squealer for informing the Scorekeepor as soon as possible. * Marks interest: responsibility of Banker to nofify Scorekeepor as soon as possible following the mandated interst payment. * Proposal lottery: responsibility of Sweepstakes Officer, who must notify Scorekeepor as soon as possible after the drawing. * Ambassador salary: responsibility of Ambassador for notifying Scorekeepor no later than one Week following the time the payment is earned. * Stock dividends: responsibility of the Scorekeepor who calculates the dividends earned. However The Banker must notify the Scorekeepor of changes in the Stock ownership. The Scorekeepor notification must be via the public forum or, if individually subscribable distribution lists are implemented, must be made on a distribution list which is potentially available to anyone who wishes to subscribe to it. This paragraph takes precendence over other Rules which would require a private Scorekeepor notification. The notification need not be on a separate message, as long as the Scorekeepor is mentioned, and the message is on a list which is received by the Scorekeepor. Other classes of Point changes whose legal responsibilty for reporting is other than the Scorekeepor may be defined by other Rules. (*Was: 906*) history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1301, 4 November 1994 text: The Legal Responsibility for detecting the following classes of Point changes and reporting them to the Scorekeepor is bestowed upon another Player: * All Point changes directly related to the submission of Proposals: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All Point changes directly related to voting on Proposals: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All point changes resulting from Vototron contributions: responsibility of Speaker, who must report these no later than the message announcing the voting results. * All point changes resulting from fees for judgements, salaries and penalties given to judges: responsibility of Clerk of the Courts, who must report these as soon as possible, and no later than the message announcing the outcome of the judgement. * Electioneer per-position-filled salary: responsibility of Electioneer to notify Scorekeepor within one Week. * Point changes regarding the "Squealer/Ninny" Rule: If the Ninny must lose Points, the responsibility lies with the Squealer for informing the Scorekeepor as soon as possible. * Ambassador salary: responsibility of Ambassador for notifying Scorekeepor no later than one Week following the time the payment is earned. The Scorekeepor notification must be via the public forum or, if individually subscribable distribution lists are implemented, must be made on a distribution list which is potentially available to anyone who wishes to subscribe to it. This paragraph takes precendence over other Rules which would require a private Scorekeepor notification. The notification need not be on a separate message, as long as the Scorekeepor is mentioned, and the message is on a list which is received by the Scorekeepor. Other classes of Point changes whose legal responsibilty for reporting is other than the Scorekeepor may be defined by other Rules. (*Was: 906*) history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1411, 1 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1472, 8 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1530, 24 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 1531, 24 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: The following classes of involuntary transfers of Currencies shall be detected by the Player specified below, within the time limit specified, if any. * Transfers resulting from the payment of fixed weekly Salaries: the Scorekeepor; * Transfers resulting from the End of a Game: the Scorekeepor; * Transfers resulting from the registration of a new Player or the deregistration of an existing Player: the Scorekeepor; * Transfers resulting from the dissolution of a Group: the Scorekeepor; * Transfers resulting from the change of Speakership: the Scorekeepor; * Transfers resulting from the submission of Proposals: the Promoter, not later than the message which distributes the Proposals; * Transfers resulting from Voting upon Proposals: the Assessor, not later the message announcing the Voting Results; * Transfers resulting from the assignment fees, salaries, or penalties to Judges or Justices: The Clerk of the Courts, not later than the message which announces the event which caused the mandated Transfer; * Transfers resulting from penalties or bonus imposed by the Rules, when the Rules do not specify another Player to make the report: the first Player to detect and report the conditions which cause the Transfer to be mandated. Other Rules may specify the party required to report a class of involuntary transfer not specified in this Rule. The specified Player shall report the transfer in question to the appropriate Recordkeepors. All transfers must be reported at least as soon as possible; if a sooner time is specified, that time takes precedence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 910 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 910 by Proposal 910 (Garth), 4 May 1994 text: Let there be three Players known as the Justices, and an Office known as the Justiciar. The Justiciar shall not receive a weekly salary. The Speaker and the Clerk of the Courts are ineligible to be Justiciar. The positions of Justice shall be held by the Speaker, the Clerk of the Courts, and the Justiciar; or by their representatives as detailed in this Rule. The Justices shall have the duty to Judge Statements that have been Appealed. They shall receive the same compensation as Judges for each Statement so Judged. The Speaker and Clerk may delegate their duties as Justices to other willing Players if they desire. They must do so if a Player would otherwise hold more than one position of Justice. Any Justice must so delegate eir duties for a particular case if e made the original CFJ, if e was the Judge of the original CFJ, or if e was Accused by that CFJ of breaking a Rule or committing a Crime. If no Player is willing to receive the duties of Justice for a case, the Clerk of the Courts shall select one randomly. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1447, 21 February 1995 text: Let there be three Players known as the Justices, and an Office known as the Justiciar. The Justiciar shall not receive a weekly salary. The Speaker and the Clerk of the Courts are ineligible to be Justiciar. The positions of Justice shall be held by the Speaker, the Clerk of the Courts, and the Justiciar; or by their representatives as detailed in this Rule. The Justices shall have the duty to Judge Statements that have been Appealed. They shall receive the same compensation as Judges for each Statement so Judged. The Speaker and Clerk may delegate their duties as Justices to other willing Players if they desire. They must do so if a Player would otherwise hold more than one position of Justice. Any Justice must so delegate eir duties for a particular case if e made the original CFJ, if e was the Judge of the original CFJ, or if e was Accused by that CFJ of breaking a Rule. If no Player is willing to receive the duties of Justice for a case, the Clerk of the Courts shall select one randomly. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1511, 24 March 1995 text: Let there be an Office of Justiciar. The Justiciar shall have the duties of judging appeals when serving as Justice. E shall receive no weekly salary. A vacant Office of Justiciar is filled in the usual manner, but the Speaker or Clerk of the Courts may not become Justiciar. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1581, 15 May 1995 text: The Justiciar Let there be an Office of Justiciar. The Justiciar shall have the duties of judging appeals when serving as Justice. E shall receive no weekly salary. A vacant Office of Justiciar is filled by an Election. As soon as possible after the office has become empty, the Registrar shall begin the Election by posting a call for nominations to the Public Forum. The Nominating Period shall be three days, and the Vote Collector shall be the Registrar. The Speaker or Clerk of the Courts may not nominate for this Election, and may not become Justiciar. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of the Justiciar, with the duty of Judging various matters of law, when the Rules so require. The Justiciar shall receive no fixed weekly salary. A Vacant Office of Justiciar shall be filled by an Election according to the standard procedure, except that: * the Nominating Period shall be three days; * the Vote Collector shall be the Registrar, or in eir absence the Speaker; and * the Speaker and the Clerk of the Courts are not permitted to be nominated. The Speaker and the Clerk of the Courts are prohibited from becoming the Justiciar. If the Player holding the Office of Justiciar becomes either Speaker or Clerk of the Courts, and thus is both Justiciar and either Speaker or Clerk of the Courts for a period of an entire week, e is removed as Justiciar and the Office becomes vacant. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2569, 12 April 1996 text: Let there exist the Office of the Justiciar, with the duty to Judge various matters of law when the Rules so require. The Justiciar does not receive a fixed weekly salary. The Speaker and the Player holding the Office of the Clerk of the Courts are not permitted to nominate in any Election for the Office of Justiciar. If the Player holding the Office of Justiciar becomes either Speaker or Clerk of the Courts, e is immediately retired from the Office of Justiciar. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3742 (Harlequin), 8 May 1998 text: Let there exist the Office of the Justiciar, with the duty to Judge various matters of law when the Rules so require. The Justiciar does not receive a fixed weekly salary. The Speaker and the Player holding the Office of the Clerk of the Courts are not permitted to nominate in any Election for the Office of Justiciar. If the Justiciar ever becomes Clerk of the Courts, e is removed from the Office of Justiciar. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3827 (Kolja A.), 4 February 1999 text: Let there exist the Office of the Justiciar, with the duty to Judge various matters of law when the Rules so require. The Justiciar does not receive a fixed salary. The Speaker and the Player holding the Office of the Clerk of the Courts are not permitted to nominate in any Election for the Office of Justiciar. If the Justiciar ever becomes Clerk of the Courts, e is removed from the Office of Justiciar. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: The Justiciar Let there exist the Office of the Justiciar, with the duty to Judge various matters of law when the Rules so require. The Justiciar receives a Salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. The Speaker and the Player holding the Office of the Clerk of the Courts are not permitted to nominate in any Election for the Office of Justiciar. If the Justiciar ever becomes Clerk of the Courts, e is removed from the Office of Justiciar. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 text: There exists the Office of Justiciar, whose responsibility it is to serve on a Board of Appeals when necessary. The Speaker and the Clerk of the Courts cannot Nominate for the Office of Justiciar. If the Justiciar ever becomes Clerk of the Courts, e is removed from the Office of Justiciar. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Justiciar is an office; its holder is responsible for justice and for serving on a Board of Appeals when necessary. Neither the Speaker nor the Clerk of the Courts (CotC) may nominate for the office of Justiciar; if the Justiciar ever becomes CotC, e is removed from the office of Justiciar. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4592 (Murphy), 4 July 2004 text: The Justiciar is an office; its holder is responsible for justice and for serving on a Board of Appeals when necessary. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4698 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: The Justiciar is an office; its holder is responsible for justice, serving on a Board of Appeals when necessary, and for maintaining a record of organizations and their jurisdictions. The Justiciar's monthly report shall contain the following information for each organization: a) Its name. b) Its administrator. c) Its executor. d) The maintainer of its charter. e) A list of players within its jurisdiction. f) The charter of each organization. In addition, as soon as possible after the Justiciar is informed of a change in any of the properties a-f above for an organization, the Justiciar shall report the change. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 text: The Justiciar is an office; its holder is responsible for justice, serving on a Board of Appeals when necessary. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 910 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 913,1020 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 913 by Proposal 913 (Garth), 4 May 1994 text: The Official Name of this Nomic shall be Agora. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=Unanimity by Proposal 1020, 4 September 1994 history: Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1484, 15 March 1995 history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 1020 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 938 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 938 by Proposal 938 (KoJen), 14 July 1994 text: The Ambassador is hereby directed to obtain new Players for Agora Nomic. For each new Player who joins at the invitation of the Ambassador and remains an Active Player for a full Game, the Ambassador receives 6 Points. The Ambassador is encouraged to share this bounty with the new Player. Responsibility for notifying the Scorekeepor is given to the Ambassador, who must make the notification within the next Game following the first full Game for which the new Player is registered. The new Player must mention that e was invited by the Ambassador before the end of the first full Game; this must be made to the public forum, or to the Registrar. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 939 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 939 by Proposal 939 (KoJen), 14 July 1994 text: Responsibility for detecting and reporting score changes resulting from a CFJ being judged TRUE is given to the Clerk of the Courts, who must notify the Scorekeepor as soon as possible, and no later than three days following the decision of the CFJ. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 942 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 942 by Proposal 942 (KoJen), 14 July 1994 text: If a Speaker is determined by CFJ to have made further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof, and the CFJ is not appealed within the allowed time, then a new Speaker is selected according to the "Rules of Succession", or if no such rules are defined, the other Player not on hold with the highest Score becomes the Speaker. This does not force the Game to be over in this case, and Scores are not reset to 0. The Game continues until a Player Wins, at which time a new Game is begun and the Winner becomes the Speaker. The new Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc., but if this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. If a Speaker is replaced in this manner, e has eir score set to minus 2N Points immediately, where N is the number of Points required for a Player to Win the Game; this is the Scorekeepor's responsibility. "Impossible" is defined here to mean overwhelmingly psychotic behavior, a complete lack of interest in the Game, or uncooperativeness of the highest order. It does *not* include normal Speaker latitudes which have been taken by past Speakers for various reasons, whether justifiable or not, including but not limited to: temporary suspension of proposal distribution, resetting of scores, or the commission of Crimes or accidental illegal actions. The Judge of the CFJ *must* take these extremely tight standards into account, and the accused Speaker *must* be given an opportunity to defend eirself. This Rule adds to the set of valid classes of Judgements, and takes precedence over other Rules which may attempt to prevent this class of Judgement. history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1425, 7 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1448, 21 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: If a Speaker is determined by CFJ to have made further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof, and the CFJ is not appealed within the allowed time, or if such a determination is made upon appeal of a CFJ; AND if the Speaker has not changed since the CFJ was made, then if there is a Speaker-Elect e immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker becomes a Voter. If not, a new Speaker is selected according to the Order of Succession, as defined elsewhere, with the Player who made the CFJ as Arbiter of Succession. The new Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc., but if this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. If a Speaker is replaced in this manner, all the Points in eir Treasury are transferred to the Bank, and e further receives 15 Blots, the receipt of which must be reported by the Player who made the CFJ. "Impossible" is defined here to mean overwhelmingly psychotic behavior, a complete lack of interest in the Game, or uncooperativeness of the highest order. It does *not* include normal Speaker latitudes which have been taken by past Speakers for various reasons, whether justifiable or not, including but not limited to: temporary suspension of proposal distribution, resetting of scores, or accidental illegal actions. The Judge of the CFJ *must* take these extremely tight standards into account, and the accused Speaker *must* be given an opportunity to defend eirself. This Rule adds to the set of valid classes of Judgements, and takes precedence over other Rules which may attempt to prevent this class of Judgement. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1682, 22 August 1995 text: If a Speaker is determined by CFJ to have made further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof, and the CFJ is not appealed within the allowed time, or if such a determination is made upon appeal of a CFJ; AND if the Speaker has not changed since the CFJ was made, then if there is a Speaker-Elect e immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker becomes a Voter. If not, a new Speaker is selected according to the Order of Succession, as defined elsewhere, with the Player who made the CFJ as Arbiter of Succession. The new Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc., but if this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. A Sepaker who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits a Class A Crime. "Impossible" is defined here to mean overwhelmingly psychotic behavior, a complete lack of interest in the Game, or uncooperativeness of the highest order. It does *not* include normal Speaker latitudes which have been taken by past Speakers for various reasons, whether justifiable or not, including but not limited to: temporary suspension of proposal distribution, resetting of scores, or accidental illegal actions. The Judge of the CFJ *must* take these extremely tight standards into account, and the accused Speaker *must* be given an opportunity to defend eirself. This Rule adds to the set of valid classes of Judgements, and takes precedence over other Rules which may attempt to prevent this class of Judgement. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2506, 3 March 1996 text: If a Speaker is determined by CFJ to have made further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof, and the CFJ is not appealed within the allowed time, or if such a determination is made upon appeal of a CFJ; AND if the Speaker has not changed since the CFJ was made, then if there is a Speaker-Elect e immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker becomes a Voter. If not, a new Speaker is selected according to the Order of Succession, as defined elsewhere, with the Player who made the CFJ as Arbiter of Succession. The new Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc., but if this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. A Speaker who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits a Class A Crime. "Impossible" is defined here to mean overwhelmingly psychotic behavior, a complete lack of interest in the Game, or uncooperativeness of the highest order. It does *not* include normal Speaker latitudes which have been taken by past Speakers for various reasons, whether justifiable or not, including but not limited to: temporary suspension of proposal distribution, resetting of scores, or accidental illegal actions. The Judge of the CFJ *must* take these extremely tight standards into account, and the accused Speaker *must* be given an opportunity to defend eirself. This Rule adds to the set of valid classes of Judgements, and takes precedence over other Rules which may attempt to prevent this class of Judgement. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2661, 7 September 1996 text: If a Speaker is determined by CFJ to have made further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof, and the CFJ is not appealed within the allowed time, or if such a determination is made upon appeal of a CFJ; AND if the Speaker has not changed since the CFJ was made, then the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. A Speaker who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits a Class A Crime. "Impossible" is defined here to mean overwhelmingly psychotic behavior, a complete lack of interest in the Game, or uncooperativeness of the highest order. It does *not* include normal Speaker latitudes which have been taken by past Speakers for various reasons, whether justifiable or not, including but not limited to: temporary suspension of proposal distribution, resetting of scores, or accidental illegal actions. The Judge of the CFJ *must* take these extremely tight standards into account, and the accused Speaker *must* be given an opportunity to defend eirself. This Rule adds to the set of valid classes of Judgements, and takes precedence over other Rules which may attempt to prevent this class of Judgement. history: Amended(7) Cosmetically by Proposal 2831 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: If a Speaker is determined by CFJ to have made further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof, and the CFJ is not appealed within the allowed time, or if such a determination is made upon appeal of a CFJ; AND if the Speaker has not changed since the CFJ was made, then the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. A Speaker who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Speaker Impossibility, a Class A Crime. "Impossible" is defined here to mean overwhelmingly psychotic behavior, a complete lack of interest in the Game, or uncooperativeness of the highest order. It does *not* include normal Speaker latitudes which have been taken by past Speakers for various reasons, whether justifiable or not, including but not limited to: temporary suspension of proposal distribution, resetting of scores, or accidental illegal actions. The Judge of the CFJ *must* take these extremely tight standards into account, and the accused Speaker *must* be given an opportunity to defend eirself. This Rule adds to the set of valid classes of Judgements, and takes precedence over other Rules which may attempt to prevent this class of Judgement. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 942 by Proposal 3703 (Steve), 9 March 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 947 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 956 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 956 by Proposal 956 (Garth), 25 July 1994 text: If a Rule will directly change the actions required of or forbidden to the Speaker, and the Speaker opposed the Proposal, then that Proposal shall be considered Contested. The Speaker shall declare if e opposes the Proposal when e distributes the Proposal. A Contested Proposal shall have its Adoption Factor doubled. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 963 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 963 by Proposal 963 (Stella?), 25 July 1994 text: Let there be an entity called the Kudo (plural: Kudos). The amount of Kudos a Player holds is called eis Honour. Initially every Player holds 20 Kudos. New Players shall start with 20 Kudos as well. No Player shall have less than zero Kudos. No Player shall have a non-integral number of Kudos. The number of Kudos held by each Player shall be kept track of by the Herald (an Officer) and published at least weekly. No more than once per Nomic week each Player may send a message to the Herald requesting the transfer of exactly one Kudo from one Player of eis choice to another Player of eis choice. The requesting Player may not eimself be the receiving Player. A Player who holds zero Kudos shall be known and addressed as `Honourless Worm' and shall address Players with more Honour as `Your Honour'. A Player who holds more than fourty Kudos shall be known and addressed as `Mighty Samourai' and may address Players with less Honour in any way e sees fit. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1008 history: Enacted as Mutable Rule 1008 by Proposal 1008, 25 August 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2502, 3 March 1996 text: Let there exist the Patent Title of "Shogun". The Patent Title of Shogun is awarded automatically to a Player when e both has at least 30 Kudos and has at least as much Honour as every other Player. The Patent Title of Shogun is revoked automatically from any Player who holds it when eir Honour drops below 30 Kudos. This Patent Title shall never be awarded or revoked by Directive. The Herald shall announce in the Public Forum whenever a Player receives or loses this Title, as soon as possible after such award or revocation occurs. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2615, 1 June 1996 text: Let there exist the Patent Title of "Shogun". Whenever a Player becomes a Samurai, and that Player has at least as much Honor as every other Player, that Player is automaticall awarded the Patent Title of Shogun. The Patent Title of Shogun is revoked automatically from any Player who holds it if e ceases to be a Samurai. A Samurai is a Player whose Honor is more than 30 Kudos. This Patent Title shall never be awarded or revoked by Directive. The Herald shall announce in the Public Forum whenever a Player receives or loses this Title, as soon as possible after such award or revocation occurs. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 2740 (Andre), 7 November 1996 text: Let there exist the Patent Title of "Shogun". Whenever a Player is a Samurai, that Player has at least as much Honor as every other Player, and that Player does not already hold the Patent Title of Shogun, that Player is automatically awarded the Patent Title of Shogun. The Patent Title of Shogun is revoked automatically from any Player who holds it if e ceases to be a Samurai. A Samurai is a Player whose Honor is more than 30 Kudos. This Patent Title shall never be awarded or revoked by Directive. The Herald shall announce in the Public Forum whenever a Player receives or loses this Title, as soon as possible after such award or revocation occurs. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: Let there exist the Patent Title of "Shogun". Whenever a Player is a Samurai, that Player has at least as much Honor as every other Player, and that Player does not already hold the Patent Title of Shogun, that Player is automatically awarded the Patent Title of Shogun. The Patent Title of Shogun is revoked automatically from any Player who holds it if e ceases to be a Samurai. A Samurai is a Player whose Honor is more than 30 Kudos. This Patent Title shall not be awarded or revoked except as specified in this Rule; this Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit otherwise. The Herald shall announce in the Public Forum whenever a Player receives or loses this Title, as soon as possible after such award or revocation occurs. history: ... history: Amended(6) text: A Samurai is a Player whose Honour is more than 30 Kudos. There exists the Patent Title of Shogun. A Samurai whose Honour is at least as great as that of any other Samurai and who does not already possess the Patent Title of Shogun is awarded the Patent Title of Shogun. The Patent Title of Shogun is revoked automatically from any Player holding it who is not a Samurai. This Patent Title shall not be awarded or revoked except as specified in this Rule; this Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit otherwise. history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be the Patent Title known as `Shogun', which is awarded to the Mighty Samourai (or Mighty Samourais) with the most Kudos. Only the Player(s) who have currently the most Honour my hold this title. The determination and announcement of assignment and revoking of the Title is made by the Herald, who must make the announcement as soon as possible after becoming aware of a change in holder of the Title. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1021 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1021 by Proposal 1021, 4 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1280, 24 October 1994 text: Every Rule shall have associated with it an Index known as its Mutability Index. No Rule may have a Mutability Index less than 1. A Rule which has a Mutability Index of 1 is also known as "Mutable"; a Rule which has a Mutability Index of Unanimity is also known as "Immutable". All other Rules are known as "Semimutable". history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1526, 24 March 1995 text: Every Rule shall have associated with it an Index known as its Mutability Index. No Rule may have a Mutability Index less than 1 or greater than 4. A Rule which has a Mutability Index of 1 is also known as "Mutable"; a Rule which has a Mutability Index of Unanimity is also known as "Immutable". All other Rules are known as "Semimutable". history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2551, 22 March 1996 text: Let there be, associated with each Rule, an Index called that Rule's Mutability Index. The Mutability Index of a Rule is a part of that Rule, and cannot be changed except by the application of a Rule Change of a type that the Rules state can change a Rule's Mutability Index. The Mutability Index of a Rule can never be changed such that it is less than 1 or greater than 4; any Rule Change which would do so does not have legal effect. A Rule whose Mutability Index is 1 is known as a "Mutable" Rule. A Rule whose Mutability Index is Unanimity is known as an "Immutable" Rule. All other Rules are known as "Semimutable" Rules. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2579, 21 April 1996 text: Let there be, associated with each Rule, an Index called that Rule's Mutability Index. The Mutability Index of a Rule is a part of that Rule, and cannot be changed except by the application of a Rule Change of a type that the Rules state can change a Rule's Mutability Index. The Mutability Index of a Rule can never be changed such that it is less than 1 or greater than 4; any Rule Change which would do so does not have legal effect. A Rule whose Mutability Index is 1 is known as a "Mutable" Rule. All other Rules are known as "Semimutable" Rules. history: ... history: Amended(5) text: Let there be, associated with each Rule, an Index called that Rule's Mutability Index. The Mutability Index of a Rule is a part of that Rule, and cannot be changed except by the application of a Rule Change of a type that the Rules state can change a Rule's Mutability Index. The Mutability Index of a Rule can never be changed such that it is less than 1 or greater than 4; any Rule Change which would do so does not have legal effect. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1022 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1022 history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be a class of Rules distinct from the Mutable and Immutable Rules, known as the Semimutable Rules. Semimutable Rules may not be Created or Repealed by Proposals. Other Rules define how Rules become, or cease to be, Semimutable. A Rule is Semimutable if, and only if, its Mutability Index is strictly greater than 1, but less than Unanimity. Hence, no Mutable Rule, nor any Immutable Rule, may be a Semimutable Rule. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1024,1080 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1024 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1080 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: When a new Player enters the Game, e shall receive 3 Marks from the Bank; however, if the new Player has previously been a Player within the last three months, e shall receive however many Marks e had when e left, or 3 Marks, whichever is less. history: ... [orphaned text: If a new Player joins the Game, 3 Marks are created and given to that Player. If a Player leaves the Game, whatever Marks are in their possession are transferred to the Bank. If that same Player later joins the Game again, they shall not recieve any Marks. (*Was: 1024*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1025,1062 history: Created [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended by Proposal 1025, 14 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, 14 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Proposal 1062, 27 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended by Rule 750, 27 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1376, 17 January 1995 text: Let there be an Entity called the Kudo (plural: Kudos). The amount of Kudos a Player holds is called eir Honour. All Players possess at all times an integral number of Kudos not less than 0. A new Player, or a Player with no Kudo record starts with 20 Kudos. If a Player is deregistered but returns within three months, e starts with the same number of Kudos e had when e left. If e returns after a longer time than three months, e is treated as a new Player with respect to Kudos. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4079 (Elysion), 30 October 2000 text: A Player's Honor is a measure of that Player's honor, measured in Kudos. The Honor of each Player is at all times a non-negative integer. A Player whose Honor is greater than 30 Kudos is a Samurai. New Players join the Game with an Honor of 20 Kudos. If a Player re-registers within three months of leaving Agora, e starts with the Honor e had at deregistration. Otherwise, a re-registering Player starts with the same Honor as a New Player. history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be an entity called the Kudo (plural: Kudos). The amount of Kudos a Player holds is called eis Honour. Initially every Player holds 20 Kudos. New Players shall start with 20 Kudos as well. No Player shall have less than zero Kudos. Players who are deregistered for any reason, but return to the game within three consecutive calender months of their departure start with the same number of Kudos they had prior to leaving; Players who return after a longer period are treated as new Players. No Player shall have a non-integral number of Kudos. The number of Kudos held by each Player shall be kept track of by the Herald (an Officer) and published at least weekly. No more than once per Nomic week each Player may send a message to the Herald requesting the transfer of exactly one Kudo from one Player of eis choice to another Player of eis choice. The requesting Player may not eimself be the receiving Player. A Player who holds less than 6 Kudos may be known and addressed as `Honourless Worm', shall address Players with more Honour as `Your Honour', and shall either sign every message to the Public Forum 'Honourless Worm _______', where _______ is their normal name/nickname, or pay 4 points and .1 Marks per message lacking that signature or a variation of it in the same spirit. A Player who holds more than fourty Kudos shall be known and addressed as `Mighty Samourai' and may address Players with less Honour in any way e sees fit. (*Was: 1025*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1032,1059 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1032 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1059 history: ... [orphaned text: There shall be a Rule Change known as "Amending a Semimutable Rule", which shall contain the declaration (Amends a Rule), and which must identify one Semimutable Rule to be amended. If adopted it has the result of amending the rule in the manner it specifies. The Adoption Factor of a Proposal to Amend a Semimutable Rule is equal to the Mutability Index of that Rule, unless otherwise specified in the Rules. (*Was: 1032*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1044 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1044 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1335, 22 November 1994 text: There shall be a subset of Patent Titles known as Unique Patent Titles. A Unique Patent Title is awarded to a single person, at the same time as the creation of the Unique Patent Title; no other person may ever hold that Patent Title. The Registrar shall record all Unique Patent Titles and the people to whom they are awarded. A Unique Patent Title is created and awarded by a Directive to award the Unique Patent Title to the specified Player. Such a Directive shall clearly state the Unique Patent Title to be awarded, that said Title is Unique, and the person who shall receive the Unique Title. The Proposal containing such a Directive shall have an Adoption Index of at least 1. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1681, 22 August 1995 text: There shall be a subset of Patent Titles known as Unique Patent Titles. A Unique Patent Title is awarded to a single person, at the same time as the creation of the Unique Patent Title; no other person may ever hold that Patent Title. The Registrar shall keep track of which Unique Patent Titles have been awarded, and to whom they have been awarded, and shall publish this information in the Registrar's Report. A Unique Patent Title is created and awarded by a Directive to award the Unique Patent Title to the specified Player. Such a Directive shall clearly state the Unique Patent Title to be awarded, that said Title is Unique, and the person who shall receive the Unique Title. The Proposal containing such a Directive shall have an Adoption Index of at least 1. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2399, 20 January 1996 text: There shall be a subset of Patent Titles known as Unique Patent Titles. A Unique Patent Title is awarded to a single person, at the same time as the creation of the Unique Patent Title; no other person may ever hold that Patent Title. The Registrar shall keep track of which Unique Patent Titles have been awarded, and to whom they have been awarded, and shall publish this information in the Registrar's Report. A Unique Patent Title is created and awarded by a Directive to award the Unique Patent Title to the specified Player. Such a Directive shall clearly state the Unique Patent Title to be awarded, that said Title is Unique, and the person who shall receive the Unique Title. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2532, 10 March 1996 text: There shall be a subset of Patent Titles known as Unique Patent Titles. A Unique Patent Title is awarded to a single person, at the same time as the creation of the Unique Patent Title; no other person may ever hold that Patent Title. A Unique Patent Title is created and awarded by a Directive to award the Unique Patent Title to the specified Player. Such a Directive shall clearly state the Unique Patent Title to be awarded, that said Title is Unique, and the person who shall receive the Unique Title. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Unique Patent Titles as part of the Gold Pages. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: Let there exist a class of Patent Titles known as Unique Patent Titles. At most one person may hold a specific Unique Patent Title at any one time. Unique Patent Titles are the same as Patent Titles in all other respects. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3916 (harvel), 27 September 1999 text: Each Unique Patent Title is a Patent Title. If a person is awarded a Unique Patent Title, then it shall automatically be revoked from any person already holding that Title. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 text: Each Unique Patent Title is a Patent Title. If a person is awarded a Unique Patent Title, then it shall automatically be revoked from any person already Bearing that Title. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4824 (Maud, Manu), 17 July 2005 text: A Patent Title is unique when the rules say it is. If a person is awarded a unique Patent Title, then the Herald shall revoke it as soon as possible from any person already Bearing that Title. The following are Unique Patent Titles: (a) Robespierre, which shall be awarded to the Player who called for a Revolt, if the Revolt succeeds. (b) Miscreant, which shall be awarded to a Player who has at least ten Blots and has a greater number of Blots than any other Player, if there is such a Player. It shall automatically be revoked if either condition becomes false. (c) Pugachev, which shall be awarded to the player who called for a Revolt, if the Revolt fails. (d) Manouchian, which shall be awarded to the player who called for a Revolt and deregistered before the Registrar announced that the Revolt succeeded. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1044 by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1047 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1047 by Proposal 1047, 20 September 1994 text: The player who most recently proposed a proposal which passed unanimously shall hold the title of Zeitgeist. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1707, 4 September 1995 text: When a Proposal made by some Player is adopted unanimously (that is, no votes are cast AGAINST it), the Player who proposed the Proposal is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist, unless that Player already holds the Title. All current holders of the Title of Zeitgeist lose the Title whenever it is newly awarded. The Assessor is responsible for detecting the award of this Title and reporting it to the Registrar. When a Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist, one Extra Vote is transferred to that Player from the Bank. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting this transfer. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2486, 16 February 1996 text: When a Proposal made by some Player is adopted unanimously (that is, no votes are cast AGAINST it), the Player who proposed the Proposal is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist. All current holders of the Title of Zeitgeist lose the Title whenever it is newly awarded. The Assessor is responsible for detecting the award of this Title and reporting it to the Registrar. When a Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist, one Extra Vote is transferred to that Player from the Bank. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting this transfer. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2522, 10 March 1996 text: When a Proposal made by some Player is adopted unanimously (that is, no votes are cast AGAINST it), and the Proposer of that Proposal is a Player, then that Proposal's Proposer is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist. All current holders of the Title of Zeitgeist lose the Title whenever it is newly awarded. The Assessor is responsible for detecting the award of this Title and reporting it to the Registrar. When a Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist, one Extra Vote is transferred to that Player from the Bank. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting this transfer. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 2747 (favor), 18 November 1996 text: When a Proposal made by some Player is adopted unanimously (that is, no votes are cast AGAINST it), and the Proposal is not a Disinterested Proposal, and the Proposer of that Proposal is a Player, then that Proposal's Proposer is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist. All current holders of the Title of Zeitgeist lose the Title whenever it is newly awarded. The Assessor is responsible for detecting the award of this Title and reporting it to the Registrar. When a Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist, one Extra Vote is transferred to that Player from the Bank. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting this transfer. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 2829 (Zefram), 7 March 1997 text: When an Interested Proposal Proposed by some Player is adopted with no votes cast AGAINST it, that Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist. All current holders of the Title of Zeitgeist lose the Title whenever it is newly awarded. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting the awarding of this Patent Title. When a Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist, one Extra Vote is transferred to that Player from the Bank. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting this transfer. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: When an Interested Proposal Proposed by some Player is adopted with no votes cast AGAINST it, that Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist. All current holders of the Title of Zeitgeist lose the Title whenever it is newly awarded. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting the awarding of this Patent Title. When a Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist, one Voting Token is transferred to that Player from the Bank. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting this transfer. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3474 (Swann), 2 May 1997 text: When an Interested Proposal Proposed by some Player is adopted with no votes cast AGAINST it, that Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist. All current holders of the Title of Zeitgeist lose the Title whenever it is newly awarded. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting the awarding of this Patent Title. When a Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist, one P-Note is transferred to that Player from the Bank. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting this transfer. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: When an Interested Proposal Proposed by some Player is adopted with no votes cast AGAINST it, that Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist. All current holders of the Title of Zeitgeist lose the Title whenever it is newly awarded. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting the awarding of this Patent Title. When a Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist, the Assessor shall pay out one P-Note to that Player. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3717 (Kolja A.), 27 March 1998 text: When an Interested Proposal Proposed by some Player is adopted with no votes cast AGAINST it, and at least three different voting entities voted for it, that Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting the awarding of this Patent Title. When a Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist, the Assessor shall pay out one P-Note to that Player. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3801 (Blob), 6 November 1998 text: When an Interested Proposal Proposed by some Player is adopted with no votes cast AGAINST it, and at least three different voting entities voted for it, that Player is awarded the Patent Title of Zeitgeist. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting the awarding of this Patent Title. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1047 by Proposal 3849 (Vlad), 6 April 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1048 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1048 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1561, 17 April 1995 text: Whenever the Rulekeepor publishes the complete Rule Set, e shall do so in the "Logical Rule Set Format". In this format, each Rule is assigned to a principal Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Catories must be listed, along with a brief description, whether or not any Rules currently are assigned to the Category. Whenever a new Rule is added, it is assigned to the most appropriate Category in the opinion of the Rulekeepor, who must choose from existing Categories. Alternatively, the Rulekeepor may create a new Rule Category and assign the Rule to this new Category, if this is permitted by other Rules. Once e assigns a Rule to a Category, e may not change it except as provided by other Rules. However, if the Proposal itself stipulates a specific Category, as provided for by other Rules, the Rulekeepor is required to abide by this, if it is a valid defined Category. Also, a Rule's Category may be changed by a type of Proposal defined in other Rules. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: Whenever the Rulekeepor publishes the complete Rule Set, e shall do so in the "Logical Rule Set Format". In this format, each Rule is assigned to a principal Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Categories must be listed, along with a brief description, whether or not any Rules currently are assigned to the Category. Whenever a new Rule is added, it is assigned to the most appropriate Category in the opinion of the Rulekeepor, who must choose from existing Categories. Alternatively, the Rulekeepor may create a new Rule Category and assign the Rule to this new Category, if this is permitted by other Rules. Once e assigns a Rule to a Category, e may not change it except as provided by other Rules. However, if the Proposal itself stipulates a specific Category, as provided for by other Rules, the Rulekeepor is required to abide by this, if it is a valid defined Category. Also, a Rule's Category may be changed by a type of Proposal defined in other Rules. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2538, 13 March 1996 text: The mandated weekly posting of the Ruleset shall be done in the "Logical Rule Set Format". In this format, each Rule is assigned to a principal Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Categories must be listed, along with a brief description, whether or not any Rules currently are assigned to the Category. Whenever a new Rule is added, it is assigned to the most appropriate Category in the opinion of the Rulekeepor, who must choose from existing Categories. Alternatively, the Rulekeepor may create a new Rule Category and assign the Rule to this new Category, if this is permitted by other Rules. Once e assigns a Rule to a Category, e may not change it except as provided by other Rules. However, if the Proposal itself stipulates a specific Category, as provided for by other Rules, the Rulekeepor is required to abide by this, if it is a valid defined Category. Also, a Rule's Category may be changed by a type of Proposal defined in other Rules. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 2741 (Zefram), 7 November 1996 text: There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Logical Ruleset. In this format, each Rule is assigned to a Rule Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Categories must be listed, along with a brief description, even if no Rules are currently assigned to the Category. A Rule Change that Creates a new Rule may specify an existing Category to which the new Rule will be assigned. If it does not, the Rulekeepor shall choose the new Rule's Category. When doing so, the Rulekeepor may create a new Rule Category and assign the Rule to this new Category. The Rulekeepor may remove an empty Rule Category as e sees fit. If the Rulekeepor creates or removes a Category, e must announce it in the Public Forum no later than the first subsequent publication of the Logical Ruleset. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 2783 (Chuck), 15 January 1997 text: A Rule Change that Creates a new Rule may specify an existing Category to which the new Rule will be assigned. If it does not, the Rulekeepor shall choose the new Rule's Category. When doing so, the Rulekeepor may create a new Rule Category and assign the Rule to this new Category. The Rulekeepor may remove an empty Rule Category as e sees fit. If the Rulekeepor creates or removes a Category, e must announce it in the Public Forum no later than the first subsequent publication of the Logical Ruleset. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3521 (Chuck), 23 June 1997 text: A Rule Change that Creates a new Rule may specify an existing Category to which the new Rule will be assigned. If it does not, the Rulekeepor shall choose the new Rule's Category. When doing so, the Rulekeepor may create a new Rule Category and assign the Rule to this new Category. The Rulekeepor may remove an empty Rule Category as e sees fit. If the Rulekeepor creates or removes a Category, e must announce it in the Public Forum no later than the first subsequent publication of the Logical Ruleset. The Rulekeepor is authorized to change the name of a Rule Category or change the Category to which a Rule is assigned Without Objection. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Rule Change that Creates a new Rule may specify an existing Category to which the new Rule will be assigned. If it does not, the Rulekeepor shall choose the new Rule's Category. When doing so, the Rulekeepor may create a new Rule Category and assign the Rule to this new Category. The Rulekeepor may remove an empty Rule Category as e sees fit. If the Rulekeepor creates or removes a Category, e must publicly announce it no later than the first subsequent publication of the Logical Ruleset. The Rulekeepor is authorized to change the name of a Rule Category or change the Category to which a Rule is assigned Without Objection. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1048 by Proposal 4841 (Goethe), 27 October 2005 [orphaned text: Whenever the Rulekeepor publishes the complete Rule Set, e shall do so in the "Logical Rule Set Format". In this format, each Rule is assigned to a principal Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Catories must be listed, along with a brief description, whether or not any Rules currently are assigned to the Category. Whenever a new Rule is added, it is assigned to the most appropriate Category in the opinion of the Rulekeepor, who must choose from existing Categories. Once e assigns a Rule to a Category, e may not change it except as provided by other Rules. However, if the Proposal itself stipulates a specific Category, as provided for by other Rules, the Rulekeepor is required to abide by this, if it is a valid defined Category. Also, a Rule's Category may be changed by a type of Proposal defined in other Rules. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1052 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1052 by Proposal 1052, 20 September 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1331, 22 November 1994 text: New Rule Categories may be created by means of a Directive to create the new Category. Such a Directive shall clearly state the name of the Category to be created. The Proposal containing such a Directive must have an Adoption Index of at least 2. The Rulekeepor shall include all existing Categories in the publication of the Logical Rule Set, even if a given Category contains no Rules. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1740, 15 October 1995 text: New Rule Categories may be created by means of a Directive to create the new Category. Such a Directive shall clearly state the name of the Category to be created. The Rulekeepor shall include all existing Categories in the publication of the Logical Rule Set, even if a given Category contains no Rules. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1053 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1053 history: ... [orphaned text: A Proposal to create a Rule may specify the Category to which the Rule will be assigned in the Rule Set. Such a Proposal must contain a line immediately after the declaration of the form, "(Category: )", where is a Category. This line does not become part of the Rule if the Proposal should pass. If the Proposal passes, the Rulekeepor must assign the Rule to Category if it is a defined category. The Proposal is legal regardless of whether or not the specified Category is an actual Category. If it is not, the category line is ignored. In no case does the category line become part of the Rule if the Proposal passes. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would treat a category line as part of a Rule. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1054 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1054 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1332, 22 November 1994 text: The assigned Category of an existing Rule may be changed by means of a Directive to change the Category of that Rule. Such a Directive shall clearly state the Rule whose Category is to be changed, its old Category, and its proposed new Category. The Proposal containing such a Directive must have an Adoption Index of at least 2. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1740, 15 October 1995 text: The assigned Category of an existing Rule may be changed by means of a Directive to change the Category of that Rule. Such a Directive shall clearly state the Rule whose Category is to be changed, its old Category, and its proposed new Category. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1056,1068 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1056 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1068 history: ... [orphaned text: Let there be a Rule Change known as Mutation. A Proposal to Mutate a Rule must contain the Declaration (Mutates a Rule), and, if adopted, has the effect of altering the Mutability Index of the Rule to be Mutated. It may have no other effects. The text of the Proposal must explicitly state the number of exactly one Rule to be Mutated, and its proposed new Mutability Index. Otherwise, the Proposal is not properly made. Immutable and Mutable Rules may each be Mutated into Semimutable Rules, and vice versa, and Semimutable Rules may be Mutated into Semimutable Rules with different Mutability Indices. A Proposal to Mutate an Immutable Rule has an Adoption Factor of 3. In all other cases, a Proposal to Mutate a Rule has an Adoption Factor equal to the Mutability Index of the Rule to be Mutated, or the proposed new Mutability Index, whichever is greater. A Proposal to Mutate an Immutable Rule which proposes a new Mutability Index for the Rule which is other than 3 is not properly made. (*Was: 1056*) ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1061 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1061 by Proposal 1061, 20 September 1994 text: For the first five consecutive Nomic Weeks following the registration of a Player who has not played in this Nomic previously, that Player shall receive 5 Points for each week in which e submits one or more Proposals to the Speaker, and any penalties which are the direct result of voting on such Proposals are halved; all of these shall be reported to the Scorekeepor by the Speaker. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1530, 24 March 1995 text: For the first five consecutive Nomic Weeks following the registration of a Player who has not played in this Nomic previously, that Player shall receive 5 Points for each week in which e submits one or more Proposals to the Promotor, and any penalties which are the direct result of voting on such Proposals are halved; all of these shall be reported to the Scorekeepor by the Promotor. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2032, 4 December 1995 text: For the first five consecutive Nomic Weeks following the registration of a Player who has not played in this Nomic previously, that Player shall receive 5 Points from the Bank for each week in which e submits one or more Proposals to the Promotor. These transfers are to be reported by the Promotor no later than the time at which any such Proposals are distributed. Furthermore, any penalties which are the direct result of voting on such Proposals are halved. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1070 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1070 history: ... history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1333, 22 November 1994 text: There shall be an Office known as the Ambassador. The Ambassador shall have the sole power to conduct Foreign Policy. Foreign Policy is defined as interacting with other Nomic Games in an official capacity, and/or participating on behalf of the Players of this Nomic Game in any Central Nomic Game to be created. The Ambassador shall report to the Public Forum once a Nomic Week on any new Foreign Policy developements of that Nomic Week or the previous one. In any Nomic Week in which Foreign Policy activity occurs, the Ambassador shall receive a salary of two (2) Points. Directives may be issued directing the Ambassador to conduct a single piece of Foreign Policy Business in a specified manner. A Proposal containing a Foreign Policy Directive shall have an Adoption Index of at least 1. The Ambassador shall maintain a record of all Foreign Policy Directives. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1468, 8 March 1995 text: There shall be an Office known as the Ambassador. The Ambassador shall have the sole power to conduct Foreign Policy. Foreign Policy is defined as interacting with other Nomic Games in an official capacity, and/or participating on behalf of the Players of this Nomic Game in any Central Nomic Game to be created. The Ambassador shall report to the Public Forum once a Nomic Week on any new Foreign Policy developements of that Nomic Week or the previous one. the Ambassador shall receive a salary of two (2) Points. Directives may be issued directing the Ambassador to conduct a single piece of Foreign Policy Business in a specified manner. A Proposal containing a Foreign Policy Directive shall have an Adoption Index of at least 1. The Ambassador shall maintain a record of all Foreign Policy Directives. The Ambassador shall publish active FPD's at least once per Nomic Game Week. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1735, 15 October 1995 text: There shall be an Office known as the Ambassador. The Ambassador shall have the sole power to conduct Foreign Policy. Foreign Policy is defined as interacting with other Nomic Games in an official capacity, and/or participating on behalf of the Players of this Nomic Game in any Central Nomic Game to be created. The Ambassador shall report to the Public Forum once a Nomic Week on any new Foreign Policy developements of that Nomic Week or the previous one. The Ambassador shall receive a salary of two (2) Points. Directives may be issued directing the Ambassador to conduct a single piece of Foreign Policy Business in a specified manner. A Proposal containing a Foreign Policy Directive shall have an Adoption Index of at least 1. The Ambassador shall maintain a record of all Foreign Policy Directives. The Ambassador shall publish active FPD's at least once per Nomic Game Week. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: There shall be an Office known as the Ambassador. The Ambassador shall have the sole power to conduct Foreign Policy. Foreign Policy is defined as interacting with other Nomic Games in an official capacity, and/or participating on behalf of the Players of this Nomic Game in any Central Nomic Game to be created. The Ambassador shall report to the Public Forum once a Nomic Week on any new Foreign Policy developments of that Nomic Week or the previous one. The Ambassador shall receive a salary of two (2) Points. Directives may be issued directing the Ambassador to conduct a single piece of Foreign Policy Business in a specified manner. A Proposal containing a Foreign Policy Directive shall have an Adoption Index of at least 1. The Ambassador shall maintain a record of all Foreign Policy Directives. The Ambassador shall publish active FPD's at least once per Nomic Game Week. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2399, 20 January 1996 text: There shall be an Office known as the Ambassador. The Ambassador shall have the sole power to conduct Foreign Policy. Foreign Policy is defined as interacting with other Nomic Games in an official capacity, and/or participating on behalf of the Players of this Nomic Game in any Central Nomic Game to be created. The Ambassador shall report to the Public Forum once a Nomic Week on any new Foreign Policy developments of that Nomic Week or the previous one. The Ambassador shall receive a salary of two (2) Points. Directives may be issued directing the Ambassador to conduct a single piece of Foreign Policy Business in a specified manner. The Ambassador shall maintain a record of all Foreign Policy Directives. The Ambassador shall publish active FPD's at least once per Nomic Game Week. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1078 history: ... history: ??? by Proposal 1078 history: ... [orphaned text: New kinds of Rule Changes may be defined by the Rules, so long as they Create, Amend, Repeal, Transmute, or otherwise change one or more Rules, without making any other direct changes to the Game State. All proposed Rule Changes are Proposals. Other kinds of Proposal may be defined by the Rules. They shall be treated as proposed Rule Changes in all respects, save that they shall not change any Rule in any way, and they shall not under any circumstances be incorporated into the Ruleset. A given class of such Proposals shall not be valid unless the Rules define which Player or Players must maintain a current record of that class of Proposals, or explicitly state that that class need not be recorded. The first paragraph of this Rule does not apply to Proposals that are not Rule Changes. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules describing the nature of Rule Changes and/or proposed Rule Changes. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1079 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1079 by Proposal 1079, ca. Oct. 11 1994 text: All occurrences of the word "random" or forms of it shall be taken to mean "any one of the choices with equally distributed possibility for each choice". history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1648, 6 August 1995 text: When a rule requires a random choice, that choice shall be made among all the possible choices with equal probability. Because of the impossibility of finding a truly random test, "equal", for the purposes of the above statement, shall mean "reasonably close to equal". It is up to common sense to determine what is reasonably close to equal; however, the burden of proof of a method's randomness lies with the Player who used the method. The probability of a Platonic solid or coin, which is not specially weighted, falling on any given face is, for the purposes of this Rule, close enough to equal to satisfy the above requirement. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 2806, 8 February 1997 text: When a rule requires a random choice, that choice shall be made among all the possible choices with equal probability. Because of the impossibility of finding a truly random test, "equal", for the purposes of the above statement, shall mean "reasonably close to equal". It is up to common sense to determine what is reasonably close to equal; however, the burden of proof of a method's randomness lies with the Player who used the method. The probability of a Platonic solid or coin, which is not specially weighted, falling on any given face is, for the purposes of this Rule, close enough to equal to satisfy the above requirement. The Speaker shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4368 (Steve), 29 August 2002 text: (a) When a Rule requires a random choice to be made, then the choice shall be made using whatever probability distribution among the possible outcomes the Rules provide for making that choice. If the Rules do not specify a probability distribution, then a uniform probability distribution shall be used. (b) Where the Rules do not indicate who is required to make a particular random choice, it shall be made by the Speaker. (c) When making a random choice as required by the Rules, a Player may rely on any physical or computational process whose probability distribution among the possible outcomes is reasonably close to that required by the Rules. (d) For the purposes of this Rule, tossing a platonic solid or coin that is not specially weighted has a probability distribution among the possible outcomes that is reasonably close to uniform. (e) For other methods, the Courts are the final arbiter of whether a method's probability distribution among the possible outcomes is reasonably close to that required by the Rules. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4693 (Maud), 18 April 2005 text: (a) When a Rule requires a random choice to be made, then the choice shall be made using whatever probability distribution among the possible outcomes the Rules provide for making that choice. If the Rules do not specify a probability distribution, then a uniform probability distribution shall be used. (b) Where the Rules do not indicate who is required to make a particular random choice, it shall be made by the Speaker. (c) When making a random choice as required by the Rules, a Player may rely on any physical or computational process whose probability distribution among the possible outcomes is reasonably close to that required by the Rules. (d) For the purposes of this Rule, tossing a platonic solid that is not specially weighted has a probability distribution among the possible outcomes that is reasonably close to uniform. (e) For other methods, the Courts are the final arbiter of whether a method's probability distribution among the possible outcomes is reasonably close to that required by the Rules. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1079 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1255 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1255 by Proposal 1255, 12 October 1994 text: At noon GMT on Monday of each Nomic Week, the Banker shall levy a Tax on all Marks accounts except the Bank. The Tax for Players shall be 1% of all Marks owned by that Player in excess of 1.00, and the Tax for all non-Player Marks-holding Entities (excluding the Bank) shall be 1% of all Marks owned by that entity. All proceeds from this Tax shall be entered into the Bank. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1274 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1274 by Proposal 1274, 24 October 1994 text: Let there be a class of Entities known as "Indices" (singular: "Index"). An Index shall have a value, which is either a non-negative real number or the special value "Unanimity". Let Indices be ordered such that for any two Indices X and Y, X is greater than Y if and only if either both X and Y are real numbers and X is numerically greater than Y, or X is the special value Unanimity and Y is a real number. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2053, 19 December 1995 text: Let there be a class of Entities known as "Indices" (singular: "Index"). An Index shall have a value, which is either a non-negative real number or the special value "Unanimity". An Index of Unanimity is greater than any other Index. When comparing other Indices, the Index which is numerically greater is the greater Index. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=3 by Proposal 2713, 12 October 1996 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3927 (harvel), 10 October 1999 text: An Index (plural: Indices) is a Nomic Property. The value of an Index shall be either a non-negative real number or the special value Unanimity. An Index of Unanimity is greater than any other Index. When comparing other Indices, the Index which is numerically greater is the greater Index. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 1274 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1281 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1281 by Proposal 1281, 24 October 1994 text: A New Rule, when it is first enacted, shall have a Mutability Index of 1, unless another Rule allows a different Mutability Index. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1288 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1288 by Proposal 1288, 25 October 1994 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as the Point Reserve, which is capable of possessing Points. Entities may transfer Points in their possession to the Point Reserve. If a Rule states that Points are to be taken from an Entity, and no Rule states where the Points are to be transferred to, the Points shall be transferred to the Point Reserve. All points transferred to the Point Reserve are destroyed. If at any time subsequent to the adoption of this Rule, there is no other Rule which refers to "the Point Reserve", this rule shall be deleted. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1322 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1322 by Proposal 1322, 21 November 1994 text: Every Rule Change shall have associated with it an Index, called its Power, which determines its ability to take effect. The Power of a non-Proposed Rule Change shall be the Mutability Index of the Rule in which the Rule Change is contained. The Power of a Proposed Rule Change shall be the Adoption Index of the Proposal in which the Rule Change is contained. No Rule Change may take effect unless its Power is not less than the current Mutation Index of the Rule it seeks to change, if any, and the Mutation Index that the Rule would possess after the change, if any. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 5 December 1995 text: Every Rule Change shall have associated with it an Index, called its Power, which determines its ability to take effect. The Power of a non-Proposed Rule Change shall be the Mutability Index of the Rule in which the Rule Change is contained. The Power of a Proposed Rule Change shall be the Adoption Index of the Proposal in which the Rule Change is contained. No Rule Change may take effect unless its Power is not less than the current Mutation Index of the Rule it seeks to change, if any, and the Mutation Index that the Rule would possess after the change, if any. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2398, 20 January 1996 text: Every Rule Change shall have associated with it an Index, called its Power, which determines its ability to take effect. The Power of a non-Proposed Rule Change shall be the Mutability Index of the Rule in which the Rule Change is contained. The Power of a Proposed Rule Change shall be the Adoption Index of the Proposal in which the Rule Change is contained. No Rule Change may take effect unless its Power is not less than the current Mutation Index of the Rule it seeks to change, if any, and the Mutation Index that the Rule would possess after the change, if any. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=3 by Proposal 2398, 20 January 1996 history: Infected but not Amended by Rule 1454, 27 November 1996 history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: A given Rule Change shall not take effect unless the Power of the instrument which specified it is at least as great as the greater of the current Power of the Rule to be Changed (if any) and the Power the Rule would have after the Change (if any). history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: A proposal can generally, as part of its effect, modify the power, title, or text of a rule with power no greater than its own. However, a proposal cannot cause a rule to have power greater than its own. Any ambiguity in a modification specified by a proposal causes that modification to be void and without effect. A variation in whitespace or capitalization in the quotation of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity for the purposes of this rule, but any other variation does. When a rule is modified, the Rulekeepor shall generally record an increase by one in its revision number. If a single proposal modifies a regulation several times, the Rulekeepor shall only record a single increase of its revision number. This rule provides the only mechanism by which rules can be modified. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 1322 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1324 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1324 by Proposal 1324, 21 November 1994 text: A Group may change its Name by the means of a message sent from its Vizier to the Registrar requesting its name be changed. However, the Vizier may send such a message only as permitted by the Ordinances of that Group; or, if the Ordinances of a Group are silent on the matter of changing the Group's name, with the unanimous consent of the Group's members. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1339 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1339 by Proposal 1339, 29 November 1994 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1414, 1 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1440, 21 February 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: There are two types of Rule Change. A Proposed Rule Change is a Rule Change which appears in a Proposal, and which, insofar as the Rules permit it to take effect, has the effect of Creating, Amending, Mutating, Repealing or otherwise changing a Rule as defined elsewhere in the Rules, directly as a result of the passage of a Proposal. A non-Proposed Rule Change has the same effect as a Proposed Rule Change, but insofar as the Rules permit it to take effect, it does so not as the direct result of the passage of a Proposal, but rather, indirectly, as the result of the effect or action of a Rule. All Rule Changes, of either type, are subject to the following constraints: An individual Rule Change must change exactly one Rule. Any Rule Change which affects an existing Rule must clearly identify the Number of the Rule to be affected. Any Rule Change which creates a New Rule may specify the Mutability Index of the New Rule; however, if the Mutability Index is specified it must be greater than or equal to 1. If the Mutability Index of any Rule created by a Rule Change is not specified, it shall be 1. Any Rule Change which creates a New Rule may specify the Category to which the New Rule will be assigned. If the Category specified exists, the Rule shall be assigned to that Category. If the Category specified does not exist, or no Category is specified, the Rulekeepor shall assign the Rule to an appropriate category of eir own choice. Any Rule Change which changes the Mutability Index of a Rule must clearly specify the new value of the Rule's Mutability Index. Any Rule Change which changes the text of a Rule must clearly and unambigiously specify the changes which are to be made. If the Rule Change quotes old text which is to be replaced with new text, then the quoted old text must match exactly with actual text in the Rule, with the exception of whitespace and capitalization. This takes precedence over Rules which would permit such differences, even if the differences would be considered inconsequential by such Rules. Any Rule Change which does not meet these criteria shall not have any legal force. text: There are two types of Rule Change. A Proposed Rule Change is a Rule Change which appears in a Proposal, and which, insofar as the Rules permit it to take effect, has the effect of Creating, Amending, Mutating, Repealing or otherwise changing a Rule as defined elsewhere in the Rules, directly as a result of the passage of a Proposal. A non-Proposed Rule Change has the same effect as a Proposed Rule Change, but insofar as the Rules permit it to take effect, it does so not as the direct result of the passage of a Proposal, but rather, indirectly, as the result of the effect or action of a Rule. All Rule Changes, of either type, are subject to the following constraints: An individual Rule Change must change exactly one Rule. Any Rule Change which affects an existing Rule must clearly identify the Number of the Rule to be affected. Any Rule Change which creates a New Rule may specify the Mutability Index of the New Rule; however, if the Mutability Index is specified it must be greater than or equal to 1. If the Mutability Index of any Rule created by a Rule Change is not specified, it shall be 1. Any Rule Change which creates a New Rule may specify the Category to which the New Rule will be assigned. If the Category specified exists, the Rule shall be assigned to that Category. If the Category specified does not exist, or no Category is specified, the Rulekeepor shall assign the Rule to an appropriate category of eir own choice. Any Rule Change which changes the Mutability Index of a Rule must clearly specify the new value of the Rule's Mutability Index. Any Rule Change which changes the text of a Rule must clearly and unambigiously specify the changes which are to be made. If the Rule Change quotes old text which is to be replaced with new text, then the quoted old text must match exactly with actual text in the Rule, with the exception of whitespace and capitalization. This takes precedence over Rules which would permit such differences, even if the differences would be considered inconsequential by such Rules. Any Rule Change which does not meet these criteria shall not have any legal force. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=3 by Proposal 1532, 24 March 1995 history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: There are two types of Rule Change. A Proposed Rule Change is a Rule Change which appears in a Proposal, and which, insofar as the Rules permit it to take effect, has the effect of Creating, Amending, Mutating, Repealing or otherwise changing a Rule as defined elsewhere in the Rules, directly as a result of the passage of a Proposal. A non-Proposed Rule Change has the same effect as a Proposed Rule Change, but insofar as the Rules permit it to take effect, it does so not as the direct result of the passage of a Proposal, but rather, indirectly, as the result of the effect or action of a Rule. All Rule Changes, of either type, are subject to the following constraints: An individual Rule Change must change exactly one Rule. Any Rule Change which affects an existing Rule must clearly identify the Number of the Rule to be affected. Any Rule Change which creates a New Rule may specify the Mutability Index of the New Rule; however, if the Mutability Index is specified it must be greater than or equal to 1. If the Mutability Index of any Rule created by a Rule Change is not specified, it shall be 1. Any Rule Change which creates a New Rule may specify the Category to which the New Rule will be assigned. If the Category specified exists, the Rule shall be assigned to that Category. If the Category specified does not exist, or no Category is specified, the Rulekeepor shall assign the Rule to an appropriate category of eir own choice. Any Rule Change which changes the Mutability Index of a Rule must clearly specify the new value of the Rule's Mutability Index. Any Rule Change which changes the text of a Rule must clearly and unambiguously specify the changes which are to be made. If the Rule Change quotes old text which is to be replaced with new text, then the quoted old text must match exactly with actual text in the Rule, with the exception of whitespace and capitalization. This takes precedence over Rules which would permit such differences, even if the differences would be considered inconsequential by such Rules. Any Rule Change which does not meet these criteria shall not have any legal force. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2671, 26 September 1996 text: There are two types of Rule Change. A Proposed Rule Change is a Rule Change which appears in a Proposal, and which, insofar as the Rules permit it to take effect, has the effect of Creating, Amending, Mutating, Repealing or otherwise changing a Rule as defined elsewhere in the Rules, directly as a result of the passage of a Proposal. A non-Proposed Rule Change has the same effect as a Proposed Rule Change, but insofar as the Rules permit it to take effect, it does so not as the direct result of the passage of a Proposal, but rather, indirectly, as the result of the effect or action of a Rule. All Rule Changes, of either type, are subject to the following constraints: An individual Rule Change must change exactly one Rule. Any Rule Change which affects an existing Rule must clearly and unambiguously identify the Rule to be affected. Any Rule Change which creates a New Rule may specify the Mutability Index of the New Rule; however, if the Mutability Index is specified it must be greater than or equal to 1. If the Mutability Index of any Rule created by a Rule Change is not specified, it shall be 1. Any Rule Change which creates a New Rule may specify the Category to which the New Rule will be assigned. If the Category specified exists, the Rule shall be assigned to that Category. If the Category specified does not exist, or no Category is specified, the Rulekeepor shall assign the Rule to an appropriate category of eir own choice. Any Rule Change which changes the Mutability Index of a Rule must clearly specify the new value of the Rule's Mutability Index. Any Rule Change which changes the text of a Rule must clearly and unambiguously specify the changes which are to be made. If the Rule Change quotes old text which is to be replaced with new text, then the quoted old text must match exactly with actual text in the Rule, with the exception of whitespace and capitalization. This takes precedence over Rules which would permit such differences, even if the differences would be considered inconsequential by such Rules. Any Rule Change which does not meet these criteria shall not have any legal force. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 2741 (Zefram), 7 November 1996 text: There are two types of Rule Change. A Proposed Rule Change is a Rule Change which appears in a Proposal, and which, insofar as the Rules permit it to take effect, has the effect of Creating, Amending, Mutating, Repealing or otherwise changing a Rule as defined elsewhere in the Rules, directly as a result of the passage of a Proposal. A non-Proposed Rule Change has the same effect as a Proposed Rule Change, but insofar as the Rules permit it to take effect, it does so not as the direct result of the passage of a Proposal, but rather, indirectly, as the result of the effect or action of a Rule. All Rule Changes, of either type, are subject to the following constraints: An individual Rule Change must change exactly one Rule. Any Rule Change which affects an existing Rule must clearly and unambiguously identify the Rule to be affected. Any Rule Change which creates a New Rule may specify the Mutability Index of the New Rule; however, if the Mutability Index is specified it must be greater than or equal to 1. If the Mutability Index of any Rule created by a Rule Change is not specified, it shall be 1. Any Rule Change which changes the Mutability Index of a Rule must clearly specify the new value of the Rule's Mutability Index. Any Rule Change which changes the text of a Rule must clearly and unambiguously specify the changes which are to be made. If the Rule Change quotes old text which is to be replaced with new text, then the quoted old text must match exactly with actual text in the Rule, with the exception of whitespace and capitalization. This takes precedence over Rules which would permit such differences, even if the differences would be considered inconsequential by such Rules. Any Rule Change which does not meet these criteria shall not have any legal force. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: Exact precision is required in the specification of Rule Changes; any ambiguity or irregularity in the specification of a Rule Change causes it to be void and without effect. Variations in whitespace or capitalization in the quotation of text in an existing Rule to be removed or replaced does not create an irregularity or ambiguity, for the purpose of this Rule. Any other variation, however, does. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 1339 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1349 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1349 by Proposal 1349, 29 November 1994 text: The Rulekeepor shall give each newly-enacted Rule a Number for reference when it is created. The Number of a Rule shall be the least integer greater than all other Numbers previously given to a Rule (including numbers assigned to Rules later determined to have been incorrectly enacted), or 301, whichever is greater. Once a Rule has been given a Rule Number, it shall not be changed except as specified in the Rules. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=2 by Proposal 2663, 12 September 1996 history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1349 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1365 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1365 by Proposal 1365, 5 January 1995 text: Upon the distribution of a legal judgement to the Nomic community, a Concurring or a Disenting Opinion may be filed in writen format with the Clerk of the Courts. The Concurring or Dissenting Opinion must satisfy the following criteria: (i) The opinion must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgement, and Agora Conventions*. (ii) The opinion must be sponsored by at least two active Agora players and the sponsors must be listed on the opinion. (iii) The opinion must be filed with the Clerk of the Courts within 1 Nomic Week. (iv) The opinion must be title as Concurring or Dissenting with the Judgement. Once an opinion satisfies these components, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the opinion to the to all Players as soon as possible. Furthermore, all Concurring and Dissenting Opinions must be appended to the Legal Judgement as Concurring or Dissenting Opinions. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1644, 1 August 1995 text: Upon the distribution of a legal judgement to the Nomic community, a Concurring or a Disenting Opinion may be filed in writen format with the Clerk of the Courts. The Concurring or Dissenting Opinion must satisfy the following criteria: (i) The opinion must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgement, and Agora Conventions*. (ii) The opinion must be sponsored by at least two active Agora players and the sponsors must be listed on the opinion. (iii) The opinion must be filed with the Clerk of the Courts within 1 Nomic Week. (iv) The opinion must be title as Concurring or Dissenting with the Judgement. Once an opinion satisfies these components, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the opinion to all Players as soon as possible. Furthermore, all Concurring and Dissenting Opinions must be appended to the Legal Judgement as Concurring or Dissenting Opinions. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1734, 15 October 1995 text: Upon the distribution of a legal judgement to the Nomic community, a Concurring or a Disenting Opinion may be filed in writen format with the Clerk of the Courts. The Concurring or Dissenting Opinion must satisfy the following criteria: (i) The opinion must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgement, and Agora Conventions. (ii) The opinion must be sponsored by at least two active Agora players and the sponsors must be listed on the opinion. (iii) The opinion must be filed with the Clerk of the Courts within 1 Nomic Week. (iv) The opinion must be entitled Concurring or Dissenting with the Judgement. Once an opinion satisfies these components, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the opinion to all Players as soon as possible. Furthermore, all Concurring and Dissenting Opinions must be appended to the Legal Judgement as Concurring or Dissenting Opinions. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: Upon the distribution of a legal judgement to the Nomic community, a Concurring or a Dissenting Opinion may be filed in written format with the Clerk of the Courts. The Concurring or Dissenting Opinion must satisfy the following criteria: (i) The opinion must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgement, and Agora Conventions. (ii) The opinion must be sponsored by at least two active Agora players and the sponsors must be listed on the opinion. (iii) The opinion must be filed with the Clerk of the Courts within 1 Nomic Week. (iv) The opinion must be entitled Concurring or Dissenting with the Judgement. Once an opinion satisfies these components, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the opinion to all Players as soon as possible. Furthermore, all Concurring and Dissenting Opinions must be appended to the Legal Judgement as Concurring or Dissenting Opinions. history: Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, 4 November 1996 text: Upon the distribution of a legal judgement to the Nomic community, a Concurring or a Dissenting Opinion may be filed in written format with the Clerk of the Courts. The Concurring or Dissenting Opinion must satisfy the following criteria: (i) The opinion must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgement, and Agora Conventions. (ii) The opinion must be sponsored by at least two active Agora players and the sponsors must be listed on the opinion. (iii) The opinion must be filed with the Clerk of the Courts within 1 Nomic Week. (iv) The opinion must be entitled Concurring or Dissenting with the Judgement. Once an opinion satisfies these components, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the opinion to all Players as soon as possible. Furthermore, all Concurring and Dissenting Opinions must be appended to the Legal Judgement as Concurring or Dissenting Opinions. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 2750 (Chuck), 18 November 1996 text: There shall exist a type of Application called an Application to Submit an Opinion. Such an Application, if effective, has the effect of annotating a Judgement or Dismissal in a given Call for Judgement. In order for such an Application to have effect upon Execution, it must satisfy the following requirements: * It must clearly indicate to which CFJ it applies. * It must be labelled as either a Concurring Opinion or a Dissenting Opinion. * It must indicate whether the Judgement or Dismissal to which it applies is that of the Judge or that of the Appeals Court. * It must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which may include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgements, and Game Custom. * It must bear the Signatures of at least two Players. * It must be Executed no earlier than the submission of the Judgement or Dismissal to which it applies, and no later than one week after the publication by the Clerk of the Courts of that Judgement or Dismissal. An Application to Submit an Opinion is Executed by submitting it to the Clerk of the Courts. Such an Application, having been Executed and having met all the requirements for effectiveness, is also called an Opinion. It is also referred to as a Concurring Opinion or a Dissenting Opinion, as indicated in the Opinion. Once an Application to Submit an Opinion is Executed and takes effect, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the Opinion to all Players as soon as possible. Furthermore, the Opinion must be appended to the Legal Judgement or Dismissal. history: Amended(6) Cosmetically by Proposal 3531 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: There shall exist a type of Application called an Application to Submit an Opinion. Such an Application, if effective, has the effect of annotating a Judgement or Dismissal in a given Call for Judgement. In order for such an Application to have effect upon Execution, it must satisfy the following requirements: * It must clearly indicate to which CFJ it applies. * It must be labeled as either a Concurring Opinion or a Dissenting Opinion. * It must indicate whether the Judgement or Dismissal to which it applies is that of the Judge or that of the Appeals Court. * It must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which may include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgements, and Game Custom. * It must bear the Signatures of at least two Players. * It must be Executed no earlier than the submission of the Judgement or Dismissal to which it applies, and no later than one week after the publication by the Clerk of the Courts of that Judgement or Dismissal. An Application to Submit an Opinion is Executed by submitting it to the Clerk of the Courts. Such an Application, having been Executed and having met all the requirements for effectiveness, is also called an Opinion. It is also referred to as a Concurring Opinion or a Dissenting Opinion, as indicated in the Opinion. Once an Application to Submit an Opinion is Executed and takes effect, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the Opinion to all Players as soon as possible. Furthermore, the Opinion must be appended to the Legal Judgement or Dismissal. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4159 (Kelly), 5 June 2001 text: There shall exist a type of Application called an Application to Submit an Opinion. Such an Application, if effective, has the effect of annotating a Judgement or Dismissal in a given Call for Judgement. In order for such an Application to have effect upon submission, it must satisfy the following requirements: * It must clearly indicate to which CFJ it applies. * It must be labeled as either a Concurring Opinion or a Dissenting Opinion. * It must indicate whether the Judgement or Dismissal to which it applies is that of the Judge or that of the Appeals Court. * It must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which may include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgements, and Game Custom. * It must bear the Signatures of at least two Players. * It must be submitted no earlier than the submission of the Judgement or Dismissal to which it applies, and no later than one week after the publication by the Clerk of the Courts of that Judgement or Dismissal. An Application to Submit an Opinion is submitted by submitting it to the Clerk of the Courts. Such an Application, having been submitted and having met all the requirements for effectiveness, is also called an Opinion. It is also referred to as a Concurring Opinion or a Dissenting Opinion, as indicated in the Opinion. Once an Application to Submit an Opinion is submitted and takes effect, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the Opinion to all Players as soon as possible. Furthermore, the Opinion must be appended to the Legal Judgement or Dismissal. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: There shall exist a type of Application called an Application to Submit an Opinion. Such an Application, if effective, has the effect of annotating a Judgement in a given Call for Judgement. In order for such an Application to have effect upon submission, it must satisfy the following requirements: * It must clearly indicate to which CFJ it applies. * It must be labeled as either a Concurring Opinion or a Dissenting Opinion. * It must indicate whether the Judgement to which it applies is that of the Judge or that of the Appeals Court. * It must be accompanied by reasons and arguments, which may include, but are not necessarily limited to, citations of deciding Rules, past Judgements, and Game Custom. * It must bear the Signatures of at least two Players. * It must be submitted no earlier than the submission of the Judgement to which it applies, and no later than one week after the publication by the Clerk of the Courts of that Judgement. An Application to Submit an Opinion is submitted by submitting it to the Clerk of the Courts. Such an Application, having been submitted and having met all the requirements for effectiveness, is also called an Opinion. It is also referred to as a Concurring Opinion or a Dissenting Opinion, as indicated in the Opinion. Once an Application to Submit an Opinion is submitted and takes effect, the Clerk of the Courts must distribute the Opinion to all Players as soon as possible. Furthermore, the Opinion must be appended to the Legal Judgement. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Two or more players may submit a Concurring or Dissenting Opinion for a given CFJ trial or appeals decision, via a single application to the Clerk of the Courts signed by all submittors. The opinion must include reference to the CFJ and the particular judgement or appeals decision to which it applies and be accompanied by reasons or arugments for the opinion. The Clerk of the Courts shall publish any properly submitted Opinion and append it to the text of the legal judgement. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: Two or more players may submit a Concurring or Dissenting Opinion for a given CFJ trial or appeals decision, via a single application to the Clerk of the Courts signed by all submitters. The opinion must include reference to the CFJ and the particular judgement or appeals decision to which it applies and be accompanied by reasons or arguments for the opinion. The Clerk of the Courts shall publish any properly submitted Opinion and append it to the text of the legal judgement. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5025 (BobTHJ), 25 June 2007 text: A player may submit a Concurring or Dissenting opinion for a given CFJ trial or appeals decision with 1 Support. The opinion must reference the CFJ in question and clearly indicate that it is an opinion to be appended to that CFJ. The opinion should be accompanied by reasons or arguments. The Clerk of the Courts shall append any properly submitted opinion to the CFJ in question, along with a list of the Player who submitted that opinion and the player(s) who supported it. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1365 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1367 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1367 by Proposal 1367, 5 January 1995 text: There shall exist a subset of the Patent Titles known as Degrees. A Patent Title is only a Degree if it is specifically made such by a Rule. A person may use a Degree with their name for any official or unofficial business if and only if that person currently possesses that Degree. Persons may come to possess Degrees only as specified in the Rules. Once a person possesses a Degree, e shall keep that Degree forever. The Registrar shall note in eir report which persons possess which Degrees. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule specifying default properties of Patent Titles. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 12 February 1996 text: There shall exist a subset of the Patent Titles known as Degrees. A Patent Title is only a Degree if it is specifically made such by a Rule. A person may use a Degree with their name for any official or unofficial business if and only if that person currently possesses that Degree. Persons may come to possess Degrees only as specified in the Rules. Once a person possesses a Degree, e shall keep that Degree forever. The Registrar shall note in eir report which persons possess which Degrees. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule specifying default properties of Patent Titles. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: There shall exist a subset of the Patent Titles known as Degrees. A Patent Title is only a Degree if it is specifically made such by a Rule. A person may use a Degree with their name for any official or unofficial business if and only if that person currently possesses that Degree. Persons may come to possess Degrees only as specified in the Rules. Once a person possesses a Degree, e shall keep that Degree forever. The Registrar shall note in eir report which persons possess which Degrees. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule specifying default properties of Patent Titles. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: There shall exist a subset of the Patent Titles known as Degrees. A Patent Title is only a Degree if it is specifically made such by a Rule. A person may use a Degree with their name for any official or unofficial business if and only if that person currently possesses that Degree. Persons may come to possess Degrees only as specified in the Rules. Once a person possesses a Degree, e shall keep that Degree forever. The Registrar shall note in eir report which persons possess which Degrees. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule specifying default properties of Patent Titles. "Granting a Degree" and "awarding a Degree" are synonymous. A Player who has been awarded a Degree possesses that Degree. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3889 (harvel), 9 August 1999 text: There shall exist a subset of the Patent Titles known as Degrees. A Patent Title is only a Degree if it is specifically made such by a Rule. A person may use a Degree with eir name for any official or unofficial business if and only if e currently possesses that Degree. Persons may come to possess Degrees only as specified in the Rules. Once a person possesses a Degree, e shall keep that Degree forever. The Registrar shall note in eir report which persons possess which Degrees. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule specifying default properties of Patent Titles. "Granting a Degree" and "awarding a Degree" are synonymous. A Player who has been awarded a Degree possesses that Degree. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: There shall exist a subset of the Patent Titles known as Degrees. A Patent Title is only a Degree if it is specifically made such by a Rule. A person may use a Degree with eir name for any official or unofficial business if and only if e currently possesses that Degree. Persons may come to possess Degrees only as specified in the Rules. Once a person possesses a Degree, e shall keep that Degree forever. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule specifying default properties of Patent Titles. "Granting a Degree" and "awarding a Degree" are synonymous. A Player who has been awarded a Degree possesses that Degree. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 text: There shall exist a subset of the Patent Titles known as Degrees. A Patent Title is only a Degree if it is specifically made such by a Rule. A person may use a Degree with eir name for any official or unofficial business if and only if e currently Bears that Degree. Persons may come to Bear Degrees only as specified in the Rules. Once a person Bears a Degree, e shall keep that Degree forever. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule specifying default properties of Patent Titles. "Granting a Degree" and "awarding a Degree" are synonymous. A Player who has been awarded a Degree Bears that Degree. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: A Patent Title is only a Degree if it is specifically made such by a Rule. Persons may come to Bear Degrees only as specified in the Rules. Once a person Bears a Degree, e shall keep that Degree forever. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule specifying default properties of Patent Titles. The following Degrees are hereby made legal: - Associate of Nomic (A.N.) - Bachelor of Nomic (B.N.) - Master of Nomic (M.N.) - Doctor of Nomic History (D.N. Hist) - Doctor of Nomic Science (D.N. Sci) - Doctor of Nomic Philosophy (D.N.Phil) Degrees shall be ranked in the order they appear in this Rule, with Degrees listed latest in the Rule being ranked higher. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5085 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: Certain patent titles are known as degrees. The degrees are - Associate of Nomic (A.N.) - Bachelor of Nomic (B.N.) - Master of Nomic (M.N.) - Doctor of Nomic History (D.N.Hist.) - Doctor of Nomic Science (D.N.Sci.) - Doctor of Nomic Philosophy (D.N.Phil.) Degrees are ranked in the order they appear in this rule, with degrees listed later being ranked higher. A degree CANNOT be awarded to any person more than once, and CANNOT be revoked once awarded. A degree CAN be awarded by the action of an instrumennt with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule, but CANNOT be awarded in any other way. A degree SHOULD be awarded ONLY IF its new bearer has published a suitable thesis with explicit intent to qualify for a degree (though not necessarily for the specific degree being awarded). A thesis is an essay whose topic is any facet of Agora Nomic or of nomic in general. A thesis's suitability depends on its originality and quality, with regard to the rank of the degree to be awarded. history: Power changed from 1 to 1.5 by Proposal 5085 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5243 (root; disi.), 7 October 2007 text: Certain patent titles are known as degrees. The degrees are - Associate of Nomic (A.N.) - Bachelor of Nomic (B.N.) - Master of Nomic (M.N.) - Doctor of Nomic History (D.N.Hist.) - Doctor of Nomic Science (D.N.Sci.) - Doctor of Nomic Philosophy (D.N.Phil.) Degrees are ranked in the order they appear in this rule, with degrees listed later being ranked higher. A degree CANNOT be awarded to any person more than once, and CANNOT be revoked once awarded. A degree CAN be awarded by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule, but CANNOT be awarded in any other way. A degree SHOULD be awarded ONLY IF its new bearer has published a suitable thesis with explicit intent to qualify for a degree (though not necessarily for the specific degree being awarded). A thesis is an essay whose topic is any facet of Agora Nomic or of nomic in general. A thesis's suitability depends on its originality and quality, with regard to the rank of the degree to be awarded. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5276 (Murphy, Pavitra, Zefram), 7 November 2007 text: Certain patent titles are known as degrees. The degrees are - Associate of Nomic (A.N.) - Bachelor of Nomic (B.N.) - Master of Nomic (M.N.) - Doctor of Nomic History (D.N.Hist.) - Doctor of Nomic Science (D.N.Sci.) - Doctor of Nomic Philosophy (D.N.Phil.) Degrees are ranked in the order they appear in this rule, with degrees listed later being ranked higher. A degree CANNOT be awarded to any person more than once, and CANNOT be revoked once awarded. The awarding of a degree is a secured change A degree SHOULD be awarded ONLY IF its new bearer has published a suitable thesis with explicit intent to qualify for a degree (though not necessarily for the specific degree being awarded). A thesis is an essay whose topic is any facet of Agora Nomic or of nomic in general. A thesis's suitability depends on its originality and quality, with regard to the rank of the degree to be awarded. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5437 (Goethe), 13 February 2008 text: Certain patent titles are known as degrees. The degrees are - Associate of Nomic (A.N.) - Bachelor of Nomic (B.N.) - Master of Nomic (M.N.) - Doctor of Nomic History (D.N.Hist.) - Doctor of Nomic Science (D.N.Sci.) - Doctor of Nomic Philosophy (D.N.Phil.) Degrees are ranked in the order they appear in this rule, with degrees listed later being ranked higher. A degree CANNOT be awarded to any person more than once, and CANNOT be revoked once awarded. A degree SHOULD be awarded ONLY IF its new bearer has published a suitable thesis with explicit intent to qualify for a degree (though not necessarily for the specific degree being awarded). A thesis is an essay whose topic is any facet of Agora Nomic or of nomic in general. A thesis's suitability depends on its originality and quality, with regard to the rank of the degree to be awarded. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1368 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1368 by Proposal 1368, 5 January 1995 text: The following Degrees are hereby made legal: - Associate of Nomic (A.N.) - Bachelor of Nomic (B.N.) - Master of Nomic (M.N.) - Doctor of Nomic Philosophy (D.N.Phil) Degrees shall be ranked in the order they appear in this Rule, with Degrees listed latest in the Rule being ranked higher than Degrees listed earlier. The abbreviations in parenthesis are not part of the actual Degree. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2682, 26 September 1996 text: The following Degrees are hereby made legal: - Associate of Nomic (A.N.) - Bachelor of Nomic (B.N.) - Doctor of Nomic History (D.N. Hist) - Master of Nomic (M.N.) - Doctor of Nomic Philosophy (D.N.Phil) Degrees shall be ranked in the order they appear in this Rule, with Degrees listed latest in the Rule being ranked higher than Degrees listed earlier. The abbreviations in parenthesis are not part of the actual Degree. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The following Degrees are hereby made legal: - Associate of Nomic (A.N.) - Bachelor of Nomic (B.N.) - Doctor of Nomic History (D.N. Hist) - Master of Nomic (M.N.) - Doctor of Nomic Philosophy (D.N.Phil) Degrees shall be ranked in the order they appear in this Rule, with Degrees listed latest in the Rule being ranked higher than Degrees listed earlier. The abbreviations in parentheses are not part of the actual Degree. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1368 by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1369 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1369 by Proposal 1369, 5 January 1995 text: There shall be a Nomic Entity known as a Thesis, plural Theses. A Thesis shall be an essay whose topic is any facet of Agora Nomic, or Nomic in general. The topic should be substantially different from all other Theses previously approved, but this is not a requirement. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3884 (harvel), 26 July 1999 text: A Thesis (plura: Theses) shall be an essay whose topic is any facet of Agora Nomic, or Nomic in general. The topic should be substantially different from all other Theses previously approved, but this is not a requirement. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: A Thesis (plural: Theses) shall be an essay whose topic is any facet of Agora Nomic, or Nomic in general. The topic should be substantially different from all other Theses previously approved, but this is not a requirement. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1369 by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1370 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1370 by Proposal 1370, 5 January 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1508, 24 March 1995 text: There shall be a legal Directive to Request a Degree. A Directive to Request a Degree must specify the intended recipient of the Degree and the Degree being Requested and include any texts necessary to the awarding of that Degree. A person shall receive a Degree if and only if the conditions specified in this Rule are met. The following conditions are a prerequisite to the awarding of a Degree to a person (referred to here as Person X): - A Proposal to Request a Degree is submitted specifying Person X as the intended receipient of the Degree. - Only the Degree specified in the Proposal may be awarded to Person X. - Person X sends a message to the Public Forum containing a Thesis authored by Person X and a statement explicitly associating the Thesis with the Proposal to Request a Degree. The Archivist shall be responsible for keeping a copy of each Thesis written in this manner. - Person X does not decline the Degree. (To decline the Degree, e states such in a message to the Public Forum.) The following are additional requirements for the awarding of individual Degrees. To receive the Degree Associate of Nomic: - The Voting Index of the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 1. To receive the Degree Bachelor of Nomic: - The Voting Index of the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 1. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Master of Nomic: - The Voting Index of the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 2. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Doctor of Nomic Philosophy: - The Voting Index of the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 3. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. - The Proposal to Request a Degree must also contain a creative work whose topic or theme is any concept related to Agora or Nomic in general. The author of this work must be Person X. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: There shall be a legal Directive to Request a Degree. A Directive to Request a Degree must specify the intended recipient of the Degree and the Degree being Requested and include any texts necessary to the awarding of that Degree. A person shall receive a Degree if and only if the conditions specified in this Rule are met. The following conditions are a prerequisite to the awarding of a Degree to a person (referred to here as Person X): - A Proposal to Request a Degree is submitted specifying Person X as the intended recipient of the Degree. - Only the Degree specified in the Proposal may be awarded to Person X. - Person X sends a message to the Public Forum containing a Thesis authored by Person X and a statement explicitly associating the Thesis with the Proposal to Request a Degree. The Archivist shall be responsible for keeping a copy of each Thesis written in this manner. - Person X does not decline the Degree. (To decline the Degree, e states such in a message to the Public Forum.) The following are additional requirements for the awarding of individual Degrees. To receive the Degree Associate of Nomic: - The Voting Index of the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 1. To receive the Degree Bachelor of Nomic: - The Voting Index of the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 1. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Master of Nomic: - The Voting Index of the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 2. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Doctor of Nomic Philosophy: - The Voting Index of the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 3. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. - The Proposal to Request a Degree must also contain a creative work whose topic or theme is any concept related to Agora or Nomic in general. The author of this work must be Person X. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2399, 20 January 1996 text: There shall be a legal Directive to Request a Degree. A Directive to Request a Degree must specify the intended recipient of the Degree and the Degree being Requested and include any texts necessary to the awarding of that Degree. A person shall receive a Degree if and only if the conditions specified in this Rule are met. The following conditions are a prerequisite to the awarding of a Degree to a person (referred to here as Person X): - A Proposal to Request a Degree is submitted specifying Person X as the intended recipient of the Degree. - Only the Degree specified in the Proposal may be awarded to Person X. - Person X sends a message to the Public Forum containing a Thesis authored by Person X and a statement explicitly associating the Thesis with the Proposal to Request a Degree. The Archivist shall be responsible for keeping a copy of each Thesis written in this manner. - Person X does not decline the Degree. (To decline the Degree, e states such in a message to the Public Forum.) The following are additional requirements for the awarding of individual Degrees. To receive the Degree Bachelor of Nomic: - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Master of Nomic: - The minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect is 2. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Doctor of Nomic Philosophy: - The minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect is 3. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. - The Proposal to Request a Degree must also contain a creative work whose topic or theme is any concept related to Agora or Nomic in general. The author of this work must be Person X. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2487, 16 February 1996 text: There shall be a legal Directive to Request a Degree. A Directive to Request a Degree must specify the intended recipient of the Degree and the Degree being Requested and include any texts necessary to the awarding of that Degree. A person shall receive a Degree if and only if the conditions specified in this Rule are met. The following conditions are a prerequisite to the awarding of a Degree to a person (referred to here as Person X): - A Proposal to Request a Degree is submitted specifying Person X as the intended recipient of the Degree. - Only the Degree specified in the Proposal may be awarded to Person X. - Person X sends a message to the Public Forum containing a Thesis authored by Person X and a statement explicitly associating the Thesis with the Proposal to Request a Degree. The Archivist shall be responsible for keeping a copy of each Thesis written in this manner. - Person X does not decline the Degree. (To decline the Degree, e states such in a message to the Public Forum.) The following are additional requirements for the awarding of individual Degrees. To receive the Degree Bachelor of Nomic: - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Master of Nomic: - The minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect is 2. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Doctor of Nomic Philosophy: - The minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect is 3. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. - The Proposal to Request a Degree must clearly identify a creative work, which has been published in the Public Forum, and whose topic or theme is any concept related to Agora or Nomic in general. The author of this work must be Person X. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2682, 26 September 1996 text: There shall be a legal Directive to Request a Degree. A Directive to Request a Degree must specify the intended recipient of the Degree and the Degree being Requested and include any texts necessary to the awarding of that Degree. A person shall receive a Degree if and only if the conditions specified in this Rule are met. The following conditions are a prerequisite to the awarding of a Degree to a person (referred to here as Person X): - A Proposal to Request a Degree is submitted specifying Person X as the intended recipient of the Degree. - Only the Degree specified in the Proposal may be awarded to Person X. - Person X sends a message to the Public Forum containing a Thesis authored by Person X and a statement explicitly associating the Thesis with the Proposal to Request a Degree. The Archivist shall be responsible for keeping a copy of each Thesis written in this manner. - Person X does not decline the Degree. (To decline the Degree, e states such in a message to the Public Forum.) The following are additional requirements for the awarding of individual Degrees. To receive the Degree Bachelor of Nomic: - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Doctor of Nomic History: - The minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect is 2. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must contain a narrative covering significant events which have occurred in Agora within at least the last eight weeks. To receive the Degree Master of Nomic: - The minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect is 2. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Doctor of Nomic Philosophy: - The minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect is 3. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. - The Proposal to Request a Degree must clearly identify a creative work, which has been published in the Public Forum, and whose topic or theme is any concept related to Agora or Nomic in general. The author of this work must be Person X. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2715, 12 October 1996 text: There shall be a legal Directive to Request a Degree. A Directive to Request a Degree must specify the intended recipient of the Degree and the Degree being Requested and include any texts necessary to the awarding of that Degree. A person shall receive a Degree if and only if the conditions specified in this Rule are met. The following conditions are a prerequisite to the awarding of a Degree to a person (referred to here as Person X): - A Proposal to Request a Degree is submitted specifying Person X as the intended recipient of the Degree. - Only the Degree specified in the Proposal may be awarded to Person X. - Person X sends a message to the Public Forum containing a Thesis authored by Person X and a statement explicitly associating the Thesis with the Proposal to Request a Degree. The Archivist shall be responsible for keeping a copy of each Thesis written in this manner. - Person X does not decline the Degree. (To decline the Degree, e states such in a message to the Public Forum.) The following are additional requirements for the awarding of individual Degrees. To receive the Degree Bachelor of Nomic: - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Doctor of Nomic History: - The minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect is 2. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must contain a narrative covering significant events which have occurred at some prior point in Agora history. To receive the Degree Master of Nomic: - The minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect is 2. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. To receive the Degree Doctor of Nomic Philosophy: - The minimum Adoption Index necessary for such a Directive to take effect is 3. - The Thesis in the Proposal to Request a Degree must be at least 500 words. - The Proposal to Request a Degree must clearly identify a creative work, which has been published in the Public Forum, and whose topic or theme is any concept related to Agora or Nomic in general. The author of this work must be Person X. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: A Degree is awarded by the operation of an instrument of sufficient Power specifying the Degree to be awarded, and its recipient. The sufficient Power required to award a Degree is determined by the Degree to be awarded. All conditions established by this and other Rules for the awarding of the named Degree must have been fulfilled before the Degree may be awarded. No Degree may be awarded to any recipient unless the recipient has posted a Thesis to the Public Forum authored by eirself, along with a statement explicitly indicating that the Thesis is being submitted with the intent to qualify for a Degree. The Archivist shall retain a copy of each Thesis posted in this manner. The Degree of Bachelor of Nomic shall not be awarded unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, and unless the instrument awarding the Degree has Power of at least 1. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic History shall not be awarded unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words and contains a narrative covering significant events which have occured in Agora within at least the last eight weeks, and unless the instrument awarding the Degree has Power of at least 2. The Degree of Master of Nomic shall not be awarded unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, and unless the instrument awarding the Degree has Power of at least 2. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic Philosophy shall not be awarded unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, unless the intended recipient has also posted in the Public Forum an additional creative work authored by emself whose topic or theme is related to Agora or Nomic in general, and unless the instrument awarding the Degree has Power of at least 3. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), 11 May 1997 text: A Degree is Granted by the operation of an instrument of sufficient Power specifying the Degree to be Granted, and its recipient. The sufficient Power required to Grant a Degree is determined by the Degree to be Granted. All conditions established by this and other Rules for the Granting of the named Degree must have been fulfilled before the Degree may be Granted. No Degree may be Granted to any recipient unless the recipient has posted a Thesis to the Public Forum authored by eirself, along with a statement explicitly indicating that the Thesis is being submitted with the intent to qualify for a Degree. The Archivist shall retain a copy of each Thesis posted in this manner. The Degree of Bachelor of Nomic shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 1. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic History shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words and contains a narrative covering significant events which have occured in Agora within at least the last eight weeks, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 2. The Degree of Master of Nomic shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 2. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic Philosophy shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, unless the intended recipient has also posted in the Public Forum an additional creative work authored by emself whose topic or theme is related to Agora or Nomic in general, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 3. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 12 September 1998 text: A Degree is Granted by the operation of an instrument of sufficient Power specifying the Degree to be Granted, and its recipient. The sufficient Power required to Grant a Degree is determined by the Degree to be Granted. All conditions established by this and other Rules for the Granting of the named Degree must have been fulfilled before the Degree may be Granted. No Degree may be Granted to any recipient unless the recipient has posted a Thesis to the Public Forum authored by eirself, along with a statement explicitly indicating that the Thesis is being submitted with the intent to qualify for a Degree. The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Thesis posted in this manner. The Degree of Bachelor of Nomic shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 1. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic History shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words and contains a narrative covering significant events which have occured in Agora within at least the last eight weeks, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 2. The Degree of Master of Nomic shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 2. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic Philosophy shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, unless the intended recipient has also posted in the Public Forum an additional creative work authored by emself whose topic or theme is related to Agora or Nomic in general, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 3. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: A Degree is Granted by the operation of an instrument of sufficient Power specifying the Degree to be Granted, and its recipient. The sufficient Power required to Grant a Degree is determined by the Degree to be Granted. All conditions established by this and other Rules for the Granting of the named Degree must have been fulfilled before the Degree may be Granted. No Degree may be Granted to any recipient unless the recipient has posted a Thesis to the Public Forum authored by emself, along with a statement explicitly indicating that the Thesis is being submitted with the intent to qualify for a Degree. The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Thesis posted in this manner. The Degree of Bachelor of Nomic shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 1. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic History shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words and contains a narrative covering significant events which have occurred in Agora within at least the last eight weeks, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 2. The Degree of Master of Nomic shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 2. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic Philosophy shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, unless the intended recipient has also posted in the Public Forum an additional creative work authored by emself whose topic or theme is related to Agora or Nomic in general, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 3. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Degree is Granted by the operation of an instrument of sufficient Power specifying the Degree to be Granted, and its recipient. The sufficient Power required to Grant a Degree is determined by the Degree to be Granted. All conditions established by this and other Rules for the Granting of the named Degree must have been fulfilled before the Degree may be Granted. No Degree may be Granted to any recipient unless the recipient has published a Thesis authored by emself, along with a statement explicitly indicating that the Thesis is being submitted with the intent to qualify for a Degree. The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Thesis posted in this manner. The Degree of Bachelor of Nomic shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 1. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic History shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words and contains a narrative covering significant events which have occurred in Agora within at least the last eight weeks, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 2. The Degree of Master of Nomic shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 2. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic Philosophy shall not be Granted unless the Thesis submitted for that Degree contains at least 500 words, unless the intended recipient has also published an additional creative work authored by emself whose topic or theme is related to Agora or Nomic in general, and unless the instrument Granting the Degree has Power of at least 3. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4303 (OscarMeyr), 17 May 2002 text: A person becomes a Candidate for a Degree when e publishes a Thesis, authored by emself, along with a statement explicitly indicating that the Thesis is being submitted with the intent to qualify for a particular Degree. If the Candidate is a Player, e may choose the first member of eir Thesis Committee, called eir Chair; for non-players, the Speaker will serve as Chair. The Chair's Opposite is defined as the Player who most often voted in the opposite manner of the Chair in the last quarter; the Opposite becomes the second committee member. The Chair and eir Opposite will select, as soon as possible, and by mutual agreement, the third member of the committee. The Chair of the Thesis Committee for a particular Candidate may grant that Degree to the Candidate if and only if: * the Candidate has satisfied all prerequisites in the rules for the award of that Degree; * a majority of members of the Thesis Committee agree that the Thesis produced by the Candidate is worthy of the Degree to be granted; and * fewer than seven years have passed since the time the Thesis Committee was formed. The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Thesis approved by its Thesis Committee. The Degree of Associate of Nomic requires a Thesis of at least 150 words. A Candidate who already holds an AN Degree receives a credit of 100 words towards the Thesis requirement for any higher Degree, unless the Candidate also holds a BN Degree. The Degree of Bachelor of Nomic requires a Thesis of at least 500 words. A Candidate who already holds an BN Degree receives a credit of 250 words towards the Thesis requirement for any higher Degree. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic History requires a Thesis of at least 750 words and containing a narrative covering significant events which have occurred in Agora within the eight weeks prior to the publication of the Thesis. The Degree of Master of Nomic requires a Thesis of at least 750 words. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic Philosophy requires a Thesis of at least 1000 words, and that the candidate has also published an additional creative work authored by emself whose topic or theme is related to Agora or Nomic in general. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4462 (Goethe), 17 March 2003 text: A person becomes a Candidate for a Degree when e publishes a Thesis Draft, authored by emself, along with a statement explicitly indicating that the Thesis Draft is being submitted with the intent to qualify for a particular degree. If the Candidate is a Player, e may choose another Player to be the first member of eir Thesis Committee, called eir Chair, with the Chair's consent. For non-players, or if no other Player consents to be the Chair within one month of draft submission, the Speaker will serve as Chair. If the Speaker is neither the Chair nor the Candidate, the Speaker shall appoint a Player who is neither the Chair nor the Candidate to be the second Committee member. Otherwise, the Justiciar shall so appoint, unless the Chair or the Candidate is the Justiciar, in which case the Clerk of the Courts shall so appoint. The two Committee members shall then select, by mutual consent, a third person who is not the Candidate to be the third Committee member. The Committee shall examine the Candidate and eir Thesis to determine eir qualifications for the Degree. The Candidate may publish a new Thesis Draft at any time, in response to Committee requests or of eir own choosing, by indicating it is a new Thesis Draft for the same Degree. If the Committee is dissolved without granting a degree, the Committee ceases to be a Committee, and the Candidate ceases to be a Candidate, and any existant Thesis Draft must be republished and subject to a new Committee selection to be eligible for a Degree. The Chair of a Thesis Committee may dissolve the Committee without granting a degree, with the consent of at least one other Committee member. To so dissolve, the Chair must publish a notice of intent to dissolve at least 14 days before dissolving. The Candidate may so dissolve the Committee at any time by public announcement. The Chair of the Thesis Committee for a particular Candidate may award that Degree to the Candidate if and only if: * the Candidate has satisfied all prerequisites in the rules for the award of that Degree; * a majority of members of the Thesis Committee agree that the most recent Thesis draft produced by the Candidate is worthy of the Degree to be granted; and * fewer than seven years have passed since that Committee was formed. Each Committee Member may have up to 14 days after a Degree is awarded to publish a Commentary for the Thesis. After that time, the Chair shall publish the most recent Thesis Draft along with all Commentary so published. This combined publication shall become the Final Thesis. Upon publication of this Final Thesis the Committee members cease to be Committee members for that Thesis. The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Final Thesis. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 text: A person becomes a Candidate for a Degree when e publishes a Thesis Draft, authored by emself, along with a statement explicitly indicating that the Thesis Draft is being submitted with the intent to qualify for a particular degree. If the Candidate is a Player, e may choose another Player to be the first member of eir Thesis Committee, called eir Chair, with the Chair's consent. For non-players, or if no other Player consents to be the Chair within one month of draft submission, the Speaker will serve as Chair. If the Speaker is neither the Chair nor the Candidate, the Speaker shall appoint a Player who is neither the Chair nor the Candidate to be the second Committee member. Otherwise, the Justiciar shall so appoint, unless the Chair or the Candidate is the Justiciar, in which case the Clerk of the Courts shall so appoint. The two Committee members shall then select, by mutual consent, a third person who is not the Candidate to be the third Committee member. The Committee shall examine the Candidate and eir Thesis to determine eir qualifications for the Degree. The Candidate may publish a new Thesis Draft at any time, in response to Committee requests or of eir own choosing, by indicating it is a new Thesis Draft for the same Degree. If the Committee is dissolved without granting a degree, the Committee ceases to be a Committee, and the Candidate ceases to be a Candidate, and any existent Thesis Draft must be republished and subject to a new Committee selection to be eligible for a Degree. The Chair of a Thesis Committee may dissolve the Committee without granting a degree, with the consent of at least one other Committee member. To so dissolve, the Chair must publish a notice of intent to dissolve at least 14 days before dissolving. The Candidate may so dissolve the Committee at any time by public announcement. The Chair of the Thesis Committee for a particular Candidate may award that Degree to the Candidate if and only if: * the Candidate has satisfied all prerequisites in the rules for the award of that Degree; * a majority of members of the Thesis Committee agree that the most recent Thesis draft produced by the Candidate is worthy of the Degree to be granted; and * fewer than seven years have passed since that Committee was formed. Each Committee Member may have up to 14 days after a Degree is awarded to publish a Commentary for the Thesis. After that time, the Chair shall publish the most recent Thesis Draft along with all Commentary so published. This combined publication shall become the Final Thesis. Upon publication of this Final Thesis the Committee members cease to be Committee members for that Thesis. The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Final Thesis. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: A person becomes a Candidate for a Degree when e publishes a Thesis along with a statement explicitly indicating that the Thesis is being submitted with the intent to qualify for a particular degree. A Thesis (plural: Theses) is an essay whose topic is any facet of Agora Nomic, or Nomic in general. The Candidate shall choose a Player other tham emself to be the first member of eir Thesis Committee, called eir Chair, with the Chair's consent. If the Speaker is neither the Chair nor the Candidate, the Speaker shall appoint a Player who is neither the Chair nor the Candidate to be the second Committee member. Otherwise, the the Clerk of the Courts shall so appoint. The two Committee members shall then select, by mutual consent, a third person who is not the Candidate to be the third Committee member. The Committee shall examine the Candidate and eir Thesis to determine eir qualifications for the Degree. The Chair of the Thesis Committee may award that Degree to the Candidate if and only if: * the Candidate has satisfied all prerequisites in the Rules for the award of that Degree; * a majority of members of the Thesis Committee agree that the Thesis is worthy of the Degree to be granted. Attention should be paid to the originality and strength of the work, as well as the extent of the work with regard to the expectations of the particular degree. The committee may award a lesser degree if appropriate; and * fewer than seven years have passed since that Committee was formed. Each Committee Member may publish a Commentary for the Thesis. The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Thesis that has resulted in a degree, along with all such Commentaries. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: A person becomes a Candidate for a Degree when e publishes a Thesis along with a statement explicitly indicating that the Thesis is being submitted with the intent to qualify for a particular degree. A Thesis (plural: Theses) is an essay whose topic is any facet of Agora Nomic, or Nomic in general. The Candidate shall choose a Player other than emself to be the first member of eir Thesis Committee, called eir Chair, with the Chair's consent. If the Speaker is neither the Chair nor the Candidate, the Speaker shall appoint a Player who is neither the Chair nor the Candidate to be the second Committee member. Otherwise, the Clerk of the Courts shall so appoint. The two Committee members shall then select, by mutual consent, a third person who is not the Candidate to be the third Committee member. The Committee shall examine the Candidate and eir Thesis to determine eir qualifications for the Degree. The Chair of the Thesis Committee may award that Degree to the Candidate if and only if: * the Candidate has satisfied all prerequisites in the Rules for the award of that Degree; * a majority of members of the Thesis Committee agree that the Thesis is worthy of the Degree to be granted. Attention should be paid to the originality and strength of the work, as well as the extent of the work with regard to the expectations of the particular degree. The committee may award a lesser degree if appropriate; and * fewer than seven years have passed since that Committee was formed. Each Committee Member may publish a Commentary for the Thesis. The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Thesis that has resulted in a degree, along with all such Commentaries. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1370 by Proposal 5085 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1371 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1371 by Proposal 1371, 5 January 1995 text: No Degree of higher rank than Bachelor of Nomic may be obtained based on the Approval of any texts authored prior to the passage of this Rule. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would allow such a Degree to be awarded. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1375 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1375 by Proposal 1375, 17 January 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1428, 5 February 1995 text: If the Speaker is On Hold, a new Speaker shall be chosen according to the Order of Succession. The Arbiter of Succession shall be the Registrar; unless the Office of Registrar is vacant, or the Speaker is also the Registrar, in which case the Arbiter of Succession is the first Voter to post a message to the Public Forum stating that e is willing to act as Arbiter of Succession. The new Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc., but if this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. If a Speaker is replaced in this manner, e has eir score set to minus 2N Points upon becoming a Voter, where N is the number of points required for that player to win at the moment e becomes a Voter. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1682, 22 August 1995 text: If the Speaker is On Hold, a new Speaker shall be chosen according to the Order of Succession. The Arbiter of Succession shall be the Registrar; unless the Office of Registrar is vacant, or the Speaker is also the Registrar, in which case the Arbiter of Succession is the first Voter to post a message to the Public Forum stating that e is willing to act as Arbiter of Succession. The new Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc., but if this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. A Speaker who goes on Hold while e is still Speaker commits a Class B Crime. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: If the Speaker is On Hold, a new Speaker shall be chosen according to the Order of Succession. The Arbiter of Succession shall be the Registrar; unless the Speaker is also the Registrar, in which case the Arbiter of Succession is the first Voter to post a message to the Public Forum stating that e is willing to act as Arbiter of Succession. The new Speaker shall make reasonable effort to obtain the former Speaker's materials: proposal queue, voting records, etc., but if this is not possible, then the new Speaker shall request that these be resubmitted by the Players. A Speaker who goes on Hold while e is still Speaker commits a Class B Crime. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2661, 7 September 1996 text: If the Speaker is On Hold, then the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. A Speaker who goes on Hold while e is still Speaker commits a Class B Crime. history: Amended(5) Cosmetically by Proposal 2831 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: If the Speaker is On Hold, then the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. A Speaker who goes on Hold while e is still Speaker commits the Crime of Speaker Inactivity, a Class B Crime. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3703 (Steve), 9 March 1998 text: A Speaker who goes On Hold while e is still Speaker commits the Crime of Speaker Inactivity, a Class B Crime. If the Speaker is On Hold, a Speaker Transition occurs. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: A Speaker who goes On Hold while e is still Speaker commits the Class 10 Crime of Speaker Inactivity. If the Speaker is On Hold, a Speaker Transition occurs. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: A Speaker who ceases to be active while e is still Speaker commits the class 10 crime of Speaker Inactivity. Whenever the Speaker is not active, a Speaker Transition occurs. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1375 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1377 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1377 by Proposal 1377, 17 January 1995 text: Let there be an Officer called the Herald, who is responsible for keeping track of the Kudos of all Players, as well as any ex-Players who have been Players within the past three months. The Herald shall post to the Public Forum once per Week, a current Kudo report. This report shall list the Kudos held by each holding Entity. For any Entity whose Kudos have changed since the previous report, the Herald must include the reasons for the Kudo change, including, if applicable, the reasons provided by a Player requesting a Kudo transfer, as provided by other Rules. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 29 January 1996 text: Let there be an Officer called the Herald, who is responsible for keeping track of the Kudos of all Players, as well as any ex-Players who have been Players within the past three months. The Herald shall post to the Public Forum once per Week, a current Kudo report. This report shall list the Kudos held by each holding Entity. For any Entity whose Kudos have changed since the previous report, the Herald must include the reasons for the Kudo change, including, if applicable, the reasons provided by a Player requesting a Kudo transfer, as provided by other Rules. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2503, 3 March 1996 text: Let there exist the Office of "Herald". The Herald shall maintain a record of the Honour of every Player and of every non-Player who has been a Player during the past three months. The Herald shall, once each Week, post a Report to the Public Forum; this Report shall report on the Honour of every entity for which the Herald is required to maintain records, and all changes to the above since the last such Report. The report of changes shall include the reason for each change; this shall include (but not be limited to) any justification provided by a Player as part of a Player-caused Kudo transfer. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 2839 (Zefram), 11 March 1997 text: There is an Office of Herald. The Herald's Report includes the Honour of every Entity that has been a Player at any time within the last three months, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Herald's Report. For each such change the Report includes the reason for each change; in the case of a Player-initiated change this includes any justification provided by the Player. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3476 (Oerjan), 11 May 1997 text: There is an Office of Herald. The Herald's Report includes the following: - The Honour of every Entity that has been a Player at any time within the last three months, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Herald's Report. - The reason for each such change; in the case of a Player-initiated change this includes any justification provided by the Player. - The number of Indulgences held in each Treasury, the changes thereof since the last posting of the Herald's Report, and the reason for each such change. - For every former Player who left the game after the creation of this Rule, their Indulgences at the time they last left the game, just before the emptying and destruction of eir Treasury (if any). The Herald shall receive a weekly salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: There is an Office of Herald. The Herald's Report includes the following: - The Honour of every Entity that has been a Player at any time within the last three months, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Herald's Report. - The reason for each such change; in the case of a Player-initiated change this includes any justification provided by the Player. - The Currency Records for Indulgences. - A list of all Fugitives from Justice, and the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to each such Fugitive. The Herald shall receive a weekly salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3827 (Kolja A.), 4 February 1999 text: There is an Office of Herald. The Herald's Report includes the following: - The Honour of every Entity that has been a Player at any time within the last three months, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Herald's Report. - The reason for each such change; in the case of a Player-initiated change this includes any justification provided by the Player. - The Currency Records for Indulgences. - A list of all Fugitives from Justice, and the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to each such Fugitive. The Herald shall receive a salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: There is an Office of Herald. The Herald's Report includes the following: - The Honour of every Entity that has been a Player at any time within the last three months, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Herald's Report. - The reason for each such change; in the case of a Player-initiated change this includes any justification provided by the Player. - The Currency Records for Indulgences. - A list of all Fugitives from Justice, and the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to each such Fugitive. The Herald shall receive a Salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3889 (harvel), 9 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3901 (Schneidster), 6 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3926 (Crito), 10 October 1999 text: There exists the Office of Herald, whose responsibility it is to keep track of Honour, and to be the Recordkeepor of Indulgences. The Herald's Report includes the following: i) The Honour of every Entity that has been a Player at any time within the last three months, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Herald's Report. ii) The reason for each such change. In the case of a Player-initiated change, this includes any justification provided by the Player. iii) The Currency Records for Indulgences. iv) The number of Blots staining each Player and Fugitive from Justice. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: There exists the Office of Herald, whose responsibility it is to keep track of Honour, and to be the Recordkeepor of Indulgences. The Herald's Report shall include the following: (i) The Honour of each entity that has been a Player within the last three months, and the changes thereto since the last posting of the Report. (ii) The reason for each such change. In the case of a Player-initiated change, this includes any justification provided by the Player. (iii) The number of Blots staining the records of each Player and Fugitive from Justice. (iv) A list of each Patent Title with Historical Significance that has been awarded and not subsequently revoked, and to whom it has been awarded. (v) A list of Degrees which have been granted, and which persons possess them. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4124 (Elysion), 28 March 2001 text: There exists the Office of Herald, whose responsibility it is to keep track of Blots and to be the Recordkeepor of Indulgences. The Herald's Report shall include the following: (i) The number of Blots staining the records of each Player and Fugitive from Justice. (ii) A list of each Patent Title with Historical Significance that at least one person Bears and that is not a Degree, with a list of which persons Bear it. (iii) A list of Degrees which have been granted, and which persons Bear them. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Herald is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of Indulgences and is responsible for keeping track of Blots. The Herald's Report shall include the following: (i) The number of Blots staining the records of each Player and Fugitive from Justice. (ii) A list of each Patent Title with Historical Significance that at least one person Bears and that is not a Degree, with a list of which persons Bear it. (iii) A list of Degrees which have been granted, and which persons Bear them. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4272 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: The Herald is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of Indulgences and is responsible for keeping track of Blots. The Herald's Report shall include the following: (i) The Stain of each Player and Fugitive from Justice. (ii) A list of each Patent Title with Historical Significance that at least one person Bears and that is not a Degree, with a list of which persons Bear it. (iii) A list of Degrees which have been granted, and which persons Bear them. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: The Herald is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of Blots. The Herald's Report shall include the following: (i) The Stain of each Player and Fugitive from Justice. (ii) A list of each Patent Title with Historical Significance that at least one person Bears and that is not a Degree, with a list of which persons Bear it. (iii) A list of Degrees which have been granted, and which persons Bear them. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4563 (OscarMeyr), 6 April 2004 text: The Herald is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of Blots. The Herald's Weekly Report shall include the following: (i) The Stain of each Player and Fugitive from Justice. (ii) A list of each Patent Title with Historical Significance that at least one person Bears and that is not a Degree, with a list of which persons Bear it. (iii) A list of Degrees which have been granted, and which persons Bear them. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 4852 (root), 18 March 2006 text: The Herald is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of Blots. The Herald's Weekly Report shall include the following: (i) The Stain of each Player and Fugitive from Justice. (ii) A list of each Patent Title with Historical Significance that at least one person Bears and that is not a Degree, with a list of which persons Bear it. (iii) A list of Degrees which have been granted, and which persons Bear them. (iv) Each player's Education. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The Herald is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of the History of Agora and its players. The Herald's Weekly Report shall include the following: (i) A list of each Patent Title and Degree that at least one person Bears, with a list of which persons Bear it. (ii) a list of all registered players, with their nicknames, if any, and listed email addresses; (iii) the most recent date on which each registered player registered; (iv) the current Officers and their dates of service. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 4939 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: The Herald is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of the History of Agora and its players. The Herald's report shall include the following: a) A list of each Patent Title and Degree that at least one person Bears, with a list of which persons Bear it. b) A list of one or more Threats, including Bears. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5036 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: The Herald is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of marks of honour and shame relating to Agora. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1377 by Proposal 5123 (Zefram; disi.), 13 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1378 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1378 by Proposal 1378, 17 January 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1497, 15 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1628, 17 July 1995 text: In each Nomic Week, each Player not On Hold (the Transferring Player) is permitted to transfer a maximum of two Kudos from Players of eir choice to other Players of eir choice, subject to these restrictions: 1) The Transferring Player is not permitted to transfer more than one Kudo from any Player, and is not permitted to transfer more than one Kudo to any Player, within the Week. 2) The Transferring Player is not permitted to transfer Kudos to emself. A Kudo transfer occurs when a Player sends to the Herald a legitimate Kudo transfer request, including a reason for the transfer. Other Rules are permitted to provide for other types of Kudo changes. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2501, 3 March 1996 text: A single Kudo shall be transferred from one Player (the "Victim") to a second Player (the "Beneficiary") when a Player (the "Transferer") sends a message to the Herald indicating that e is transferring a Kudo from the Victim to the Beneficiary, and all the following conditions hold: a) the Transferer has not, during the current Nomic Week, previously caused two or more Kudo transfers; b) the Transferer is not the same Player as the Beneficiary; c) The Transferer has not, during the current Nomic Week, previously transferred a Kudo away from the Victim or to the Beneficiary; d) the Victim has at least one Kudo; and e) the message contains a justification for the transfer. This Rule does not in any way prohibit other Rules from causing changes to a Player's Honour. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4079 (Elysion), 30 October 2000 text: A Notice of Honor is a public message containing exactly one Victim (a Player whose Honor shall be decreased), exactly one Beneficiary (a Player whose Honor shall be increased) and the reason why each was selected. Any Player may execute a Notice of Honor provided that following conditions hold: a) E has not already executed two or more Notices of Honor during the current Nomic Week. b) E is not also the Beneficiary. c) E has not already executed a Notice of Honor during the current Nomic Week naming the same Victim. d) The Victim has an Honor of at least one Kudo. The effect of a Notice of Honor is to reduce the Honor of the Victim by one Kudo and to increase the Honor of the Beneficiary by one Kudo. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1379 [Problematic source edition ignored: can't place 1379/0 anywhere in its rule history.] history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1378 by Proposal 1378, 17 January 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1397 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1397 by Proposal 1397, 29 January 1995 text: A Group shall cease to exist when any of the following conditions become true: (a) The Group has no members; (b) The continued existence of the Group would result in the Office of Vizier of that Group being vacant; or (c) The Group elects to dissolve in accordance with its Ordinances. Upon the dissolution of a Group, all remaining Members of the Group simultaneously cease to be Members of that Group. Next, any Points remaining in the Group's Treasury are destroyed, and any Currencies remaining in the Group's Treasury are transferred to the issuing Entity for that Currency (the Bank for Marks, the issuing Group for Coins). Finally, all Coins issued by the dissolving Group are destroyed. In the case of a Group which elects to dissolve, the Vizier of the dissolving Group shall notify the Registrar of the Group's dissolution. in all other cases, the Registrar shall be responsible to detect and report the Group's dissolution. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1687, 1 September 1995 text: A Group shall cease to exist when any of the following conditions become true: (a) The Group has no members; (b) The continued existence of the Group would result in the Office of Vizier of that Group being vacant; or (c) The Group elects to dissolve in accordance with its Ordinances. At the moment a Group dissolves, the following events take place: (1) The Currencies remaining in the Group's Treasury are divided up as evenly as possible and transferred to those Players who were Members of the Group at the moment of its dissolution. (2) All Coins issued by that Group are destroyed. (3) The Group's Treasury, and the Group itself, cease to exist. All Players who were members of that Group cease to be Members. In the case of a Group which elects to dissolve, the Vizier of the dissolving Group shall notify the Registrar of the Group's dissolution. The Registrar is responsible for detecting when a Group dissolves due to a lack of Members or a lack of a Vizier. Whenever a Group dissolves for any reason, the Registrar shall report that event as soon as possible to the Public Forum. The Banker is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers required by this Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: An Organization ceases to exist when any of the following conditions become true: i) Its Compact ceases to have Jurisdiction over any Players and no provision exists for the Jurisdiction to expand. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would result in the absence of a Administrator (and/or the absence of an Executor in the case of a Orginization with Treasuries) with no provision for any Player to fulfill the role(s). iii) The Organization is required to dissolve in accordance with its Compact or the Rules. At the moment an Organization dissolves, the following occurs, in order. i) Any Currencies remaining in the Organization's Treasuries (if such exist) are distributed as provided for by other Rules. ii) All Players cease to be within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's Compact. iii) The Organization's Treasuries, Compact, and the Organization itself, cease to exist. Whenever a Public Organization dissolves, the Notary shall report that event to the Public Forum As Soon As Possible after e is notified as required by other Rules. Other Rules may define additional causes of dissolution. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2421, 30 January 1996 text: An Organization ceases to exist when any of the following conditions become true: i) Its Compact ceases to have Jurisdiction over any Players and no provision exists for the Jurisdiction to expand. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would result in the absence of a Administrator (and/or the absence of an Executor in the case of a Organization with Treasuries) with no provision for any Player to fulfill the role(s). iii) The Organization is required to dissolve in accordance with its Compact or the Rules. At the moment an Organization dissolves, the following occurs, in order. i) Any Currencies remaining in the Organization's Treasuries (if such exist) are distributed as provided for by other Rules. ii) All Players cease to be within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's Compact. iii) The Organization's Treasuries, Compact, and the Organization itself, cease to exist. Whenever a Public Organization dissolves, the Notary shall report that event to the Public Forum As Soon As Possible after e is notified as required by other Rules. Other Rules may define additional causes of dissolution. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: An Organization is required to be dissolved when: a) its Compact's Jurisdiction becomes empty, and there is no way for it to cease to be empty; b) the continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Adminstrator; or c) the continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor, but only if the Organization possesses a Treasury. This Rule does not in any way prevent other Rules from requiring an Organization to dissolve under other circumstances. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: An Organization shall only be dissolved when the Rules or the Organization's SLC require it. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Administrator. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. The Notary is required to detect when an Administrative Dissolution takes place. As soon as possible after an Organization dissolves, for any reason, the Notary shall report that dissolution to the Public Forum. All Organizations cease to exist upon dissolution. Other Rules can require an Organization to dissolve under other circumstances. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: An Organization shall be dissolved only when the Rules or the Organization's SLC requires it. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions is true: (i) the Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change; (ii) the continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization not have all of a legal Administrator, a legal Executor, and a legal Maintainer for its SLC; or (iii) the SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. Requirement to dissolve by condition (iii) is Voluntary. Any other requirement to dissolve is Administrative. The Notary shall detect when an Administrative Dissolution takes place. Each Organization ceases to exist upon its dissolution. Other Rules may require an Organization to dissolve under other circumstances. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4181 (Murphy), 9 July 2001 text: A Organization shall cease to exist only as specified by its Charter or by the Rules. An Organization shall cease to exist if it would otherwise lack a property that Organizations are required to have. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1397 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1416 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1416 by Proposal 1416, 1 February 1995 text: An empty Rule Category may be deleted by means of a Directive to delete that Category. Such a Directive shall clearly state the Category to be deleted. The Proposal containing such a Directive must have an Adoption Index of at least 2. If the Proposal passes, the Rule Category shall be removed from the Rule Set. Non-empty Rule Categories may not be deleted. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1740, 15 October 1995 text: An empty Rule Category may be removed by the Rulekeepor as e sees fit. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1427 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1427 by Proposal 1427, 7 February 1995 text: If a Rule requires that the position of Speaker or Speaker-Elect is to be filled during the Arbitration Period for filling the position of Speaker, then that requirement is negated; this Rule takes precedence over such Rules. If a Rule requires that the position of Speaker-Elect is to be filled during the Arbitration Period for filling the position of Speaker-Elect, then that requirement is negated; this Rule takes precedence over such Rules. If a Rule requires that the position of Speaker is to be filled during the Arbitration Period for filling the position of Speaker-Elect, then the Order of Succession procedure for Speaker-Elect is not completed, and the position of Speaker is filled according to that Rule. This Rule takes precedence over Rules requiring the position of Speaker-Elect to be filled by the Order of Succession in such a case. If a Voter becomes Speaker-Elect during a Arbitration Period by winning the game, then the Order of Succession procedure shall not be completed, and the Speaker-Elect fills the position. That is, -if the position to be filled is Speaker-Elect, the Speaker-Elect remains Speaker-Elect. -if the position to be filled is Speaker, the Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker and the old Speaker becomes a Voter. In such a case, this Rule takes precedence over any Rule requiring the Order of Succession to be completed. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1430 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1430 by Proposal 1430 (Kelly), 7 February 1995 text: Whenever a Rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor shall attach to the Rule an annotation giving the type of change, the source of the Change (that is, the Number of the Proposal or Rule which contained the Change), and the date upon which the change took effect. Other Rules may require additional information to appear in an annotation for certain types of Rule Change. Such an annotation does not in any way affect the Rule itself, is not part of the text of the Rule, and is not a Rule Change in its own regard. The Rulekeepor shall indicate all annotations in such a way that they are readily distinguished from the text of the Rule. When a Rule is repealed, all annotations attached to it are discarded, and need not appear in the published Ruleset. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2738 (Swann), 7 November 1996 text: Whenever a Rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor shall attach to the Rule an annotation giving the type of change, the source of the Change (that is, the Number of the Proposal and the Entity that proposed it, or Rule-- or other entity-- which mandated the Change), and the date upon which the change took effect. Other Rules may require additional information to appear in an annotation for certain types of Rule Change. Such an annotation does not in any way affect the Rule itself, is not part of the text of the Rule, and is not a Rule Change in its own regard. The Rulekeepor shall indicate all annotations in such a way that they are readily distinguished from the text of the Rule. When a Rule is repealed, all annotations attached to it are discarded, and need not appear in the published Ruleset. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 2783 (Chuck), 15 January 1997 text: Whenever a Rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor shall record a historical annotation to the Rule giving the type of change, the source of the Change (that is, the Number of the Proposal and the Entity that proposed it, or Rule-- or other entity-- which mandated the Change), and the date upon which the change took effect. Other Rules may require additional information to appear in an annotation for certain types of Rule Change. Such an annotation does not in any way affect the Rule itself, is not part of the text of the Rule, and is not a Rule Change in its own regard. The Rulekeepor shall indicate all annotations in such a way that they are readily distinguished from the text of the Rule. When a Rule is repealed, all annotations attached to it are discarded, and need not appear in the published Ruleset. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3842 (Chuck), 15 March 1999 text: Whenever a Rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor shall record a historical annotation to the Rule giving the type of change, the source of the Change (that is, a reference to the Proposal and the Entity that proposed it, or Rule or other entity which mandated the Change) , and the date upon which the change took effect. Other Rules may require additional information to appear in an annotation for certain types of Rule Change. Such an annotation does not in any way affect the Rule itself, is not part of the text of the Rule, and is not a Rule Change in its own regard. The Rulekeepor shall indicate all annotations in such a way that they are readily distinguished from the text of the Rule. When a Rule is repealed, all annotations attached to it are discarded, and need not appear in the published Ruleset. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3884 (harvel), 26 July 1999 text: Whenever a Rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor shall record a historical annotation to the Rule giving the type of change, the source of the Change (that is, a reference to the Proposal and its Proposer, or Rule or other entity which mandated the Change) , and the date upon which the change took effect. Other Rules may require additional information to appear in an annotation for certain types of Rule Change. Such an annotation does not in any way affect the Rule itself, is not part of the text of the Rule, and is not a Rule Change in its own regard. The Rulekeepor shall indicate all annotations in such a way that they are readily distinguished from the text of the Rule. When a Rule is repealed, all annotations attached to it are discarded, and need not appear in the published Ruleset. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4664 (Sherlock), 9 April 2005 text: Whenever a Rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor shall record a historical annotation to the Rule giving the type of change, the source of the Change (that is, a reference to the Proposal and its Proposer (along with any Players explicitly named as co-authors in the Proposal), or Rule or other entity which mandated the Change) , and the date upon which the change took effect. Other Rules may require additional information to appear in an annotation for certain types of Rule Change. Such an annotation does not in any way affect the Rule itself, is not part of the text of the Rule, and is not a Rule Change in its own regard. The Rulekeepor shall indicate all annotations in such a way that they are readily distinguished from the text of the Rule. When a Rule is repealed, all annotations attached to it are discarded, and need not appear in the published Ruleset. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4828 (Maud), 30 July 2005 text: Whenever a rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeeper shall record a historical annotation to the rule indicating: (a) the type of change; (b) if the rule was changed due to a proposal, a reference to that proposal, its proposer, and any coauthors explicitly named in that proposal; (c) if the rule was changed by some other mechanism, the mechanism which specified the change; and (d) the date on which the change took effect. Other rules may require additional information to appear in an annotation for certain types of Rule Change. Annotations to a rule are not part of the rule, and annotating a rule is not a rule change. The Rulekeepor shall indicate all annotations in such a way that they are readily distinguished from the text of the rule. When a rule is repealed, all annotations attached to it are discarded, and need not appear in the published Ruleset. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1430 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1431 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1431 by Proposal 1431 (Kelly), 7 February 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1491, 15 March 1995 text: If a Player, hereafter called the Claimant, believes any official report or document to contain an error, e shall post to the Public Forum a statement that e believes the report to be in error, specifying the nature of the error, and requesting the Player responsible for the document, hereafter called the Respondant, to correct the error. The Respondant shall immediately investigate the claim of error, and, as soon as possible after the posting of the claim, either admit the claim and issue an official correction to the document, or deny the claim. Such admission or denial shall be posted to the Public Forum. If and only if the Respondant does not admit the claim, the Claimant may, within one week of the posted denial (or the expiration of any prescribed time limit for the Respondant's response), make a Call for Judgement alleging the document to be in error. If the Respondant does not admit the claim and a subsequent Call for Judgement finds that the claim is true, the Respondant shall lose 5 points. The Claimant is responsible for reporting this score change when it occurs. There is no penalty under this Rule if the Respondant admits the claim and corrects the error without a Call for Judgement having been made. A claim is illegal and may not be made if: a) another claim has previously been made alleging the same error, unless this prior claim was not admitted and the time limit to make a CFJ has expired; b) the document containing the error was published more than 21 days prior to the claim; or c) the Player making the claim is the same as the Player responsible for the document alleged to be in error. d) the report in error has been superceded by another report. For the purpose of this Rule, an "offical report or document" is any report or document which an Officer (or the Speaker) is required to maintain by the Rules in the course of eir duties as that Officer (or as Speaker), and an "error" is the omission or inclusion of any information which causes the official report or document to allege that the Game State is in any way different than it actually is. No Call for Judgement may be made alleging that a document contains errors except as prescribed in this Rule. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which might allow a Call for Judgement prohibited by this Rule to be made, or which might prohibit a Call for Judgement permitted by the Rule from being made. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1643, 1 August 1995 text: If a Player, hereafter called the Claimant, believes any official report or document to contain an error, e shall post to the Public Forum a statement that e believes the report to be in error, specifying the nature of the error, and requesting the Player responsible for the document, hereafter called the Respondant, to correct the error. The Respondant shall immediately investigate the claim of error, and, as soon as possible after the posting of the claim, either admit the claim and issue an official correction to the document, or deny the claim. Such admission or denial shall be posted to the Public Forum. If and only if the Respondant does not admit the claim, then any Player may, within one week of the posted denial (or the expiration of any prescribed time limit for the Respondant's response), make a Call for Judgement alleging the document to be in error in the way in which the Claim of Error alleged it to be in error. If and only if the Respondant admits the claim, then any Player may, within one week of the posted admission (or the expiration of any prescribed time limit for the Respondant's response), make a Call for Judgement alleging that the document is not in error in the way in which the Claim of Error alleged it to be in error. If the Respondant does not admit the claim and a subsequent Call for Judgement finds that the claim is true, the Respondant shall lose 5 points. The Claimant is responsible for reporting this score change when it occurs. There is no penalty under this Rule if the Respondant admits the claim and corrects the error without a Call for Judgement having been made. A claim is illegal and may not be made if: a) another claim has previously been made alleging the same error, unless this prior claim was not admitted and the time limit to make a CFJ has expired; b) the document containing the error was published more than 21 days prior to the claim; or c) the Player making the claim is the same as the Player responsible for the document alleged to be in error. d) the report in error has been superceded by another report. For the purpose of this Rule, an "offical report or document" is any report or document which an Officer (or the Speaker) is required to maintain by the Rules in the course of eir duties as that Officer (or as Speaker), and an "error" is the omission or inclusion of any information which causes the official report or document to allege that the Game State is in any way different than it actually is. No Call for Judgement may be made alleging that a document contains errors except as prescribed in this Rule. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which might allow a Call for Judgement prohibited by this Rule to be made, or which might prohibit a Call for Judgement permitted by the Rule from being made. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: If a Player, hereafter called the Claimant, believes any official report or document to contain an error, e shall post to the Public Forum a statement that e believes the report to be in error, specifying the nature of the error, and requesting the Player responsible for the document, hereafter called the Respondant, to correct the error. The Respondant shall immediately investigate the claim of error, and, as soon as possible after the posting of the claim, either admit the claim and issue an official correction to the document, or deny the claim. Such admission or denial shall be posted to the Public Forum. If and only if the Respondant does not admit the claim, then any Player may, within one week of the posted denial (or the expiration of any prescribed time limit for the Respondant's response), make a Call for Judgement alleging the document to be in error in the way in which the Claim of Error alleged it to be in error. If and only if the Respondant admits the claim, then any Player may, within one week of the posted admission (or the expiration of any prescribed time limit for the Respondant's response), make a Call for Judgement alleging that the document is not in error in the way in which the Claim of Error alleged it to be in error. If the Respondant does not admit the claim and a subsequent Call for Judgement finds that the claim is true, the Respondant shall lose 5 points. The Claimant is responsible for reporting this score change when it occurs. There is no penalty under this Rule if the Respondant admits the claim and corrects the error without a Call for Judgement having been made. A claim is illegal and may not be made if: a) another claim has previously been made alleging the same error, unless this prior claim was not admitted and the time limit to make a CFJ has expired; b) the document containing the error was published more than 21 days prior to the claim; or c) the Player making the claim is the same as the Player responsible for the document alleged to be in error. d) the report in error has been superceded by another report. For the purpose of this Rule, an "official report or document" is any report or document which an Officer (or the Speaker) is required to maintain by the Rules in the course of eir duties as that Officer (or as Speaker), and an "error" is the omission or inclusion of any information which causes the official report or document to allege that the Game State is in any way different than it actually is. No Call for Judgement may be made alleging that a document contains errors except as prescribed in this Rule. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which might allow a Call for Judgement prohibited by this Rule to be made, or which might prohibit a Call for Judgement permitted by the Rule from being made. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2424, 30 January 1996 text: If a Player, hereafter called the Claimant, believes any official report or document to contain an error, e shall at eir discretion post to the Public Forum a statement that e believes the report to be in error, specifying the nature of the error, and requesting the Player responsible for the document, hereafter called the Respondant, to correct the error. The Respondant shall immediately investigate the claim of error, and, as soon as possible after the posting of the claim, either admit the claim and issue an official correction to the document, or deny the claim. Such admission or denial shall be posted to the Public Forum. If and only if the Respondant does not admit the claim, then any Player may, within one week of the posted denial (or the expiration of any prescribed time limit for the Respondant's response), make a Call for Judgement alleging the document to be in error in the way in which the Claim of Error alleged it to be in error. If and only if the Respondant admits the claim, then any Player may, within one week of the posted admission (or the expiration of any prescribed time limit for the Respondant's response), make a Call for Judgement alleging that the document is not in error in the way in which the Claim of Error alleged it to be in error. If the Respondant does not admit the claim and a subsequent Call for Judgement finds that the claim is true, the Respondant shall lose 5 points. The Claimant is responsible for reporting this score change when it occurs. There is no penalty under this Rule if the Respondant admits the claim and corrects the error without a Call for Judgement having been made. A claim is illegal and may not be made if: a) another claim has previously been made alleging the same error, unless this prior claim was not admitted and the time limit to make a CFJ has expired; b) the document containing the error was published more than 21 days prior to the claim; or c) the Player making the claim is the same as the Player responsible for the document alleged to be in error. d) the report in error has been superceded by another report. For the purpose of this Rule, an "official report or document" is any report or document which an Officer (or the Speaker) is required to maintain by the Rules in the course of eir duties as that Officer (or as Speaker), and an "error" is the omission or inclusion of any information which causes the official report or document to allege that the Game State is in any way different than it actually is. No Call for Judgement may be made alleging that a document contains errors except as prescribed in this Rule. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which might allow a Call for Judgement prohibited by this Rule to be made, or which might prohibit a Call for Judgement permitted by the Rule from being made. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2492, 16 February 1996 text: Any Player (hereafter the Claimant) who believes that any message posted to the Public Forum makes a claim about the Game State which is in error is permitted to, at eir discretion, post to the Public Forum alleging that that message contains an error. Such an allegation is a Claim of Error, and to be legal must also specify the nature of the alleged error. As soon as possible after a legal Claim of Error is posted, the Player who posted the message which contains the alleged error (hereafter, the Respondant) shall investigate the allegation of error and report to the Public Forum the results of this investigation. If the investigation determines that the original claim was in error, the Respondant shall retract that claim, replacing it with the corrected version. A Player who is not on Hold who fails to complete such an investigation within seven days when required by this Rule commits a Class C Crime. The determinations of such an investigation may be challenged by a Call for Judgement alleging that the original (or revised) claim is in error. A Player who is determined by CFJ to have posted an erroneous claim to the Public Forum commits an Infraction, the penalty for which is 1 Blot, to be reported by the Judge of the CFJ. This penalty only applies if a legal Claim of Error was made upon the erroneous claim, and that Claim of Error was either not investigated by the Respondant, or was investigated and found to be without merit, and finally if the erroneous claim was not retracted prior to the making of the CFJ. A Claim of Error is not legal and has no effect if: a) another Claim of Error has previously been made alleging the same error; b) the message containing the alleged error was posted more than 21 days prior to the making of the Claim of Error; c) the claim alleged to be in error has already been withdrawn or retracted; or d) the Player posting the message alleged to contain the error is the same as the Player making the Claim of Error. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2561, 12 April 1996 text: A Claim of Error is a message posted to the Public Forum to the effect that a specific post to the Public Forum misrepresents the actual Game State, and documenting the nature of the error. A Response to a Claim of Error consists in posting to the Public Forum either a denial of the Claim, or an admission of the Claim, which shall then include a corrected version of the portion of the relevant message which was in error. A Response must be provided by the Player who is required by the Rules to publish the information subject to a Claim within one week of the Claim being made, unless any of the following holds: * a previous Claim was made concerning the same error * the relevant message has been posted more than 21 days before * another message by the same Player has corrected the error A Player who fails to post a Response whithin the alloted time commits an Infraction carrying a penalty of 1 Blot, to be reported by the Player who posted the Claim. A Player who incorrectly issues a denial of a Claim commits a Class 1 Crime. history: Amended(7) Cosmetically by Proposal 2830 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) Cosmetically by Proposal 2831 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: A Claim of Error is a message posted to the Public Forum to the effect that a specific post to the Public Forum misrepresents the actual Game State, and documenting the nature of the error. A Response to a Claim of Error consists in posting to the Public Forum either a denial of the Claim, or an admission of the Claim, which shall then include a corrected version of the portion of the relevant message which was in error. A Response must be provided by the Player who is required by the Rules to publish the information subject to a Claim within one week of the Claim being made, unless any of the following holds: * a previous Claim was made concerning the same error * the relevant message has been posted more than 21 days before * another message by the same Player has corrected the error A Player who fails to post a Response whithin the alloted time commits the Infraction of Delayed COE Response, carrying a penalty of 1 Blot, to be reported by the Player who posted the Claim. A Player who incorrectly issues a denial of a Claim commits the Crime of Wrongful COE Denial, a Class 1 Crime. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Proposal 3456 (Murphy), 7 April 1997 text: A Claim of Error is a message posted to the Public Forum to the effect that a specific post to the Public Forum misrepresents the actual Game State, and documenting the nature of the error. A Response to a Claim of Error consists in posting to the Public Forum either a denial of the Claim, or an admission of the Claim, which shall then include a corrected version of the portion of the relevant message which was in error. A Response denying a Claim may be superseded by a second Response admitting that Claim. A Response must be provided by the Player who is required by the Rules to publish the information subject to a Claim within one week of the Claim being made, unless any of the following holds: * a previous Claim was made concerning the same error * the relevant message has been posted more than 21 days before * another message by the same Player has corrected the error A Player who fails to post a Response within the alloted time commits the Infraction of Delayed COE Response, carrying a penalty of 1 Blot, to be reported by the Player who posted the Claim. A Player who incorrectly issues a denial of a Claim commits the Crime of Wrongful COE Denial, a Class 1 Crime, unless e then admits the Claim within 72 hours after the incorrect denial. history: Amended(10) Substantially by Proposal 3528 (Steve), 8 July 1997 text: A Claim of Error is a message posted to the Public Forum to the effect that a specific post to the Public Forum misrepresents the actual Game State, and documenting the nature of the error. A Response to a Claim of Error consists in posting to the Public Forum either a denial of the Claim or an admission of the Claim. If the Claim is admitted, then the Player making the admission is required to post a corrected version of the relevant portion of the message which was in error, before one week passes from the time the Claim of Error was made. A Player who admits a Claim but does not publish a correction is deemed not to have Responded to that Claim. A Response must be provided by the Player who is required by the Rules to publish the information subject to a Claim within one week of the Claim being made, unless any of the following holds: * a previous Claim was made concerning the same error * the relevant message has been posted more than 21 days before * another message by the same Player has corrected the error A Player who fails to post a Response within the alloted time commits the Infraction of Delayed COE Response, carrying a penalty of 1 Blot, to be reported by the Player who posted the Claim. A Player who incorrectly issues a denial of a Claim commits the Crime of Wrongful COE Denial, a Class 1 Crime, unless e then admits the Claim within 72 hours after the incorrect denial. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: A Claim of Error is a message posted to the Public Forum to the effect that a specific post to the Public Forum misrepresents the actual Game State, and documenting the nature of the error. A Response to a Claim of Error consists in posting to the Public Forum either a denial of the Claim or an admission of the Claim. If the Claim is admitted, then the Player making the admission is required to post a corrected version of the relevant portion of the message which was in error, before one week passes from the time the Claim of Error was made. A Player who admits a Claim but does not publish a correction is deemed not to have Responded to that Claim. A Response must be provided by the Player who is required by the Rules to publish the information subject to a Claim within one week of the Claim being made, unless any of the following holds: * a previous Claim was made concerning the same error * the relevant message has been posted more than 21 days before * another message by the same Player has corrected the error A Player who fails to post a Response within the alloted time commits the Class 1 Infraction of Delayed COE Response, to be reported by the Player who posted the Claim. A Player who incorrectly issues a denial of a Claim commits the Crime of Wrongful COE Denial, a Class 1 Crime, unless e then admits the Claim within 72 hours after the incorrect denial. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: A Claim of Error is a public message to the effect that a specific post to the Public Forum misrepresents the actual Game State, and documenting the nature of the error. A Response to a Claim of Error posting publicly either a denial of the Claim or an admission of the Claim. If the Claim is admitted, then the Player making the admission is required to post a corrected version of the relevant portion of the message which was in error, before one week passes from the time the Claim of Error was made. A Player who admits a Claim but does not publish a correction is deemed not to have Responded to that Claim. A Response must be provided by the Player who is required by the Rules to publish the information subject to a Claim within one week of the Claim being made, unless any of the following holds: * a previous Claim was made concerning the same error * the relevant message has been posted more than 21 days before * another message by the same Player has corrected the error A Player who fails to post a Response within the alloted time commits the Class 1 Infraction of Delayed COE Response, to be reported by the Player who posted the Claim. A Player who incorrectly issues a denial of a Claim commits the Crime of Wrongful COE Denial, a Class 1 Crime, unless e then admits the Claim within 72 hours after the incorrect denial. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4047 (Taral), 15 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: A Claim of Error is a public message to the effect that a specific post to the Public Forum misrepresents the actual Game State, and documenting the nature of the error. A Response to a Claim of Error posting publicly either a denial of the Claim or an admission of the Claim. If the Claim is admitted, then the Player making the admission is required to post a corrected version of the relevant portion of the message which was in error, before one week passes from the time the Claim of Error was made. A Player who admits a Claim but does not publish a correction is deemed not to have Responded to that Claim. A Response must be provided by the Player who is required by the Rules to publish the information subject to a Claim within one week of the Claim being made, unless any of the following holds: * a previous Claim was made concerning the same error * the relevant message has been posted more than 21 days before * another message by the same Player has corrected the error * the Claim is in dispute A Player who fails to post a Response within the allotted time commits the Class 1 Infraction of Delayed COE Response, to be reported by the Player who posted the Claim. A Player who incorrectly issues a denial of a Claim commits the Crime of Wrongful COE Denial, a Class 1 Crime, unless e then admits the Claim within 72 hours after the incorrect denial. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Claim of Error is a public message to the effect that a specific public communication misrepresents the actual Game State, and documenting the nature of the error. A Response to a Claim of Error posting publicly either a denial of the Claim or an admission of the Claim. If the Claim is admitted, then the Player making the admission is required to post a corrected version of the relevant portion of the message which was in error, before one week passes from the time the Claim of Error was made. A Player who admits a Claim but does not publish a correction is deemed not to have Responded to that Claim. A Response must be provided by the Player who is required by the Rules to publish the information subject to a Claim within one week of the Claim being made, unless any of the following holds: * a previous Claim was made concerning the same error * the relevant message has been posted more than 21 days before * another message by the same Player has corrected the error * the Claim is in dispute A Player who fails to post a Response within the allotted time commits the Class 1 Infraction of Delayed COE Response, to be reported by the Player who posted the Claim. A Player who incorrectly issues a denial of a Claim commits the Crime of Wrongful COE Denial, a Class 1 Crime, unless e then admits the Claim within 72 hours after the incorrect denial. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4380 (Steve), 11 September 2002 text: A Claim of Error is a public message claiming that a specific public communication misrepresents the actual Game State, and documenting the nature of the error. The person who sent the original communication is hereafter known as the Journalist, and the portion of the communication claimed to be in error is hereafter known as the Yellow Document. A Response to a Claim of Error is a public message from the Journalist that either admits or denies the claim. An admission is not valid until the Journalist posts a corrected version of the Yellow Document. If the Journalist was required by the Rules to publish the information in the Yellow Document, then e must publish a Response as soon as possible, unless one of the following holds: a) E has already published a correction. b) A previous Claim was made concerning the same error. c) The Claim was posted more than three weeks after the Yellow Document. d) The Claim is in dispute. If the Claim ceases to be in dispute, then the Journalist must publish a Response as soon as possible after it ceases to be in dispute. If the Journalist was not required by the Rules to publish the information in the Yellow Document, then e is encouraged (but not required) to publish a Response in a timely fashion. A Player who incorrectly denies a Claim commits the Class 1 Crime of Implausible Deniability. However, if e admits the Claim within three days after the incorrect denial, then e shall not be convicted of this Crime. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1431 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1432 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1432 by Proposal 1438, 21 February 1995 text: If a Person becomes a Player, then ceases to be a Player, then becomes a Player once again, the Person becomes the same Player as e was previously. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2718, 23 October 1996 text: If a Person becomes a Player, then ceases to be a Player, then becomes a Player once again, the Person becomes the same Player as e was previously. Further, no person may be registered as a Player more than once concurrently. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=2 by Proposal 2718, 23 October 1996 history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1433 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1433 by Proposal 1450, 1 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: A Game ends when a Win occurs. If there is more than one simultaneous Winner, there is nevertheless only one Game end. When a Game ends due to a Win: - If there is only one Winner, that Voter becomes the Speaker-Elect. If there was already a Speaker-Elect, the old Speaker-Elect ceases to be Speaker-Elect. - If there is more than one Winner, the Winner with the highest Point total becomes the Speaker-Elect. If more than one Winner is tied for the highest score, the Speaker randomly selects one of them to be Speaker-Elect. If there was already a Speaker-Elect, the old Speaker-Elect ceases to be Speaker-Elect. - All Points held in the Treasuries of Players are transferred to the Bank. - A new Game is begun. All Rules and Proposals retain the status they had at the end of the old Game. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1691, 1 September 1995 text: A Game ends when a Win occurs. If there is more than one simultaneous Winner, there is nevertheless only one Game end. When a Game ends due to a Win: - If there is only one Winner, that Voter becomes the Speaker-Elect. If there was already a Speaker-Elect, the old Speaker-Elect ceases to be Speaker-Elect. - If there is more than one Winner, the Winner with the highest Point total becomes the Speaker-Elect. If more than one Winner is tied for the highest score, the Speaker randomly selects one of them to be Speaker-Elect. If there was already a Speaker-Elect, the old Speaker-Elect ceases to be Speaker-Elect. - For every Treasury other than the Bank, if that Treasury possesses Points, a commensurate number of Marks computed using the secondary Mark Exchange Rate are transferred from the Bank to that Treasury, and all Points in that Treasury are transferred to the Bank. These transfers are to be detected and reported by the Scorekeepor. - A new Game is begun. All Rules and Proposals retain the status they had at the end of the old Game. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2471, 16 February 1996 text: A Game ends when a Win occurs. If there is more than one simultaneous Winner, there is nevertheless only one Game end. When a Game ends due to a Win: - If there is only one Winner, that Voter becomes the Speaker-Elect. If there was already a Speaker-Elect, the old Speaker-Elect ceases to be Speaker-Elect. - If there is more than one Winner, the Winner with the highest Point total becomes the Speaker-Elect. If more than one Winner is tied for the highest score, the Speaker randomly selects one of them to be Speaker-Elect. If there was already a Speaker-Elect, the old Speaker-Elect ceases to be Speaker-Elect. - For every Treasury other than the Bank, if that Treasury possesses Points, a commensurate number of Marks computed using the secondary Mark Exchange Rate are transferred from the Bank to that Treasury, and all Points in that Treasury are transferred to the Bank. These transfers are to be detected and reported by the Scorekeepor. - A new Game is begun. All Rules and Proposals retain the status they had at the end of the old Game. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2661, 7 September 1996 text: A Game ends when a Win occurs. If there is more than one simultaneous Winner, there is nevertheless only one Game end. When a Game ends due to a Win: - For every Treasury other than the Bank, if that Treasury possesses Points, a commensurate number of Marks computed using the secondary Mark Exchange Rate are transferred from the Bank to that Treasury, and all Points in that Treasury are transferred to the Bank. These transfers are to be detected and reported by the Scorekeepor. - A new Game is begun. All Rules and Proposals retain the status they had at the end of the old Game. history: Amended(5) by proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: A Game ends when a Win occurs. If there is more than one simultaneous Winner, there is nevertheless only one Game end. When a Game ends due to a Win: - A new Game is begun. All Rules and Proposals retain the status they had at the end of the old Game. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1434 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1434 by Proposal 1456, 1 March 1995 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure is specifically NOT to be used for Proposal Voting until this Rule is amended to remove this restriction, and the Proposal Rules are amended accordingly. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is the Entity responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes and announcing the result. This Entity is the Speaker if not otherwise specified. * Voting Entities: Every Player not on Hold may Vote on a Referendum. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Vote. * Voting: A Voting Entity Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voting Entity may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins when a Referendum is begun, as defined in other Rules. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector may not give away any information about the Votes while the Voting is underway. * Secrecy After Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector shall post to the Public Forum, after the Voting Period is over, the number of Votes of each kind as well as the name and Vote of each Entity which cast a Vote. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio, the ratio of FOR Votes on a Referendum relative to the AGAINST VOTES, must be greater than 1 for the Referendum to pass. If it is not, the Referendum fails. * Quorum: The Quorum, the smallest allowable fraction of eligible Voting Entities which actually Vote on a particular Referendum, is 50%. If a smaller fraction Voted, the Referendum automatically fails. * Nonperformance by Vote Collector: The Vote Collector must perform eir required duties, but if the result of a Referendum is not announced within one Week following the end of the Voting Period, it automatically fails. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2543, 19 March 1996 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is the Entity responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes and announcing the result. This Entity is the Speaker if not otherwise specified. * Voting Entities: Every Player not on Hold may Vote on a Referendum. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Vote. * Voting: A Voting Entity Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voting Entity may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Referendum is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector may not give away any information about the Votes while the Voting is underway. * Secrecy After Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector shall post to the Public Forum, after the Voting Period is over, the number of Votes of each kind as well as the name and Vote of each Entity which cast a Vote. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio, the ratio of FOR Votes on a Referendum relative to the AGAINST VOTES, must be greater than 1 for the Referendum to pass. If it is not, the Referendum fails. * Quorum: The Quorum, the smallest allowable fraction of eligible Voting Entities which actually Vote on a particular Referendum, is 50%. If a smaller fraction Voted, the Referendum automatically fails. * Nonperformance by Vote Collector: The Vote Collector must perform eir required duties, but if the result of a Referendum is not announced within one Week following the end of the Voting Period, it automatically fails. * Effectiveness: the full effects of a Referendum, as defined in Rules which make use of the Referendum procedure, come into force as of the moment the results are announced to the Public Forum. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2585, 1 May 1996 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is the Entity responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes and announcing the result. This Entity is the Speaker if not otherwise specified. * Voting Entities: Every Player not on Hold may Vote on a Referendum. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Vote. * Voting: A Voting Entity Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voting Entity may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Referendum is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector may not give away any information about the Votes while the Voting is underway. This shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Players who have already Voted. * Secrecy After Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector shall post to the Public Forum, after the Voting Period is over, the number of Votes of each kind as well as the name and Vote of each Entity which cast a Vote. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio, the ratio of FOR Votes on a Referendum relative to the AGAINST VOTES, must be greater than 1 for the Referendum to pass. If it is not, the Referendum fails. * Quorum: The Quorum, the smallest allowable fraction of eligible Voting Entities which actually Vote on a particular Referendum, is 50%. If a smaller fraction Voted, the Referendum automatically fails. * Nonperformance by Vote Collector: The Vote Collector must perform eir required duties, but if the result of a Referendum is not announced within one Week following the end of the Voting Period, it automatically fails. * Effectiveness: the full effects of a Referendum, as defined in Rules which make use of the Referendum procedure, come into force as of the moment the results are announced to the Public Forum. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 2783 (Steve), 15 January 1997 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is the Entity responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes and announcing the result. This Entity is the Speaker if not otherwise specified. * Voting Entities: Every Player not on Hold may Vote on a Referendum. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Vote. * Voting: A Voting Entity Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voting Entity may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Referendum is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector may not give away any information about the Votes while the Voting is underway. This shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Players who have already Voted. * Secrecy After Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector shall post to the Public Forum, after the Voting Period is over, the number of Votes of each kind as well as the name and Vote of each Entity which cast a Vote. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio, the ratio of FOR Votes on a Referendum relative to the AGAINST VOTES, must be greater than 1 for the Referendum to pass. If it is not, the Referendum fails. * Quorum: Quorum shall be set at 50% of the eligible Voting Entities at the beginning of the Voting Period. If a smaller fraction voted, the Referendum automatically fails. * Nonperformance by Vote Collector: The Vote Collector must perform eir required duties, but if the result of a Referendum is not announced within one Week following the end of the Voting Period, it automatically fails. * Effectiveness: the full effects of a Referendum, as defined in Rules which make use of the Referendum procedure, come into force as of the moment the results are announced to the Public Forum. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3746 (Blob), 15 May 1998 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is the Entity responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes and announcing the result. This Entity is the Speaker if not otherwise specified. * Voting Entities: Every Player not on Hold may Vote on a Referendum. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Vote. * Voting: A Voting Entity Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voting Entity may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Referendum is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector may not give away any information about the Votes while the Voting is underway. This shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Players who have already Voted. * Secrecy After Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector shall post to the Public Forum, after the Voting Period is over, the number of Votes of each kind as well as the name and Vote of each Entity which cast a Vote. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio, the ratio of FOR Votes on a Referendum relative to the AGAINST VOTES, must be greater than Adotion Index for the Referendum to pass. If it is not, the Referendum fails. * Adoption Index: Unless otherwise specified, the Adoption Index for a Referendum is 1. * Quorum: Quorum shall be set at 50% of the eligible Voting Entities at the beginning of the Voting Period. If a smaller fraction voted, the Referendum automatically fails. * Nonperformance by Vote Collector: The Vote Collector must perform eir required duties, but if the result of a Referendum is not announced within one Week following the end of the Voting Period, it automatically fails. * Effectiveness: the full effects of a Referendum, as defined in Rules which make use of the Referendum procedure, come into force as of the moment the results are announced to the Public Forum. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3884 (harvel), 26 July 1999 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes and announcing the result. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Vote Collector. * Voting Entities: Every Player not on Hold may Vote on a Referendum. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Vote. * Voting: A Voting Entity Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voting Entity may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Referendum is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector may not give away any information about the Votes while the Voting is underway. This shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Players who have already Voted. * Secrecy After Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector shall post to the Public Forum, after the Voting Period is over, the number of Votes of each kind as well as the name and Vote of each Entity which cast a Vote. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio, the ratio of FOR Votes on a Referendum relative to the AGAINST VOTES, must be greater than Adotion Index for the Referendum to pass. If it is not, the Referendum fails. * Adoption Index: Unless otherwise specified, the Adoption Index for a Referendum is 1. * Quorum: Quorum shall be set at 50% of the eligible Voting Entities at the beginning of the Voting Period. If a smaller fraction voted, the Referendum automatically fails. * Nonperformance by Vote Collector: The Vote Collector must perform eir required duties, but if the result of a Referendum is not announced within one Week following the end of the Voting Period, it automatically fails. * Effectiveness: the full effects of a Referendum, as defined in Rules which make use of the Referendum procedure, come into force as of the moment the results are announced to the Public Forum. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3972 (Peekee), 14 February 2000 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes and announcing the result. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Vote Collector. * Voters: Only Active Players may Vote on a Referendum. Activity is measured at the time a Player sends eir Vote. * Voting: A Voting Entity Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voting Entity may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Referendum is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector may not give away any information about the Votes while the Voting is underway. This shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Players who have already Voted. * Secrecy After Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector shall post to the Public Forum, after the Voting Period is over, the number of Votes of each kind as well as the name and Vote of each Entity which cast a Vote. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio, the ratio of FOR Votes on a Referendum relative to the AGAINST VOTES, must be greater than Adotion Index for the Referendum to pass. If it is not, the Referendum fails. * Adoption Index: Unless otherwise specified, the Adoption Index for a Referendum is 1. * Quorum: Quorum shall be set at 50% of the eligible Voters at the beginning of the Voting Period. If a smaller fraction voted, the Referendum automatically fails. * Nonperformance by Vote Collector: The Vote Collector must perform eir required duties, but if the result of a Referendum is not announced within one Week following the end of the Voting Period, it automatically fails. * Effectiveness: the full effects of a Referendum, as defined in Rules which make use of the Referendum procedure, come into force as of the moment the results are announced to the Public Forum. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes and announcing the result. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Vote Collector. * Voters: Only Active Players may Vote on a Referendum. Activity is measured at the time a Player sends eir Vote. * Voting: A Voting Entity Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voting Entity may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Referendum is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector may not give away any information about the Votes while the Voting is underway. This shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from posting, at any time and to the Public Forum, a list of those Players who have already Voted. * Secrecy After Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector shall post to the Public Forum, after the Voting Period is over, the number of Votes of each kind as well as the name and Vote of each Entity which cast a Vote. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio, the ratio of FOR Votes on a Referendum relative to the AGAINST VOTES, must be greater than Adoption Index for the Referendum to pass. If it is not, the Referendum fails. * Adoption Index: Unless otherwise specified, the Adoption Index for a Referendum is 1. * Quorum: Quorum shall be set at 50% of the eligible Voters at the beginning of the Voting Period. If a smaller fraction voted, the Referendum automatically fails. * Nonperformance by Vote Collector: The Vote Collector must perform eir required duties, but if the result of a Referendum is not announced within one Week following the end of the Voting Period, it automatically fails. * Effectiveness: the full effects of a Referendum, as defined in Rules which make use of the Referendum procedure, come into force as of the moment the results are announced to the Public Forum. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes and announcing the result. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Vote Collector. * Voters: Only Active Players may Vote on a Referendum. Activity is measured at the time a Player sends eir Vote. * Voting: A Voting Entity Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voting Entity may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time the first correct and legal public announcement that a Referendum is begun, as defined in other Rules. Such an announcement must include the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector may not give away any information about the Votes while the Voting is underway. This shall in no way prohibit the Vote Collector from publishing at any time a list of those Players who have already Voted. * Secrecy After Voting: Unless otherwise specified, the Vote Collector shall publish, after the Voting Period is over, the number of Votes of each kind as well as the name and Vote of each Entity which cast a Vote. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio, the ratio of FOR Votes on a Referendum relative to the AGAINST VOTES, must be greater than Adoption Index for the Referendum to pass. If it is not, the Referendum fails. * Adoption Index: Unless otherwise specified, the Adoption Index for a Referendum is 1. * Quorum: Quorum shall be set at 50% of the eligible Voters at the beginning of the Voting Period. If a smaller fraction voted, the Referendum automatically fails. * Nonperformance by Vote Collector: The Vote Collector must perform eir required duties, but if the result of a Referendum is not announced within one Week following the end of the Voting Period, it automatically fails. * Effectiveness: the full effects of a Referendum, as defined in Rules which make use of the Referendum procedure, come into force as of the moment the results are published. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4257 (Murphy), 21 February 2002 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes, and announcing the results. The Vote Collector is the Speaker at the time the Referendum begins. * Disappearance of Vote Collector: If the Vote Collector deregisters or is deregistered before announcing the results of the Referendum, then the Referendum fails. * Voters: A Voter is an entity permitted to Vote on a Referendum. Only Active Players are Voters. Activity is measured at the time a Vote is sent. * Voting: A Voter Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voter may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time of the first correct and legal public announcement that a Referendum has begun, as defined in other Rules. Such an announcement must include the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: At any time, the Vote Collector may publish a list of Voters who have Voted. However, the Vote Collector shall not reveal the value of any Voter's Vote to anyone but that Voter, unless e has the Voter's permission to do so. * Announcement of Results: As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period, the Vote Collector shall announce the number of Votes of each kind, as well as the name and Vote of each Entity that Voted. If e does not do this as soon as possible, then the Referendum fails. * Quorum: Quorum is 50% of the eligible Voters at the beginning of the Voting Period. If fewer Voters Vote, then the Referendum fails. * Adoption Index: The Adoption Index of a Referendum is 1. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio of a Referendum is the ratio of FOR Votes to AGAINST Votes. If the Adoption Ratio is greater than the Adoption Index (or if both are Unanimity), and if the Referendum does not fail for some other reason, then it passes; otherwise, it fails. * Effectiveness: A Referendum takes effect when the Vote Collector correctly announces that it passes. The effect of a Referendum is defined by other Rules. * Cutoff for Challenges: If the results of a Referendum are not challenged within seven days after the Vote Collector announces them, then the announced results are the true results of that Referendum, even if they would otherwise be in error. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4258 (Murphy), 21 February 2002 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes, and announcing the results. The Vote Collector is the Speaker at the time the Referendum begins. * Disappearance of Vote Collector: If the Vote Collector deregisters or is deregistered before announcing the results of the Referendum, then the Referendum fails. * Voters: For the purpose of this Rule, a Voter is an entity permitted to Vote on a Referendum. Only Active Players are Voters. Activity is measured at the time a Vote is sent. * Voting: A Voter Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voter may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time of the first correct and legal public announcement that a Referendum has begun, as defined in other Rules. Such an announcement must include the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: At any time, the Vote Collector may publish a list of Voters who have Voted. However, the Vote Collector shall not reveal the value of any Voter's Vote to anyone but that Voter, unless e has the Voter's permission to do so. * Announcement of Results: As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period, the Vote Collector shall announce the number of Votes of each kind, as well as the name and Vote of each Entity that Voted. If e does not do this as soon as possible, then the Referendum fails. * Quorum: Quorum is 50% of the eligible Voters at the beginning of the Voting Period. If fewer Voters Vote, then the Referendum fails. * Adoption Index: The Adoption Index of a Referendum is 1. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio of a Referendum is the ratio of FOR Votes to AGAINST Votes. If the Adoption Ratio is greater than the Adoption Index (or if both are Unanimity), and if the Referendum does not fail for some other reason, then it passes; otherwise, it fails. * Effectiveness: A Referendum takes effect when the Vote Collector correctly announces that it passes. The effect of a Referendum is defined by other Rules. * Cutoff for Challenges: If the results of a Referendum are not challenged within seven days after the Vote Collector announces them, then the announced results are the true results of that Referendum, even if they would otherwise be in error. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4629 (Murphy), 19 December 2004 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes, and announcing the results. The Vote Collector is the Speaker at the time the Referendum begins. * Disappearance of Vote Collector: If the Vote Collector deregisters or is deregistered before announcing the results of the Referendum, then the Referendum fails. * Voters: For the purpose of this Rule, a Voter is an entity permitted to Vote on a Referendum. Only Active Players are Voters. Activity is measured at the time a Vote is sent. * Voting: A Voter Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voter may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time of the first correct and legal public announcement that a Referendum has begun, as defined in other Rules. Such an announcement must include the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: At any time, the Vote Collector may publish a list of Voters who have Voted. However, the Vote Collector shall not reveal the value of any Voter's Vote to anyone but that Voter, unless e has the Voter's permission to do so. * Announcement of Results: As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period, the Vote Collector shall announce the number of Votes of each kind, as well as the name and Vote of each Entity that Voted. If e does not do this as soon as possible, then the Referendum fails. * Quorum: Quorum is one third of the eligible Voters at the beginning of the Voting Period. If fewer Voters Vote, then the Referendum fails. * Adoption Index: The Adoption Index of a Referendum is 1. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio of a Referendum is the ratio of FOR Votes to AGAINST Votes. If the Adoption Ratio is greater than the Adoption Index (or if both are Unanimity), and if the Referendum does not fail for some other reason, then it passes; otherwise, it fails. * Effectiveness: A Referendum takes effect when the Vote Collector correctly announces that it passes. The effect of a Referendum is defined by other Rules. * Cutoff for Challenges: If the results of a Referendum are not challenged within seven days after the Vote Collector announces them, then the announced results are the true results of that Referendum, even if they would otherwise be in error. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4637 (Murphy), 19 February 2005 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes, and announcing the results. The Vote Collector is the Speaker at the time the Referendum begins. * Disappearance of Vote Collector: If the Vote Collector deregisters or is deregistered before announcing the results of the Referendum, then the Referendum fails. * Voters: For the purpose of this Rule, a Voter is an entity permitted to Vote on a Referendum. Only Active Players are Voters. Activity is measured at the time a Vote is sent. * Voting: A Voter Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voter may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: A Vote, once sent to the Vote Collector, cannot be changed. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time of the first correct and legal public announcement that a Referendum has begun, as defined in other Rules. Such an announcement must include the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: At any time, the Vote Collector may publish a list of Voters who have Voted. However, the Vote Collector shall not reveal the value of any Voter's Vote to anyone but that Voter, unless e has the Voter's permission to do so. * Announcement of Results: As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period, the Vote Collector shall announce the number of Votes of each kind, as well as the name and Vote of each Entity that Voted. If e does not do this as soon as possible, then the Referendum fails. * Quorum: Quorum is one third of the eligible Voters at the beginning of the Voting Period. If fewer Voters Vote, then the Referendum fails. * Adoption Index: The Adoption Index of a Referendum is 1. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio of a Referendum is the ratio of FOR Votes to AGAINST Votes. If the Adoption Ratio is greater than the Adoption Index (or if both are Unanimity), and if the Referendum does not fail for some other reason, then it passes; otherwise, it fails. * Effectiveness: A Referendum takes effect when the Vote Collector correctly announces that it passes. The effect of a Referendum is defined by other Rules. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4699 (Sherlock), 18 April 2005 text: When a Referendum Vote is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following Standard Referendum Voting Procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. This procedure shall under no circumstances be used for Voting on Proposals, unless specifically required by the Rules governing specific types of Proposals. * Vote Collector: The Vote Collector is responsible for collecting and tallying the Votes, and announcing the results. The Vote Collector is the Speaker at the time the Referendum begins. * Disappearance of Vote Collector: If the Vote Collector deregisters or is deregistered before announcing the results of the Referendum, then the Referendum fails. * Voters: For the purpose of this Rule, a Voter is an entity permitted to Vote on a Referendum. Only Active Players are Voters. Activity is measured at the time a Vote is sent. * Voting: A Voter Votes by sending eir Vote to the Vote Collector during the Voting Period, indicating what Referendum e is Voting on, and what eir Vote is. * Vote Values: A Vote is FOR, AGAINST, or ABSTAIN. Words which are effectively synonymous with these are also permissible. * Vote Strength: Every Vote has equal strength. No Voter may Vote more than once on any single Referendum. * Retraction: During the Voting period a Voter may change or cancel any Vote e has sent to the Vote Collector by notifying the Vote Collector. * Start of Voting: The Voting Period begins at the time of the first correct and legal public announcement that a Referendum has begun, as defined in other Rules. Such an announcement must include the identity of the Vote Collector. * Duration of Voting: The Voting Period lasts for one Week. All Votes received by the Vote Collector outside of the Voting Period have no effect. * Secrecy During Voting: At any time, the Vote Collector may publish a list of Voters who have Voted. However, the Vote Collector shall not reveal the value of any Voter's Vote to anyone but that Voter, unless e has the Voter's permission to do so. * Announcement of Results: As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period, the Vote Collector shall announce the number of Votes of each kind, as well as the name and Vote of each Entity that Voted. If e does not do this as soon as possible, then the Referendum fails. * Quorum: Quorum is one third of the eligible Voters at the beginning of the Voting Period. If fewer Voters Vote, then the Referendum fails. * Adoption Index: The Adoption Index of a Referendum is 1. * Adoption Ratio: The Adoption Ratio of a Referendum is the ratio of FOR Votes to AGAINST Votes. If the Adoption Ratio is greater than the Adoption Index (or if both are Unanimity), and if the Referendum does not fail for some other reason, then it passes; otherwise, it fails. * Effectiveness: A Referendum takes effect when the Vote Collector correctly announces that it passes. The effect of a Referendum is defined by other Rules. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: Determining whether to adopt a referendum is an Agoran decision. For this decision, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT, and the eligible voters are the players. If the option selected by Agora on this decision is ADOPTED, then the referendum is adopted, and unless other rules prevent it from taking effect, it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would permit a referendum to take effect. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1434 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1435 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1435 by Proposal 1457, 1 March 1995 text: Let there be an Entity called a Blot. At all times all Players possess an integral number of Blots equal to or greater than zero. Any Player with zero Blots is referred to as Immaculate. Any new Player, or a Player with no recorded Blots, shall be Immaculate. Blots may never be transferred between Players. A Player who is not Immaculate can't Win the Game. This Rule takes precedence over any other rule defining who is eligible to Win. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3476 (Oerjan), 11 May 1997 text: Indulgences are a Currency. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. A Blot is an amount of -1 Indulgences. A gain of Blots is the same as a loss of Indulgences, and a loss of Blots is the same as a gain of Indulgences. Any Player with nonnegative Indulgences is referred to as Immaculate. Not being Immaculate is a Win-Preventing Condition. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Indulgences are a Currency. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. A Payment Order for 1 Indulgence, the payee of which is the Bank, is called a Blot. When a Rule states that a Player is to gain some number of Blots, a Payment Order shall be executed with that Player as the payor, the Bank as the payee, and for a number of Indulgences equal to the number of Blots that Player is to receive. This order is to be executed by whomever is required to report the change in Blots. A Player may be said to have a number of Blots equal to the sum of the amounts of all Payment Orders for Indulgences naming em as the payor and the Bank as payee, including orders which are disputed (but not those which have been vacated). A Player with no such Payment Orders is Immaculate. It is a Win-Preventing condition for a Player to have one or more Blots. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3543 (Harlequin), 17 August 1997 text: Indulgences are a Currency. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. The Mintor of Indulgences is the Bank. A Payment Order for 1 Indulgence, the payee of which is the Bank, is called a Blot. When a Rule states that a Player is to gain some number of Blots, a Payment Order shall be executed with that Player as the payor, the Bank as the payee, and for a number of Indulgences equal to the number of Blots that Player is to receive. This order is to be executed by whomever is required to report the change in Blots. A Player may be said to have a number of Blots equal to the sum of the amounts of all Payment Orders for Indulgences naming em as the payor and the Bank as payee, including orders which are disputed (but not those which have been vacated or satisfied). A Player with no such Payment Orders is Immaculate. It is a Win-Preventing condition for a Player to have one or more Blots. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3569 (Zefram), 30 October 1997 text: Indulgences are a Currency. The MUQ of Indulgences is 1. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. The Mintor of Indulgences is the Bank. The Herald's Report includes the number of Indulgences possessed by each entity which possesses them, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Herald's Report. A Payment Order for a number of Indulgences, the payee of which is the Bank, is known as that number of Blots. When a Rule states that a Player is to gain some number of Blots, a Payment Order shall be executed with that Player as the payor, the Bank as the payee, and for a number of Indulgences equal to the number of Blots that Player is to receive. This order is to be executed by whomever is required to report the change in Blots. A Player may be said to have a number of Blots equal to the sum of the amounts of all Payment Orders for Indulgences naming em as the payor and the Bank as payee, including orders which are disputed (but not those which have been vacated). A Player with no such Payment Orders is Immaculate. It is a Win-Preventing condition for a Player to have one or more Blots. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 text: Indulgences are a Currency. The MUQ of Indulgences is 1. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. The Mintor of Indulgences is the Bank. The Herald's Report includes the number of Indulgences possessed by each entity which possesses them, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Herald's Report. A Payment Order for a number of Indulgences, the payee of which is the Bank, is known as that number of Blots. When a Rule states that a Player is to gain some number of Blots, a Payment Order shall be executed with that Player as the payor, the Bank as the payee, and for a number of Indulgences equal to the number of Blots that Player is to receive. This order is to be executed by whomever is required to report the change in Blots. A Player may be said to have a number of Blots equal to the sum of the amounts of all Payment Orders for Indulgences naming em as the payor and the Bank as payee, including orders which are disputed (but not those which have been vacated). A Player with no such Payment Orders is Immaculate. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3901 (Schneidster), 6 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3926 (Crito), 10 October 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 text: Indulgences are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Indulgences is .1. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. A Blot is a stain on a Player's record, recorded by the Herald. Whenever the Rules state that a Player gains or is assessed some number of Blots, and specify a method of reporting that gain or assessment to the Herald, the Herald shall record this increase in the number of Blots staining the affected Player as soon as possible after receiving the notification. Blots may be expunged from a Player's record as follows: i. The Rules authorize the expunging of Blots and specify a method by which this is reported to the Herald. ii. The Executor of an entity may expunge a number of Blots by transferring to the Bank a number of Indulgences equal to the number of Blots to be expunged, specifying the Blotted Player and the purpose of the transfer. Such a transfer may not be made for any other purpose. If the transfer specifies a number of Indulgences greater than the number of Blots staining the Blotted Player, then that transfer shall be deemed invalid. iii. The Player originally reporting the imposition of a Blot penalty may expunge the reported Blots, if e determines that the penalty was imposed in error. iv. Blots may be expunged by Judicial or Appellate Orders. The Herald shall record the decrease in the number of Blots staining a Player as soon as possible after receiving notification of the expungement or after successfully executing the relevant Indulgence Transfer Order. The Rules may define other methods by which the Herald may be required to record changes to a Player's Blot status. A player with zero Blots staining eir record is said to be Immaculate. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4003 (t), 8 May 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: Indulgences are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Indulgences is .1. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. A Blot is a stain on a Player's record, recorded by the Herald. Whenever the Rules state that a Player gains or is assessed some number of Blots, and specify a method of reporting that gain or assessment to the Herald, the Herald shall record this increase in the number of Blots staining the affected Player as soon as possible after receiving the notification. Blots may be expunged from a Player's record as follows: i. The Rules authorize the expunging of Blots and specify a method by which this is reported to the Herald. ii. The Executor of an entity may expunge a number of Blots by posting publicly the number of Blots to be expunged and the Player to whom the Blots belong and Paying a Fee of a number of Indulgences equal to the number of Blots to be expunged. Any attempt to expunge more of a Player's Blots than e has fails. iii. The Player originally reporting the imposition of a Blot penalty may expunge the reported Blots, if e determines that the penalty was imposed in error. iv. Blots may be expunged by Judicial or Appellate Orders. The Herald shall record the decrease in the number of Blots staining a Player as soon as possible after receiving notification of the expungement or after successfully executing the relevant Indulgence Transfer Order. The Rules may define other methods by which the Herald may be required to record changes to a Player's Blot status. A player with zero Blots staining eir record is said to be Immaculate. Not being Immaculate is a Win-Preventing condition. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4102 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: Indulgences are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Indulgences is 0.1. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. A Blot is a stain on a Player's record, recorded by the Herald. Whenever the Rules state that a Player gains or is assessed some number of Blots, and specify a method of reporting that gain or assessment to the Herald, the Herald shall record this increase in the number of Blots staining the affected Player as soon as possible after receiving the notification. Blots are expunged from a Player's record when: (1) an entity transfers to the Bank some number of Indulgences, specifying in the Notice of Transfer that the transfer is for the purpose of expunging the Blots of some Player; a number of Blots equal to the number of Indulgences transferred are expunged from the Player specified, or all of that Player's Blots if more Indulgences are transferred than that Player has (and the excess indulgences returned to the transferor); or (2) the Rules otherwise establish some method by which Blots are to be expunged, provided that such method must include a requirement of notice to the Herald of the expungement and such notice is actually sent to the Herald. A player with zero Blots staining eir record is said to be Immaculate. Not being Immaculate is a Win-Preventing Condition. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4155 (harvel), 18 May 2001 text: Indulgences are a Bank Currency. The Minimum Unit Quantity (MUQ) of Indulgences is 0.1. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. A Blot is a stain on a Player's record, recorded by the Herald. Whenever the Rules state that a Player gains or is assessed some number of Blots, and specify a method of reporting that gain or assessment to the Herald, then, as soon as possible after receiving such a notification, the Herald shall record an increase of that amount (or, if the affected Player is Unready, of one half (rounded to the nearest integer) of that amount) in the number of Blots staining the affected Player. Blots are expunged from a Player's record when: (1) an entity transfers to the Bank some number of Indulgences, specifying in the Notice of Transfer that the transfer is for the purpose of expunging the Blots of some Player; a number of Blots equal to the number of Indulgences transferred are expunged from the Player specified, or all of that Player's Blots if more Indulgences are transferred than that Player has (and the excess indulgences returned to the transferor); or (2) the Rules otherwise establish some method by which Blots are to be expunged, provided that such method must include a requirement of notice to the Herald of the expungement and such notice is actually sent to the Herald. A player with zero Blots staining eir record is said to be Immaculate. Not being Immaculate is a Win-Preventing Condition. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4203 (neil), 28 August 2001 text: Indulgences are a Bank Currency. The Minimum Unit Quantity (MUQ) of Indulgences is 0.001. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. A Blot is a stain on a Player's record, recorded by the Herald. Whenever the Rules state that a Player gains or is assessed some number of Blots, and specify a method of reporting that gain or assessment to the Herald, then, as soon as possible after receiving such a notification, the Herald shall record an increase of that amount (or, if the affected Player is Unready, of one half (rounded to the nearest integer) of that amount) in the number of Blots staining the affected Player. Blots are expunged from a Player's record when: (1) an entity transfers to the Bank some number of Indulgences, specifying in the Notice of Transfer that the transfer is for the purpose of expunging the Blots of some Player; a number of Blots equal to the number of Indulgences transferred are expunged from the Player specified, or all of that Player's Blots if more Indulgences are transferred than that Player has (and the excess indulgences returned to the transferor); or (2) the Rules otherwise establish some method by which Blots are to be expunged, provided that such method must include a requirement of notice to the Herald of the expungement and such notice is actually sent to the Herald. A player with zero Blots staining eir record is said to be Immaculate. Not being Immaculate is a Win-Preventing Condition. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4272 (Murhpy), 22 March 2002 text: Indulgences are a Bank Currency. The Minimum Unit Quantity (MUQ) of Indulgences is 0.001. The Recordkeepor for Indulgences is the Herald. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1435 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1436 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1436 by Proposal 1457, 1 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1494, 15 March 1995 text: Let there be the Office of Tabulator. A vacant Office of Tabulator is filled in the usual manner, but the Scorekeepor or Herald may not become Tabulator, nor may the Tabulator become Scorekeepor or Herald." The Tabulator is the Officer responsible for keeping track of the Blots possessed by each Player, as well as all ex-Players who have Blots. The Tabulator may have other duties as defined in the Rules. Once a Week The Tabulator shall post to the Public Forum a report of the Blots held by each Player. If a Player has earned Blots since the last report, this report must publicize the reason for the gain in Blots. The Tabulator's salary shall be four Points per Week. If any Rule mandates a change in Blots, but does not also specifically state the Player who is Legally Responsible for detecting the change and reporting it to the Tabulator, then the change in Blots is canceled. If a Blot change is not reported within four Weeks of its occurrence, or by the end of the Game in which it occurred, whichever is sooner, the change in Blots is cancelled. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1735, 15 October 1995 text: Let there be the Office of Tabulator. A vacant Office of Tabulator is filled in the usual manner, but the Scorekeepor or Herald may not become Tabulator, nor may the Tabulator become Scorekeepor or Herald. The Tabulator is the Officer responsible for keeping track of the Blots possessed by each Player, as well as all ex-Players who have Blots. The Tabulator may have other duties as defined in the Rules. Once a Week The Tabulator shall post to the Public Forum a report of the Blots held by each Player. If a Player has earned Blots since the last report, this report must publicize the reason for the gain in Blots. The Tabulator's salary shall be four Points per Week. If any Rule mandates a change in Blots, but does not also specifically state the Player who is Legally Responsible for detecting the change and reporting it to the Tabulator, then the change in Blots is canceled. If a Blot change is not reported within four Weeks of its occurrence, or by the end of the Game in which it occurred, whichever is sooner, the change in Blots is cancelled. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: Let there exist the Office of Tabulator. The Tabulator is the Officer responsible for keeping track of the Blots possessed by each Player, as well as all ex-Players who have Blots. The Tabulator may have other duties as defined in the Rules. Once a Week The Tabulator shall post to the Public Forum a report of the Blots held by each Player. If a Player has earned Blots since the last report, this report must publicize the reason for the gain in Blots. The Tabulator's salary shall be four Points per Week. If any Rule mandates a change in Blots, but does not also specifically state the Player who is Legally Responsible for detecting the change and reporting it to the Tabulator, then the change in Blots is canceled. If a Blot change is not reported within four Weeks of its occurrence, or by the end of the Game in which it occurred, whichever is sooner, the change in Blots is cancelled. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: Let there exist the Office of Tabulator. The Tabulator is the Officer responsible for keeping track of the Blots possessed by each Player, as well as all ex-Players who have Blots. The Tabulator may have other duties as defined in the Rules. Once a Week The Tabulator shall post to the Public Forum a report of the Blots held by each Player. If a Player has earned Blots since the last report, this report must publicize the reason for the gain in Blots. The Tabulator's salary shall be four Mils per Week. If any Rule mandates a change in Blots, but does not also specifically state the Player who is Legally Responsible for detecting the change and reporting it to the Tabulator, then the change in Blots is canceled. If a Blot change is not reported within four Weeks of its occurrence, or by the end of the Game in which it occurred, whichever is sooner, the change in Blots is cancelled. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: Let there exist the Office of Tabulator. The Tabulator is the Officer responsible for keeping track of the Blots possessed by each Player, as well as all ex-Players who have Blots. The Tabulator may have other duties as defined in the Rules. Once a Week The Tabulator shall post to the Public Forum a report of the Blots held by each Player. If a Player has earned Blots since the last report, this report must publicize the reason for the gain in Blots. The Tabulator shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. If any Rule mandates a change in Blots, but does not also specifically state the Player who is Legally Responsible for detecting the change and reporting it to the Tabulator, then the change in Blots is canceled. If a Blot change is not reported within four Weeks of its occurrence, or by the end of the Game in which it occurred, whichever is sooner, the change in Blots is cancelled. history: Null-Amended(6) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: Let there exist the Office of Tabulator. The Tabulator is the Officer responsible for keeping track of the Blots possessed by each Player, as well as all ex-Players who have Blots. The Tabulator may have other duties as defined in the Rules. Once a Week The Tabulator shall post to the Public Forum a report of the Blots held by each Player. If a Player has earned Blots since the last report, this report must publicize the reason for the gain in Blots. The Tabulator shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. If any Rule mandates a change in Blots, but does not also specifically state the Player who is Legally Responsible for detecting the change and reporting it to the Tabulator, then the change in Blots is canceled. If a Blot change is not reported within four Weeks of its occurrence, or by the end of the Game in which it occurred, whichever is sooner, the change in Blots is cancelled. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1437 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1437 by Proposal 1458, 1 March 1995 text: If a Player who is not Immaculate is deregistered and subsequently returns to the Game, e returns with B/(2^T) Blots, where B is the number of Blots the Player had upon deregistering, and T is the number of months since eir deregistration. The number of Blots thus received is rounded down to the next whole integer, but not reduced below one Blot. If a Immaculate Player deregisters, e is also Immaculate upon returning to the Game. If a former Player returns to the Game and has no Blots recorded, e is Immaculate upon eir return. Blot Changes due to this Rule are detected and reported by the Tabulator. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2789 (favor), 25 January 1997 text: If a Player who is not Immaculate is deregistered and subsequently returns to the Game, e returns with B/(2^T) Blots, where B is the number of Blots the Player had upon deregistering, and T is the number of months since eir deregistration. The number of Blots thus received is rounded down to the next whole integer, but not reduced below one Blot. If a Immaculate Player deregisters, e is also Immaculate upon returning to the Game. If a former Player returns to the Game and has no Blots recorded, e is Immaculate upon eir return. Blot Changes due to this Rule are detected and reported by the Herald. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3476 (Oerjan), 11 May 1997 text: If a Player who is not Immaculate is deregistered and subsequently returns to the Game, e receives B/(2^T) Blots, where B is the number of Blots the Player had upon deregistering, and T is the number of months since eir deregistration. The number of Blots thus received is rounded down to the next whole integer, but not reduced below one Blot. However, if a former Player returns to the Game and has no Blots recorded, e receives no Blots upon eir return. Blot Changes due to this Rule are detected and reported by the Herald. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: When an Player is deregistered from the game while not Immaculate, e becomes a Fugitive from Justice, and e receives Fugitive Blots equal to the number of Blots e then had. The Herald shall keep a record of the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to each Fugitive from Justice. At the beginning of each month, the Herald shall halve the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to each Fugitive of Justice, rounding down; but no Fugitive from Justice shall have the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to em reduced to less than one by this method. When a Fugitive from Justice reregisters, the Herald shall assess against em a number of Blots equal to the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to em at the time of eir reregistration. Eir Fugitive Blots are then removed. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: When a Player is deregistered from the game while not Immaculate, e becomes a Fugitive from Justice, and e receives Fugitive Blots equal to the number of Blots e then had. The Herald shall keep a record of the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to each Fugitive from Justice. At the beginning of each month, the Herald shall halve the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to each Fugitive of Justice, rounding down; but no Fugitive from Justice shall have the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to em reduced to less than one by this method. When a Fugitive from Justice reregisters, the Herald shall assess against em a number of Blots equal to the number of Fugitive Blots attributed to em at the time of eir reregistration. Eir Fugitive Blots are then removed. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3901 (Schneidster), 6 September 1999 text: When a Player is deregistered from the game while not Immaculate, e becomes a Fugitive from Justice. The Herald shall continue to keep a record of the number Blots staining each Fugitive from Justice. At the beginning of each month, the Herald shall halve the number of Blots staining each Fugitive of Justice, rounding down; but no Fugitive from Justice shall have eir number of Blots reduced to less than one by this method. When a Fugitive from Justice reregisters, e ceases to be a Fugitive from Justice. The act of reregistration causes no change in eir number of Blots. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4272 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: When a Player deregisters or is deregistered, e keeps eir Stain (though it may be modified by other Rules). A non-Player with a non-zero Stain is known as a Fugitive from Justice. At the beginning of the month, the Herald shall expunge half the Blots of each Fugitive from Justice; however, no Fugitive from Justice shall have eir Stain reduced to less than one by this method. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1437 by Proposal 4921 (Zefram), 2 April 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1438 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1438 by Proposal 1459, 1 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1495, 15 March 1995 text: A Punitive Point Loss is a point loss that results in gaining Blots. Whenever a Rule calls for a Punitive Point loss, the Player losing Points will receive Blots equal to half the number of Points lost, rounded down. Punitive Point Losses are those losses *not* due to: i) Voluntary transfers of Points to any other Player or any other Nomic Entity. ii) Voluntary destruction of a Player's own Points. iii) the direct result of submission of or Voting on a Proposal iv) Adjustments made as part of a correction in the Game State. v) The reset of scores due to the end of a Game. vi) A score change that a Rule specifically designates as Non-Punitive. vii) Rules that also adjust the number of Blots a Player has. Further, a Point Loss ceases to be Punitive when the Rule mandating the Loss is amended to explicitly state either of the following: i) The Rule does not impose a Blot penalty. ii) The Rule does impose a Blot penalty, the amount of the Blot penalty, and the Player responsible for reporting those Blots to the Tabulator. Players Legally Responsible for reporting Punitive Point losses to the Scorekeepor also have the Legal Responsibility to report Blots due to those Punitive Point losses to the Tabulator. This Rule shall remain in effect until there are no longer any Punitive Point Losses defined in the Ruleset, at which point this Rule will repeal itself. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1439 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1439 by Proposal 1460, 1 March 1995 text: If a Call For Judgment (CFJ) clearly alleging that a Player has violated a specific Rule is found to be TRUE, the Player receives Blots equal to the Mutability Index of the violated Rule rounded down to the nearest whole integer, or four Blots if its Mutability Index exceeds four. This Rule defers to the wording of the violated Rule when it defines a Blot penalty in the specific case of a CFJ, or specifically forbids Blot penalties in the case of a CFJ. The Player who initially called for the CFJ has the Legal Responsibility to report Blots due to the CFJ to the Tabulator. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1674, 22 August 1995 text: If a Call For Judgment (CFJ) clearly alleging that a Player has violated a specific Rule is found to be TRUE, the Player receives Blots equal to the Mutability Index of the violated Rule rounded down to the nearest whole integer, or four Blots if its Mutability Index exceeds four. This Rule defers to the wording of the violated Rule when it defines a Blot penalty in the specific case of a CFJ, or specifically forbids Blot penalties in the case of a CFJ. The Player who initially called for the CFJ has the Legal Responsibility to report Blots due to the CFJ to the Tabulator. If such a Judgement is overturned upon appeal, then the Player who received Blots shall lose the same number of Blots as were given due to the initial Judgement of the CFJ, unless e already had fewer than that number of Blots, in which case e shall lose all his Blots. The Player losing the Blots has responsibility for reporting that loss to the Tabulator history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 2879 (favor), 25 January 1997 text: If a Call For Judgment (CFJ) clearly alleging that a Player has violated a specific Rule is found to be TRUE, the Player receives Blots equal to the Mutability Index of the violated Rule rounded down to the nearest whole integer, or four Blots if its Mutability Index exceeds four. This Rule defers to the wording of the violated Rule when it defines a Blot penalty in the specific case of a CFJ, or specifically forbids Blot penalties in the case of a CFJ. The Player who initially called for the CFJ has the Legal Responsibility to report Blots due to the CFJ to the Herald If such a Judgement is overturned upon appeal, then the Player who received Blots shall lose the same number of Blots as were given due to the initial Judgement of the CFJ, unless e already had fewer than that number of Blots, in which case e shall lose all his Blots. The Player losing the Blots has responsibility for reporting that loss to the Herald. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3476 (Oerjan), 11 May 1997 text: If a Call For Judgment (CFJ) clearly alleging that a Player has violated a specific Rule is found to be TRUE, the Player receives Blots equal to the Mutability Index of the violated Rule rounded down to the nearest whole integer, or four Blots if its Mutability Index exceeds four. This Rule defers to the wording of the violated Rule when it defines a Blot penalty in the specific case of a CFJ, or specifically forbids Blot penalties in the case of a CFJ. The Player who initially called for the CFJ has the Legal Responsibility to report Blots due to the CFJ to the Herald If such a Judgement is overturned upon appeal, then the Player who received Blots shall lose the same number of Blots as were given due to the initial Judgement of the CFJ. The Player losing the Blots has responsibility for reporting that loss to the Herald. history: Amended(4) Cosmetically by Proposal 3489 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: If a Call For Judgement (CFJ) clearly alleging that a Player has violated a specific Rule is found to be TRUE, the Player receives Blots equal to the Mutability Index of the violated Rule rounded down to the nearest whole integer, or four Blots if its Mutability Index exceeds four. This Rule defers to the wording of the violated Rule when it defines a Blot penalty in the specific case of a CFJ, or specifically forbids Blot penalties in the case of a CFJ. The Player who initially called for the CFJ has the Legal Responsibility to report Blots due to the CFJ to the Herald If such a Judgement is overturned upon appeal, then the Player who received Blots shall lose the same number of Blots as were given due to the initial Judgement of the CFJ. The Player losing the Blots has responsibility for reporting that loss to the Herald. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 3500 (Crito; disi.), 3 June 1997 text: If a Call For Judgement (CFJ) clearly alleging that a Player has violated a specific Rule is found to be TRUE, the Player receives Blots equal to the Power of the violated Rule rounded down to the nearest whole integer, or four Blots if its Power exceeds four. This Rule defers to the wording of the violated Rule when it defines a Blot penalty in the specific case of a CFJ, or specifically forbids Blot penalties in the case of a CFJ. The Player who initially called for the CFJ has the Legal Responsibility to report Blots due to the CFJ to the Herald If such a Judgement is overturned upon appeal, then the Player who received Blots shall lose the same number of Blots as were given due to the initial Judgement of the CFJ. The Player losing the Blots has responsibility for reporting that loss to the Herald. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: If a Call For Judgement (CFJ) clearly alleging that a Player has violated a specific Rule is found to be TRUE, the Player receives Blots equal to the Power of the violated Rule rounded down to the nearest whole integer, or four Blots if its Power exceeds four. This Rule defers to the wording of the violated Rule when it defines a Blot penalty in the specific case of a CFJ, or specifically forbids Blot penalties in the case of a CFJ. The Player who initially called for the CFJ shall make the Payment Orders necessary to apply the Blots. If such a Judgement is overturned upon appeal, then the Player who received Blots shall vacate the Blots that were given due to the initial Judgement of the CFJ. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3901 (Schneidster), 6 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3950 (harvel), 8 December 1999 text: If a Call For Judgement (CFJ) clearly alleging that a Player has violated a specific Rule is found to be TRUE, the Player receives Blots equal to the Power of the violated Rule rounded down to the nearest whole integer, or four Blots if its Power exceeds four, unless the violated Rule explicitly defines or forbids a Blot penalty in the case of a CFJ. The penalty shall be as defined in the Rule, if the Rule defines it; no Blot penalty shall be imposed if the Rule forbids it. The Player who initially called for the CFJ shall notify the Herald of the Blot assessment. If such a Judgement is overturned upon appeal, then the Player who received Blots shall expunge the Blots that were given due to the initial Judgement of the CFJ and notify the Herald of this action. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: Violating a Rule is the Class N Crime of Disobedience, unless other Rules define or prohibit a penalty for the violation. N is the Power of the violated Rule (rounded down to the nearest multiple of the MUQ of Indulgences), but shall not exceed 4. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: Violating a Rule is the Class N Crime of Disobedience, unless other Rules define or prohibit a penalty for the violation. N is the Power of the violated Rule (rounded down to the nearest integer), or 4, whichever is less. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1439 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1440 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1440 by Proposal 1461, 1 March 1995 text: A Player may Erase eir Blots by spending five Points for each Blot Erased. A Player may Erase any number of Blots as long as e does not reduce eir Point total below zero. A Player with less than five Points may not Erase Blots. The Player Erasing Blots must report to the Tabulator and the Scorekeepor the number of Blots e is Erasing, and the Points required to do so. If this requires more Points than the Player has at the time of the request, then no Blots are erased, and no Points are lost. If there are sufficient Points, the Scorekeepor reduces the Player's Points by the required amount and the Tabulator reduces the Player's Blots as requested. Other rules may define additional methods of Erasing Blots. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1613, 10 July 1995 text: A Player may Erase eir Blots by spending five Points for each Blot Erased. A Player may Erase any number of Blots as long as e does not reduce eir Point total below zero. A Player with less than five Points may not Erase Blots. The Player must notify both the Scorekeepor and the Tabulator, in the Public Forum, of the number of Blots e is erasing, and the number of Points e is spending to do so. If this requires more Points than the Player has at the time of the request, then no Blots are erased, and no Points are lost. If there are sufficient Points, the Player's Point and Blot totals are reduced by the requested amount. Other rules may define additional methods of Erasing Blots. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2472, 16 February 1996 text: A Player who has at least one Blot is permitted to remove any or all of those Blots by sending a message to the Public Forum indicating how many Blots e wishes to remove. If that Player's Treasury contains at least five Points for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Points is transferred from the Player's Treasury, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Points are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Scorekeepor shall detect and report all transfers and Blot Changes resulting from the application of this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: A Player who has at least one Blot is permitted to remove any or all of those Blots by sending a message to the Public Forum indicating how many Blots e wishes to remove. If that Player's Treasury contains at least five Mils for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mils is transferred from the Player's Treasury, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mils are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Banker shall detect and report all transfers and Blot Changes resulting from the application of this Rule. text: A Player who has at least one Blot is permitted to remove any or all of those Blots by sending a message to the Public Forum indicating how many Blots e wishes to remove. If that Player's Treasury contains at least five Mils for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mils is transferred from the Player's Treasury, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Points are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Banker shall detect and report all transfers and Blot Changes resulting from the application of this Rule. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: A Player who has at least one Blot is permitted to remove any or all of those Blots by sending a message to the Public Forum indicating how many Blots e wishes to remove. If that Player's Treasury contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Treasury, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Banker shall detect and report all transfers and Blot Changes resulting from the application of this Rule. history: ... history: Amended(5) text: A Player who has at least one Blot is permitted to remove any or all of those Blots by sending a message to the Public Forum indicating how many Blots e wishes to remove. If that Player's Treasury contains at least 1 VT for each Blot to be removed, then that number of VTs is transferred from the Player's Treasury, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Herald shall detect and report all transfers and Blot Changes resulting from the application of this Rule. history: ... history: Amended(6) text: A Player who has at least one Blot is permitted to remove any or all of those Blots by sending a message to the Public Forum indicating how many Blots e wishes to remove. If that Player's Treasury contains at least 1 VT for each Blot to be removed, then that number of VTs is transferred from the Player's Treasury, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no VTs are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Herald shall detect and report all transfers and Blot Changes resulting from the application of this Rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1441 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1441 by Proposal 1462, 1 March 1995 text: Upon beginning a new Game, any Player with Blots immediately loses Points equal to the number of eir Blots. Every Player who is not Immaculate has eir total Blots halved, rounding down to the next lower integer. This halving will never reduce a Player's total Blots below one. Detecting and reporting this Blot change is the Tabulator's responsibility. The Tabulator reports the Point losses to the Scorekeepor. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: Upon beginning a new Game, any Player with Blots immediately loses a number of Mils equal to the number of eir Blots. Every Player who is not Immaculate has eir total Blots halved, rounding down to the next lower integer. This halving will never reduce a Player's total Blots below one. Detecting and reporting this Blot change is the Tabulator's responsibility. The Tabulator reports the Mark losses to the Banker. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: Upon beginning a new quarter, any Player with Blots immediately loses a number of Mils equal to the number of eir Blots. Every Player who is not Immaculate has eir total Blots halved, rounding down to the next lower integer. This halving will never reduce a Player's total Blots below one. Detecting and reporting this Blot change is the Tabulator's responsibility. The Tabulator reports the Mark losses to the Banker. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: Upon beginning a new quarter, any Player with Blots immediately loses a number of Mil equal to the number of eir Blots. Every Player who is not Immaculate has eir total Blots halved, rounding down to the next lower integer. This halving will never reduce a Player's total Blots below one. Detecting and reporting this Blot change is the Tabulator's responsibility. The Tabulator reports the Mark losses to the Banker. history: ... history: Amended(4) text: Upon beginning a new quarter, any Player with Blots immediately loses a number of Mil equal to the number of eir Blots. Every Player who is not Immaculate has eir total Blots halved, rounding down to the next lower integer. This halving will never reduce a Player's total Blots below one. Detecting and reporting this Blot change is the Herald's responsibility. The Herald reports the Mark losses to the Banker. history: ... history: Amended(5) text: Upon beginning a new quarter, any Player with Blots immediately loses a number of VTs equal to the number of eir Blots divided by five, rounded up to the nearest 0.5 VT. Every Player who is not Immaculate has eir total Blots halved, rounding down to the next lower integer. This halving will never reduce a Player's total Blots below one. Detecting and reporting this Blot change is the Herald's responsibility. The Herald reports the VT losses to the Assessor. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1442 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1442 by Proposal 1479, 15 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1533, 24 March 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1538, 4 April 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1544, 14 April 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1565, 28 April 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: Provided that e possesses sufficient Extra Votes, a Player may use them to cast extra Votes on a Proposal up to the maximum allowed to them for that Proposal, as specified in other Rules. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 1625, 17 July 1995 text: Provided that e possesses sufficient Extra Votes, a Player may use them to cast extra Votes on a Proposal up to the maximum allowed to them for that Proposal, as specified in other Rules. A Player casts an extra Vote by notifying the Assessor that e is doing so, at the same time specifying the Proposal upon which the Vote is cast, and the Vote itself. If, at the moment the Player casts an extra Vote, e possesses at least one Extra Vote, then the casted Vote is legal, and one Extra Vote is transferred from the Treasury of the Player to the Bank. Otherwise, the casted Vote is not legal, and no transfer takes place. All transfers required by this Rule shall be detected and reported by the Assessor. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2506, 3 March 1996 text: Provided that e possesses sufficient Extra Votes, a Player may use them to cast extra Votes on a Proposal up to the maximum allowed to them for that Proposal, as specified in other Rules. A Player casts an extra Vote by notifying the Assessor that e is doing so, at the same time specifying the Proposal upon which the Vote is cast, and the Vote itself. If, at the moment the Player casts an extra Vote, e possesses at least one Extra Vote, then the Vote cast is legal, and one Extra Vote is transferred from the Treasury of the Player to the Bank. Otherwise, the casted Vote is not legal, and no transfer takes place. All transfers required by this Rule shall be detected and reported by the Assessor. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 2519, 10 March 1996 text: Provided that e possesses sufficient Extra Votes, a Player may use them to cast extra Votes on a Proposal up to the maximum allowed to them for that Proposal, as specified in other Rules. A Player casts an extra Vote by notifying the Assessor that e is doing so, at the same time specifying the Proposal upon which the Vote is cast, and the Vote itself. Extra Votes may only be cast on a Proposal during the Voting Period of that Proposal. If, at the moment the Player casts an extra Vote, e possesses at least one Extra Vote, then the Extra Vote is legally cast, and one Extra Vote is transferred from the Treasury of the Player to the Bank. Otherwise, the Extra Vote is not legally cast, and no transfer takes place. All transfers required by this Rule shall be detected and reported by the Assessor. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Proposal 2736 (Oerjan), 7 November 1996 text: Provided that e possesses sufficient Extra Votes, a Player may use them to cast extra Votes on a Proposal up to the maximum allowed to them for that Proposal, as specified in other Rules. A Player casts an extra Vote by notifying the Assessor that e is doing so, at the same time specifying the Proposal upon which the Vote is cast, and the Vote itself. Extra Votes may only be cast on a Proposal during the Voting Period of that Proposal. If, at the moment the Player casts an extra Vote, e possesses at least one Extra Vote not in Limbo, then the Extra Vote is legally cast, and one Extra Vote of the Player is put in Limbo until the end of the Voting Period of the Proposal specified. history: Amended(10) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: The casting of any votes may only be achieved by the spending of VTs, as specified below. A Player spends a VT to cast a vote on a Proposal currently up for vote by notifying the Assessor that e is doing so, and at the same time specifying the Proposal which the vote will be cast on, and what the vote shall be. If, at the moment the Player spends a VT in this way, e possesses at least one full VT not in Limbo, then the VT is legally spent, one vote is made towards the Proposal in question, and one VT in the Player's Treasury is put in Limbo until the end of the Voting Period of the Proposal specified. This shall be noted and recorded by the Assessor. If, at the time a Player attempts to spend a VT in this manner, e does not have 1 VT not in Limbo, no VT of eirs is put into Limbo, and e does not cast that vote. If several votes are contained in a single message, each vote is considered a separate action. If several votes are cast on the same Proposal, each vote is considered a separate action. history: Amended(11) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The casting of any votes may only be achieved by the spending of VTs, as specified below. A Voting Entity Votes upon a Proposal when e, during the Voting Period of that Proposal, informs the Assessor of the Vote (or Votes) e is casting upon that Proposal. This act also comprises the implicit submission of a delayed Transfer Order from the Voting Entity to the Bank for however many VTs are necessary to cast those Votes, to be executed at the end of the Voting Period of that Proposal, and also the implicit cancellation of all other delayed Transfer Orders submitted but not yet executed by Voting on that Proposal. A Voting Entity may specify that e casts no Votes on a Proposal, and doing so cancels any previously Votes cast on that Proposal (if done during the Voting Period of that Proposal) and cancels any delayed Transfer Orders submitted but not yet executed by Voting on that Proposal. A Voting Entity's Votes on a given Proposal are counted for that Proposal only if the delayed Transfer Order implicitly submitted by Voting on that Proposal is successfully executed at the end of the Voting Period of that Proposal. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3693 (Steve), 26 February 1998 text: A Voting Entity votes upon a Proposal when, during the Voting Period of that Proposal, e informs the Assessor of the vote or votes e is casting upon that Proposal, provided that e is authorized to vote on that Proposal. A Voting Entity may inform the Assessor that e casts no votes on a Proposal, and doing so cancels any votes e has previously cast on that Proposal, if this is done during the Voting Period of that Proposal. Cancelled votes are not counted by the Assessor and do not count towards Quorum. As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period of a Proposal, the Assessor shall bill each Voting Entity one Voting Token for each uncancelled vote cast by that Voting Entity on that Proposal. In the case where a Voting Entity has cast more than one vote on a Proposal, or a Voting Entity has cast votes on more than one Proposal, the results of which the Assessor has published at the same time, the Assessor is permitted to bill the Voting Entity for an amount of Voting Tokens equivalent to all the uncancelled votes cast by the Voting Entity on those Proposals, instead of billing the Voting Entity once for each uncancelled vote e cast. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: A Voting Entity Votes upon a Proposal when e, during the Voting Period of that Proposal, informs the Assessor of the Vote (or Votes) e is casting upon that Proposal. A Voting Entity may specify that e casts no Votes on a Proposal, and doing so cancels any previously Votes cast on that Proposal (if done during the Voting Period of that Proposal). Cancelled Votes are not counted by the Assessor and do not count toward Quorum. As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period of a given Proposal, the Assessor shall bill each Voting Entity a number of VTs equal to the cost of the Votes cast on that Proposal by that entity. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 3718 (Steve), 3 April 1998 text: As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period of a given Proposal, the Assessor shall bill each Voting Entity a number of Voting Tokens equal to the votes cast on that Proposal by that entity. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 3783 (Blob), 24 August 1998 text: Proposals have a voting cost, equal to the Voting Tariff at the time they were distributed. If there was no value set for the Voting Tariff at that time, then the voting cost is 1 VT. As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period of a given Proposal, the Assessor shall bill each Voting Entity a number of Voting Tokens equal to the votes cast on that Proposal by that entity multiplied by the voting cost for that Proposal. history: ... history: Amended(20) text: Votes on Proposals have a voting cost, based on the Voting Tariff and Voting Factor at the time they were distributed. If either of these had no value set at that time, then they are deemed to have been 1 VT and 1, respectively. The voting cost of an entity's first vote on an Interested Proposal is equal to the Voting Tariff. The voting cost of each additional vote by that entity on that Proposal is equal to the previous vote's cost multiplied by the Voting Factor, then rounded up to the nearest multiple of the MUQ of VTs. The voting cost for all votes on a Disinterested Proposal is zero. As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period of a given Proposal, the Assessor shall bill each Entity that voted on the Proposal as follows: (1) For each FOR vote cast on the Proposal, a number of Positively charged Voting Tokens equal to the total cost of those votes. (2) For each AGAINST vote cast on the Proposal, a number of Negatively charged Voting Tokens equal to the total cost of those votes. (3) For each ABSTAIN vote cast on the Proposal, a number of Voting Tokens equal to the total cost of those votes. history: ... history: Amended(21) text: As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period of an Interested Proposal, the Assessor shall bill each entity that voted on the Proposal as follows: (1) For N FOR votes cast on the Proposal, N squared +VTs. (2) For N AGAINST votes cast on the Proposal, N squared -VTs. (3) For N ABSTAIN votes cast on the Proposal, N squared VTs. history: ... history: Amended(22) text: As soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period of an Interested, Democratic Proposal, the Assessor shall bill each entity that voted on the Proposal a number of Voting Tokens equal to the square of the total number of votes (FOR, AGAINST and ABSTAIN) cast by the entity on that Proposal. history: ... [orphaned text: There is a Currency called Extra Votes. The Recordkeepor for this Currency is the Speaker. Possession of an Extra Vote entitles a Player to cast an extra Vote on a Proposal of eir choice. Extra Votes may be traded between Players, but they may not be owned by Groups. An Extra Vote is created for a Player whenever that Player casts a vote of ABSTAIN on any Proposal, and that Player does not already possess 5 Extra Votes. However, the Player does not receive the Extra Vote created for em by the casting of a vote of ABSTAIN on a Proposal until the results of the voting on that Proposal are published. An Extra Vote is destroyed whenever the Player who possesses it uses it to cast a Vote on a Proposal. Provided that they possess at least one Extra Vote, Players may use a maximum of one Extra Vote per proposal to cast an extra Vote on that Proposal. Extra Votes are cast in the same manner as Votes, as described in other Rules. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1443 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1443 by Proposal 1493, 15 March 1995 text: A Proposal may be proto-Proposed by sending it to the Public Forum and identifying it as a proto-Proposal. A proposal which passes, and which was proto-proposed in the same form between four and fourteen days before being submitted as a proposal, shall earn its proposer an extra two points at the end of the voting period. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1606, 19 June 1995 text: A Proto-Proposal is any text which meets the following conditions: * it has been sent to the Public Forum * the author of the message containing the Proto-Proposal is verifiable * the author has clearly identified the text as a Proto-Proposal A Proposal is considered to have been Proto-Proposed if a Proto-Proposal has been made between three and fourteen days prior to the Proposal's submission, which is identical to the submitted Proposal. The Proposer of any Proposal which has been Proto-Proposed and which Passes shall receive two Points upon the publishing of Voting Results of that Proposal. The Assessor is responsible for reporting this score change. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1720, 19 September 1995 text: A Proto-Proposal is any text which meets the following conditions: * it has been sent to the Public Forum * the author of the message containing the Proto-Proposal is verifiable * the author has clearly identified the text as a Proto-Proposal A Proposal is Proto-Proposed if and only if a Proto-Proposal which is identical to the submitted Proposal has been made between three and fourteen days prior to the Proposal's submission, and the Assessor is informed of this fact prior to the conclusion of the Voting Period for that Proposal. The Proposer of any Proposal which has been Proto-Proposed and which Passes shall receive two Points upon the publishing of Voting Results of that Proposal. The Assessor is responsible for reporting this score change. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1770, 31 October 1995 text: A Proto-Proposal is any text which meets the following conditions: * it has been sent to the Public Forum * the author of the message containing the Proto-Proposal is verifiable * the author has clearly identified the text as a Proto-Proposal A Proposal is Proto-Proposed if and only if a Proto-Proposal which is identical to the submitted Proposal has been made between three and fourteen days prior to the Proposal's submission, and the Assessor is informed of this fact prior to the conclusion of the Voting Period for that Proposal. The Proposer of any Proposal which has been Proto-Proposed and which Passes shall receive two Points upon the publishing of Voting Results of that Proposal. The Assessor shall report this transfer, and shall do so no later than the time e announces the Voting Results of the Proposal in question. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1444 history: Created, ca. Mar. 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1445 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1446 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1446 by Proposal 1509, 24 March 1995 text: A contest is a subgame of Agora Nomic, having its own Name, Entry Fee, Regulations, Contestmaster, and Contest Fund. It is created when a Player posts to the Public Forum an announcement of the contest, including the Name and Regulations. Participants in the subgame are called Contestants of that contest. The player making the post becomes the Contestmaster. The Contestmaster for a given Contest is a Player who has responsibility for administering the subgame. He reports all score changes and currency transfers taking place under the Regulations, administers the Contest Fund, and maintains the Regulations. The Contest Fund is an entity capable of owning, trading, and spending Points or Currencies in the same manner as a Player, but only as authorized by the Regulations. The Regulations specify the operation of the Contest. All Contestants, and the Contestmaster, are bound by the Regulations except where these conflict with the Rules. They may also specify: - how the Contestmaster is replaced, - how currencies and Points are transferred to or from the Contest Fund, - the amount of the Entry Fee for the Contest, which shall be in Points, - additional restrictions on Players to become Contestants, - how the Regulations may be changed, and - ways for the Contest to be dissolved. A Player becomes a Contestant by notifying the Contestmaster and paying the prescribed Entry Fee to the Contest Fund. A Contestant may quit a Contest at any time by so notifying the Contestmaster, or by so posting to the Public Forum. A contest is dissolved when there is no Contestmaster and no provision for replacing em, or as otherwise provided in the rules, or in the Regulations. When this happens the Contest Fund is distributed as provided in the Regulations; if no provision is made the Fund is divided equally between the Contestants. If according to the Regulations the Contest Fund must transfer Points and/or currency to a Contestant, and the Fund does not have sufficient resources, then enough of the Contestmaster's Points and/or currency are transferred to the Fund to cover the transaction. If e does not have sufficient Points or currency to accomplish this, then each Contestant is given back eir entry fee, and the Contestmaster loses the number of Points of the returned entry fees. The Contest is then dissolved. No Blots shall be assigned by this Rule. This transfer is not taxable. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules which determine which Point and Currency transfers are legal and/or taxable, or which would assign Blots to any Player. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1574, 28 April 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: A contest is a subgame of Agora Nomic, having its own Name, Entry Fee, Regulations, Contestmaster, and Contest Fund. It is created when a Player posts to the Public Forum an announcement of the contest, including the Name and Regulations. Participants in the subgame are called Contestants of that contest. The player making the post becomes the Contestmaster. The Contestmaster for a given Contest is a Player who has responsibility for administering the subgame. He reports all currency transfers taking place under the Regulations, is the Executor of the Contest Fund, and maintains the Regulations. The Contest Fund is a Treasury, as provided for in other Rules. The owner of this Treasury is the Contest, and the Executor of this Treasury is, at all times, the Contestmaster of the Contest. The Regulations specify the operation of the Contest. All Contestants, and the Contestmaster, are bound by the Regulations except where these conflict with the Rules. They may also specify: 1. how a Contestmaster is replaced. However, no person may become Contestmaster without eir consent; 2. how the Currencies in the Contest Fund shall be spent, so long as this does not conflict with the Rules; 3. the amount of the Entry Fee for the Contest, in the form of units one or more Currency; 4. additional restrictions on Players to become Contestants, and conditions under which Contestants cease to be Contestants; 5. how the Regulations may be changed. If they do not so specify, the Regulations may not be changed. Whenever the Regulations are changed, the Contestmaster must post the new Regulations to the Public Forum, and no such change is effective until it is so posted; and 6. how the Contest may be dissolved. A Player becomes a Contestant by notifying the Contestmaster and paying the prescribed Entry Fee to the Contest Fund. A Contestant may quit a Contest at any time by so notifying the Contestmaster, or by so posting to the Public Forum. A Contestmaster may resign at any time by posting a message to that effect to the Public Forum, at which time e ceases to be Contestmaster. A contest is dissolved when there is no Contestmaster and no provision for replacing em, or upon unanimous agreement of the Contestmaster and all Contestants, or as otherwise provided in the rules, or in the Regulations. When this happens the Contest Fund is distributed as provided in the Regulations; if no provision is made the Fund is divided equally between the Contestants. If the Contest Regulations require a transfer to be made, but the Contest Fund has insufficient currencies to permit that transfer to be made, sufficient currencies to cover the transfer shall be involuntarily transferred from the Contestmaster's Treasury to the Contest Fund. The Contestmaster shall report this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepors. No Blots shall be assigned by this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1644, 1 August 1995 text: A contest is a subgame of Agora Nomic, having its own Name, Entry Fee, Regulations, Contestmaster, and Contest Fund. It is created when a Player posts to the Public Forum an announcement of the contest, including the Name and Regulations. Participants in the subgame are called Contestants of that contest. The player making the post becomes the Contestmaster. The Contestmaster for a given Contest is a Player who has responsibility for administering the subgame. He reports all currency transfers taking place under the Regulations, is the Executor of the Contest Fund, and maintains the Regulations. The Contest Fund is a Treasury, as provided for in other Rules. The owner of this Treasury is the Contest, and the Executor of this Treasury is, at all times, the Contestmaster of the Contest. The Regulations specify the operation of the Contest. All Contestants, and the Contestmaster, are bound by the Regulations except where these conflict with the Rules. They may also specify: 1. how a Contestmaster is replaced. However, no person may become Contestmaster without eir consent; 2. how the Currencies in the Contest Fund shall be spent, so long as this does not conflict with the Rules; 3. the amount of the Entry Fee for the Contest, in the form of units of one or more Currency; 4. additional restrictions on Players to become Contestants, and conditions under which Contestants cease to be Contestants; 5. how the Regulations may be changed. If they do not so specify, the Regulations may not be changed. Whenever the Regulations are changed, the Contestmaster must post the new Regulations to the Public Forum, and no such change is effective until it is so posted; and 6. how the Contest may be dissolved. A Player becomes a Contestant by notifying the Contestmaster and paying the prescribed Entry Fee to the Contest Fund. A Contestant may quit a Contest at any time by so notifying the Contestmaster, or by so posting to the Public Forum. A Contestmaster may resign at any time by posting a message to that effect to the Public Forum, at which time e ceases to be Contestmaster. A contest is dissolved when there is no Contestmaster and no provision for replacing em, or upon unanimous agreement of the Contestmaster and all Contestants, or as otherwise provided in the rules, or in the Regulations. When this happens the Contest Fund is distributed as provided in the Regulations; if no provision is made the Fund is divided equally between the Contestants. If the Contest Regulations require a transfer to be made, but the Contest Fund has insufficient currencies to permit that transfer to be made, sufficient currencies to cover the transfer shall be involuntarily transferred from the Contestmaster's Treasury to the Contest Fund. The Contestmaster shall report this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepors. No Blots shall be assigned by this Rule. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1670, 18 August 1995 text: A contest is a subgame of Agora Nomic, having its own Name, Entry Fee, Regulations, Contestmaster, and Contest Fund. It is created when a Player posts to the Public Forum an announcement of the contest, including the Name and Regulations. Participants in the subgame are called Contestants of that contest. The player making the post becomes the Contestmaster. The Contestmaster for a given Contest is a Player who has responsibility for administering the subgame. He reports all currency transfers taking place under the Regulations, is the Executor of the Contest Fund, and maintains the Regulations. The Contest Fund is a Treasury, as provided for in other Rules. The owner of this Treasury is the Contest, and the Executor of this Treasury is, at all times, the Contestmaster of the Contest. The Regulations specify the operation of the Contest. All Contestants, and the Contestmaster, are bound by the Regulations except where these conflict with the Rules. They may also specify: 1. how a Contestmaster is replaced. However, no person may become Contestmaster without eir consent; 2. how the Currencies in the Contest Fund shall be spent, so long as this does not conflict with the Rules; 3. the amount of the Entry Fee for the Contest, in the form of units of one or more Currency; 4. additional restrictions on Players to become Contestants, and conditions under which Contestants cease to be Contestants; 5. how the Regulations may be changed. If they do not so specify, the Regulations may not be changed. Whenever the Regulations are changed, the Contestmaster must post the new Regulations to the Public Forum, and no such change is effective until it is so posted; and 6. how the Contest may be dissolved. A Player becomes a Contestant by notifying the Contestmaster and paying the prescribed Entry Fee to the Contest Fund. A Contestant may quit a Contest at any time by so notifying the Contestmaster, or by so posting to the Public Forum. A Contestmaster may resign at any time by posting a message to that effect to the Public Forum, at which time e ceases to be Contestmaster. A contest is dissolved when there is no Contestmaster and no provision for replacing em, or upon unanimous agreement of the Contestmaster and all Contestants, or as otherwise provided in the rules, or in the Regulations. When this happens the Contest Fund is distributed as provided in the Regulations; if no provision is made the Fund is divided equally between the Contestants. No Blots shall be assigned by this Rule. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Let there be a Class of Organization known as a Contest, also known as a subgame of Agora Nomic. A Contest's Compact is known as its Regulations, its Administrator is known as the Contestmaster, it has one Treasury known as the Contest Fund, and its Executor is the Contestmaster. Players, other than the Contestmaster, within the Regulation's Jurisdiction are known as its Contestants. The Contestmaster is always within the Regulations' Jurisdiction. The Foundor of a Contest is its initial Contestmaster. A Contest is Public, and the Notary must publish the initial Contest Name and Regulations in the Public Forum As Soon As Possible after e receives them from the Contestmaster. text: Let there be a Class of Organization known as a Contest, also known as a subgame of Agora Nomic. A Contest's Compact is known as its Regulations, its Administrator is known as the Contestmaster, it has one Treasury known as the Contest Fund, and its Executor is the Contestmaster. Players, other than the Contestmaster, within the Regulation's Jurisdiction are known as its Contestants. The Contestmaster is always within the Regulations' Jurisdiction. The Foundor of a Contest is its initial Contestmaster. A Contest is Public, and the Notary must publish the initial Contest Name and Regulations in the Public Forum As Soon As Possible after e receives them from the Contestmaster. history: Null-Amended(6) by Proposal 1763, 31 October 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Let there be a Class of Organization known as a Contest, also known as a subgame of Agora Nomic. A Contest's Compact is known as its Regulations, its Administrator is known as the Contestmaster, it has one Treasury known as the Contest Fund, and its Executor is the Contestmaster. Players, other than the Contestmaster, within the Regulation's Jurisdiction are known as its Contestants. The Contestmaster is always within the Regulations' Jurisdiction. The Foundor of a Contest is its initial Contestmaster. A Contest is Public, and the Notary must publish the initial Contest Name and Regulations in the Public Forum As Soon As Possible after e receives them from the Contestmaster. text: Let there be a Class of Organization known as a Contest, also known as a subgame of Agora Nomic. A Contest's Compact is known as its Regulations, its Administrator is known as the Contestmaster, it has one Treasury known as the Contest Fund, and its Executor is the Contestmaster. Players, other than the Contestmaster, within the Regulation's Jurisdiction are known as its Contestants. The Contestmaster is always within the Regulations' Jurisdiction. The Foundor of a Contest is its initial Contestmaster. A Contest is Public, and the Notary must publish the initial Contest Name and Regulations in the Public Forum As Soon As Possible after e receives them from the Contestmaster. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2401, 20 January 1996 text: A "Contest" is an Organization of Class Contest; this Class is a valid Class of Organization. All Contests are Public Organizations. The Jurisdiction of a Contest is permitted to contain any Player. Each Contest shall possess exactly one Treasury. The Executor of a Contest is, at all times, its Administrator. A Contest must have exactly one Foundor, who becomes the Contest's initial Administrator. The following definitions pertain to Contests: * Regulations: a synonym for a Contest's Compact. * Contestmaster: a synonym for a Contest's Administrator. * Contest Fund: a synonym for a Contest's Treasury. * Contestant: a Player who is part of a Contest's Jurisdiction, but who is not the Contest's Administrator. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 2562, 6 April 1996 text: A "Contest" is an Organization of Class Contest; this Class is a valid Class of Organization. All Contests are Public Organizations. The Jurisdiction of a Contest is permitted to contain any Player. Each Contest shall possess exactly one Treasury. The Executor of a Contest is, at all times, its Administrator. A Contest must have exactly one Foundor, who becomes the Contest's initial Administrator. The following definitions pertain to Contests: * Regulations: a synonym for a Contest's Compact. * Contestmaster: a synonym for a Contest's Administrator. * Contest Fund: a synonym for a Contest's Treasury. * Contestant: a Player who is part of a Contest's Jurisdiction, but who is not the Contest's Administrator. A Contest is created by distributing a copy of its initial Regulations to the Public Forum, along with the Contest's Name, any provisions to the contrary in the default Organization Rules notwithstanding. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 2584, 1 May 1996 text: A "Contest" is an Organization of Class Contest; this Class is a valid Class of Organization. All Contests are Public Organizations. The Jurisdiction of a Contest is permitted to contain any Player. Each Contest shall possess exactly one Treasury. The Executor of a Contest is, at all times, its Administrator. A Contest must have exactly one Foundor, who becomes the Contest's initial Administrator. The following definitions pertain to Contests: * Regulations: a synonym for a Contest's Compact. * Contestmaster: a synonym for a Contest's Administrator. * Contest Fund: a synonym for a Contest's Treasury. * Contestant: a Player who is part of a Contest's Jurisdiction, but who is not the Contest's Administrator. A Contest is created by distributing a copy of its initial Regulations to the Public Forum, along with the Contest's Name, any provisions to the contrary in the default Organization Rules notwithstanding. This Rule defers to any Rule which restricts which Players may come to be under the Jurisdiction of a Contest, and how they may come to be. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: There is a class of Organization known collectively as the class of Contests. Each single Organization within this class is a Contest. The SLC associated with a Contest are that Contest's Regulations. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Contestmaster. A Contest's Contestants are those Players within the Jurisdiction of that Group's SLC, other than the Contestmaster. Any Player is permitted to be a Contestant or a Contestmaster of any Contest, unless that would conflict with that Contest's Regulations, or the Rules. A Contest must have exactly one Foundor, who becomes the Contest's initial Contestmaster. The ACO to create a Contest must be Posted to the Public Forum to have effect. history: Amended(11) Substantially by Proposal 3502 (General Chaos), 8 June 1997 text: There is a class of Organization known collectively as the class of Contests. Each single Organization within this class is a Contest. The SLC associated with a Contest are that Contest's Regulations. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Contestmaster. A Contest's Contestants are those Players within the Jurisdiction of that Group's SLC, other than the Contestmaster. Any Player is permitted to be a Contestant or a Contestmaster of any Contest, unless that would conflict with that Contest's Regulations, or the Rules. A Contest must have exactly one Foundor, who becomes the Contest's initial Contestmaster. The ACO to create a Contest must be Posted to the Public Forum to have effect. Each Contest has Mint Authority. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3968 (harvel), 4 February 2000 text: Each Contest is an Organization associated with an SLC called its Regulations. The Adminstrator for each Contest is that Contest's Contestmaster, and the Players within the Jurisdiction of its SLC, other than the Contestmaster, are its Contestants. Any Player is permitted to be a Contestant or a Contestmaster of any Contest, unless that would conflict with that Contest's Regulations, or the Rules. A Contest must have exactly one Foundor, who becomes the Contest's initial Contestmaster. The ACO to create a Contest must be Posted to the Public Forum to have effect. Each Contest has Mint Authority. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: Each Contest is an Organization associated with an SLC called its Regulations. The Administrator for each Contest is that Contest's Contestmaster, and the Players within the Jurisdiction of its SLC, other than the Contestmaster, are its Contestants. Any Player is permitted to be a Contestant or a Contestmaster of any Contest, unless that would conflict with that Contest's Regulations, or the Rules. A Contest must have exactly one Foundor, who becomes the Contest's initial Contestmaster. The ACO to create a Contest must be Posted to the Public Forum to have effect. Each Contest has Mint Authority. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: Each Contest is an Organization associated with an SLC called its Regulations. The Administrator for each Contest is that Contest's Contestmaster, and the Players within the Jurisdiction of its SLC, other than the Contestmaster, are its Contestants. Any Player is permitted to be a Contestant or a Contestmaster of any Contest, unless that would conflict with that Contest's Regulations, or the Rules. A Contest must have exactly one Foundor, who becomes the Contest's initial Contestmaster. The ACO to create a Contest must be published to have effect. Each Contest has Mint Authority. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4554 (Elysion), 27 February 2004 text: Each Contest is an Organization associated with an SLC called its Regulations. The Administrator for each Contest is that Contest's Contestmaster, and the Players within the Jurisdiction of its SLC, other than the Contestmaster, are its Contestants. Any Player is permitted to be a Contestant or a Contestmaster of any Contest, unless that would conflict with that Contest's Regulations, or the Rules. A Contest must have exactly one Foundor, who becomes the Contest's initial Contestmaster. The ACO to create a Contest must be published to have effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1446 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1447 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1447 by Proposal 1511, 24 March 1995 text: If a majority of the Justices' Judgements agree, the Statement shall be considered to have been Judged accordingly. Otherwise, it shall be considered to have been ruled UNKNOWN. The Justices' reasoning and arguments shall be recorded with the original CFJ. The Justices may make Injunctions in the same manner as Judges, provided a majority of them agree. The decision of the Justices is final; no further Appeal of that Statement may be made. If the decision of the original Judge of the Statement is changed by the Justices, the Judge shall forfeit the compensation e received for judging. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1656, 14 August 1995 text: If a majority of the Justices' Judgements agree, the Statement shall be considered to have been Judged accordingly. Otherwise, it shall be considered to have been ruled UNKNOWN. The Justices' reasoning and arguments shall be recorded with the original CFJ. The Justices may make Injunctions in the same manner as Judges, provided a majority of them agree. The decision of the Justices is final; no further Appeal of that Statement may be made. If the decision of the original Judge of the Statement is changed by the Justices, the Judge shall forfeit the compensation e received for judging, unless a majority of the Justices agree on some lesser forfeit, and so announce in their Judgement, in which case the lesser forfeit will apply instead. history: Infected and Amended(2) by Rule 1454, 10 September 1995 text: If a majority of the Justices' Judgements agree, the Statement shall be considered to have been Judged accordingly. Otherwise, it shall be considered to have been ruled UNKNOWN. The Justices' reasoning and arguments shall be recorded with the original CFJ. The Justices may make Injunctions in the same manner as Judges, provided a majority of them agree. The decision of the Justices is final; no further Appeal of that Statement may be made. If the decision of the original Judge of the Statement is changed by the Justices, the Judge shall forfeit the compensation e received for judging, unless a majority of the Justices agree on some lesser forfeit, and so announce in their Judgement, in which case the lesser forfeit will apply instead. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been constituted upon a given question, the Justices shall consider the question amongst themselves. A Justice is permitted to, at any time, request that any other Player act in eir stead as Justice on a given Board of Appeals, provided that this second Player is both eligible to hold that position and consents to the assignment. A Justice who wishes to do this shall inform the Clerk of the Courts of this desire. Each Justice shall convey eir determination on the matter of the Appeal to the Clerk of the Courts before seven days have elapsed from the time e became a Justice on that Board of Appeals. If e fails to do so, e commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and carrying a penalty of three Blots. E also becomes ineligible to serve on that Board of Appeals, and the Clerk of the Courts shall select a new Player according to the procedures for selecting Justices. A Justice shall either sustain or overturn the matter which is being considered. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the Clerk of the Courts, the Clerk shall post to the Public Forum these determinations along with any arguments, evidence, or other material the Justices have included with their determination. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter which is being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon Appeal shall be determined by the Rules which permit an Appeal of that sort. All three Justices receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Points each upon the publication of their determinations and the outcome of the Appeal. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2553, 22 March 1996 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been constituted upon a given question, the Justices shall consider the question amongst themselves. A Justice is permitted to, at any time, appoint another Player to act in eir stead as Justice on a given Board of Appeals, provided that this second Player is both eligible to hold that position and consents to the assignment. A Justice does this by so informing the Clerk of the Courts. Each Justice shall convey eir determination on the matter of the Appeal to the Clerk of the Courts before seven days have elapsed from the time e became a Justice on that Board of Appeals. If e fails to do so, e commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and carrying a penalty of three Blots. E also becomes ineligible to serve on that Board of Appeals, and the Clerk of the Courts shall select a new Player according to the procedures for selecting Justices. A Justice shall either sustain or overturn the matter which is being considered. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the Clerk of the Courts, the Clerk shall post to the Public Forum these determinations along with any arguments, evidence, or other material the Justices have included with their determination. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter which is being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon Appeal shall be determined by the Rules which permit an Appeal of that sort. All three Justices receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Points each upon the publication of their determinations and the outcome of the Appeal. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been constituted upon a given question, the Justices shall consider the question amongst themselves. A Justice is permitted to, at any time, appoint another Player to act in eir stead as Justice on a given Board of Appeals, provided that this second Player is both eligible to hold that position and consents to the assignment. A Justice does this by so informing the Clerk of the Courts. Each Justice shall convey eir determination on the matter of the Appeal to the Clerk of the Courts before seven days have elapsed from the time e became a Justice on that Board of Appeals. If e fails to do so, e commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and carrying a penalty of three Blots. E also becomes ineligible to serve on that Board of Appeals, and the Clerk of the Courts shall select a new Player according to the procedures for selecting Justices. A Justice shall either sustain or overturn the matter which is being considered. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the Clerk of the Courts, the Clerk shall post to the Public Forum these determinations along with any arguments, evidence, or other material the Justices have included with their determination. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter which is being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon Appeal shall be determined by the Rules which permit an Appeal of that sort. All three Justices receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mils each upon the publication of their determinations and the outcome of the Appeal. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2685, 3 October 1996 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is an Infraction, detected and reported by the CotC, bearing a penalty of 3 Blots, which results in that Justice's dismissal as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace eim. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall post these determinations in the Public Forum along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. All three Justices receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mils each upon the publication of their determinations. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is an Infraction, detected and reported by the CotC, bearing a penalty of 3 Blots, which results in that Justice's dismissal as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace eim. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall post these determinations in the Public Forum along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. All three Justices receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mil each upon the publication of their determinations. history: Amended(8) Cosmetically by Proposal 2830 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is the Infraction of Failing to Judge an Appeal, detected and reported by the CotC, bearing a penalty of 3 Blots, which results in that Justice's dismissal as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace eim. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall post these determinations in the Public Forum along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. All three Justices receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mil each upon the publication of their determinations. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Proposal 3473 (Harlequin; disi.), 2 May 1997 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is the Infraction of Failing to Judge an Appeal, detected and reported by the CotC, bearing a penalty of 3 Blots, which results in that Justice's dismissal as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace eim. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall post these determinations in the Public Forum along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. All three Justices receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT each upon the publication of their determinations. history: Amended(10) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is the Infraction of Failing to Judge an Appeal, detected and reported by the CotC, bearing a penalty of 3 Blots, which results in that Justice's dismissal as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall post these determinations in the Public Forum along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. All three Justices receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT each upon the publication of their determinations. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3645 (elJefe), 29 December 1997 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is the Infraction of Failing to Judge an Appeal, detected and reported by the CotC, bearing a penalty of 3 Blots, which results in that Justice's dismissal as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall post these determinations in the Public Forum along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. Each Justice who submits eir determination to the CotC before the end of the assigned deliberation period shall receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT each upon the publication of their determinations. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is the Infraction of Failing to Judge an Appeal, detected and reported by the CotC, bearing a penalty of 3 Blots, which results in that Justice's dismissal as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall post these determinations in the Public Forum along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. Each Justice who submits eir determination to the CotC before the end of the assigned deliberation period shall receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT upon the publication of eir determination. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is the Class 3 Infraction of Failing to Judge an Appeal, detected and reported by the Cotc, which results in that Justice's dismissal as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall post these determinations in the Public Forum along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. Each Justice who submits eir determination to the CotC before the end of the assigned deliberation period shall receive a Judicial Salary of 20 Stems upon the publication of eir determination. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 3998 (harvel), 2 May 2000 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is the Class 3 Infraction of Failing to Judge an Appeal, detected and reported by the Cotc, which results in that Justice's dismissal as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall post these determinations in the Public Forum along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. If a Justice submits eir determination to the Clerk of the Courts before the end of the assigned deliberation period, then the Clerk of the Courts shall pay out to that Justice the Judicial Salary as soon as possible after the publication of eir determination. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4109 (Steve), 13 February 2001 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is the Class 3 Infraction of Failing to Judge an Appeal, detected and reported by the Cotc. A Justice who does not submit eir determination to the CotC within seven days is immediately recused as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall post these determinations in the Public Forum along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. If a Justice submits eir determination to the Clerk of the Courts before the end of the assigned deliberation period, then the Clerk of the Courts shall pay out to that Justice the Judicial Salary as soon as possible after the publication of eir determination. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: Once a Board of Appeals has been selected to decide a particular appeal, the Justices shall, collectively, consider the question. Each Justice has seven days, from the point e becomes Justice on a particular Board, in which to reach a determination that either sustains or overturns the matter being considered by that Board and submit it to the CotC. Failure to do so is the Class 3 Infraction of Failing to Judge an Appeal, detected and reported by the Cotc. A Justice who does not submit eir determination to the CotC within seven days is immediately recused as a Justice from that Board. In this case the CotC must randomly select an eligible Player to replace em. After all three Justices have submitted their determinations to the CotC, the CotC shall publish these determinations along with any arguments, evidence, or other material included with those determinations. If a majority of the Justices agree to sustain the matter being considered, it is sustained; otherwise, it is overturned. The specific results of overturning a matter upon appeal are determined by the Rules permitting such appeals. If a Justice submits eir determination to the Clerk of the Courts before the end of the assigned deliberation period, then the Clerk of the Courts shall pay out to that Justice the Judicial Salary as soon as possible after the publication of eir determination. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: For an Appelate Judge, a Judgement is exactly one of the following: SUSTAIN or OVERTURN. Other Rules may modify this, based on the subject of the Appeal. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 text: For an Appellate Judge, a Judgement is exactly one of the following: SUSTAIN or OVERTURN. Other Rules may modify this, based on the subject of the Appeal. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: For an Appelate Judge assigned to the Appeal of a Judgement, a Judgement is exactly one of the following: SUSTAIN, REVERSE, REASSIGN, or REMAND. For the appeal of other matters, a Judgement is exactly one of the following: SUSTAIN or OVERTURN. Other Rules may modify this based on the subject of the Appeal. If a Judgement of TRUE or FALSE is Appealed, the Board of Appeals shall consider the correctness of that Judgement. If a Judgement of DISMISSED is Appealed, the Board shall not consider the truth or falsity of the original CFJ; they shall only consider whether a Judgement of DISMISSED should have been delivered. If a majority of the Appellate Judges Judge SUSTAIN, then the subject of the Appeal is sustained. Otherwise, it is overturned. The Board of Appeals shall execute whatever Appelate Orders are necessary to enforce its determination. When a Judgement is overturned: a) If a majority of the Appelate Judges Judge REVERSE, then the CFJ shall be treated as if it were Judged normally, with the Judgement being that which a majority of the Appelate Judges agree on. b) If a majority of the Appelate Judges Judge REASSIGN, then the original Judgement is ignored, the original Judge is recused, and the Clerk of the Courts shall reassign the CFJ to a new Judge in the same fashion as it was originally assigned. The new Judge cannot make the same Judgement as the original Judge for the same reason. c) If a majority of the Appelate Judges Judge REMAND, then the original Judgement shall be ignored, and the Clerk of the Courts shall reassign the CFJ to the original Judge as if it were being originally assigned. The Judge may not make the same Judgement for the same reason. d) If none of the above is true, then the CFJ shall be reassigned as described above. As soon as possible after all members of a Board of Appeals have submitted eir Judgement, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce that this has happened. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: For an Appellate Judge assigned to the Appeal of a Judgement, a Judgement is exactly one of the following: SUSTAIN, REVERSE, REASSIGN, or REMAND. For the appeal of other matters, a Judgement is exactly one of the following: SUSTAIN or OVERTURN. Other Rules may modify this based on the subject of the Appeal. If a Judgement of TRUE or FALSE is Appealed, the Board of Appeals shall consider the correctness of that Judgement. If a Judgement of DISMISSED is Appealed, the Board shall not consider the truth or falsity of the original CFJ; they shall only consider whether a Judgement of DISMISSED should have been delivered. If a majority of the Appellate Judges Judge SUSTAIN, then the subject of the Appeal is sustained. Otherwise, it is overturned. The Board of Appeals shall execute whatever Appellate Orders are necessary to enforce its determination. When a Judgement is overturned: a) If a majority of the Appellate Judges Judge REVERSE, then the CFJ shall be treated as if it were Judged normally, with the Judgement being that which a majority of the Appellate Judges agree on. b) If a majority of the Appellate Judges Judge REASSIGN, then the original Judgement is ignored, the original Judge is recused, and the Clerk of the Courts shall reassign the CFJ to a new Judge in the same fashion as it was originally assigned. The new Judge cannot make the same Judgement as the original Judge for the same reason. c) If a majority of the Appellate Judges Judge REMAND, then the original Judgement shall be ignored, and the Clerk of the Courts shall reassign the CFJ to the original Judge as if it were being originally assigned. The Judge may not make the same Judgement for the same reason. d) If none of the above is true, then the CFJ shall be reassigned as described above. As soon as possible after all members of a Board of Appeals have submitted eir Judgement, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce that this has happened. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5057 (root), 5 July 2007 text: For an Appellate Judge assigned to the Appeal of a Judgement, a Judgement is exactly one of the following: SUSTAIN, REVERSE, REASSIGN, or REMAND. For the appeal of other matters, a Judgement is exactly one of the following: SUSTAIN or OVERTURN. Other Rules may modify this based on the subject of the Appeal. If a Judgement of TRUE or FALSE is Appealed, the Board of Appeals shall consider the correctness of that Judgement. If a Judgement of DISMISSED is Appealed, the Board shall not consider the truth or falsity of the original CFJ; they shall only consider whether a Judgement of DISMISSED should have been delivered. If a majority of the Appellate Judges Judge SUSTAIN, then the subject of the Appeal is sustained. Otherwise, it is overturned. The Board of Appeals shall execute whatever Appellate Orders are necessary to enforce its determination. When a Judgement is overturned: a) If a majority of the Appellate Judges Judge REVERSE, then the CFJ shall be treated as if it were Judged normally, with the Judgement being that which a majority of the Appellate Judges agree on. b) If a majority of the Appellate Judges Judge REMAND, then the original Judgement shall be ignored, and the Clerk of the Courts shall reassign the CFJ to the original Judge as if it were being originally assigned. The Judge may not make the same Judgement for the same reason. c) Otherwise, the original Judgement is ignored, the original Judge is recused, and the Clerk of the Courts shall reassign the CFJ to a new Judge in the same fashion as it was originally assigned. The new Judge cannot make the same Judgement as the original Judge for the same reason. A Board of Appeals is not considered to have returned a Judgement until all of its members have submitted eir Judgements. As soon as possible after this happened, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce the Board's decision. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1447 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1448 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1448 by Proposal 1511, 24 March 1995 text: If any Justice fails to deliver Judgement within one week, e shall lose 10 points, and the CotC shall as soon as possible select another eligible player at random to serve as Justice in place of the defaulting Justice. The CotC is responsible for reporting this point change to the Scorekeepor. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1657, 14 August 1995 text: If any Justice fails to deliver Judgement within one week, e shall gain 3 blots, and the CotC shall as soon as possible select another eligible player at random to serve as Justice in place of the defaulting Justice. The CotC is responsible for reporting this Blot change to the Tabulator. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1449 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1449 by Proposal 1531, 24 March 1995 text: Let there be an Officer called to Assessor. The Assessor has a weekly salary of 5 Points. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 18 June 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Let there be an Officer called to Assessor. The Assessor has a weekly salary of 5 Points. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. text: Let there be an Officer called to Assessor. The Assessor has a weekly salary of 5 Points. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1776, 6 November 1995 text: There is an Office called the Office of Assessor. The Assessor has a weekly salary of 8 points. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: There is an Office called the Office of Assessor. The Assessor has a weekly salary of 8 Mils. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Assessor. The Assessor shall receive a weekly salary equal to 3 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Null-Amended(5) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Assessor. The Assessor shall receive a weekly salary equal to 3 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3693 (Steve), 26 February 1998 text: There shall exist the Office of Assessor. The Assessor shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3779 (Blob), 12 August 1998 text: There shall exist the Office of Assessor. The Assessor shall receive a weekly salary equal to 0.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Assessor shall also receive a Commission. At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, the Assessor shall pay out to emself an amount equal to 5% of the VTs spent on voting on that Proposal. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3827 (Kolja A.), 4 February 1999 text: There shall exist the Office of Assessor. The Assessor shall receive a salary equal to 0.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Assessor shall also receive a Commission. At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, the Assessor shall pay out to emself an amount equal to 5% of the VTs spent on voting on that Proposal. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: The Assessor There shall exist the Office of Assessor. The Assessor shall receive a salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. The Assessor shall also receive a Commission. At the end of the Voting Period for a Proposal, the Assessor shall pay out to emself an amount equal to 5% of the VTs spent on voting on that Proposal. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 text: There exists the Office of Assessor, whose responsibility it is to receive and announce the results of Votes on Proposals. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 text: (a) There exists the Office of Assessor, whose responsibility it is to receive and announce the results of Votes on Proposals. (b) The Assessor shall include the Voting Power of each entity on Ordinary and Democratic Proposals in eir Weekly Report. E may exclude entities whose Voting Power is zero on both Ordinary and Democratic Proposal from the Report. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Assessor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of Voting Entitlements and is responsible for receiving and announcing the results of votes on proposals. The Assessor's Weekly Report shall include a list of the identity, voting power on ordinary proposals, and voting power on democratic proposals for each entity with nonzero voting power on either ordinary or democratic proposals. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4255 (Steve), 21 February 2002 text: The Assessor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of Voting Entitlements and is responsible for receiving and announcing the results of votes on proposals. The Assessor's Weekly Report shall include a list of the identity, voting power on ordinary proposals, and voting power on democratic proposals for each entity with nonzero voting power on either ordinary or democratic proposals. (c) The Assessor's Budget shall consist of the Voting Entitlements per Player (VEPP), a real multiple of 0.1 between 0.5 and 2.0 inclusive. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4282 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: The Assessor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of Voting Entitlements and is responsible for receiving and announcing the results of votes on proposals. The Assessor's Weekly Report shall include a list of the identity and voting power for Proposals in each Chamber, for all entities with nonzero voting power in at least one Chamber. (c) The Assessor's Budget shall consist of the Voting Entitlements per Player (VEPP), a real multiple of 0.1 between 0.5 and 2.0 inclusive. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: The Assessor is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and announcing the results of votes on proposals. The Assessor's Weekly Report shall include * a list of the identity and voting power for Proposals in each Chamber, for all entities with nonzero voting power in at least one Chamber. * the Voting Potentials of every Player. * the prevailing mode of voting on Proposals. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: The Assessor is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and announcing the results of votes on proposals. The Assessor's weekly report shall include a list of the identity and voting limit for proposals in each chamber for each entity with nonzero voting power in at least one chamber. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1449 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1450 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1450 by Proposal 1547, 14 April 1995 text: If at any time the Speaker is also CotC or Justiciar, e shall transfer such Office to another willing player within one week, if possible. At the end of any full Nomic week during which the Speaker holds the Office of either CotC or Justiciar, such Office becomes vacant, and will be filled in the usual manner. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: The Speaker shall never hold either of the Office of Clerk of the Courts or the Office of Justiciar in the normal fashion. If the Clerk of the Courts or the Justiciar becomes Speaker, e is immediately retired from whichever of those Offices e holds. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3742 (Harlequin), 8 May 1998 text: If at any time the Speaker shall be the Electee to either the Office of CotC or the Office of Justiciar, e shall be retired from whichever of those Offices e is Electee to. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: If at any time the Speaker shall be the Electee to any of the Office of ADoP, the Office of CotC, or the Office of Justiciar, e shall be retired from whichever of those Offices e is Electee to. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4592 (Murphy), 4 July 2004 text: Whenever the Speaker is Electee to the Office of Clerk of the Courts, e is retired from that Office. Whenever the Speaker is Electee to the Office of Justiciar, e is retired from that Office. Whenever a Player is both Clerk of the Courts and Justiciar, e is removed from the Office of Justiciar. Neither the Speaker, the Justiciar, nor a nominee for Justiciar may be nominated for Clerk of the Courts. Neither the Speaker, the Clerk of the Courts, nor a nominee for Clerk of the Courts may be nominated for Justiciar. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The Speaker, Clerk of the Courts, and Promotor are mutually exclusive offices. A Player holding one of these offices may not come to simultaneously hold another of them, unless there are no other Players in the game eligible. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule that governs offices. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4939 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: The following sets of positions are mutually exclusive: a) Promotor and Assessor b) Speaker and Clerk of the Courts A player holding two or more positions within one of these sets is removed from all but one of them. If one of them is the Speakership, then e retains it; otherwise, e retains the position e came to hold most recently. This rule takes precedence over all rules governing offices. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5106 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: Any change in officeholdings that would result in a single entity holding the offices of promotor and assessor simultaneously is INVALID. This rule takes precedence over all other rules regarding offices. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5476 (Murphy; disi.), 27 March 2008 text: Any change in officeholdings that would result in a single entity holding the offices of Promotor and Assessor simultaneously is INVALID. This rule takes precedence over all other rules regarding offices. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1451 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1451 by Proposal 1549, 14 April 1995 text: A player may disown their own proposal if it has not yet been distributed or if no more than four days have passed since its distribution, by sending a statement disowning it to the Public Forum. The player so disowning a proposal loses a flat fee of five points, reported by the Assessor, but any other score changes, blots, or other effects resulting from the player's submission of that proposal, including but not limited to formatting penalties, rule repeal rewards, new player bonuses, and awards or penalties for votes cast on that proposal are cancelled and shall not be taken into account. The disowning Player does not receive any Extra Votes for a Proposal he disowned, even if it passes. Neither the Assessor nor any Player who has been Assessor since the beginning of the voting period on that proposal may disown a proposal, unless that proposal has not yet been distributed. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which would otherwise seek to reward or penalize any player based on the disowned proposal. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1700, 1 September 1995 text: A player may disown eir own proposal if it has not yet been distributed or if no more than four days have passed since its distribution, by sending a statement disowning it to the Public Forum. The player so disowning a proposal loses a flat fee of five points, reported by the Assessor, but any other score changes, blots, or other effects resulting from the player's submission of that proposal, including but not limited to formatting penalties, rule repeal rewards, new player bonuses, and awards or penalties for votes cast on that proposal are cancelled and shall not be taken into account. The disowning Player does not receive any Extra Votes for a Proposal he disowned, even if it passes. Neither the Assessor nor any Player who has been Assessor since the beginning of the voting period on that proposal may disown a proposal, unless that proposal has not yet been distributed. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which would otherwise seek to reward or penalize any player based on the disowned proposal. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2473, 16 February 1996 text: A Proposal is disowned when its Proposer sends a message to the Public Forum disowning it, provided that the Proposal in question either has not yet been distributed, or less than four days have passed since its distribution. Only the Proposer of a given Proposal is permitted to disown it. A Proposal which has been distributed is not permitted to be disowned if its Proposer is currently the Assessor or has been the Assessor at any time after that Proposal's distribution. When a Proposal is disowned, five Points are transferred from that Player to the Bank; this transfer is to be reported by the Assessor. All other transfers of Currencies or Blot Changes occuring as a result of the submission of, or voting upon, that Proposal do not take place, regardless of the outcome of the Vote on that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would seek to transfer Currencies or cause Blot Changes as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of, a Proposal. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2522, 10 March 1996 text: A Proposal is disowned when its Proposer sends a message to the Public Forum disowning it, provided that the Proposal in question either has not yet been distributed, or less than four days have passed since its distribution. Only the Proposer of a given Proposal is permitted to disown it. A Proposal which has been distributed is not permitted to be disowned if its Proposer is currently the Assessor or has been the Assessor at any time after that Proposal's distribution. When a Proposal is disowned, five Points are transferred from its Proposer to the Bank; this transfer is to be reported by the Assessor. All other transfers of Currencies or Blot Changes occuring as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of that Proposal do not take place, regardless of the outcome of the Vote on that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would seek to transfer Currencies or cause Blot Changes as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of, a Proposal. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: A Proposal is disowned when its Proposer sends a message to the Public Forum disowning it, provided that the Proposal in question either has not yet been distributed, or less than four days have passed since its distribution. Only the Proposer of a given Proposal is permitted to disown it. A Proposal which has been distributed is not permitted to be disowned if its Proposer is currently the Assessor or has been the Assessor at any time after that Proposal's distribution. When a Proposal is disowned, five Mils are transferred from its Proposer to the Bank; this transfer is to be reported by the Assessor. All other transfers of Currencies or Blot Changes occuring as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of that Proposal do not take place, regardless of the outcome of the Vote on that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would seek to transfer Currencies or cause Blot Changes as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of, a Proposal. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: A Proposal is disowned when its Proposer sends a message to the Public Forum disowning it, provided that the Proposal in question either has not yet been distributed, or less than four days have passed since its distribution. Only the Proposer of a given Proposal is permitted to disown it. A Proposal which has been distributed is not permitted to be disowned if its Proposer is currently the Assessor or has been the Assessor at any time after that Proposal's distribution. When a Proposal is disowned, five Mil are transferred from its Proposer to the Bank; this transfer is to be reported by the Assessor. All other transfers of Currencies or Blot Changes occuring as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of that Proposal do not take place, regardless of the outcome of the Vote on that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would seek to transfer Currencies or cause Blot Changes as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of, a Proposal. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: A Proposal is disowned when its Proposer sends a message to the Public Forum disowning it, provided that the Proposal in question either has not yet been distributed, or less than four days have passed since its distribution. Only the Proposer of a given Proposal is permitted to disown it. A Proposal which has been distributed is not permitted to be disowned if its Proposer is currently the Assessor or has been the Assessor at any time after that Proposal's distribution. When a Proposal is disowned, 1 VT are transferred from its Proposer to the Bank; this transfer is to be reported by the Assessor. All other transfers of Currencies or Blot Changes occuring as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of that Proposal do not take place, regardless of the outcome of the Vote on that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would seek to transfer Currencies or cause Blot Changes as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of, a Proposal. history: Infected and Amended(7) Substantially by Rule 1454, 23 April 1997 text: A Proposal is disowned when its Proposer sends a message to the Public Forum disowning it, provided that the Proposal in question either has not yet been distributed, or less than four days have passed since its distribution. Only the Proposer of a given Proposal is permitted to disown it. A Proposal which has been distributed is not permitted to be disowned if its Proposer is currently the Assessor or has been the Assessor at any time after that Proposal's distribution. When a Proposal is disowned, 1 VT are transferred from its Proposer to the Bank; this transfer is to be reported by the Assessor. All other transfers of Currencies or Blot Changes occuring as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of that Proposal do not take place, regardless of the outcome of the Vote on that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would seek to transfer Currencies or cause Blot Changes as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of, a Proposal. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3474 (Swann), 2 May 1997 text: A Proposal is disowned when its Proposer sends a message to the Public Forum disowning it, provided that the Proposal in question either has not yet been distributed, or less than four days have passed since its distribution. Only the Proposer of a given Proposal is permitted to disown it. A Proposal which has been distributed is not permitted to be disowned if its Proposer is currently the Assessor or has been the Assessor at any time after that Proposal's distribution. When a Proposal is disowned, one P-Note are transferred from its Proposer to the Bank; this transfer is to be reported by the Assessor. All other transfers of Currencies or Blot Changes occuring as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of that Proposal do not take place, regardless of the outcome of the Vote on that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would seek to transfer Currencies or cause Blot Changes as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of, a Proposal. This Rule, however, does not mandate the refund of any Petition fees already paid to the Bank. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Rule 1451, 7 May 1997 text: A Proposal is disowned when its Proposer sends a message to the Public Forum disowning it, provided that the Proposal in question either has not yet been distributed, or less than four days have passed since its distribution. Only the Proposer of a given Proposal is permitted to disown it. A Proposal which has been distributed is not permitted to be disowned if its Proposer is currently the Assessor or has been the Assessor at any time after that Proposal's distribution. When a Proposal is disowned, one P-Note are transferred from its Proposer to the Bank; this transfer is to be reported by the Assessor. All other transfers of Currencies or Blot Changes occuring as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of that Proposal do not take place, regardless of the outcome of the Vote on that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would seek to transfer Currencies or cause Blot Changes as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of, a Proposal. This Rule, however, does not mandate the refund of any Petition fees already paid to the Bank. history: Amended(10) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: A Proposal is disowned when its Proposer sends a message to the Public Forum disowning it, provided that the Proposal in question either has not yet been distributed, or less than four days have passed since its distribution. A Proposal can only be disowned by its Proposer, and then only if its Proposer is neither the Assessor nor has been the Assessor at any time after the distribution of that Proposal. The Assessor shall bill the disowning Player a fee of one P-Note. All other payments or awards of Currency which would result from the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of that Proposal do not take place, regardless of the outcome of the Vote on that Proposal. This Rule, however, neither requires nor permits any Payment Orders already executed as a result of this Proposal to be vacated. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would seek to cause the payment or award of Currencies as a result of the submission of, voting upon, or adoption of, a Disowned Proposal. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1451 by Proposal 3659 (Repeal-O-Matic), 17 January 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1452 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1452 by Proposal 1561, 17 April 1995 text: The Rulekeepor is given the authority to define a new Rule Category in the following specific situation: If the Category is not specified in a Proposal to Create a Rule, AND in the Rulekeepor's estimation none of the existing Rule Categories is appropriate, then the Rulekeepor may unilaterally define and create a new Category and assign the new Rule to this Category. The Rulekeepor must announce the creation of the new Category to the Public Forum no later than the publication of the first Rule Set which uses the new Category. The announcement may be in the same message as the Rule Set itself. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2577, 21 April 1996 text: The Rulekeepor is given the authority to define a new Rule Category in the following specific situation: If the Category is not specified in a Proposal to Create a Rule, AND in the Rulekeepor's estimation none of the existing Rule Categories is appropriate, then the Rulekeepor may unilaterally define and create a new Category and assign the new Rule to this Category. The Rulekeepor must announce the creation of the new Category to the Public Forum no later than the publication of the first Rule Set which uses the new Category. The announcement may be in the same message as the Rule Set itself. An empty Rule Category may be removed by the Rulekeepor as e sees fit. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1453 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1453 by Proposal 1566, 28 April 1995 text: There is a Patent Title known as the Order of Machiavelli. The Title is awarded to a Player when a Directive to award the Title to that Player is adopted. Any such Directive has an Adoption Index of 2. A Player ceases to hold the Title when a Directive to remove the Title from that Player is adopted. Any such Directive has an Adoption Index of 1. When a Player holds the Title of the Order of Machiavelli, e is entitled to cast a third vote on a Proposal. E does this by casting two Extra Votes on the Proposal. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1454 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1454 by Proposal 1573 (Steve), 28 April 1995 text: There is a Nomic Entity called the Virus which has the effect of altering the texts of Rules, in the manner and under the conditions set out below. This process is known as "infection". The effect of the Virus on a Rule, when it has an effect, is that of a non-Proposed Amendment to that Rule. Thus, the Virus can only be effective inasmuch as it satisfies the Rules for the effectiveness of non-Proposed Rule Changes. The selection of the Rule to be infected by the Virus occurs as follows: as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Rulekeepor shall select a random integer in the range [M,N], where M and N are, respectively, the numbers of the lowest and highest numbered Rules at the beginning of that week. Call a number selected in this way a Virus Number. If the Virus Number selected is the number of a Rule, then that Rule is infected as described below, and no further Virus Numbers are selected in that week. If the Virus Number is not the number of a Rule, then a new Virus Number is selected as above, unless five such Virus Numbers (which are not the numbers of a Rule) have already been selected in that week. In that case, the Virus is ineffective and no Rule is infected in that week. The Rulekeepor shall publish the results of the selection process in the Public Forum within 24 hours of the completion of that process. If a Rule has been infected, e shall announce the number of that Rule. If no Rule has been infected, then e shall that no Rule has been infected. An infected Rule is amended in the following way, given that other Rules permit it: if the Rule does not already contain the sentence "This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence.", then that sentence is appended to the Rule. If the Rule already contains the sentence, then the sentence is deleted from the Rule. There is one exception to the above: if this Rule is the infected Rule, then this Rule automatically Repeals itself. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1712, 12 September 1995 text: There is a Nomic Entity called the Virus which has the effect of altering the texts of Rules, in the manner and under the conditions set out below. This process is known as "infection". The effect of the Virus on a Rule, when it has an effect, is that of a non-Proposed Amendment to that Rule. Thus, the Virus can only be effective inasmuch as it satisfies the Rules for the effectiveness of non-Proposed Rule Changes. The selection of the Rule to be infected by the Virus occurs as follows: as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Rulekeepor shall select a random integer in the range [M,N], where M and N are, respectively, the numbers of the lowest and highest numbered Rules at the beginning of that week. Call a number selected in this way a Virus Number. If the Virus Number selected is the number of a Rule, then that Rule is infected as described below, and no further Virus Numbers are selected in that week. If the Virus Number is not the number of a Rule, then a new Virus Number is selected as above, unless five such Virus Numbers (which are not the numbers of a Rule) have already been selected in that week. In that case, the Virus is ineffective and no Rule is infected in that week. The Rulekeepor shall publish the results of the selection process in the Public Forum within 24 hours of the completion of that process. If a Rule has been infected, e shall announce the number of that Rule. If no Rule has been infected, then e shall announce that no Rule has been infected. An infected Rule is amended in the following way, given that other Rules permit it: if the Rule does not already contain the sentence "This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence.", then that sentence is appended to the Rule. If the Rule already contains the sentence, then the sentence is deleted from the Rule. There is one exception to the above: if this Rule is the infected Rule, then this Rule automatically Repeals itself. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1781, 13 November 1995 text: There is a Nomic Entity called the Virus which has the effect of altering the texts of Rules, in the manner and under the conditions set out below. This process is known as "infection". The effect of the Virus on a Rule, when it has an effect, is that of a non-Proposed Amendment to that Rule. Thus, the Virus can only be effective inasmuch as it satisfies the Rules for the effectiveness of non-Proposed Rule Changes. The selection of the Rule to be infected by the Virus occurs as follows: as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Rulekeepor shall select a random integer in the range [M,N], where M and N are, respectively, the numbers of the lowest and highest numbered Rules at the beginning of that week. Call a number selected in this way a Virus Number. If the Virus Number selected is the number of a Rule, then that Rule is infected as described below, and no further Virus Numbers are selected in that week. If the Virus Number is not the number of a Rule, then a new Virus Number is selected as above, unless five such Virus Numbers (none of which is the number of a Rule) have already been selected in that week. In that case, the Virus is ineffective and no Rule is infected in that week. The Rulekeepor shall publish the results of the selection process in the Public Forum within 24 hours of the completion of that process. If a Rule has been infected, e shall announce the number of that Rule. If no Rule has been infected, then e shall announce that no Rule has been infected. An infected Rule is amended in the following way, given that other Rules permit it: if the Rule does not already contain the sentence "This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence.", then that sentence is appended to the Rule. If the Rule already contains the sentence, then the sentence is deleted from the Rule. There is one exception to the above: if this Rule is the infected Rule, then this Rule automatically Repeals itself. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by Proposal 2738 (Swann), 7 November 1996 text: There is a Nomic Entity called the Virus which has the effect of altering the texts of Rules, in the manner and under the conditions set out below. This process is known as "infection". The effect of the Virus on a Rule, when it has an effect, is that of a non-Proposed Amendment to that Rule. Thus, the Virus can only be effective inasmuch as it satisfies the Rules for the effectiveness of non-Proposed Rule Changes. The selection of the Rule to be infected by the Virus occurs as follows: as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Rulekeepor shall select a random integer in the range [M,N], where M and N are, respectively, the numbers of the lowest and highest numbered Rules at the beginning of that week. Call a number selected in this way a Virus Number. If the Virus Number selected is the number of a Rule, then that Rule is infected as described below, and no further Virus Numbers are selected in that week. If the Virus Number is not the number of a Rule, then a new Virus Number is selected as above, unless five such Virus Numbers (none of which is the number of a Rule) have already been selected in that week. In that case, the Virus is ineffective and no Rule is infected in that week. The Rulekeepor shall publish the results of the selection process in the Public Forum within 24 hours of the completion of that process. If a Rule has been infected, e shall announce the number of that Rule. If no Rule has been infected, then e shall announce that no Rule has been infected. An infected Rule is amended in the following way, given that other Rules permit it: if the Rule does not already contain the sentence "This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence.", then that sentence is appended to the Rule. If the Rule already contains the sentence, then the sentence is deleted from the Rule. There is one exception to the above: if this Rule is the infected Rule, then this Rule automatically Repeals itself. All Rule Changes by the Virus shall be Unattributed. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity called the Virus which has the effect of altering the texts of Rules, in the manner and under the conditions set out below. This process is known as "infection". The effect of the Virus on a Rule, when it has an effect, is that of a non-Proposed Amendment to that Rule. Thus, the Virus can only be effective inasmuch as it satisfies the Rules for the effectiveness of non-Proposed Rule Changes. The selection of the Rule to be infected by the Virus occurs as follows: as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Rulekeepor shall select a random integer in the range [M,N], where M and N are, respectively, the numbers of the lowest and highest numbered Rules at the beginning of that week. Call a number selected in this way a Virus Number. If the Virus Number selected is the number of a Rule, then that Rule is infected as described below, and no further Virus Numbers are selected in that week. If the Virus Number is not the number of a Rule, then a new Virus Number is selected as above, unless five such Virus Numbers (none of which is the number of a Rule) have already been selected in that week. In that case, the Virus is ineffective and no Rule is infected in that week. The Rulekeepor shall publish the results of the selection process in the Public Forum within 24 hours of the completion of that process. If a Rule has been infected, e shall announce the number of that Rule. If no Rule has been infected, then e shall announce that no Rule has been infected. Given that other Rules permit it, an infected Rule is amended by appending to it the following paragraph: "This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule." There is one exception to the above: if this Rule is the infected Rule, then this Rule automatically Repeals itself. All Rule Changes by the Virus shall be Unattributed. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1454 by Proposal 3638 (Michael), 29 December 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1455 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1455 by Proposal 1575, 28 April 1995 text: A Contract is a Nomic Entity which has the legal force to require one or more Players to perform any action, or face penalties for Breach of Contract. Only Players may be parties to a Contract. A Contract must specify the identities of all Players who are parties of the Contract. A Contract may also specify any or all of the following: * How the Contract may be changed; if this is not specified, the Contract may not be changed after it has been enacted. * How the Contract may be dissolved; if this is not specified, the Contract may only be dissolved as specified in the Rules. * How additional parties may be joined to the Contract after it has been enacted; if this is not specified, additional parties may not be added to the Contract after it has been enacted. * How a party to the Contract may be released from the Contract; if this is not specified, no party of the Contract may be released from the Contract while the Contract continues to exist. * What actions the parties to the contract are required to perform, or are prohibited from performing, and under what conditions these requirements or prohibitions have force. * What penalties are imposed upon a party who breaches the Contract. A new Contract is entered into only when the Notary has received identical copies of the Contract from every party named in the Contract. The Notary shall send a notification to all parties of a contract as soon as possible after it has been legally entered into. The Contract shall be in force no sooner than the moment of that notification. A Contract ceases to have force at the moment it is dissolved in accordance with its own terms, or one or more of the parties of the Contract ceases to to be a Player, or the Contract is breached as described elsewhere. Whenever a Contract is changed in any way (including the addition of new parties to, or release of existing parties from), some party of the Contract must notify the Notary of the change as soon as possible after it occurs. In the case of a party being added to Contract, the change only has effect if that new party sends the notification to the Notary. The Notary shall forward this notification of change to all parties (including new parties and former parties, if appropriate) of the Contract as soon as possible thereafter. No Contract may be interpreted in such a way as to have any legal force on a Player who is not a party of the contract, or such that it requires a Player to be joined as a Party of the Contract. No term of a Contract may have retroactive effect. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Let there be a class of Organization known as a Contract, whose Compact can also be referred to as a Contract. A Contract consists only of Warranties, which are known as its Terms, the Players within its Jurisdiction are known as the Parties to the Contract, and the Administrator for all Contracts is the Notary. Contracts do not possess Treasuries, nor do they possess Executors. Contracts have the legal force to impose penalties upon Parties that do not abide by the Terms of the Contract. Parties that are unwilling or unable to abide by the Terms are said to be in Breach of the Contract. A Contract may specify the following: i) What actions the parties to the contract are required to perform, or are prohibited from performing, and under what conditions these requirements or prohibitions have force. ii) What penalties are imposed upon a party who Breaches the Contract. The Foundors of a Contract must be the set of all Parties to the Contract. In addition to what other Rules require them to provide to the Notary, the Foundors must also specify the following information: i) The identity of each Party to the Contract, each of whom must be named in the Terms of the Contract itself. Providing a unique Name for the Contract is optional, this takes precedence over the general requirements for information provided. If no Name is provided, the Notary must provide a unique Name for the Contract and provide this Name to all Parties. Parties can then change the Name as provided for in the Contract or in other Rules. A Contract is Private, and the Notary shall send a notification to all the Parties of a Contract As Soon As Possible after it has been legally entered into. The Contract shall be in force no sooner than the moment of that notification. A Contract ceases to have force at the moment it is dissolved in accordance with its Terms, or one or more of the Parties of the Contract ceases to be a Player, or the Contract is breached as described elsewhere. When a Contract is changed (including any change in the Parties) a current Party to the Contract must inform the Notary of the change as soon as possible after it occurs. If a Party is being added to, or removed from, the Contract, the change only has effect if _that_ Party sends the notification. The Notary shall forward this notification of change to all current Parties of the Contract As Soon As Possible thereafter. text: Let there be a class of Organization known as a Contract, whose Compact can also be referred to as a Contract. A Contract consists only of Warranties, which are known as its Terms, the Players within its Jurisdiction are known as the Parties to the Contract, and the Administrator for all Contracts is the Notary. Contracts do not possess Treasuries, nor do they possess Executors. Contracts have the legal force to impose penalties upon Parties that do not abide by the Terms of the Contract. Parties that are unwilling or unable to abide by the Terms are said to be in Breach of the Contract. A Contract may specify the following: i) What actions the parties to the contract are required to perform, or are prohibited from performing, and under what conditions these requirements or prohibitions have force. ii) What penalties are imposed upon a party who Breaches the Contract. The Foundors of a Contract must be the set of all Parties to the Contract. In addition to what other Rules require them to provide to the Notary, the Foundors must also specify the following information: i) The identity of each Party to the Contract, each of whom must be named in the Terms of the Contract itself. Providing a unique Name for the Contract is optional, this takes precedence over the general requirements for information provided. If no Name is provided, the Notary must provide a unique Name for the Contract and provide this Name to all Parties. Parties can then change the Name as provided for in the Contract or in other Rules. A Contract is Private, and the Notary shall send a notification to all the Parties of a Contract As Soon As Possible after it has been legally entered into. The Contract shall be in force no sooner than the moment of that notification. A Contract ceases to have force at the moment it is dissolved in accordance with its Terms, or one or more of the Parties of the Contract ceases to be a Player, or the Contract is breached as described elsewhere. When a Contract is changed (including any change in the Parties) a current Party to the Contract must inform the Notary of the change as soon as possible after it occurs. If a Party is being added to, or removed from, the Contract, the change only has effect if _that_ Party sends the notification. The Notary shall forward this notification of change to all current Parties of the Contract As Soon As Possible thereafter. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1456 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1456 by Proposal 1575, 28 April 1995 text: All parties to a Contract must abide by all terms of the Contract at all times, or suffer the penalties for breach of Contract. A Contract is breached if any party to the Contract fails, due to neglect, inability, or unwillingness, to perform any action required of em by the Contract, or performs, voluntarily or involuntarily, any action prohibited of em by the Contract. In the event that a party would be required to violate the Rules in any way in order to uphold a Contract, the party is required to breach the Contract. A party which breaches a Contract shall immediately lose 20 Points, and gain 3 Blots. In addition, 30 Points shall be taken from the party in breach and distributed as evenly as possible to the other parties of the Contract, with any remainder being destroyed. If the party in breach does not have enough Points for all of these transfers to be executed in full, they shall be deferred until such time as the party in breach has sufficient Points such that all of these transfers may be executed in full. A Contract may specify additional penalties which are to be imposed in the event of a breach; however, such penalties shall be limited to the mandatory transfer of Points or Currencies from the party who breached the Contract to any or all of the other parties of the contract. The Notary shall be responsible for reporting all Score, Currency, and Blot changes which arise as a result of this Rule. All Point Penalties herein are non-punitive. In the event of a breach, the Notary shall have the authority to order those Point and Currency forfeitures and transfers which are required by the Rules pertaining to Contracts and by the Contract which has been breached. This authority is limited to ordering the forfeiture of Points possessed by the party in breach and the transfer of Points or Currencies from the party in breach to any or all of the other parties of the Contract, but only to the extent permitted by the Rules pertaining to Contracts and by the Contract which has been breached. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1682, 22 August 1995 text: All parties to a Contract must abide by all terms of the Contract at all times, or suffer the penalties for breach of Contract. A Contract is breached if any party to the Contract fails, due to neglect, inability, or unwillingness, to perform any action required of em by the Contract, or performs, voluntarily or involuntarily, any action prohibited of em by the Contract. In the event that a party would be required to violate the Rules in any way in order to uphold a Contract, the party is required to breach the Contract. A party which breaches a Contract commits a Class C Crime. In addition, 30 Points shall be taken from the party in breach and distributed as evenly as possible to the other parties of the Contract, with any remainder being destroyed. If the party in breach does not have enough Points for all of these transfers to be executed in full, they shall be deferred until such time as the party in breach has sufficient Points such that all of these transfers may be executed in full. A Contract may specify additional penalties which are to be imposed in the event of a breach; however, such penalties shall be limited to the mandatory transfer of Points or Currencies from the party who breached the Contract to any or all of the other parties of the contract. The Notary shall be responsible for reporting all Score, Currency, and Blot changes which arise as a result of this Rule. All Point Penalties herein are non-punitive. In the event of a breach, the Notary shall have the authority to order those Point and Currency forfeitures and transfers which are required by the Rules pertaining to Contracts and by the Contract which has been breached. This authority is limited to ordering the forfeiture of Points possessed by the party in breach and the transfer of Points or Currencies from the party in breach to any or all of the other parties of the Contract, but only to the extent permitted by the Rules pertaining to Contracts and by the Contract which has been breached. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1696, 1 September 1995 text: All parties to a Contract must abide by all terms of the Contract at all times, or suffer the penalties for breach of Contract. A Contract is breached if any party to the Contract fails, due to neglect, inability, or unwillingness, to perform any action required of em by the Contract, or performs, voluntarily or involuntarily, any action prohibited of em by the Contract. In the event that a party would be required to violate the Rules in any way in order to uphold a Contract, the party is required to breach the Contract. The following shall take place in the event that a party of a Contract breaches that contract: * 20 Marks shall be immediately transferred from the breaching Player to the Bank. * The breaching Player shall gain 3 Blots. * 30 Marks shall be divided as evenly as possible and transferred from the breaching Player to each of the other parties of the Contract. A Contract may specify additional penalties which are to be imposed in the event of a breach; however, such penalties shall be limited to the mandatory transfer of Points or Currencies from the party who breached the Contract to any or all of the other parties of the contract. The Notary shall be responsible for reporting all Score, Currency, and Blot changes which arise as a result of this Rule. All Point Penalties herein are non-punitive. In the event of a breach, the Notary shall have the authority to order those Point and Currency forfeitures and transfers which are required by the Rules pertaining to Contracts and by the Contract which has been breached. This authority is limited to ordering the forfeiture of Points possessed by the party in breach and the transfer of Points or Currencies from the party in breach to any or all of the other parties of the Contract, but only to the extent permitted by the Rules pertaining to Contracts and by the Contract which has been breached. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: A Contract is Breached if any party to the Contract fails, for any reason, to perform any action required of em by the Contract, or performs, for any reason, any action prohibited of em by the Contract. A Breach is officially determined when the Notary finds a Player in Violation of the Contract's Terms, as described in other Rules. If a Party cannot fulfill the Terms of the Contract because to do so would conflict with the Rules, e is required to Breach the Contract and must suffer the penalties for a Breach. (This applies even if other Rules absolve the Party from obeying the Terms.) The following shall take place in the event that a party of a Contract breaches that contract: i) 20 Marks shall be immediately transferred from the breaching Player to the Bank. ii) The breaching Player shall gain 3 Blots. iii) 30 Marks shall be divided as evenly as possible and transferred from the breaching Player to each of the other parties of the Contract. A Contract may specify additional penalties which are to be imposed in the event of a breach; however, such penalties shall be limited to the transfer of Currencies from the party who breached the Contract to any or all of the other Parties of the Contract. The Notary shall be responsible for reporting all Currency and Blot changes which arise as a result of this Rule. In the event of a breach, the Notary shall have the authority to order all specifically enumerated Currency transfers required by the Rules pertaining to Contracts and by the Contract which has been Breached. This authority is limited to ordering the transfer of Currencies from the Party in breach to the Bank and/or to other Parties of the Contract. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1457 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1457 by Proposal 1575, 28 April 1995 text: When any party to a Contract believes the Contract has been breached, that party shall inform the Notary that e believes the Contract has been breached, specifying which party e believes breached the Contract. The Notary shall then, as soon as possible, distribute this notice to all parties of the Contract. If, within seven days of this distribution, no party of the Contract disputes the claim of breach, the Notary shall declare the Contract breached, and order any and all forfeitures and transfers of Points and Currencies that may be required by the Rules or the Contract in the event of a breach. If, however, any party disputes the claim of breach within seven days, then any party of the Contract in dispute may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific party of the Contract has breached the Contract. No Player who is not a party of the Contract in question may make such a Call for Judgement, nor may such a Call for Judgement be made in any other circumstance. All Players who are parties to the Contract are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. In the event that such a CFJ is found TRUE, the Contract is breached, and the Notary shall perform the same duties as when no party contests the claim. In the event that such a CFJ is found FALSE, the Player which made the Call for Judgement shall lose 5 Points, which shall be reported by the Notary. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1697, 1 September 1995 text: When any party to a Contract believes the Contract has been breached, that party shall inform the Notary that e believes the Contract has been breached, specifying which party e believes breached the Contract. The Notary shall then, as soon as possible, distribute this notice to all parties of the Contract. If, within seven days of this distribution, no party of the Contract disputes the claim of breach, the Notary shall declare the Contract breached, and order any and all forfeitures and transfers of Points and Currencies that may be required by the Rules or the Contract in the event of a breach. If, however, any party disputes the claim of breach within seven days, then any party of the Contract in dispute may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific party of the Contract has breached the Contract. No Player who is not a party of the Contract in question may make such a Call for Judgement, nor may such a Call for Judgement be made in any other circumstance. All Players who are parties to the Contract are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. In the event that such a CFJ is found TRUE, the Contract is breached, and the Notary shall perform the same duties as when no party contests the claim. In the event that such a CFJ is found FALSE, the Player which called the CFJ shall lose 5 Marks; this transfer shall be detected and reported by the Notary. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: When any Player within the Jurisdiction of a Compact believes the Compact to have been Violated by another Player, e shall inform the Administrator of that Compact's Organization of that belief, along with the nature of the Violation, the Violated text of the Compact, and the identity of the Violating Player. The Administrator shall then, As Soon As Possible, distribute this information to all Players within the Jurisdiction of the Violated Compact. If, within seven days of this distribution, no Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction disputes the claim, the Administrator shall declare the Compact Violated. The Administrator is then allowed to initiate any corrections and penalties allowed by the Rules and eir Organization's Compact. If, however, any Player under the Compact's Jurisdiction disputes the claim of Violation within seven days, then any Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific Player has Violated the Compact. Such a Call for Judgement cannot be made in any other circumstance. All Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. In the event that such a CFJ is found TRUE, the Compact has been Violated and the Compact's Administrator shall perform the same duties as when no Player contests the claim. In the event that such a CFJ is found FALSE, the Player which called the CFJ shall lose 5 Marks to the Bank; this transfer shall be detected and reported by the Administrator of the Compact's Organization, if the Organization does not possess a Treasury, by its Executor otherwise. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2604, 26 May 1996 text: When any Player within the Jurisdiction of a Compact believes the Compact to have been Violated by another Player, e shall inform the Administrator of that Compact's Organization of that belief, along with the nature of the Violation, the Violated text of the Compact, and the identity of the Violating Player. The Administrator shall then, As Soon As Possible, distribute this information to all Players within the Jurisdiction of the Violated Compact. If, within seven days of this distribution, no Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction disputes the claim, the Administrator shall declare the Compact Violated. The Administrator is then allowed to initiate any corrections and penalties allowed by the Rules and eir Organization's Compact. If, however, any Player under the Compact's Jurisdiction disputes the claim of Violation within seven days, then any Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific Player has Violated the Compact. Such a Call for Judgement cannot be made in any other circumstance. All Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. In the event that such a CFJ is found TRUE, the Compact has been Violated and the Compact's Administrator shall perform the same duties as when no Player contests the claim. In the event that such a CFJ is found FALSE, the Player which called the CFJ shall lose 1 Mil to the Bank; this transfer shall be detected and reported by the Administrator of the Compact's Organization, if the Organization does not possess a Treasury, by its Executor otherwise. history: Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, 4 July 1996 text: When any Player within the Jurisdiction of a Compact believes the Compact to have been Violated by another Player, e shall inform the Administrator of that Compact's Organization of that belief, along with the nature of the Violation, the Violated text of the Compact, and the identity of the Violating Player. The Administrator shall then, As Soon As Possible, distribute this information to all Players within the Jurisdiction of the Violated Compact. If, within seven days of this distribution, no Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction disputes the claim, the Administrator shall declare the Compact Violated. The Administrator is then allowed to initiate any corrections and penalties allowed by the Rules and eir Organization's Compact. If, however, any Player under the Compact's Jurisdiction disputes the claim of Violation within seven days, then any Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific Player has Violated the Compact. Such a Call for Judgement cannot be made in any other circumstance. All Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. In the event that such a CFJ is found TRUE, the Compact has been Violated and the Compact's Administrator shall perform the same duties as when no Player contests the claim. In the event that such a CFJ is found FALSE, the Player which called the CFJ shall lose 1 Mil to the Bank; this transfer shall be detected and reported by the Administrator of the Compact's Organization, if the Organization does not possess a Treasury, by its Executor otherwise. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: When any Player believes that a Subordinate Legal Code (SLC) has been violated by a Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction e shall inform the Maintainer of that SLC of that belief, along with the nature of the violation, the violated text of the SLC, and the identity of the violating Player. The Maintainer shall then, as soon as possible, distribute this information to all Players within the Jurisdiction of the violated SLC. If, within 72 hours of this distribution, no Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim, the Maintainer shall declare the SLC violated. The Maintainer is then allowed to initiate any corrections and penalties allowed by the Rules and the violated SLC. If, any Player under the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim of violation within 72 hours, then any Player may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific Player has violated the Compact. Such a CFJ cannot be made in any other circumstance. All Players within the SLC's Jurisdiction are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. Whenever such a CFJ is found TRUE, the SLC has been violated and the SLC's Maintainer shall perform the same duties as when no Player contests the claim. If such a TRUE Judgement is overturned on Appeal, those actions shall be reversed to the extent possible immediately upon the resolution of the appeal. Whenever such a CFJ is found FALSE, the Player who called the CFJ is guilty of an Infraction whose penalty is 1 Mil. This Infraction transfer shall be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. If such a FALSE Judgement is overturned upon appeal, this Mil shall be refunded to eim, this transfer to be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(6) Cosmetically by Proposal 2745 (Swann), 18 November 1996 text: When any Player believes that a Subordinate Legal Code (SLC) has been violated by a Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction e shall inform the Maintainer of that SLC of that belief, along with the nature of the violation, the violated text of the SLC, and the identity of the violating Player. The Maintainer shall then, as soon as possible, distribute this information to all Players within the Jurisdiction of the violated SLC. If, within 72 hours of this distribution, no Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim, the Maintainer shall declare the SLC violated. The Maintainer is then allowed to initiate any corrections and penalties allowed by the Rules and the violated SLC. If, any Player under the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim of violation within 72 hours, then any Player may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific Player has violated the SLC. Such a CFJ cannot be made in any other circumstance. All Players within the SLC's Jurisdiction are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. Whenever such a CFJ is found TRUE, the SLC has been violated and the SLC's Maintainer shall perform the same duties as when no Player contests the claim. If such a TRUE Judgement is overturned on Appeal, those actions shall be reversed to the extent possible immediately upon the resolution of the appeal. Whenever such a CFJ is found FALSE, the Player who called the CFJ is guilty of an Infraction whose penalty is 1 Mil. This Infraction transfer shall be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. If such a FALSE Judgement is overturned upon appeal, this Mil shall be refunded to eim, this transfer to be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(7) Cosmetically by Proposal 2830 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: When any Player believes that a Subordinate Legal Code (SLC) has been violated by a Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction e shall inform the Maintainer of that SLC of that belief, along with the nature of the violation, the violated text of the SLC, and the identity of the violating Player. The Maintainer shall then, as soon as possible, distribute this information to all Players within the Jurisdiction of the violated SLC. If, within 72 hours of this distribution, no Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim, the Maintainer shall declare the SLC violated. The Maintainer is then allowed to initiate any corrections and penalties allowed by the Rules and the violated SLC. If, any Player under the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim of violation within 72 hours, then any Player may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific Player has violated the SLC. Such a CFJ cannot be made in any other circumstance. All Players within the SLC's Jurisdiction are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. Whenever such a CFJ is found TRUE, the SLC has been violated and the SLC's Maintainer shall perform the same duties as when no Player contests the claim. If such a TRUE Judgement is overturned on Appeal, those actions shall be reversed to the extent possible immediately upon the resolution of the appeal. Whenever such a CFJ is found FALSE, the Player who called the CFJ is guilty of the Infraction of False Claim of SLC Violation whose penalty is 1 Mil. This Infraction transfer shall be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. If such a FALSE Judgement is overturned upon appeal, this Mil shall be refunded to eim, this transfer to be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3473 (Harlequin; disi.), 2 May 1997 text: When any Player believes that a Subordinate Legal Code (SLC) has been violated by a Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction e shall inform the Maintainer of that SLC of that belief, along with the nature of the violation, the violated text of the SLC, and the identity of the violating Player. The Maintainer shall then, as soon as possible, distribute this information to all Players within the Jurisdiction of the violated SLC. If, within 72 hours of this distribution, no Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim, the Maintainer shall declare the SLC violated. The Maintainer is then allowed to initiate any corrections and penalties allowed by the Rules and the violated SLC. If, any Player under the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim of violation within 72 hours, then any Player may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific Player has violated the SLC. Such a CFJ cannot be made in any other circumstance. All Players within the SLC's Jurisdiction are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. Whenever such a CFJ is found TRUE, the SLC has been violated and the SLC's Maintainer shall perform the same duties as when no Player contests the claim. If such a TRUE Judgement is overturned on Appeal, those actions shall be reversed to the extent possible immediately upon the resolution of the appeal. Whenever such a CFJ is found FALSE, the Player who called the CFJ is guilty of the Infraction of False Claim of SLC Violation whose penalty is 0.5 VTs. This Infraction transfer shall be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. If such a FALSE Judgement is overturned upon appeal, this VT shall be refunded to eim, this transfer to be detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(9) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(10) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: When any Player believes that a Subordinate Legal Code (SLC) has been violated by a Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction e shall inform the Maintainer of that SLC of that belief, along with the nature of the violation, the violated text of the SLC, and the identity of the violating Player. The Maintainer shall then, as soon as possible, distribute this information to all Players within the Jurisdiction of the violated SLC. If, within 72 hours of this distribution, no Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim, the Maintainer shall declare the SLC violated. The Maintainer is then allowed to initiate any corrections and penalties allowed by the Rules and the violated SLC. If, any Player under the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim of violation within 72 hours, then any Player may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific Player has violated the SLC. Such a CFJ cannot be made in any other circumstance. All Players within the SLC's Jurisdiction are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. Whenever such a CFJ is found TRUE, the SLC has been violated and the SLC's Maintainer shall perform the same duties as when no Player contests the claim. If such a TRUE Judgement is overturned on Appeal, those actions shall be reversed to the extent possible immediately upon the resolution of the appeal. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: When any Player believes that a Subordinate Legal Code (SLC) has been violated by a Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction e shall inform the Maintainer of that SLC of that belief, along with the nature of the violation, the violated text of the SLC, and the identity of the violating Player. The Maintainer shall then, as soon as possible, distribute this information to all Players within the Jurisdiction of the violated SLC. If, within 72 hours of this distribution, no Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim, the Maintainer shall declare the SLC violated. The Maintainer is then allowed to initiate any corrections and penalties allowed by the Rules and the violated SLC. If any Player under the SLC's Jurisdiction disputes the claim of violation within 72 hours, then any Player may submit a Call for Judgement, alleging that a specific Player has violated the SLC. Such a CFJ cannot be made in any other circumstance. All Players within the SLC's Jurisdiction are automatically ineligible to Judge such a CFJ. Whenever such a CFJ is found TRUE, the SLC has been violated and the SLC's Maintainer shall perform the same duties as when no Player contests the claim. If such a TRUE Judgement is overturned on Appeal, those actions shall be reversed to the extent possible immediately upon the resolution of the appeal. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: Only Players within the Jurisdiction of a SLC may CFJ that a Player has violated that SLC. All Players within the Jurisdiction of a SLC are automatically ineligible to Judge a CFJ that a Player has violated that SLC. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1457 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1458 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1458 by Proposal 1575, 28 April 1995 text: There shall exist an Officer called the Notary. The Notary shall generally be responsible for the administration of Contracts and Contract Law. The Notary shall maintain a record of all Contracts legally entered into. E shall retain a copy of a Contract as long as it is legally in force. The Notary's Salary shall be 3 Points per Nomic Week. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: There shall exist an Officer called the Notary. The Notary shall generally be responsible for maintaining a Record of Organizations and the Players under the Jurisdiction of their Compacts. The Notary shall maintain an up-to-date list of the Names of all Organizations, and an up-to-date list of the Players under the Jurisdiction of the Compacts of those Organizations. E Shall also keep track of the Administrators of each Organization, and the Executors of those Organizations with Treasuries. The Notary's Salary shall be 5 Points per Nomic Week. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2451, 6 February 1996 text: There shall exist an Officer called the Notary. The Notary shall generally be responsible for maintaining a Record of Organizations and the Players under the Jurisdiction of their Compacts. The Notary shall maintain an up-to-date list of the Names of all Organizations, and an up-to-date list of the Players under the Jurisdiction of the Compacts of those Organizations. E Shall also keep track of the Administrators of each Organization, and the Executors of those Organizations with Treasuries. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: There shall exist an Officer called the Notary. The Notary shall generally be responsible for maintaining a Record of Organizations and the Players under the Jurisdiction of their SLCs. The Notary shall maintain an up-to-date record of the following; i) The Name of every Organization. ii) The Administrator of every Organization. iii) The Executor of every Organization. iv) The Maintainer of every Organization's SLC. v) The Players within the Jurisdiction of every Organization's SLC. history: Amended(4) Cosmetically by Proposal 2810 (Blob), 8 February 1997 text: Let there exist the Office of Notary. The Notary shall generally be responsible for maintaining a Record of Organizations and the Players under the Jurisdiction of their SLCs. The Notary shall maintain an up-to-date record of the following; i) The Name of every Organization. ii) The Administrator of every Organization. iii) The Executor of every Organization. iv) The Maintainer of every Organization's SLC. v) The Players within the Jurisdiction of every Organization's SLC. history: Infected and Amended(5) Substantially by Rule 1454, 12 October 1997 text: Let there exist the Office of Notary. The Notary shall generally be responsible for maintaining a Record of Organizations and the Players under the Jurisdiction of their SLCs. The Notary shall maintain an up-to-date record of the following; i) The Name of every Organization. ii) The Administrator of every Organization. iii) The Executor of every Organization. iv) The Maintainer of every Organization's SLC. v) The Players within the Jurisdiction of every Organization's SLC. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Rule 1458, 26 October 1997 text: Let there exist the Office of Notary. The Notary shall generally be responsible for maintaining a Record of Organizations and the Players under the Jurisdiction of their SLCs. The Notary shall maintain an up-to-date record of the following; i) The Name of every Organization. ii) The Administrator of every Organization. iii) The Executor of every Organization. iv) The Maintainer of every Organization's SLC. v) The Players within the Jurisdiction of every Organization's SLC. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: Let there exist the Office of Notary. The Notary shall generally be responsible for maintaining a Record of Organizations and the Players under the Jurisdiction of their SLCs. The Notary shall maintain an up-to-date record of the following; i) The Name of every Organization. ii) The Administrator of every Organization. iii) The Executor of every Organization. iv) The Maintainer of every Organization's SLC. v) The Players within the Jurisdiction of every Organization's SLC. The Notary shall receive a Salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 text: There exists the Office of Notary, whose responsibility it is to maintain a Record of Organizations and their Jurisdictions. The Notary's Report includes the following information, for every Organization: i) Its Name. ii) Its Administrator. iii) Its Executor. iv) The Maintainer of its SLC. v) The Players within the Jurisdiction of its SLC. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: The Notary's Report shall include the following information for each Organization: (i) its name; (ii) its Administrator; (iii) its Executor; (iv) its SLC's Maintainer; and (v) its Jurisdiction's Players. Also, as soon as possible after the creation or dissolution of any Organization, the Notary shall announce that fact. If an Organization is created, the Notary shall announce the above information for that Organization. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 01-002 (Blob), 2 February 2001 text: There exists the Office of Notary, whose responsibility it is to maintain a Record of Organizations and their Jurisdictions. The Notary's Report shall include the following information for each Organization: (i) its name; (ii) its Administrator; (iii) its Executor; (iv) its SLC's Maintainer; and (v) its Jurisdiction's Players. Also, as soon as possible after the creation or dissolution of any Organization, the Notary shall announce that fact. If an Organization is created, the Notary shall announce the above information for that Organization. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Notary is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining a record of organizations and their jurisdictions. The Notary's Report shall include the following information for each Organization: (i) its name; (ii) its Administrator; (iii) its Executor; (iv) its SLC's Maintainer; and (v) its Jurisdiction's Players. Also, as soon as possible after the creation or dissolution of any Organization, the Notary shall announce that fact. If an Organization is created, the Notary shall announce the above information for that Organization. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: The Notary is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining a record of organizations and their jurisdictions, and generic information, excluding holdings, of currencies. The Notary's Report shall include the following information: (A) For each organization: (i) its name; (ii) its Administrator; (iii) its Executor; (iv) its SLC's Maintainer; and (v) its Jurisdiction's Players. (B) For each currency, its name, mintor, recordkeepor, and Minimum Unit Quantity. Also, as soon as possible after the creation or dissolution of any Organization, the Notary shall announce that fact. If an Organization is created, the Notary shall announce the above information for that Organization. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4510 (Sherlock), 10 July 2003 text: The Notary is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining a record of organizations and their jurisdictions. The Notary's Weekly Report shall include the following information for each Organization: (i) its name; (ii) its Administrator; (iii) its Executor; (iv) its SLC's Maintainer; and (v) its Jurisdiction's Players. The Notary's Monthly Report shall include the SLC of each Organization. Also, as soon as possible after the creation or dissolution of any Organization, the Notary shall announce that fact. If an Organization is created, the Notary shall announce the above information for that Organization. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4525 (Murphy), 28 August 2003 text: The Notary is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining a record of organizations and their jurisdictions. The Notary's Weekly Report shall include the following information for each Organization: (i) its name; (ii) its Administrator; (iii) its Executor; (iv) its SLC's Maintainer; and (v) its Jurisdiction's Players. The Notary's Monthly Report shall include the Charter of each Organization. Also, as soon as possible after the creation or dissolution of any Organization, the Notary shall announce that fact. If an Organization is created, the Notary shall announce the above information for that Organization. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 text: The Notary is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining a record of organizations and their jurisdictions. The Notary's weekly report shall include the following information for each organization: a) Its name. b) Its administrator. c) Its executor. d) The maintainer of its charter. e) A list of players within its jurisdiction. The Notary's monthly report shall include the charter of each organization. As soon as possible after the creation or dissolution of an organization, the Notary shall announce that fact. If an organization is created, the Notary shall announce the above information for that organization. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1458 by Proposal 4698 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1459 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1459 by Proposal 1575, 18 April 1995 text: A Player who is or has been Notary may not divulge any part of any Contract which was entered into or was in force during the time that e is or was Notary. However, the following disclosures are legal, as noted: * Disclosure of part or all of a Contract, to any party of that Contract; * Disclosure of part or all of any Contract, to the current Notary; * Disclosure of part or all of any Contract, to a Judge or Justice who believes that knowledge of the contents of the Contract is necessary for em to Judge a CFJ. If a Judge or Justice requires disclosure of a Contract to em for the purpose of Judging a CFJ, the Notary is required to provide a copy of the Contract to the Judge or Justice as soon as possible after the Judge's or Justice's request. The Judge or Justice receiving the contract is then bound by the same strictures of nondisclosure as is the Notary, and is further prohibited from attaching a copy of it to eir Judgement as evidence. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would require the Notary to provide such records upon request, and which would require a Judge to include a copy of a Contract as part of the evidence justifying eir Ruling. In addition, this Rule shall never be construed such that a Player may not disclose part of all of any Contract of which e is a party. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1684, 29 August 1995 text: A Player who is or has been Notary may not divulge any part of any Contract which was entered into or was in force during the time that e is or was Notary. However, the following disclosures are legal, as noted: * Disclosure of part or all of a Contract, to any party of that Contract; * Disclosure of part or all of any Contract, to the current Notary; * Disclosure of part or all of any Contract, to a Judge or Justice judging a CFJ, where the Caller of the CFJ is a party to the Contract, and the evidence provided by the Caller of the CFJ contains text purported to be part or all of the Contract. If a Judge or Justice requires disclosure of a Contract to em for the purpose of Judging a CFJ, the Notary is required to provide a copy of the Contract to the Judge or Justice as soon as possible after the Judge's or Justice's request. The Judge or Justice receiving the contract is then bound by the same strictures of nondisclosure as is the Notary, and is further prohibited from attaching a copy of it to eir Judgement as evidence. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would require the Notary to provide such records upon request, and which would require a Judge to include a copy of a Contract as part of the evidence justifying eir Ruling. In addition, this Rule shall never be construed such that a Player may not disclose part of all of any Contract of which e is a party. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: An Organization can only be Private if the Rules defining its Class permit (or require) it to be Private. If its Class permits Privacy, but does not require it, an Organization is not Private unless its Compact claims Privacy. The Compact of a Private Organization are privileged, and may only be divulged by Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction. (This defers to the Compact where it forbids such disclosure.) The following are the only legal exceptions: i) Disclosure of any part of the Compact to a Player within its Jurisdiction. ii) Disclosure of any part of the Compact to the current Notary. iii) Disclosure of any part of the Compact to a Judge or Justice judging a CFJ, where the Caller of the CFJ is a Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction, and the evidence provided by the Caller of the CFJ contains text purported to be part or all of the Compact. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would require any Player to provide the Compact of a Private Organization upon request. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1789, 13 November 1995 text: An Organization can only be Private if the Rules defining its Class permit (or require) it to be Private. If its Class permits Privacy, but does not require it, an Organization is not Private unless its Compact claims Privacy. Any Organization which is not a Private Organization is a Public Organization. The Compact of a Private Organization are privileged, and may only be divulged by Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction. (This defers to the Compact where it forbids such disclosure.) The following are the only legal exceptions: i) Disclosure of any part of the Compact to a Player within its Jurisdiction. ii) Disclosure of any part of the Compact to the current Notary. iii) Disclosure of any part of the Compact to a Judge or Justice judging a CFJ, where the Caller of the CFJ is a Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction, and the evidence provided by the Caller of the CFJ contains text purported to be part or all of the Compact. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would require any Player to provide the Compact of a Private Organization upon request. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1460 history: Created, ca. May 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1461 history: Created, ca. May 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1462 history: Created, ca. May 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1463 history: Created, ca. May 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1464 history: Created, ca. May 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1465 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1465 by Proposal 1594 (Steve), 2 June 1995 text: Any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule shall be granted the Champion's Reward: the right to cast a third vote on Proposals. The Champion's Reward shall be granted to a winning Player beginning at the start of the first full Nomic Week after the the legal and correct announcement that that Player has won a game. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from this time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. Responsibility is given to the Registrar to accurately record in eir Report the times of commencement and conclusion of Champion's Rewards. In addition, ten Extra Votes shall be created and given to any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule, at the commencement of that Player's Champion's Reward. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1663, 18 August 1995 text: Any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule shall be granted the Champion's Reward: the right to cast a third vote on Proposals. The Champion's Reward shall be granted to a winning Player beginning at the start of the first full Nomic Week after the the legal and correct announcement that that Player has won a game. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from this time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. Responsibility is given to the Registrar to accurately record in eir Report the times of commencement and conclusion of of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn. In addition, ten Extra Votes shall be created and given to any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule, at the commencement of that Player's Champion's Reward. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1721, 6 October 1995 text: Any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule shall be granted the Champion's Reward: the right to cast a third vote on Proposals. The Champion's Reward shall be granted to a winning Player beginning at the start of the first full Nomic Week after the the legal and correct announcement that that Player has won a game. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from this time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. Responsibility is given to the Registrar to accurately record in eir Report the times of commencement and conclusion of of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn. In addition, ten Extra Votes shall be transferred from the Bank to any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule, at the commencement of that Player's Champion's Reward. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2484, 16 February 1996 text: Any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule shall be granted the Champion's Reward: the right to cast a third vote on Proposals. The Champion's Reward shall be granted to a winning Player beginning at the start of the first full Nomic Week after the the legal and correct announcement that that Player has won a game. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from this time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. Responsibility is given to the Registrar to accurately record in eir Report the times of commencement and conclusion of of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn. In addition, ten Extra Votes shall be transferred from the Bank to any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule, at the commencement of that Player's Champion's Reward. This transfer is detected and reported by the Assessor. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2532, 10 March 1996 text: Any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule shall be granted the Champion's Reward: the right to cast a third vote on Proposals. The Champion's Reward shall be granted to a winning Player beginning at the start of the first full Nomic Week after the the legal and correct announcement that that Player has won a game. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from this time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. In addition, ten Extra Votes shall be transferred from the Bank to any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule, at the commencement of that Player's Champion's Reward. This transfer is detected and reported by the Assessor. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn, including to whom they have been granted, and their times of commencement and conclusion. This list is known as the Green Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Infected and Amended(5) by Rule 1454, 4 June 1996 text: Any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule shall be granted the Champion's Reward: the right to cast a third vote on Proposals. The Champion's Reward shall be granted to a winning Player beginning at the start of the first full Nomic Week after the the legal and correct announcement that that Player has won a game. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from this time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. In addition, ten Extra Votes shall be transferred from the Bank to any Player who wins a game after the creation of this Rule, at the commencement of that Player's Champion's Reward. This transfer is detected and reported by the Assessor. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn, including to whom they have been granted, and their times of commencement and conclusion. This list is known as the Green Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 2794 (Andre), 30 January 1997 text: At the start of the first Nomic Week after the legal and correct announcement that a Player has won a Game, that Player shall receive a Champion's Reward, and ten Extra Votes are transferred from the Bank to that Player. This transfer is detected and reported by the Assessor. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from that time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. Any Player who has been awarded a Champion's Reward that has not yet been withdrawn, has the right to cast three votes on any Proposal. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn, including to whom they have been granted, and their times of commencement and conclusion. This list is known as the Green Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3473 (Harlequin; disi.), 2 May 1997 text: At the start of the first Nomic Week after the legal and correct announcement that a Player has won a Game, that Player shall receive a Champion's Reward, and ten VTs are transferred from the Bank to that Player. This transfer is detected and reported by the Assessor. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from that time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. Any Player who has been awarded a Champion's Reward that has not yet been withdrawn, has the right to cast three votes on any Proposal. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn, including to whom they have been granted, and their times of commencement and conclusion. This list is known as the Green Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: At the start of the first Nomic Week after the legal and correct announcement that a Player has won a Game, that Player shall receive a Champion's Reward. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from that time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. At the onset of that Player's Champion's Reward, the Assessor shall pay out ten VTs to that Player. Any Player who has been awarded a Champion's Reward that has not yet been withdrawn, has the right to cast three votes on any Proposal. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn, including to whom they have been granted, and their times of commencement and conclusion. This list is known as the Green Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Proposal 3566 (General Chaos), 24 October 1997 text: At the start of the first Nomic Week after the legal and correct announcement that a Player has won a Game, that Player shall receive a Champion's Reward. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from that time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. At the onset of that Player's Champion's Reward, the Registrar shall pay out ten VTs to that Player. Any Player who has been awarded a Champion's Reward that has not yet been withdrawn, has the right to cast three votes on any Proposal. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn, including to whom they have been granted, and their times of commencement and conclusion. This list is known as the Green Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3673 (Steve), 30 January 1998 text: At the start of the first Nomic Week after the legal and correct announcement that a Player has won a Game, that Player shall receive a Champion's Reward. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from that time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. As soon as possible after the legal and correct announcement that a Player has won a Game, the Registrar shall pay out ten Voting Tokens to that Player. Any Player who has been awarded a Champion's Reward that has not yet been withdrawn, has the right to cast three votes on any Proposal. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn, including to whom they have been granted, and their times of commencement and conclusion. This list is known as the Green Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3725 (Steve), 21 April 1998 text: At the start of the first Nomic Week after the legal and correct announcement that a Player has won a Game, that Player shall receive a Champion's Reward. The Champion's Reward shall last for four Nomic weeks from that time, and is then withdrawn from that Player. As soon as possible after the legal and correct announcement that a Player has won a Game, the Registrar shall pay out four Voting Tokens to that Player. Any Player who has been awarded a Champion's Reward that has not yet been withdrawn, has the right to cast three votes on any Proposal. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Champion's Rewards which have been granted and have not yet been withdrawn, including to whom they have been granted, and their times of commencement and conclusion. This list is known as the Green Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1465 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1466 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1466 by Proposal 1596, 2 June 1995 text: There is a type of Directive, called a Currency Directive. These Directives have an Adoption Index of 2. If adopted, they have the effect of specifying the Currency holdings contained in an Entity or Entities' Treasury or Treasuries. They may have no other effects. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1637, 25 July 1995 text: There is a type of Directive, called a Currency Directive. A Proposal containing one or more Currency Directives has an Adoption Index of 2, or higher if something else in the Proposal requires a higher index. If adopted, they have the effect of specifying the Currency holdings contained in an Entity or Entities' Treasury or Treasuries. They may have no other effects. history: Null-Amended(2) by Proposal 1640, 1 August 1995 text: There is a type of Directive, called a Currency Directive. A Proposal containing one or more Currency Directives has an Adoption Index of 2, or higher if something else in the Proposal requires a higher index. If adopted, they have the effect of specifying the Currency holdings contained in an Entity or Entities' Treasury or Treasuries. They may have no other effects. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1669, 18 August 1995 text: There is a type of Directive, called a Currency Directive. If adopted, they have the effect of specifying the Currency holdings contained in an Entity or Entities' Treasury or Treasuries. They may have no other effects. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2293, 29 December 1995 text: There is a type of Directive, called a Currency Directive. If adopted, they have the effect of specifying the Currency holdings contained in an Entity or Entities' Treasury or Treasuries. They may have no other effects. The AI of a Proposal which contains such a Directive shall be at least 1. history: ... history: Amended(5) text: There is a type of Directive, called a Currency Directive. If adopted, they have the effect of specifying the Currency holdings contained in an Entity or Entities' Treasury or Treasuries. They may have no other effects. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1467 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1467 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: A Currency is a type of Nomic Entity. Only those Nomic Entities which are specifically defined by the Rules as being Currencies are Currencies. A Currency must have a Name (which must not be the name of any other Currency), a minimum unit quantity, a Recordkeepor, and a Mintor. The minimum unit quantity (MUQ) of a Currency is the smallest amount of that Currency which may be transferred. All transfers, holdings, and calculations involving a given Currency shall be rounded off to the nearest multiple of its MUQ. The MUQ of a given Currency is 1, unless another Rule specifies a different MUQ for that Currency. The Recordkeepor of a Currency is the Player who is required to maintain a record of the amount of that Currency held in the various Treasuries which exist. If a Currency ceases to have a valid Recordkeepor, the Banker (or, in eir absence, the Speaker) shall fulfill that responsibility until a new Recordkeepor is selected according to the appropriate procedures. If no procedure exists to select a new recordkeepor, all units of the Currency are instead destroyed, and the Currency ceases to exist. The Mintor of a Currency is the Nomic Entity which is authorized to create and destroy units of that Currency. If the Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist, all units of the Currency are immediately destroyed, and the Currency also ceases to exist. The Banker shall maintain a record of all existing Currencies and their MUQs, Recordkeepors, and Mintors. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1685, 1 September 1995 text: A Currency is a type of Nomic Entity. Only those Nomic Entities which are specifically defined by the Rules as being Currencies are Currencies. A Currency must have a Name (which must not be the name of any other Currency), a minimum unit quantity, a Recordkeepor, and a Mintor. The Mintor of a Currency is the Mint if it is not otherwise defined. The minimum unit quantity (MUQ) of a Currency is the smallest amount of that Currency which may be transferred. All transfers, holdings, and calculations involving a given Currency shall be rounded off to the nearest multiple of its MUQ. The MUQ of a given Currency is 1, unless another Rule specifies a different MUQ for that Currency. The Recordkeepor of a Currency is the Player who is required to maintain a record of the amount of that Currency held in the various Treasuries which exist. If a Currency ceases to have a valid Recordkeepor, the Banker (or, in eir absence, the Speaker) shall fulfill that responsibility until a new Recordkeepor is selected according to the appropriate procedures. If no procedure exists to select a new recordkeepor, all units of the Currency are instead destroyed, and the Currency ceases to exist. The Mintor of a Currency is the Nomic Entity which is authorized to create and destroy units of that Currency. If the Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist, all units of the Currency are immediately destroyed, and the Currency also ceases to exist. The Banker shall maintain a record of all existing Currencies and their MUQs, Recordkeepors, and Mintors. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2470, 16 February 1996 text: There are certain entities which are Currencies. An entity is a Currency if and only if it has been made such by the Rules, and if and only if it complies with all the requirements in the Rules pertaining to Currencies. Neither Currencies nor units of Currency shall be created or destroyed except as specified by the Rules. history: Infected and Amended(3) Substantially by Rule 1454, 13 October 1997 text: There are certain entities which are Currencies. An entity is a Currency if and only if it has been made such by the Rules, and if and only if it complies with all the requirements in the Rules pertaining to Currencies. Neither Currencies nor units of Currency shall be created or destroyed except as specified by the Rules. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Rule 1467, 27 October 1997 text: There are certain entities which are Currencies. An entity is a Currency if and only if it has been made such by the Rules, and if and only if it complies with all the requirements in the Rules pertaining to Currencies. Neither Currencies nor units of Currency shall be created or destroyed except as specified by the Rules. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3894 (harvel), 16 August 1999 text: A Currency is a class of Nomic Entities. Each Currency shall have a Minimum Unit Quantity (MUQ). All transfers and holdings of each Currency shall be rounded off to the nearest multiple of its MUQ. Unless otherwise specified, the MUQ of each Currency is 1. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3999 (harvel), 2 May 2000 text: There may exist Currencies, which are classes of entities. Each Currency shall have a Minimum Unit Quantity, abbreviated MUQ, which shall be 1 unless otherwise specified. All transfers and holdings of each Currency shall be rounded off to the nearest multiple of its MUQ. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: A Currency is a category of entities established by the Rules. Each instance of a Currency is a Property. Instances of a given Currency are fungible. The size of a single instance, or "unit", of a given Currency is its Minimum Unit Quantity (MUQ). Individual units of a Currency cannot be divided; therefore, the final result of all computations involving numbers of units of Currency shall be rounded off to the nearest integral multiple of its MUQ. Unless otherwise specified, the MUQ of a Currency is one (1). Since units of Currency are fungible, it is not necessary for the Recordkeepor of a Currency to track the individual ownership of each unit; rather, it is sufficient to maintain a record of the total number of units possessed by each entity which possesses any number of units of that Currency. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1467 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1468 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1468 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: A Treasury is a repository for holding Currencies. Currencies may exist only within a Treasury. A Treasury may contain a positive, negative, or zero quantity of a given Currency, unless otherwise prohibited by the Rules. Currencies may be transferred between Treasuries only as specified in the Rules. Only those Nomic Entities which are authorized by the Rules to possess Treasuries may possess Treasuries. No Treasury may be possessed by more than one Nomic Entity. The possession of Treasuries may never be changed, once created. Each Player and each Group has a Treasury of its own. Whenever an Entity possesses only one Treasury, it shall be a permissible and unambiguous abbreviation to state that the Entity possesses the Currencies within its Treasury. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2496, 3 March 1996 text: A Treasury is a repository for holding Currencies. A Treasury is permitted to contain any quantity of Currencies in any combination, unless otherwise restricted by some other Rule. Every unit of every Currency always resides in some Treasury. Units of Currency shall only be placed into, removed from, or transferred between, Treasuries as permitted by the Rules. The possession of Treasuries is limited to those entities authorized by the Rules to possess them. No entity shall possess more than one Treasury; no Treasury shall be possessed by more than one entity. Treasuries shall not be transferred. It shall always be a permissible and unambiguous abbreviation to state that an entity in possession of a Treasury possesses the Currencies within that Treasury. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1468 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1469 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1469 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: Whenever an Entity which is permitted to possess a Treasury is created, or an existing Entity is granted the permission to possess a Treasury, a Treasury is created for that Entity. Such a new Treasury shall initially contain no Currencies, unless otherwise specified in the Rules. Whenever an Entity which possesses a Treasury ceases to exist or ceases to be permitted to possess a Treasury, all Currencies within are immediately transferred to the Treasuries of the Mintors of the respective Currencies. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1698, 1 September 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1705, 4 September 1995 text: Whenever an Entity which is permitted to possess a Treasury is created, or an existing Entity is granted the permission to possess a Treasury, a Treasury is created for that Entity. Such a new Treasury shall initially contain no Currencies, unless otherwise specified in the Rules. Whenever an Entity which possesses a Treasury ceases to exist or ceases to be permitted to possess a Treasury, all Currencies within are immediately transferred to the Treasuries of the Mintors of the respective Currencies, and the Treasury itself is destroyed. The Banker shall report the creation or destruction of a Treasury to the Public Forum as soon as possible after such creation or destruction takes place, unless this creation or destruction is the immediate and direct consequence of an action which is also required to be reported in the Public Forum, in which case that notification is sufficient, and no further notification is required of the Banker. A legal notification of the destruction of a Treasury is also, by implication, a report of the transfer of all Currencies within that Treasury to their Mintors as required by this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2496, 3 March 1996 text: Treasuries shall only be created or destroyed when required by the Rules. When a Treasury is created, it contains no units of any Currency. When a Treasury is destroyed, all units of Currency within it are transferred to the Treasuries of the Mintors of the respective Currencies, to the extent permitted by the Rules. Any untransferrable Currencies are instead destroyed. The Recordkeepors of each individual Currency are required to detect and report transfers of that Currency which occur as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3476 (Oerjan), 11 May 1997 text: Treasuries shall only be created or destroyed when required by the Rules. When a Treasury is created, it contains no units of any Currency. When a Treasury is destroyed, sufficient units of each Currency are transferred between that Treasury and the Treasuries of the Mintors of the respective Currencies, in either direction, so as to make the Treasury contain zero of each Currency, to the extent permitted by the Rules. Any untransferable Currencies in the Treasury are instead destroyed. The Recordkeepors of each individual Currency are required to detect and report transfers of that Currency which occur as a result of this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1469 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1470 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1470 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: There shall exist a Nomic Entity called the Mint. The Mint shall have a Treasury known as the Bank. The Mint may never transfer Currencies from its Treasury, or create or destroy any of the Currencies of which it is the Mintor, except as specifically authorized to do so in the Rules. The Mint shall not have an Executor. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2470, 16 February 1996 text: There shall exist a Nomic Entity called the Mint. The Mint shall have a Treasury known as the Bank. The Mint may never transfer Currencies from its Treasury, or create or destroy any of the Currencies of which it is the Mintor, except as specifically authorized to do so in the Rules. The Mint shall not have an Executor. The Mint has Mint Authority. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: There shall exist a Nomic Entity called the Bank. The Bank has Mint Authority. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 text: There shall exist a set of Entities known collectively as the Bank. This set consists of one Entity for each Bank Currency defined by the rules, which is the Mintor of that Currency. Each of the Entities in the Bank has Mint Authority. A Transfer Order (or Payment Order) of Bank Currency to (or from) the Bank shall be interpreted unambiguously to be a Transfer (Payment) Order to (from) the Mintor of that Currency. Transfer Orders or Payment orders to or from the Bank in non-Bank Currencies are invalid. Each of these Entities may only own Currency of its associated type. A Transfer order or Payment Order involving the Mintor of a Bank Currency, which is not in that Currency is invalid. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: There shall exist an entity known as the Bank. The Executor of the Bank shall be the Treasuror. Each Recordkeepor of each Bank Currency shall be a Limited Executor of the Bank, with the authority to execute transfers of units of that Currency, from and on behalf of the Bank. The Bank has Mint Authority. The Bank is the Mintor of every Bank Currency. The Bank shall not transfer Currencies except when specifically authorized to do so by the Rules. Whenever the Bank incurs a debt to any other entity, the Bank shall, as soon as possible and by its Executor or by one of its Limited Executors, either satisfy that debt by transferring appropriate Properties to the creditor, or dispute the debt by whatever means are appropriate in the situation. The authority to compromise or forgive a debt of the Bank rests only in the Treasuror. This power may only be exercised only: (1) pursuant to a properly-issued Order; or (2) Without Objection, at the Treasuror's discretion. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4156 (Ian), 18 May 2001 text: (a) There is an entity known as the Bank. The Bank has Mint Authority. The Bank is the Mintor of each Bank Currency. (b) The Executor of the Bank is the Treasuror. Each Recordkeepor of each Bank Currency is a Limited Executor of the Bank. (c) The Executor of the Bank, and each Limited Executor, is authorized to transfer Property from the Bank as and when the Rules explicitly require or permit it. Transfers of Property from the Bank which are made without being explicitly required or permitted by the Rules are unauthorized. (d) Whenever the Bank incurs a debt to any other entity, the Bank shall, as soon as possible and by its Executor or by one of its Limited Executors, either satisfy that debt by transferring appropriate Properties to the creditor, or dispute the debt by whatever means are appropriate in the situation. (e) The Treasuror has sole authority to forgive debts owed to the Bank, in whole or in part. This power may only be exercised: (1) pursuant to a properly-issued Order; or (2) Without Objection, at the Treasuror's discretion. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4190 (Steve), 18 July 2001 text: (a) There is an entity known as the Bank. The Bank has Mint Authority. The Bank is the Mintor of each Bank Currency. The Bank is permitted to transfer Property in its possession to other entities. (b) The Treasuror is the Executor of the Bank. Each Recordkeepor of each Bank Currency is a Limited Executor of the Bank, and is empowered to make transfers of that Currency from the Bank. (c) Each Recordkeepor of each Bank Currency is the Prime Executor of the Bank with respect to debts denominated in that Currency. The Treasuror is the Prime Executor of the Bank with respect to all other actions that the Bank is required to perform. (d) As soon as possible after the Bank incurs a debt to any other entity, the Bank shall either satisfy that debt by transferring appropriate Properties to the creditor, or dispute the debt by whatever means are appropriate in the situation. (e) The Bank is permitted to forgive debts owed to it, in whole or in part: (1) pursuant to a properly-issued Order; or (2) Without Objection, at the Treasuror's discretion. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4322 (t), 31 May 2002 text: (a) There is an entity known as the Bank. The Bank has Mint Authority. The Bank is the Mintor of each Bank Currency. The Bank may transfer Property in its possession to other entities only to satisfy its debts. (b) The Treasuror is the Executor of the Bank. Each Recordkeepor of each Bank Currency is a Limited Executor of the Bank, and is empowered to make transfers of that Currency from the Bank. (c) Each Recordkeepor of each Bank Currency is the Prime Executor of the Bank with respect to debts denominated in that Currency. The Treasuror is the Prime Executor of the Bank with respect to all other actions that the Bank is required to perform. (d) As soon as possible after the Bank incurs a debt to any other entity, the Bank shall either satisfy that debt by transferring appropriate Properties to the creditor, or dispute the debt by whatever means are appropriate in the situation. (e) The Bank is permitted to forgive debts owed to it, in whole or in part: (1) pursuant to a properly-issued Order; or (2) Without Objection, at the Treasuror's discretion. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4322 (t), 31 May 2002 history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1470 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1471 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1471 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: The Mintor of a Currency may, at any time, create new units of that Currency, so long as this creation is permitted by the Rules. These newly-created units of Currency are placed in the Treasury of the Mintor. Units of Currency may not otherwise be created except as specifically authorized by the Rules. The Mintor of a Currency may, at any time, destroy those units of that Currency which it currently possesses in its Treasury, so long as this destruction is permitted by the Rules. Units of Currency may not be otherwise destroyed except as specifically authorized by the Rules. If the Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist, or ceases to have the authority to be a Mintor, then all units of that Currency are immediately destroyed, and Currency ceases to exist. The Mintor of the Currency shall notify the Recordkeepor of the Currency as soon as possible after it creates or destroys Units of Currency. A Mintor must have a Treasury. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2619, 19 June 1996 text: The Mintor of a Currency may, at any time, create new units of that Currency, so long as this creation is permitted by the Rules. These newly-created units of Currency are placed in the Treasury of the Mintor. Units of Currency may not otherwise be created except as specifically authorized by the Rules. The Mintor of a Currency may, at any time, destroy those units of that Currency which it currently possesses in its Treasury, so long as this destruction is permitted by the Rules. Units of Currency may not be otherwise destroyed except as specifically authorized by the Rules. If the Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist, or ceases to have the authority to be a Mintor, then all units of that Currency are immediately destroyed, and that Currency ceases to exist. The Mintor of the Currency shall notify the Recordkeepor of the Currency as soon as possible after it creates or destroys Units of Currency. A Mintor must have a Treasury. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: New units of a Currency are created when the Mintor of that Currency transmits to the Recordkeepor of that Currency a notice that e is creating new units of that Currency, specifying the number of units that e is creating. The newly created units are added to the Mintor's possessions. Units of Currency are destroyed when any entity which possesses units of that Currency transmits to the Recordkeepor of that Currency a notice that e is destroying units of that Currency, specifying the number of units that e is destroying. An entity cannot destroy more units of a Currency than e possesses, however. The units destroyed are removed from the possession of the entity performing the destruction. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1471 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1472 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1472 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: The owner of a given Treasury may, at any time, transfer any or all of the units of Currency within that Treasury to any other Treasury, so long as this transfer is permitted by the Rules. Such a transfer is known as a "voluntary" transfer. Voluntary transfers are restricted to positive quantities, and in no case may more of a given Currency be transferred from a Treasury than that Treasury possessed prior to the transfer. The Recordkeepor of a Currency must be notified as soon as possible by the owner of the Treasury from which a voluntary transfer is made. If a voluntary transfer is not reported to the Recordkeepor within seven days, it is cancelled and does not take place. Transfers which are not voluntary transfers ("involuntary" transfers) may only be made as specifically required by the Rules. Such transfers must be reported to the Recordkeepors of the Currencies involved as soon as possible thereafter, by a Player specified by the Rules. Involuntary transfers may be of any amount (limited only by MUQ rounding), and may involve amounts greater than the amount in the Treasury from which the transfer originates. If an involuntary transfer is not reported to the Recordkeepor within seven days, or there is no Rule which requires a Player to report the involuntary transfer, the transfer is cancelled and does not take place. All transfers take effect no sooner than the time the Recordkeepor of the Currency is informed of the transfer. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1649, 1 August 1995 text: The owner of a given Treasury is permitted to, at any time, transfer any or all of the units of Currency within that Treasury to any other Treasury, so long as this transfer is permitted by the Rules. Such a transfer is known as a "voluntary" transfer. Transfers which are indirectly required by the Rules--that is, required only because they are required by a non-Rule entity which is required by the Rules to be obeyed (including, but not necessarily limited to Group Ordinances and Contest Regulations)--are also "voluntary" transfers. Voluntary transfers are restricted to positive quantities, and in no case may more of a given Currency be transferred from a Treasury than that Treasury possessed prior to the transfer. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which attempts to transfer more than that amount in a voluntary transfer. The Recordkeepor of a Currency must be notified as soon as possible by the owner of the Treasury from which a voluntary transfer is made. If a voluntary transfer is not reported to the Recordkeepor within seven days, it is cancelled and does not take place. Transfers which are not voluntary transfers ("involuntary" transfers) shall only be made as directly required by the Rules. Such transfers must be reported to the Recordkeepors of the Currencies involved as soon as possible thereafter, by a Player specified by the Rules. Involuntary transfers are permitted to be of any amount (limited only by MUQ rounding), and are permitted to involve amounts greater than the amount in the Treasury from which the transfer originates. If an involuntary transfer is not reported to the Recordkeepor within seven days, or there is no Rule which requires a Player to report the involuntary transfer, the transfer is cancelled and does not take place. All transfers take effect no sooner than the time the Recordkeepor of the Currency is informed of the transfer. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1702, 1 September 1995 text: It shall be legal to transfer Currencies between Treasuries, provided this is done in accordance with the Rules. Every transfer shall involve a positive amount of exactly one Currency, which shall be transferred from exactly one Treasury into exactly one other Treasury. Every transfer has an initiator, which is the Entity which causes the transfer to take place. A transfer which is explicitly and directly required to take place by a Rule is initiated by that Rule, and is called a Class I Transfer. A transfer which is required to take place by an Entity (other than the Rules) to which the Rules have granted the power to require Currency Transfers to take place is initiated by that Entity (_not_ the Rule which grants that power to that Entity), and is called a Class II Transfer. A transfer which is not required to take place, and which is instead the consequence of a Player's action, is initiated by that Player, and is a called a Class III Transfer. For the purpose of this Rule, a Rule, or an Entity other than the Rules to which the Rules have granted the power to require Players to perform actions, which requires a Player to initiate a transfer is _not_ requiring the transfer. Such a transfer is a Class III transfer initiated by that Player. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would require a Player to initiate a transfer which is prohibited by this Rule. A Class I transfer is not permitted if there is no Rule which specifies a Player who is to detect and report the transfer. A Class II transfer is not permitted if there is no Rule, or Entity other than the Rules to which the Rules have granted the power to require Players to perform actions, which specifies a Player who is to detect and report the transfer. A Class II or Class III Transfer is not permitted if the Treasury from which the Currency is being transferred will possess a negative quantity of that Currency after the transfer has been completed. A Class III Transfer is not permitted unless the transfer is initiated by the Executor of the Owner of the Treasury from which the Currency is being transferred. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit a transfer prohibited by this Rule. The Recordkeepor of a Currency must be notified of a transfer involving that Currency within seven days, unless another Rule specifies a different time limit for reporting a certain type of transfer. For a Class I or Class II transfer, the notification shall be made by the Player required to detect and report it. For a Class III transfer, the notification shall be made by the Player who initiated it. Class I and Class II transfers take place at the time they are required to take place. Class III transfers take place at the time they are reported. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2493, 16 February 1996 text: Units of Currency are transferrable between Treasuries under the following conditions: a) The transfer shall be from exactly one Treasury to exactly one other Treasury. b) The transfer must be of a positive amount of exactly one Currency, and that amount must be an exact integral multiple of that Currency's MUQ. c) Some Rule must authorize the transfer, either by requiring it directly or by granting authority to require the transfer to some other entity. d) Some Rule must specify a Player whose duty it is to report the occurence of the transfer to the Recordkeepor of the Currency involved. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit or require a transfer prohibited by this Rule, and defers to any Rule which prohibits a transfer permitted by this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1472 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1473 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1473 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: Marks are a Currency. The MUQ of Marks is 0.01. The Recordkeepor for Marks is the Banker, or, in eir absence, the Speaker. The Mintor for Marks is the Mint. The Banker shall post at least once every Nomic Week an Official Report to the Public Forum detailing the number of Marks held in every Treasury, and the changes thereof since at least the last such report. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2571, 12 April 1996 text: Marks are a Currency. The MUQ of Marks is 0.01. The Recordkeepor for Marks is the Banker. The Mintor for Marks is the Mint. The Banker shall post at least once every Nomic Week an Official Report to the Public Forum detailing the number of Marks held in every Treasury, and the changes thereof since at least the last such report. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: Marks are a Currency. The MUQ of Marks is 0.01. The Recordkeepor for Marks is the Banker. The Mintor for Marks is the Mint. The Banker's Report includes the number of Marks held in each Treasury, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Banker's Report. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1474 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1474 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: Each Group shall have an associated Currency, the name of which shall be formed by appending the word "Coins" to the name of the Group. The MUQ of all Group Coins is 1. The Recordkeepor for each variety of Group Coin is the Vizier of the associated Group. The Mintor for each variety of Group Coin is the associated Group. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: An Organization is permitted to be the Mintor of a Currency _only_ if that Organization possesses a Treasury, _and_ if the Rules defining that Organization's Class specifically permit it to become the Mintor of a Currency. Each Rule that permits an Organization of a specific Class to be a Mintor must define a unique generic name for every type of Currency associated with that Class of Organization. The name of any Currency associated with a specific Organization shall be the Name of the Organization followed by the unique generic name defined by the Class of that Organization. The Recordkeepor of any Organization's Currency is the Executor of the associated Organization. The MUQ of all such Currencies is 1. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1475 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1475 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: Points are a Currency. The MUQ of Points is 0.1. The Recordkeepor for Points is the Scorekeepor, or, in eir absence, the Speaker. The Mintor for Points is the Mint. The Scorekeepor shall post at least once every Nomic Week an Official Report to the Public Forum detailing the number of Points held in every Treasury, and the changes thereof since at least the last such report. All transfers involving Points shall be reported to the Public Forum. This takes precedence over any Rule which might not require, or which might prohibit, the reporting of a transfer to the Public Forum. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2571, 12 April 1996 text: Points are a Currency. The MUQ of Points is 0.1. The Recordkeepor for Points is the Scorekeepor. The Mintor for Points is the Mint. The Scorekeepor shall post at least once every Nomic Week an Official Report to the Public Forum detailing the number of Points held in every Treasury, and the changes thereof since at least the last such report. All transfers involving Points shall be reported to the Public Forum. This takes precedence over any Rule which might not require, or which might prohibit, the reporting of a transfer to the Public Forum. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1476 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1476 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: Any transfer of Points, voluntary or involuntary, from any Treasury other than the Bank to the Treasury of any Player shall be limited to the largest amount such that the Treasury of the Player receiving the transfer will not contain more than 90% of the Points which that Player would need in order to win. Any portion of a transfer which would violate this requirement is cancelled and does not take place. Transfers of Points from the Bank are never restricted in this manner. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1709, 4 September 1995 text: Any transfer of Points, voluntary or involuntary, from any Treasury other than the Bank to the Treasury of any Player shall be limited to the largest amount such that the Treasury of the Player receiving the transfer will not contain more than 90% of the Points which that Player would need in order to win. Any portion of a transfer which would violate this requirement is cancelled and does not take place. Transfers of Points from the Bank are never restricted in this manner. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit transfers or portions of transfers forbidden by this Rule to take place. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1477 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1477 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: Extra Votes are a Currency. The MUQ of Extra Votes is 1. The Recordkeepor for Extra Votes is the Assessor, or, in eir absence, the Speaker. The Mintor of Extra Votes is the Mint. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2571, 12 April 1996 text: Extra Votes are a Currency. The MUQ of Extra Votes is 1. The Recordkeepor for Extra Votes is the Assessor. The Mintor of Extra Votes is the Mint. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: Extra Votes are a Currency. The MUQ of Extra Votes is 1. The Recordkeepor for Extra Votes is the Assessor. The Mintor of Extra Votes is the Mint. At least once each Nomic week, the Assessor shall post a Report to the Public Forum, including a list of all transfers of Extra Votes since the previous such Report, and the current ownership of all Extra Votes. history: ... history: Amended(3) text: Extra Votes are a Currency. The MUQ of Extra Votes is 1. The Recordkeepor for Extra Votes is the Assessor. The Mintor of Extra Votes is the Mint. The Assessor's Report includes the number of Extra Votes held in each Treasury, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Assessor's Report. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1478 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1478 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: The Rules may, for any given non-Player Nomic Entity, specify a Player, or the means to designate a Player, who shall act as the Executor of that Entity. The Executor of a non-Player Nomic Entity shall have the legal authority to act on behalf of that Entity, as if e were that Entity. The Rules may also specify constraints on how the Executor of an Entity may act. If a non-Player Nomic Entity has no Executor, it may not act except as specifically required of it by the Rules. The Executor of a Group is that Group's Vizier. For the sake of completeness, a Player is eir own Executor. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2514, 3 March 1996 text: The Rules may, for any given non-Player Nomic Entity, specify a Player, or the means to designate a Player, who shall act as the Executor of that Entity. The Executor of a non-Player Nomic Entity shall have the legal authority to act on behalf of that Entity, as if e were that Entity. The Rules may also specify constraints on how the Executor of an Entity may act. If a non-Player Nomic Entity has no Executor, it may not act except as specifically required of it by the Rules. The Executor of a Group is that Group's Vizier. For the sake of completeness, a Player is eir own Executor. Whenever a Player is acting on behalf of some Entity of which e is the Executor, e must make it clear that e is doing so. If such a Player fails to clearly indicate that e is acting as the Executor of some other Entity, it shall be presumed that e is acting on eir own behalf. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3516 (General Chaos), 16 June 1997 text: The Executor of an entity is a Player who is empowered by the Rules to act on behalf of that entity, as if e was that entity. Except when the Rules stipulate otherwise, a Player is eir own Executor. Any other entity has an Executor only when the Rules specify either a Player or a means to designate a Player to be the Executor of that entity. Whenever a Player is acting on behalf of some entity of which e is the Executor other than emself, e must make it clear that e is doing so. If such a Player fails to clearly indicate that e is acting as the Executor of some other entity, it shall be presumed that e is acting on eir own behalf. A Nomic Entity (other than a person who is not a Player) which has no Executor, or whose Executor is not a Player, may not perform any action except when required to do so by the Rules. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3968 (harvel), 4 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3999 (harvel), 2 May 2000 text: The Executor of an entity is a Player who is empowered by the Rules to act on behalf of that entity, as if e were that entity. Except when the Rules stipulate otherwise, a Player is eir own Executor. Any other entity has an Executor only when the Rules specify either a Player or a means to designate a Player to be the Executor of that entity. Whenever a Player is acting on behalf of some entity of which e is the Executor other than emself, e must make it clear that e is doing so. If such a Player fails to clearly indicate that e is acting as the Executor of some other entity, it shall be presumed that e is acting on eir own behalf. Only a person or an entity with a Player Executor may perform actions. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4190 (Steve), 18 July 2001 text: (a) An Executor of an entity is a Player who is empowered by the Rules to act on behalf of that entity, who is called the Executee. There may be more than one such Player. An Executor of an Executee may perform on behalf of the Executee all such actions as the Rules permit the Executee to perform. (b) A Limited Executor of an entity is a Player who is empowered by the Rules to perform on behalf of that entity a subset of the actions which the Rules permit the entity to perform. A Limited Executor is permitted to perform on behalf of an Executee only such actions as are explicitly permitted by the Rules. (c) A Player is always eir own Executor. Other entities have Executors (or Limited Executors) only as and when the Rules provide. (d) A Player acting on behalf of an entity other than emself must clearly indicate on whose behalf e is acting. A Player who does not clearly indicate that e is acting on behalf of some entity other than emself is presumed to be acting on eir own behalf. (e) Only persons may perform actions. Non-persons perform actions only via the agency of persons, as specified by the Rules. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1478 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1479 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1479 by Proposal 1601, 19 June 1995 text: Whenever a Rule calls for a Player to lose a number of Points without specifying where these Points shall be transferred to, the Player shall be required to transfer that number of Points from eir own Treasury to the Bank. Whenever a Rule calls for a Player to receive a number of Points, but does not specify where the Points shall be received from, that number of Points shall be transferred from the Bank to that Player's Treasury. The payment of all Salaries shall be by transfer of Points from the Bank to that of the Player receiving the Salary. All of these transfers are involuntary in nature. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2476, 16 February 1996 text: Whenever a Rule calls for a Player to lose some quantity of Currency without specifying where this Currency shall be transferred to, that quantity shall be transferred from that Player's Treasury to the Bank. Whenever a Rule calls for a Player to receive some quantity of Currency but does not specify where the Currency shall be transferred from, that quantity shall be transferred from the Bank to that Player's Treasury. The payment of all Salaries shall be by transfer from the Bank to that of the Player receiving the Salary. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Whenever a Rule calls for a Player to pay out some quantity of Currency to some entity, that Player shall execute a Payment Order from the Bank to that entity for the amount specified. Whenever a Rule calls for a Player to bill an entity for some quantity of Currency, that Player shall execute a Payment Order from that entity to the Bank for the amount specified. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: Whenever a Rule requires a Player to pay out one or more Properties to some entity, the Bank shall incur a debt to that entity for those Properties, and the named Player shall, as soon as possible, post a public notice of the debt. Whenever a Rule requires a Player to bill an entity for one or more Properties, that entity shall incur a debt to the Bank for those Properties, and the named Player shall, as soon as possible, post a public notice of the debt. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4353 (Steve), 7 August 2002 text: (a) Whenever a Rule requires a Player to pay out one or more Properties to some entity, the Bank shall incur a debt to that entity for those Properties, and the named Player shall, as soon as possible, post a public notice of the debt. (b) If a Rule explicitly permits a Player to pay out one or more Properties to some entity, but does not require em to do so, then the Bank shall incur a debt to that entity for those Properties when the Player posts a public notice of the debt. (c) Whenever a Rule requires a Player to bill an entity for one or more Properties, that entity shall incur a debt to the Bank for those Properties, and the named Player shall, as soon as possible, post a public notice of the debt. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4364 (Steve), 16 August 2002 text: (a) Whenever a Rule requires a Player to pay out one or more Properties to some entity, the Bank shall incur a debt to that entity for those Properties, and the named Player shall, as soon as possible, post a public notice of the debt. (b) If a Rule explicitly permits a Player to pay out one or more Properties to some entity, but does not require em to do so, then the Bank shall incur a debt to that entity for those Properties when the Player posts a public notice of the debt. (c) Whenever a Rule requires a Player to bill an entity for one or more Properties, that entity shall incur a debt to the Bank for those Properties, and the named Player shall, as soon as possible, post a public notice of the debt. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4402 (Steve), 23 October 2002 text: (a) Whenever a Rule requires a Player to pay out one or more Properties to some entity, the Bank shall incur a debt to that entity for those Properties, and the named Player shall, as soon as possible, post a public notice of the debt. The Player is relieved of this obligation if the debt is satisfied before the public notice is posted. (b) If a Rule explicitly permits a Player to pay out one or more Properties to some entity, but does not require em to do so, then the Bank shall incur a debt to that entity for those Properties when the Player posts a public notice of the debt. (c) Whenever a Rule requires a Player to bill an entity for one or more Properties, that entity shall incur a debt to the Bank for those Properties, and the named Player shall, as soon as possible, post a public notice of the debt. The Player is relieved of this obligation if the bill is paid before the public notice is posted. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1479 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1480 history: Created, ca. Jun. 19 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1481 history: Created, ca. Jun. 19 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1482 history: Enacted as MI=3 Rule 1482 by Proposal 1603, 19 June 1995 text: In a conflict between Rules with different Mutability Indices, the Rule with the higher Mutability Index takes precedence over the Rule with the lower Mutability Index. history: Infected but not Amended by Rule 1454, 2 December 1995 history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: In a conflict between Rules with different Power, the Rule with the higher Power takes precedence over the Rule with the lower Power. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4942 (Zefram), 3 May 2007 text: In a conflict between Rules with different Power, the Rule with the higher Power takes precedence over the Rule with the lower Power. No change to the Ruleset can occur that would cause a Rule to stipulate any other means of determining precedence between Rules of unequal Power. This applies to changes by the enactment or amendment of a Rule, or of any other form. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule that would permit such a change to the Ruleset. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1483 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1483 by Proposal 1619, 17 July 1995 text: Any collection of text delivered by a Player to the Promoter and designated by the submitting Player as a Proposal is a Proposal. The effect of the adoption of a Proposal shall be limited to the application of those legally defined Rule Changes and Directives which are contained within the Proposal and which can be clearly identified as such. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2522, 10 March 1996 text: A Proposal is created whenever a Proposing Entity delivers some collection of text to the Promotor with the clear indication that that text is intended to become a Proposal. The collection of text thus delivered is a new Proposal, and the Proposing Entity which delivered it its Proposer. A collection of text is said to be Proposed when it becomes a Proposal. The delivery of the text of an existing Proposal which was Proposed less than three weeks previously does not cause that text to become another Proposal, unless there is a clear indication that that text is intended to become a duplicate of a prior Proposal. In this case, the Proposing Entity must specifically acknowledge that the intended new Proposal is a duplicate of an existing Proposal. Further, the Promotor's distribution of previously undistributed Proposals never causes the Proposing of new Proposals. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 2829 (Zefram), 7 March 1997 text: A Proposal is created whenever a Proposing Entity delivers some collection of text to the Promotor with the clear indication that that text is intended to become a Proposal. The collection of text thus delivered is a new Proposal, and the Proposing Entity which delivered it its Proposer. The message in which the Proposal is delivered may specify whether the Proposal is Disinterested. A collection of text is said to be Proposed when it becomes a Proposal. The delivery of the text of an existing Proposal which was Proposed less than three weeks previously does not cause that text to become another Proposal, unless there is a clear indication that that text is intended to become a duplicate of a prior Proposal. In this case, the Proposing Entity must specifically acknowledge that the intended new Proposal is a duplicate of an existing Proposal. Further, the Promotor's distribution of previously undistributed Proposals never causes the Proposing of new Proposals. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3487 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: A Proposal is created whenever a Proposing Entity delivers some collection of text to the Promotor with the clear indication that that text is intended to become a Proposal. The collection of text thus delivered is a new Proposal, and the Proposing Entity which delivered it its Proposer. A collection of text is said to be Proposed when it becomes a Proposal. The delivery of the text of an existing Proposal which was Proposed less than three weeks previously does not cause that text to become another Proposal, unless there is a clear indication that that text is intended to become a duplicate of a prior Proposal. In this case, the Proposing Entity must specifically acknowledge that the intended new Proposal is a duplicate of an existing Proposal. Further, the Promotor's distribution of previously undistributed Proposals never causes the Proposing of new Proposals. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3799 (Blob), 29 October 1998 text: A Proposal is created whenever a Proposing Entity delivers some collection of text to the Public Forum with the clear indication that that text is intended to become a Proposal. The collection of text thus delivered is a new Proposal, and the Proposing Entity which delivered it its Proposer. A collection of text is said to be Proposed when it becomes a Proposal. The delivery of the text of an existing Proposal which was Proposed less than three weeks previously does not cause that text to become another Proposal, unless there is a clear indication that that text is intended to become a duplicate of a prior Proposal. In this case, the Proposing Entity must specifically acknowledge that the intended new Proposal is a duplicate of an existing Proposal. Further, the Promotor's distribution of previously undistributed Proposals never causes the Proposing of new Proposals. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3937 (Wes), 31 October 1999 text: A Proposal is created whenever an entity with a Legislative Status of Legislator delivers some collection of text to the Public Forum with the clear indication that the text is intended to become a Proposal. The collection of text becomes a Proposal and the entity delivering that text becomes the Proposer of that Proposal. This process is known as Proposing or submitting a Proposal. The delivery of text identical to another Proposal which was Proposed less than three weeks previous does not create a new Proposal unless accompanied by a clear and explicit indication that the intent was to Propose a duplicate Proposal. The publishing of the Proposal Queue never creates new Proposals. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3972 (Peekee), 14 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3990, "Harsher Blot Penalties", (Elysion), 30 March 2000 text: A Proposal is created when a Legislator who is not Mute sends a body of text to the Public Forum with the clear indication that it is intended to become a Proposal. The collection of text becomes a Proposal and the entity delivering that text becomes the Proposer of that Proposal. This process is known as Proposing or submitting a Proposal. The delivery of text identical to another Proposal which was Proposed less than three weeks previous does not create a new Proposal unless accompanied by a clear and explicit indication that the intent was to Propose a duplicate Proposal. The publishing of the Proposal Queue never creates new Proposals. All Players are Legislators. A Player is Mute while e has more than 5 Blots. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 text: A Proposal is created when a Legislator who is not Mute sends a body of text to the Public Forum with the clear indication that it is intended to become a Proposal. The collection of text becomes a Proposal and the entity delivering that text becomes the Proposer of that Proposal. This process is known as Proposing or submitting a Proposal. The delivery of text identical to another Proposal which was Proposed less than three weeks previous does not create a new Proposal unless accompanied by a clear and explicit indication that the intent was to Propose a duplicate Proposal. The publishing of the Proposal Pool never creates new Proposals. All Players are Legislators. A Player is Mute while e has more than 5 Blots. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Proposal is created when a Legislator who is not Mute publishes a body of text with the clear indication that it is intended to become a Proposal. The collection of text becomes a Proposal and the entity delivering that text becomes the Proposer of that Proposal. This process is known as Proposing or submitting a Proposal. The delivery of text identical to another Proposal which was Proposed less than three weeks previous does not create a new Proposal unless accompanied by a clear and explicit indication that the intent was to Propose a duplicate Proposal. The publishing of the Proposal Pool never creates new Proposals. All Players are Legislators. A Player is Mute while e has more than 5 Blots. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4658 (root), 29 March 2005 text: A Proposal is created when a Legislator who is not Mute publishes a body of text with the clear indication that it is intended to become a Proposal. The collection of text becomes a Proposal and the entity delivering that text becomes the Proposer of that Proposal. This process is known as Proposing or submitting a Proposal. The publishing of the Proposal Pool never creates new Proposals. All Players are Legislators. A Player is Mute while e has more than 5 Blots. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A legislator submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal. As soon as possible afterward, the Promotor shall add this proposal to the Proposal Pool. While a proposal is in the Proposal Pool, its proposer may modify its adoption index by announcement, specifying the proposal and its new adoption index. The default adoption index of a proposal is one. All players are legislators. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4829 (Maud), 30 July 2005 text: A proposal is a document outlining changes to be made to Agora, including enacting, repealing, or amending rules, or making other explicit changes to the gamestate. A legislator submits a proposal by publishing it with a clear indication that it is intended to become a proposal. As soon as possible afterward, the Promotor shall add this proposal to the Proposal Pool. Before the Promotor distributes a proposal, its proposer may modify its adoption index by announcement. The default adoption index of a proposal is one. All players are legislators. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1483 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1484 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1484 by Proposal 1624, 17 July 1995 text: At no time may the a Player hold the Office of Clerk of the Courts while simultaneously holding either the Office of Promotor or the Office of Assessor. Any Move which would cause this to occur does not take place, and the Office (or Offices) which that Player whould have assumed instead becomes Vacant and shall then be filled according to the appropriate Rules. This Rule shall not be construed so as to prevent the Speaker from fulfilling the duties of any of these Offices in the event of a vacancy. However, the Speaker is highly encouraged to delegate eir duties for one or more of these Offices to another Players, should such a conflict arise as a result of Vacancies. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1734, 15 October 1995 text: At no time may the a Player hold the Office of Clerk of the Courts while simultaneously holding either the Office of Promotor or the Office of Assessor. Any Move which would cause this to occur does not take place, and the Office (or Offices) which that Player whould have assumed instead becomes Vacant and shall then be filled according to the appropriate Rules. This Rule shall not be construed so as to prevent the Speaker from fulfilling the duties of any of these Offices in the event of a vacancy. However, the Speaker is highly encouraged to delegate eir duties for one or more of these Offices to other Players, should such a conflict arise as a result of Vacancies. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: At no time may the a Player hold the Office of Clerk of the Courts while simultaneously holding either the Office of Promotor or the Office of Assessor. Any Move which would cause this to occur does not take place, and the Office (or Offices) which that Player would have assumed instead becomes Vacant and shall then be filled according to the appropriate Rules. This Rule shall not be construed so as to prevent the Speaker from fulfilling the duties of any of these Offices in the event of a vacancy. However, the Speaker is highly encouraged to delegate eir duties for one or more of these Offices to other Players, should such a conflict arise as a result of Vacancies. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1485 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1485 by Proposal 1634, 25 July 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: All Rules have a Title, which is a single line of text containg not more than 60 characters. The Title must be listed by the Rulekeepor along with the Rule. However, they are not part of the Rule itself and have no effect on the application of the Rule, being merely a convenience for the Players. Titles, once assigned, may not be altered except as specified in this and other Rules. For a new Rule created as a result of a Rule Change Proposal: If the Rule Change Proposal specifies the Title within the body of the Proposal, that Title is assigned. If not, then the Title of the Proposal is assigned if the Proposal contained only one Rule Change; otherwise the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. For a new Rule created by other means: If the procedure which caused the Rule to be created specifies a way to determine the Title, then that Title is assigned. Otherwise, the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. To change the Title of an existing Rule: A Rule's Title may be changed by a Directive. The Adoption Index of a Proposal containing such a Directive must be at least as great as the Mutability Index of the Rule. The Directive must unambiguously state the number of the Rule and the new Title. Titles for old Rules with no Titles: If a Rule has no Title, because it was created at a time when this Rule did not apply, the Rulekeepor shall choose a Title for that Rule. text: All Rules have a Title, which is a single line of text containg not more than 60 characters. The Title must be listed by the Rulekeepor along with the Rule. However, they are not part of the Rule itself and have no effect on the application of the Rule, being merely a convenience for the Players. Titles, once assigned, may not be altered except as specified in this and other Rules. For a new Rule created as a result of a Rule Change Proposal: If the Rule Change Proposal specifies the Title within the body of the Proposal, that Title is assigned. If not, then the Title of the Proposal is assigned if the Proposal contained only one Rule Change; otherwise the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. For a new Rule created by other means: If the procedure which caused the Rule to be created specifies a way to determine the Title, then that Title is assigned. Otherwise, the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. To change the Title of an existing Rule: A Rule's Title may be changed by a Directive. The Adoption Index of a Proposal containing such a Directive must be at least as great as the Mutability Index of the Rule. The Directive must unambiguously state the number of the Rule and the new Title. Titles for old Rules with no Titles: If a Rule has no Title, because it was created at a time when this Rule did not apply, the Rulekeepor shall choose a Title for that Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1668, 18 August 1995 text: All Rules have a Title, which is a single line of text containg not more than 60 characters. The Title must be listed by the Rulekeepor along with the Rule. However, they are not part of the Rule itself and have no effect on the application of the Rule, being merely a convenience for the Players. Titles, once assigned, may not be altered except as specified in this and other Rules. For a new Rule created as a result of a Rule Change Proposal: If the Rule Change Proposal specifies the Title within the body of the Proposal, that Title is assigned. If not, then the Title of the Proposal is assigned if the Proposal contained only one Rule Change; otherwise the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. For a new Rule created by other means: If the procedure which caused the Rule to be created specifies a way to determine the Title, then that Title is assigned. Otherwise, the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. To change the Title of an existing Rule: A Rule's Title may be changed by a Directive. The Adoption Index of a Proposal containing such a Directive must be at least 2. The Directive must unambiguously state the number of the Rule and the new Title. Titles for old Rules with no Titles: If a Rule has no Title, because it was created at a time when this Rule did not apply, the Rulekeepor shall choose a Title for that Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1673, 22 August 1995 text: All Rules have a Title, which is a single line of text containg not more than 60 characters. The Title must be listed by the Rulekeepor along with the Rule. However, they are not part of the Rule itself and have no effect on the application of the Rule, being merely a convenience for the Players. Titles, once assigned, may not be altered except as specified in this and other Rules. For a new Rule created as a result of a Rule Change Proposal: If the Rule Change Proposal specifies the Title within the body of the Proposal, that Title is assigned. Otherwise the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. For a new Rule created by other means: If the procedure which caused the Rule to be created specifies a way to determine the Title, then that Title is assigned. Otherwise, the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. To change the Title of an existing Rule: A Rule's Title may be changed by a Directive. The Adoption Index of a Proposal containing such a Directive must be at least 2. The Directive must unambiguously state the number of the Rule and the new Title. Titles for old Rules with no Titles: If a Rule has no Title, because it was created at a time when this Rule did not apply, the Rulekeepor shall choose a Title for that Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1740, 15 October 1995 text: All Rules have a Title, which is a single line of text containg not more than 60 characters. The Title must be listed by the Rulekeepor along with the Rule. However, they are not part of the Rule itself and have no effect on the application of the Rule, being merely a convenience for the Players. Titles, once assigned, may not be altered except as specified in this and other Rules. For a new Rule created as a result of a Rule Change Proposal: If the Rule Change Proposal specifies the Title within the body of the Proposal, that Title is assigned. Otherwise the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. For a new Rule created by other means: If the procedure which caused the Rule to be created specifies a way to determine the Title, then that Title is assigned. Otherwise, the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. To change the Title of an existing Rule: A Rule's Title may be changed by a Directive. The Directive must unambiguously state the number of the Rule and the new Title. Titles for old Rules with no Titles: If a Rule has no Title, because it was created at a time when this Rule did not apply, the Rulekeepor shall choose a Title for that Rule. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: All Rules have a Title, which is a single line of text containing not more than 60 characters. The Title must be listed by the Rulekeepor along with the Rule. However, they are not part of the Rule itself and have no effect on the application of the Rule, being merely a convenience for the Players. Titles, once assigned, may not be altered except as specified in this and other Rules. For a new Rule created as a result of a Rule Change Proposal: If the Rule Change Proposal specifies the Title within the body of the Proposal, that Title is assigned. Otherwise the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. For a new Rule created by other means: If the procedure which caused the Rule to be created specifies a way to determine the Title, then that Title is assigned. Otherwise, the Rulekeepor chooses a Title. To change the Title of an existing Rule: A Rule's Title may be changed by a Directive. The Directive must unambiguously state the number of the Rule and the new Title. Titles for old Rules with no Titles: If a Rule has no Title, because it was created at a time when this Rule did not apply, the Rulekeepor shall choose a Title for that Rule. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 2741 (Zefram), 7 November 1996 text: All Rules have a Title, which is a single line of text containing not more than 60 characters. The Title must be listed by the Rulekeepor along with the Rule. However, the Title is not part of the Rule itself and has no effect on the meaning or application of the Rule, being merely a convenience for the Players. A Rule Change that Creates a new Rule may specify a Title for the new Rule. If it does not, the Rulekeepor shall choose the new Rule's Title. To change the Title of an existing Rule: A Rule's Title may be changed by a Directive. The Directive must unambiguously state the number of the Rule and the new Title. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: All Rules have a Title, which is a single line of text containing not more than 60 characters. The Title must be listed by the Rulekeepor along with the Rule. However, the Title is not part of the Rule itself and has no effect on the meaning or application of the Rule, being merely a convenience for the Players. A Rule Change that Creates a new Rule may specify a Title for the new Rule. If it does not, the Rulekeepor shall choose the new Rule's Title. To change the Title of an existing Rule: history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3521 (Chuck), 23 June 1997 text: All Rules have a Title, which is a single line of text containing not more than 60 characters. The Title must be listed by the Rulekeepor along with the Rule. However, the Title is not part of the Rule itself and has no effect on the meaning or application of the Rule, being merely a convenience for the Players. A Rule Change that Creates a new Rule may specify a Title for the new Rule. If it does not, the Rulekeepor shall choose the new Rule's Title. The Rulekeepor is authorized to change the Title of a Rule Without Objection. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3968 (harvel), 4 February 2000 text: Each Rule has a Title, which is a single line of text containing not more than 60 characters. The Title must be listed by the Rulekeepor along with the Rule. However, the Title is not part of the Rule itself and has no effect on the meaning or application of the Rule, being merely a convenience for the Players. A Rule Change that Creates a new Rule may specify a Title for the new Rule. If it does not, the Rulekeepor shall choose the new Rule's Title. The Rulekeepor is authorized to change the Title of a Rule Without Objection. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1485 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1486 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1486 by Proposal 1638, 25 July 1995 text: This Rule defines the "Procedure To Impeach An Officer". This Rule applies only to certain Offices, as defined by other Rules. An Officer is Impeached when a Referendum calling for the Impeachment of the Officer passes. Any Active Player is permitted to call such a Referendum at any time, by requesting such to the Public Forum. The Referendum must list both the Office and the Player holding this Office by name. If upon passage of the Referendum the named Player is holding the named Office, then that Player is immediately removed from that Office, and that Office becomes Vacant. For this Referendum the default procedure for referenda is modified as follows: Vote Collector is the Player who called for the Impeachment Referendum. Voting Entities do not include the Officer under consideration for Impeachment. Adoption Ratio is 2. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: This Rule defines the "Procedure To Impeach An Officer". This Rule applies only to certain Offices, as defined by other Rules. An Officer is Impeached when a Referendum calling for the Impeachment of the Officer passes. Any Active Player is permitted to call such a Referendum at any time, by requesting such to the Public Forum. The Referendum must list both the Office and the Player holding this Office by name. If upon passage of the Referendum the named Player is holding the named Office, then that Player is immediately removed from that Office. For this Referendum the default procedure for referenda is modified as follows: Vote Collector is the Player who called for the Impeachment Referendum. Voting Entities do not include the Officer under consideration for Impeachment. Adoption Ratio is 2. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2577, 21 April 1996 text: An Officer is Impeached when a Referendum calling for the Impeachment of the Officer passes. Any Active Player is permitted to call such a Referendum at any time, by requesting such to the Public Forum. The Referendum must list both the Office and the Player holding this Office by name. If upon passage of the Referendum the named Player is holding the named Office, then that Player is immediately removed from that Office. For this Referendum the default procedure for referenda is modified as follows: Vote Collector is the Player who called for the Impeachment Referendum. Voting Entities do not include the Officer under consideration for Impeachment. Adoption Ratio is 2. This procedure shall only apply to the Offices of Assessor and Promotor, or to any Office of which the Rules explicitly state that this procedure applies to. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2668, 12 September 1996 text: An Officer is Impeached when a Referendum calling for the Impeachment of the Officer passes. Any Active Player is permitted to call such a Referendum at any time, by requesting such to the Public Forum. The Referendum must list both the Office and the Player holding this Office by name. If upon passage of the Referendum the named Player is holding the named Office, then that Player is immediately removed from that Office. For this Referendum the default procedure for referenda is modified as follows: Vote Collector is the Player who called for the Impeachment Referendum. Voting Entities do not include the Officer under consideration for Impeachment. Adoption Ratio is 2. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: Any Active Player is permitted to call a Referendum to Impeach an Officer at any time, by requesting such in the Public Forum. The Officer is Impeached when such a Referendum is passed. The Referendum must list both the Office and the current Electee to that Office by name. If upon passage of the Referendum the named Player is the current Electee of that Office, then the Player is immediately removed from Office. For this Referendum the default procedure for referenda is modified as follows: Vote Collector is the Player who called for the Impeachment Referendum. Voting Entities do not include the Officer under consideration for Impeachment. Adoption Ratio must be greater than or equal to 2 for the Referendum to pass. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3972 (Peekee), 14 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: Any Active Player is permitted to call a Referendum to Impeach an Officer at any time, by publicly requesting such. The Officer is Impeached when such a Referendum is passed. The Referendum must list both the Office and the current Electee to that Office by name. If upon passage of the Referendum the named Player is the current Electee of that Office, then the Player is immediately removed from Office. For this Referendum the default procedure for referenda is modified as follows: Vote Collector is the Player who called for the Impeachment Referendum. Voters do not include the Officer under consideration for Impeachment. Adoption Ratio must be greater than or equal to 2 for the Referendum to pass. history: Amended(???) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: An active player (the Witch Hunter) may hold a referendum to remove an officer from office. For this referendum: (a) The set of eligible voters is the set of active players besides the Witch Hunter and the named officer. (b) The adoption index is 2. (c) "BURN THE WITCH" is a synonym for "FOR". (d) "LET THE WITCH LIVE" is a synonym for "AGAINST". (e) "OF COURSE THE WITCH IS GUILTY, BUT I WANT TO SEE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE THINK" is a synonym for "PRESENT". If the referendum is adopted, it shall have the effect of removing the named player from the named office if e is electee to that office. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1486 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1487 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1487 by Proposal 1639, 25 July 1995 text: It is permissible for the "Procedure To Impeach An Officer", as defined in another Rule, to be used for the Offices of Promotor and Assessor. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1488 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1488 by Proposal 1647, 6 August 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Let there be an Entity known as the Nomic Potato. There is only one Potato which cannot be destroyed. The Potato can be possessed by any Agora Player who owns Extra Votes (EVs). A Player with no EVs cannot possess the Potato, and if the Player possessing the Potato ever ceases to own EVs, e also loses possession of the Potato. If the Potato's possessor ceases to possess the Potato though ceasing to own EVs, or ceasing to be a Player, or in any other way not otherwise described by the Rules pertaining to the Nomic Potato, the possession of the Potato immediately passes to the Player who owns the greatest number of EVs. If more than one Player is tied for the greatest number of EVs, the Potato is transferred to the tied Player who: i) Has not previously possessed the Potato; providing all other tied Players have previously possessed the Potato. ii) Has not possessed the Potato for the longest consecutive period of time immediately prior to the Potato's transfer; providing all other tied Players have previously possessed the Potato. iii) The tied Player randomly determined by the Assessor, provided neither i) or ii) apply. As long as at least one Player owns EVs, the Potato is always in some Player's possession. The only time that the Potato is not possessed by a Player is when no Player owns EVs. The Assessor keeps track of who possesses the Potato. text: Let there be an Entity known as the Nomic Potato. There is only one Potato which cannot be destroyed. The Potato can be possessed by any Agora Player who owns Extra Votes (EVs). A Player with no EVs cannot possess the Potato, and if the Player possessing the Potato ever ceases to own EVs, e also loses possession of the Potato. If the Potato's possessor ceases to possess the Potato though ceasing to own EVs, or ceasing to be a Player, or in any other way not otherwise described by the Rules pertaining to the Nomic Potato, the possession of the Potato immediately passes to the Player who owns the greatest number of EVs. If more than one Player is tied for the greatest number of EVs, the Potato is transferred to the tied Player who: i) Has not previously possessed the Potato; providing all other tied Players have previously possessed the Potato. ii) Has not possessed the Potato for the longest consecutive period of time immediately prior to the Potato's transfer; providing all other tied Players have previously possessed the Potato. iii) The tied Player randomly determined by the Assessor, provided neither i) or ii) apply. As long as at least one Player owns EVs, the Potato is always in some Player's possession. The only time that the Potato is not possessed by a Player is when no Player owns EVs. The Assessor keeps track of who possesses the Potato. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1763, 21 October 1995 text: Let there be an Entity known as the Nomic Potato. There is only one Potato which cannot be destroyed. The Potato can be possessed by any Agora Player who owns Extra Votes (EVs). A Player with no EVs cannot possess the Potato, and if the Player possessing the Potato ever ceases to own EVs, e also loses possession of the Potato. If the Potato's possessor ceases to possess the Potato though ceasing to own EVs, or ceasing to be a Player, or in any other way not otherwise described by the Rules pertaining to the Nomic Potato, the possession of the Potato immediately passes to the Player who owns the greatest number of EVs. If more than one Player is tied for the greatest number of EVs, the Potato is transferred to the tied Player who: i) Has not previously possessed the Potato; providing all other tied Players have previously possessed the Potato. ii) Has not possessed the Potato for the longest consecutive period of time immediately prior to the Potato's transfer; providing all other tied Players have previously possessed the Potato. iii) has been randomly selected by the Assessor, provided neither i) or ii) apply. As long as at least one Player owns EVs, the Potato is always in some Player's possession. The only time that the Potato is not possessed by a Player is when no Player owns EVs. The Assessor keeps track of who possesses the Potato. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1489 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1489 by Proposal 1647, 6 August 1995 text: Any Player who does not possess the Potato can spend five points to transfer the Potato to any Player who can legally own the Potato. (This can even be to the transferring Player, provided e may possess the Potato.) Each Player is limited to one such transfer every week. The transfer is made when the transferring Player posts a message in the Public Forum, reporting to the Assessor which Player the Potato is being transferred to. If the Player being transferred to is eligible to possess the Potato, and the transferring Player possesses at least five points, the transfer is made and the Assessor reports the transferring Player's score change to the Scorekeepor. The five points go to the Bank. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1490 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1490 by Proposal 1647, 6 August 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: The Player possessing the Potato receives the following benefits: i) e receives five points from the Bank for every full Nomic week e possesses the Potato. ii) e receives ten points from the Bank for every EV e spends while e possesses the Potato. (These points are received at the time the vote is cast, and the Potato must be possessed at that time.) iii) e receives fifteen points and 1 EV from the Bank when the Potato is transferred away from eir possession. The Player possessing the Potato suffers the following penalties: i) e loses two EVs for every full Nomic week e possesses the Potato and does not spend at least one EV while voting. (This does not apply during any Nomic Week in which no Proposals are up for vote.) ii) e loses half the EVs in eir possession (rounded down to the next integer) if e possesses the Potato at the End of the Game. Point changes as a result of this Rule are Reported to the Scorekeepor by the Assessor. EV changes as a result of this rule are detected by the Assessor. EVs lost are transferred to the Bank. EVs gained are transferred from the Bank. text: The Player possessing the Potato receives the following benefits: i) e receives five points from the Bank for every full Nomic week e possesses the Potato. ii) e receives ten points from the Bank for every EV e spends while e possesses the Potato. (These points are received at the time the vote is cast, and the Potato must be possessed at that time.) iii) e receives fifteen points and 1 EV from the Bank when the Potato is transferred away from eir possession. The Player possessing the Potato suffers the following penalties: i) e loses two EVs for every full Nomic week e possesses the Potato and does not spend at least one EV while voting. (This does not apply during any Nomic Week in which no Proposals are up for vote.) ii) e loses half the EVs in eir possession (rounded down to the next integer) if e possesses the Potato at the End of the Game. Point changes as a result of this Rule are Reported to the Scorekeepor by the Assessor. EV changes as a result of this rule are detected by the Assessor. EVs lost are transferred to the Bank. EVs gained are transferred from the Bank. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1710, 12 September 1995 text: The Player possessing the Potato receives the following benefits: i) e receives five points from the Bank for every full Nomic week e possesses the Potato. ii) e receives ten points from the Bank for every EV e spends while e possesses the Potato. (These points are received at the time the vote is cast, and the Potato must be possessed at that time.) iii) e receives fifteen points and 1 EV from the Bank when another Player spends five points to transfer the Potato away from eir possession. The Player possessing the Potato suffers the following penalties: i) e loses two EVs for every full Nomic week e possesses the Potato and does not spend at least one EV while voting. (This does not apply during any Nomic Week in which no Proposals are up for vote.) ii) e loses half the EVs in eir possession (rounded down to the next integer) if e possesses the Potato at the End of the Game. Point changes as a result of this Rule are Reported to the Scorekeepor by the Assessor. EV changes as a result of this rule are detected by the Assessor. EVs lost are transferred to the Bank. EVs gained are transferred from the Bank. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1773, 6 November 1995 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1774, 6 November 1995 text: The Player possessing the Potato receives the following benefits: i) e receives five points from the Bank for every full Nomic week e possesses the Potato. ii) e receives three points from the Bank for every EV e spends while e possesses the Potato. (These points are received at the time the vote is cast, and the Potato must be possessed at that time.) iii) e receives fifteen points and 1 EV from the Bank when another Player spends five points to transfer the Potato away from eir possession. The Player possessing the Potato suffers the following penalties: i) e loses two EVs for every full Nomic week e possesses the Potato and does not spend at least one EV while voting. (This does not apply during any Nomic Week in which no Proposals are up for vote.) ii) e loses two EVs if e possesses the Potato at the End of the Game. Point changes as a result of this Rule are Reported to the Scorekeepor by the Assessor. EV changes as a result of this rule are detected by the Assessor. EVs lost are transferred to the Bank. EVs gained are transferred from the Bank. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1491 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1491 by Proposal 1653, 6 August 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Let there be a Currency known as a Win Token. Any Player may possess any number of Win Tokens, which are created, destroyed, transferred, and otherwise manipulated only according to this and other Rules. The Recordkeepor for Win Tokens is the Tabulator. The Tabulator is responsible for keeping track of the status of Win Tokens. E shall post to the Public Forum at least once per Week, a report of the number of Tokens currently possessed by each Player, as well as a description of the changes since the previous report. Additionally, e shall make a report as soon as possible following a Win By Tokens. Upon creation of this Rule, all Players start with 0 Win Tokens. When a Player joins the Game, e starts with 0 Win Tokens. Whenever a Game ends (for any reason), all Win Tokens are destroyed. text: Let there be a Currency known as a Win Token. Any Player may possess any number of Win Tokens, which are created, destroyed, transferred, and otherwise manipulated only according to this and other Rules. The Recordkeepor for Win Tokens is the Tabulator. The Tabulator is responsible for keeping track of the status of Win Tokens. E shall post to the Public Forum at least once per Week, a report of the number of Tokens currently possessed by each Player, as well as a description of the changes since the previous report. Additionally, e shall make a report as soon as possible following a Win By Tokens. Upon creation of this Rule, all Players start with 0 Win Tokens. When a Player joins the Game, e starts with 0 Win Tokens. Whenever a Game ends (for any reason), all Win Tokens are destroyed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2471, 16 February 1996 text: Win Tokens are a Currency. The Recordkeepor of Win Tokens is the Tabulator; the Mintor of Win Tokens is the Mint. The Tabulator shall, at least once per Nomic Week, post a report detailing the number of Win Tokens held in each Treasury and all transactions involving Win Tokens which have occured since the last report. Whenever a Game Ends, all Win Tokens in existence are destroyed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: Win Tokens are a Currency. The Recordkeepor of Win Tokens is the Tabulator; the Mintor of Win Tokens is the Mint. The Tabulator shall, at least once per Nomic Week, post a report detailing the number of Win Tokens held in each Treasury and all transactions involving Win Tokens which have occured since the last report. Whenever a Player Wins the Game by Tokens, all Win Tokens in existence are destroyed. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1492 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1492 by Proposal 1653, 6 August 1995 text: A Player not on Hold becomes the Winner (a Win By Tokens) when the number of Win Tokens e possesses is at least X greater than the number of Win Tokens possessed by any other Player at that time. X is the number of Players at the time the previous Game ended. The number of Tokens required to Win shall be listed by the Tabulator in eir report. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2471, 16 February 1996 text: A Player Wins when e is both not on Hold and possesses a number of Win Tokens which exceeds the number held by every other Player at that time by the number of registered Players at the time the current Game began. The Tabulator shall notify the Public Forum as soon as possible after a Player Wins by the application of this Rule. The Tabulator shall include in eir Report the number of Tokens currently required to Win by the application of this Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2693, 3 October 1996 text: A Player Wins when e is both not on Hold and possesses a number of Win Tokens which exceeds the number held by every other Player at that time by the number of registered Players at the time the current Game began. No Player already holding a Noble or higher Cup may Win in this manner. The Tabulator shall notify the Public Forum as soon as possible after a Player Wins by the application of this Rule. The Tabulator shall include in eir Report the number of Tokens currently required to Win by the application of this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: A Player Wins when e is both not on Hold and possesses a number of Win Tokens which exceeds the number held by every other Player at that time by the number of registered Players at the time the current month began. No Player already holding a Noble or higher Cup may Win in this manner. The Tabulator shall notify the Public Forum as soon as possible after a Player Wins by the application of this Rule. The Tabulator shall include in eir Report the number of Tokens currently required to Win by the application of this Rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1493 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1493 by Proposal 1653, 6 August 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: During each Nomic Week, each Player not on Hold may make 0, 1, 2, or 3 transfers of Win Tokens, in addition to any transfers permitted by default Currency Rules. These transfers occur when a Player sends a legitimate message to the Tabulator, requesting the transfer, which the Tabulator must record. The following are the only legitimate transfers, except that the default Currency Rules may permit other kinds of transfers as well: * 1 Token created and given to any Player, except the requesting Player. * 1 Token removed from any Player and destroyed. * 1 Token moved from any Player to any other Player except the Player making the transfer. This counts as two transfers. text: During each Nomic Week, each Player not on Hold may make 0, 1, 2, or 3 transfers of Win Tokens, in addition to any transfers permitted by default Currency Rules. These transfers occur when a Player sends a legitimate message to the Tabulator, requesting the transfer, which the Tabulator must record. The following are the only legitimate transfers, except that the default Currency Rules may permit other kinds of transfers as well: * 1 Token created and given to any Player, except the requesting Player. * 1 Token removed from any Player and destroyed. * 1 Token moved from any Player to any other Player except the Player making the transfer. This counts as two transfers. history: Null-Amended(1) by Proposal 1705, 4 September 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: During each Nomic Week, each Player not on Hold may make 0, 1, 2, or 3 transfers of Win Tokens, in addition to any transfers permitted by default Currency Rules. These transfers occur when a Player sends a legitimate message to the Tabulator, requesting the transfer, which the Tabulator must record. The following are the only legitimate transfers, except that the default Currency Rules may permit other kinds of transfers as well: * 1 Token created and given to any Player, except the requesting Player. * 1 Token removed from any Player and destroyed. * 1 Token moved from any Player to any other Player except the Player making the transfer. This counts as two transfers. text: During each Nomic Week, each Player not on Hold may make 0, 1, 2, or 3 transfers of Win Tokens, in addition to any transfers permitted by default Currency Rules. These transfers occur when a Player sends a legitimate message to the Tabulator, requesting the transfer, which the Tabulator must record. The following are the only legitimate transfers, except that the default Currency Rules may permit other kinds of transfers as well: * 1 Token created and given to any Player, except the requesting Player. * 1 Token removed from any Player and destroyed. * 1 Token moved from any Player to any other Player except the Player making the transfer. This counts as two transfers. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2471, 16 February 1996 text: Each Player is permitted to make up to 3 Win Token Transactions, of the sorts described in this Rule, per Nomic Week. A Currency Transfer, as defined elsewhere, which involves Win Tokens is not a Win Token Transaction. The legal Win Token Transactions are: * The creation of one Win Token, which is then placed in the Treasury of any Player other than the Player making the Transaction; and * The removal of one Win Token from the Treasury of any Player; this Win Token is then destroyed. A Player who wishes to make a Win Token Transaction shall do so by notifying the Tabulator of the Transaction. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1494 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1494 by Proposal 1655 (favor), 14 August 1995 text: The Registrar, in consultation with the Speaker, shall develop and maintain a Welcome Message, welcoming a new player to Agora Nomic, explaining any subscriptions required to receive the Public Forum, how to obtain a current ruleset, and any other information, advice, and gossip as the Registrar sees fit. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Welcome Message to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. In consideration for this service, the Registrar shall receive an additional point of Salary for any week in which one or more Players register for the first time. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1703, 1 September 1995 text: The Registrar, in consultation with the Speaker, shall develop and maintain a Welcome Message, welcoming a new player to Agora Nomic, explaining any subscriptions required to receive the Public Forum, how to obtain a current ruleset, and any other information, advice, and gossip as the Registrar sees fit. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Welcome Message to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1494 by Proposal 3656 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 January 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1495 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1495 by Proposal 1664, 18 August 1995 text: These exists a type of Nomic Entity known as an Aristocrat. An Aristocrat is a Voting Entity. An Aristocrat has a Default Vote and a Name. Each Aristocrat will Vote once on each proposal. Unless the Aristocrat is Influenced in a manner defined by these rules, that Vote will be the Default Vote. The Assessor keeps track of Aristocrat Votes, and those Votes are publishes in eir report(s) along with Player Votes. The number of Aristocrats is added to the number of Active Players for the purposes of determining Quorom. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1496 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1496 by Proposal 1665, 18 August 1995 text: There exists an Aristocrat whose Name is Fortinbras. Fortinbras' Default Vote is FOR. There exists an Aristocrat whose Name is Augustine. Augustine's Default Vote is AGAINST. There exists an Aristocrat whose Name is Zombie. Zombie's Default vote is ABSTAIN. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1497 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1497 by Proposal 1667, 18 August 1995 text: No Player shall present, as correct, information which e believes to be incorrect in any of the following: -a post to the Public Forum -evidence in a COE, CFJ, or Judgement -a response to a request for information which the Player is required to provide. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 10 December 1995 text: No Player shall present, as correct, information which e believes to be incorrect in any of the following: -a post to the Public Forum -evidence in a COE, CFJ, or Judgement -a response to a request for information which the Player is required to provide. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2043, 11 December 1995 text: No Player shall present, as correct, information which e believes to be incorrect in any of the following: -a post to the Public Forum -evidence in a COE, CFJ, or Judgement -a response to a request for information which the Player is required to provide. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. A Player who violates this Rule commits a Class B Crime. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2548, 22 March 1996 text: A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Misrepresentation, a Class C Crime. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be inccorect as part of evidence in a Claim of Error, Call for Judgement, or Judgement commits the Crime of Perjury, a Class B Crime. A Player shall never be convicted of both Misrepresentation and of Perjury for the same act. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2614, 1 June 1996 text: A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Misrepresentation, a Class C Crime. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of a message to an Officer which that Officer is then required to act upon commits the Crime of Falsification, a Class C Crime. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of evidence in a Claim of Error, Call for Judgement, or Judgement commits the Crime of Perjury, a Class B Crime. A Player shall never be convicted of more than one of the above Crimes for the same act. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Class 4 Crime of Misrepresentation. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of a message to an Officer which that Officer is then required to act upon commits the Class 4 Crime of Falsification. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of evidence in a Claim of Error, Call for Judgement, or Judgement commits the Class 10 Crime of Perjury. A Player shall never be convicted of more than one of the above Crimes for the same act. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect, either publicly or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide, commits the Class 4 Crime of Misrepresentation. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of a message to an Officer which that Officer is then required to act upon commits the Class 4 Crime of Falsification. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of evidence in a Claim of Error, Call for Judgement, or Judgement commits the Class 10 Crime of Perjury. A Player shall never be convicted of more than one of the above Crimes for the same act. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4148 (Kelly), 13 May 2001 text: Any Player who willfully makes a false statement of fact as part of evidence submitted in support of a Claim of Error, Call for Judgement, or Judgement, or in response to a Judicial or Appellate Order requiring that Player to disclose information known to that Player, commits the Class 10 Crime of Perjury. Any Player who willfully makes a false statement of fact as part of a public message, as any part of a response to a request for information where that Player was required to respond, or as part of a message to an Officer upon which that Officer is then required to act, commits the Class 4 Crime of Misrepresentation. For the purposes of this Rule, the Speaker shall be considered an Officer. For the purposes of this Rule, a false statement of fact is made "willfully" when the Player making it, at the time the statement was made, has the intention to make a false statement of fact and knowledge that the statement actually made was false. Particularly, a Player who makes a false statement of fact through excusable negligence, reasonable error, or reasonable reliance on the representations of another, shall not be considered to have willfully made a false statement of fact. A conclusion as to the interpretation of the Rules or their application to a particular situation is not a "statement of fact". history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4273 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: Any Player who willfully makes a false statement of fact as part of evidence submitted in support of a Claim of Error, Call for Judgement, or Judgement, or in response to a Judicial or Appellate Order requiring that Player to disclose information known to that Player, commits the Class 10 Crime of Perjury. Any Player who willfully makes a false statement of fact as part of a public message, as any part of a response to a request for information where that Player was required to respond, or as part of a message to an Officer upon which that Officer is then required to act, commits the Class 4 Crime of Misrepresentation. For the purposes of this Rule, the Speaker shall be considered an Officer. For the purpose of this Rule, for a Player to "willfully make a false statement of fact", all of the following conditions must be true at the time the Player makes the statement. a) The Player must present the statement as if it were true. b) The Player must know that the statement is false. In particular, the following things are not willful: excusable negligence, reasonable error, or reasonable reliance on the representations of another. c) The statement is not a conclusion as to the interpretation of the Rules, or as to their application to a particular situation. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1497 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1498 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1498 by Proposal 1671, 22 August 1995 text: Another Way to Win If, at any time, there is only one Immaculate Player, that Player may Win the Game by announcing this fact to the Public Forum, providing that Player has not also Won the previous Game in this manner. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2471, 16 February 1996 text: A Player Wins the Game if e is the only Immaculate Player, and e has correctly reported this fact to the Public Forum, provided that e did not Win the Previous Game in this same manner. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2693, 3 October 1996 text: A Player Wins the Game if e is the only Immaculate Player, and e has correctly reported this fact to the Public Forum, provided that e did not Win the Previous Game in this same manner. No Player already holding any Winner's Cup may Win in this manner. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: A Player Wins the Game if e is the only Immaculate Player, and e has correctly reported this fact to the Public Forum, provided that e did not Win in this manner within the three months prior to this announcement. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1498 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1499 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1499 by Proposal 1676, 22 August 1995 text: A Bearerbond is a Nomic Entity which obeys all the rules for a Contract, except: In the statement of the Bearerbond, one or more of the parties are identified only by unique abstract Role names (such as Bearer, or Party of the First Part and Party of the Second Part, or Feduciacrator, Honker, and Trusiast, or whatever), rather than being identified as a specific Player. At all times, exactly one Player is associated with each Role; the Player associated with a particular Role is known as the Rolebearer for that Role in that Bearerbond. All the copies of the Bearerbond sent and received during the setting up of the Bearerbond shall be accompanied by a statement clearly identifying the initial Rolebearer for each Role in the Bearerbond. All these statements must be identical. To change the Rolebearer for some Role in a Bearerbond, the current Rolebearer and the new Rolebearer notify the Notary of the transaction, clearly indicating which Role in which Bearerbond is involved (the notary may assign identifying names to Bearerbonds, or otherwise impose identification mechanisms as e sees fit). Unless the Bearerbond specifies otherwise, the Rolebearer for any Role may be changed in this way at any time. When any Rolebearer in a Bearerbond changes, the Notary shall notify all parties to the Bearerbond of the fact of the change, the Role invovled, and the identity of the new Bearer. The change of Rolebearer takes effect when the Notary sends this notification. All Rolebearers in a Bearerbond are in all ways parties to the Bearerbond. When the Rolebearer for some Role in a Bearerbond changes, the previous Rolebearer is no longer a party to the Bearerbond, unless e is explicitly named in the Bearerbond itself, or is the Rolebearer for some other Role in it. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: A Bearerbond is a Nomic Entity which obeys all the rules for a Contract, except: In the statement of the Bearerbond, one or more of the parties are identified only by unique abstract Role names (such as Bearer, or Party of the First Part and Party of the Second Part, or Feduciacrator, Honker, and Trusiast, or whatever), rather than being identified as a specific Player. At all times, exactly one Player is associated with each Role; the Player associated with a particular Role is known as the Rolebearer for that Role in that Bearerbond. All the copies of the Bearerbond sent and received during the setting up of the Bearerbond shall be accompanied by a statement clearly identifying the initial Rolebearer for each Role in the Bearerbond. All these statements must be identical. To change the Rolebearer for some Role in a Bearerbond, the current Rolebearer and the new Rolebearer notify the Notary of the transaction, clearly indicating which Role in which Bearerbond is involved (the notary may assign identifying names to Bearerbonds, or otherwise impose identification mechanisms as e sees fit). Unless the Bearerbond specifies otherwise, the Rolebearer for any Role may be changed in this way at any time. When any Rolebearer in a Bearerbond changes, the Notary shall notify all parties to the Bearerbond of the fact of the change, the Role involved, and the identity of the new Bearer. The change of Rolebearer takes effect when the Notary sends this notification. All Rolebearers in a Bearerbond are in all ways parties to the Bearerbond. When the Rolebearer for some Role in a Bearerbond changes, the previous Rolebearer is no longer a party to the Bearerbond, unless e is explicitly named in the Bearerbond itself, or is the Rolebearer for some other Role in it. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2033, 4 December 1995 text: Let there be a Class of Organization known as a Bearerbond, whose Compact can also be referred to as Bearerbond. Organizations in this Class are created, maintained, and otherwise behave in exactly the same manner as Organizations of the Class Contracts with the only exceptions being those given in the Rules explicitly applying to Bearerbonds. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1500 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1500 by Proposal 1677, 22 August 1995 text: When a CFJ alleging that an Ordinance, Regulation, or Contract (hereinafter the Target) should be interpreted in a certain way is Judged TRUE, the Judge may include with the Judgement an Injuction requiring the Ordinancekeepor of the relevant Group (in the case of Ordinances), the Contestmaster of the relevant Contest (in the case of Regulations) or the Notary (in the case of Contracts) to annotate the Target with the Statement in the CFJ. The annotation shall remain only until the Target is changed in any way; or until a CFJ determines that the injunction no longer applies, as described below. While it remains, it shall guide the application of the Target. If a Player believes that the circumstances which led to the Judgement no longer prevail and the annotation is therefore no longer applicable, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is Judged TRUE, the annotation shall be stricken from the Target. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: When a CFJ alleging that a Statute or a Warranty (hereinafter the Target) should be interpreted in a certain way is Judged TRUE, the Judge may include with the Judgement an Injunction requiring the Administrator of the Organization whose Compact contains the Target to annotate the Target with the Statement in the CFJ. The annotation shall remain only until the Target is changed in any way; or until a CFJ determines that the injunction no longer applies, as described below. While it remains, it shall guide the application of the Target. If a Player believes that the circumstances which led to the Judgement no longer prevail and the annotation is therefore no longer applicable, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is Judged TRUE, the annotation shall be stricken from the Target. text: When a CFJ alleging that a Statute or a Warranty (hereinafter the Target) should be interpreted in a certain way is Judged TRUE, the Judge may include with the Judgement an Injunction requiring the Administrator of the Organization whose Compact contains the Target to annotate the Target with the Statement in the CFJ. The annotation shall remain only until the Target is changed in any way; or until a CFJ determines that the injunction no longer applies, as described below. While it remains, it shall guide the application of the Target. If a Player believes that the circumstances which led to the Judgement no longer prevail and the annotation is therefore no longer applicable, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is Judged TRUE, the annotation shall be stricken from the Target. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: If a Call for Judgement alleges that a Statute or Warranty should be interpreted in a certain way, and the Caller of that CFJ has included a list of Rules, Statutes, and Warranties relevant to that CFJ (which must include the Statute or Warranty in question), and that CFJ has been Judged TRUE, the Judge of the CFJ is permitted to issue an Injunction ordering the Player responsible for maintaining that particular Statute or Warranty to annotate the Statute or Warranty in question with the Statement in the CFJ and the list of relevant Rules, Statutes, and Warranties. Such an annotation shall remain only until any of the Rules, Statutes, or Warranties in the list of relevant Rules, Statutes, or Warranties is changed in any way, or until removed by another Injunction. While it remains, it shall guide the application of that Statute or Warranty. If a Call for Judgement alleges that the circumstances which led to an annotation of a Statute or Warranty under this Rule no longer prevail, and that CFJ has been Judged TRUE, the Judge of that CFJ is required to issue an Injunction ordering the Player responsible for maintaining that particular Statute or Warranty to remove said annotation. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2576, 21 April 1996 text: When a player makes a CFJ alleging that a SLC should be interpreted in a certain way, e shall also submit a list of Rules relevant to that CFJ. If the statement is Judged TRUE, the Judge may include with the Judgement an Injuction requiring the Maintainer of the SLC in question to annotate that SLC with the Statement in the CFJ and the list of relevant Rules. The annotation shall remain only until one of the Rules in the list of relevant Rules, or the annotated SLC, is changed in any way; or until a CFJ determines that the injunction no longer applies, as described below. While it remains, it shall guide the application of that SLC. If a Player believes that the circumstances which led to the Judgement no longer prevail and the annotation is therefore no longer applicable, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is Judged TRUE, the annotation shall be stricken from the SLC. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2684, 3 October 1996 text: A CFJ alleging a SLC should be interpreted in a certain way must be accompanied by a list of relevant Rules, assembled by the Caller. If the Judge finds this CFJ's Statement TRUE, e is permitted to issue an Injunction requiring the Maintainer of the SLC to annotate the SLC with that Statement and the list of relevant Rules. This annotation, while it exists, shall guide application of that SLC. The annotation is removed once any change occurs in a Rule from the list of relevant Rules. If a Player believes that the circumstances leading to the Judgement no longer prevail, rendering the annotation inapplicable, e may submit a CFJ to that effect. If it is Judged TRUE, the annotation is removed. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The Judge of any CFJ, the Statement of which alleges that an SLC should be interpreted in a certain way, which is judged TRUE, may, at eir discretion, issue an Order requiring the Maintainer of that SLC to annotate the SLC in question with the Statement of that CFJ. Such an annotation, while it exists, shall guide application of that SLC. The Maintainer of that SLC may remove such an annotation only when the SLC ceases to exist, or when required to do so by a valid Order. Annotations to an SLC may not be modified in any way except as specified in this Rule. If a Player believes that an annotation is no longer pertinent, e may file, in the original CFJ from which the Order of Annotation arises, a Motion to Vacate the Order of Annotation. If such a Motion is granted, the Judge granting it shall Order the original Order Vacated and shall Order the Maintainer of that SLC to remove the annotation in question. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3768 (Chuck), 22 July 1998 text: The Judge of any CFJ, the Statement of which alleges that an SLC should be interpreted in a certain way, which is judged TRUE, may, at eir discretion, issue an Order requiring the Maintainer of that SLC to annotate the SLC in question with the Statement of that CFJ. Such an annotation, while it exists, shall guide application of that SLC. The Maintainer of that SLC may remove such an annotation only if the SLC ceases to exist; if required to do so by a valid Order; or if the original Order to Annotate is amended, stayed, or vacated. The Maintainer of an SLC may vacate an Order to annotate that SLC Without Objection. Annotations to an SLC may not be modified in any way except as specified in this Rule. If a Player believes that an annotation is no longer pertinent, e may file, in the original CFJ from which the Order of Annotation arises, a Motion to Vacate the Order of Annotation. If such a Motion is granted, the Judge granting it shall Order the original Order Vacated and shall Order the Maintainer of that SLC to remove the annotation in question. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1500 by Proposal 4794 (Manu), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1501 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1501 by Proposal 1680, 22 August 1995 text: If a Player (the "Requestor") asks the Ordinancekeepor of a Group for a copy of the Group's Ordinances, the Ordinancekeepor is obliged to provide it as soon as possible, without cost or other obligation on the part of the Requestor. If the Ordinances change during the time interval [R...P], where R is the time that the Requestor sends the request message and P is the time that the Ordinancekeepor Provides the information, then the Ordinancekeepor must provide the Ordinances as they existed at time R. Additionally, e most provide, for each time at which the Ordinances changed during this time interval, the time of the change and the Ordinances as they existed as a result of the change. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1715, 12 September 1995 text: If a Player (the "Requestor") asks the Ordinancekeepor of a Group for a copy of the Group's Ordinances, the Ordinancekeepor is obliged to provide it as soon as possible, without cost or other obligation on the part of the Requestor. If, between the time the Requestor's request is made and the time the Ordinancekeepor fulfills the request, the Ordinances have been changed, the Ordinancekeepor must provide the Ordinances as they existed at the time of the request, and must additionally, for each change of the Ordinances which occurred between the time of the request and the time of fulfillment, give the time of that change and the state of the Ordinances as they existed as a result of that change. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: An Organization is Public unless the Rules defining its Class permit (or require) it to be Private. If its Class permits Privacy, but does not require it, an Organization is Public unless its Compact claims Privacy. The Compact of a Public Organization must be provided by the Administrator of that Organization to any Player on demand. If, between the time of the demand and the time the Administrator fulfills the demand, the Compact has changed, the Administrator must provide the Compact as it existed at the time of the demand, and must additionally document every change made to the Compact between the demand and its fulfillment. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 1785, 13 November 1995 text: An Organization is Public unless the Rules defining its Class permit (or require) it to be Private. If its Class permits Privacy, but does not require it, an Organization is Public unless its Compact claims Privacy. The Compact of a Public Organization must be provided by the Administrator of that Organization to any Player As Soon As Possible on demand. If, between the time of the demand and the time the Administrator fulfills the demand, the Compact has changed, the Administrator must provide the Compact as it existed at the time of the demand, and must additionally document every change made to the Compact between the demand and its fulfillment. history: Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, 8 March 1996 text: An Organization is Public unless the Rules defining its Class permit (or require) it to be Private. If its Class permits Privacy, but does not require it, an Organization is Public unless its Compact claims Privacy. The Compact of a Public Organization must be provided by the Administrator of that Organization to any Player As Soon As Possible on demand. If, between the time of the demand and the time the Administrator fulfills the demand, the Compact has changed, the Administrator must provide the Compact as it existed at the time of the demand, and must additionally document every change made to the Compact between the demand and its fulfillment. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1502 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1502 by Proposal 1681, 22 August 1995 text: At least once every Nomic Week the Registrar shall post to the Public Forum a Registrar's Report. The information contained in this Report shall include but shall not be limited to all the information pertaining to Players, Groups, Patent Titles, and Degrees which the Registrar is required by other Rules to record and to publish in the Registrar's Report. Other Rules may specify further things which must be included in the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2038, 4 December 1995 text: At least once every Nomic Week the Registrar shall post to the Public Forum a Registrar's Report. The information contained in this Report shall include but shall not be limited to all the information pertaining to Players, Patent Titles, and Degrees which the Registrar is required by other Rules to record and to publish in the Registrar's Report. Other Rules may specify further things which must be included in the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2532, 10 March 1996 text: There is a set of information known as the Registrar's Report. It consists of all the information that the Rules say is part of the Registrar's Report. At least once every Nomic Week the Registrar shall post the Registrar's Report to the Public Forum. A Registrar that fails to do so commits a Class C Crime. history: Infected and Amended(3) by Rule 1454, 8 October 1996 text: There is a set of information known as the Registrar's Report. It consists of all the information that the Rules say is part of the Registrar's Report. At least once every Nomic Week the Registrar shall post the Registrar's Report to the Public Forum. A Registrar that fails to do so commits a Class C Crime. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 2792 (Andre), 30 January 1997 text: There is a set of information known as the Registrar's Report. The Registrar shall maintain all the information in the Registrar's Report, and post the Report to the Public Forum at least once every Nomic Week A Registrar that fails to do so commits a Class C Crime. The Registrar's Report shall at least contain the following: 1. The White Pages, which consist of a list of all Registered Players, with their Nomic nickname, preferred email address, current On/Off Hold status, and the date the Player last Registered or went On or Off Hold. 2. The Blue Pages, which consist of a list of all Offices and other official positions within Agora (such as Speaker), with the Nomic nickname of the holder of each position, and (in the case of Offices) when the last Election for that Office was and whether the Office is held temporarily. history: Amended(5) Cosmetically by Proposal 2831 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) Cosmetically by Proposal 2839 (Zefram), 11 March 1997 text: The Registrar's Report shall at least contain the following: 1. The White Pages, which consist of a list of all Registered Players, with their Nomic nickname, preferred email address, current On/Off Hold status, and the date the Player last Registered or went On or Off Hold. 2. The Blue Pages, which consist of a list of all Offices and other official positions within Agora (such as Speaker), with the Nomic nickname of the holder of each position, and (in the case of Offices) when the last Election for that Office was and whether the Office is held temporarily. history: ... history: Amended(8) text: The Registrar's Report shall at least contain the following: 1. A list of all Registered Players, with their Nomic nickname, if any, preferred email address, current On/Off Hold status, and the date the Player last Registered or went On or Off Hold. 2. The identity of the Speaker and eir Term of Service. 3. The identity of the Distributor. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1503 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1503 by Proposal 1682, 22 August 1995 text: Whenever a Player performs an action which is designated by the Rules as a Crime, and further it has been determined by a CFJ that in fact that this action did take place and was in fact a Crime, then that Player shall be subject to the penalties for that Crime, as defined by the Rules. An action is a Crime only if there is a Rule which designates it to be a Crime. The fact that an action is prohibited by the Rules is not sufficient to make it a Crime. The designation of an action as a Crime does not in any way grant legal status to that action. A Rule which designates an action to be a Crime must also either specify an explicit penalty for committing that Crime, or designate that Crime to be one of several Classes of Crime defined elsewhere in the Rules. If a Rule designates an action to be a Crime, but does not either specify an explicit penalty or specify a valid Class of Crime, then that Crime shall not have any associated penalty. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2677, 26 September 1996 text: The Rules can penalize Players for performing, or failing to perform, some specific action. Such penalized actions, or failures to act, are defined as either Crimes or Infractions. A Player shall only be subject to the penalty for a Crime after a CFJ has explicitly found that the Player has committed that Crime, or after an appeal to a Judgement finds so. A Player shall be subject to the penalty for an Infraction as soon as it is reported by the Officer in charge of detecting that Infraction. There are no Crimes or Infractions outside those defined in the Rules. If a Rule defines a Crime or Infraction without specifying an explicit penalty, or a class of penalty that is defined in the Rules, then that Crime or Infraction imposes no penalty. Any Rule that defines an Infraction must also specify the Officer in charge of detecting and reporting that Infraction, otherwise the Infraction imposes no penalty. Crimes are detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. Any penalties reported by unauthorized persons have no effect. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2700, 10 October 1996 text: The Rules can penalize Players for performing, or failing to perform, some specific action. Such penalized actions, or failures to act, are defined as either Crimes or Infractions. A Player shall only be subject to the penalty for a Crime after a CFJ has explicitly found that the Player has committed that Crime, or after an appeal to a Judgement finds so. A Player shall be subject to the penalty for an Infraction as soon as it is reported by the Player in charge of detecting that Infraction. There are no Crimes or Infractions outside those defined in the Rules. If a Rule defines a Crime or Infraction without specifying an explicit penalty, or a class of penalty that is defined in the Rules, then that Crime or Infraction imposes no penalty. Any Rule that defines an Infraction must also specify the Player in charge of detecting and reporting that Infraction, otherwise the Infraction imposes no penalty. Crimes are detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. Any penalties reported by unauthorized persons have no effect. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2770 (Steve), 19 December 1996 text: The Rules can penalize Players for performing, or failing to perform, some specific action. Such penalized actions, or failures to act, are defined as either Crimes or Infractions. A Player shall only be subject to the penalty for a Crime after a CFJ has explicitly found that the Player has committed that Crime, or after an appeal to a Judgement finds so. A Player shall be subject to the penalty for an Infraction as soon as it is reported by the Player in charge of detecting that Infraction. There are no Crimes or Infractions outside those defined in the Rules. If a Rule defines a Crime or Infraction without specifying an explicit penalty, or a class of penalty that is defined in the Rules, then that Crime or Infraction imposes no penalty. Any Rule that defines an Infraction must also specify a Player or Players who are authorized to detect and report the commission of that Infraction; otherwise, the Infraction carries no penalty. Any penalties reported by unauthorized persons have no effect. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Any entity who performs an action defined by the Rules to be a Crime, or fails to perform an action where such failure is defined by the Rules to be a Crime, shall be subject to whatever penalty the Rules prescribe for that Crime upon the execution of a Sentencing Order executed consequent to a judicial finding that e did in fact commit that Crime. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4152 (Murphy), 13 May 2001 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: An action or inaction is a Crime or an Infraction only if defined as such by the Rules. An entity may be convicted of a Crime only by a judicial finding that e has committed that Crime. An entity may be convicted of an Infraction only by announcement of a Player authorized by the Rules to report the commission of that Infraction. The commission of a Crime or Infraction may be penalized only as defined by the Rules. text: An action or inaction is a Crime or an Infraction only if defined as such by the Rules. An entity may be convicted of a Crime only by a judicial finding that e has committed that Crime. An entity may be convicted of an Infraction only by announcement of a Player authorized by the Rules to report the commission of that Infraction. The commission of a Crime or Infraction may be penalized only as defined by the Rules. history: Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: In general, the Rules shall be adjudicated as if the Rules were a binding agreement between all Players, entered into by every player as a part of becoming a Player. An actual or alleged Rule violation shall be treated as the violation of a binding agreement to be bound by the Rule or Rules in question. The proposal, fora, and registration processes shall, prima facie, be considered to be protective of a Player's rights and privileges with respect to making and changing the agreement to be bound by the rules. Other rules may further differentiate the treatment of rules violations from the treatment of violations of other types of agreements. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 1503 by Proposal 5104 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1504 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1504 by Proposal 1682, 22 August 1995 text: All criminal penalties shall take effect 72 hours after the announcement of the Judge's Ruling in the CFJ which alleges the criminal act; however, if the CFJ is appealed prior to this time, then the penalty shall not be applied until immediately after the announcement of the ruling of the Appeals Court, and then only if the Judgement of the Appeals Court is also TRUE. If the CFJ is appealed, but not within 72 hours, and the Appeals Court judges differently than the Judge of the CFJ, then all penalties shall be reversed to the fullest extent possible at the time the Appeal Court's Judgement is announced. Responsibility for reporting all consequences of the application or reversal of a Criminal penalty falls unto the Clerk of the Courts, or, in eir absence, the Speaker. This includes, but is not limited to, reporting any Blot Awards or Currency Transfers to the Tabulator or the appropriate Recordkeepors. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which requires another Player to report Score, Currency, or Blot changes which result from the commission of a Crime, or which causes Score, Currency, or Blots changes resulting from the commission of a Crime to take effect sooner than specified in this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2570, 12 April 1996 text: All criminal penalties shall take effect 72 hours after the announcement of the Judge's Ruling in the CFJ which alleges the criminal act; however, if the CFJ is appealed prior to this time, then the penalty shall not be applied until immediately after the announcement of the ruling of the Appeals Court, and then only if the Judgement of the Appeals Court is also TRUE. If the CFJ is appealed, but not within 72 hours, and the Appeals Court judges differently than the Judge of the CFJ, then all penalties shall be reversed to the fullest extent possible at the time the Appeal Court's Judgement is announced. Responsibility for reporting all consequences of the application or reversal of a Criminal penalty falls unto the Clerk of the Courts. This includes, but is not limited to, reporting any Blot Awards or Currency Transfers to the Tabulator or the appropriate Recordkeepors. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which requires another Player to report Score, Currency, or Blot changes which result from the commission of a Crime, or which causes Score, Currency, or Blots changes resulting from the commission of a Crime to take effect sooner than specified in this Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2677, 26 September 1996 text: Penalties for a Crime are applied 72 hours after the CotC legally reports the penalty. If the CFJ alleging the Crime is appealed before this time, then application of the penalty is deferred until immediately after the resolution of the appeal. If an appeal finds that the Crime has occurred and the penalty has not yet been applied, then the penalty is applied immediately upon resolution of the appeal. If an appeal finds the Crime did not occur, the penalty shall not be applied. If the penalty has already been applied, then the penalty shall be reversed to the extent possible immediately upon resolution of the appeal. Penalties for Infractions are applied immediately upon their legal report. The Player so penalized is permitted to submit a CFJ alleging that the Infraction did not occur. If this CFJ is found TRUE, then the penalties are reversed, to the extent possible, 72 hours from the time of Judgement. If the CFJ is appealed before this time, this reversal is deferred until immediately after the appeal is resolved. If an appeal finds that the Infraction did not occur, and the penalty has not been reversed, the penalty is reversed to the extent possible immediately upon resolution of the appeal. If an appeal finds that the Infraction did occur, then the penalty shall not be reversed. If the penalty has been reversed, the penalty is immediately re-applied upon resolution of the appeal. Detecting and reporting the consequences of penalty reversals and re-applications due to this Rule shall be the duty of the Clerk of the Courts. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule that would require another Player to report Score, Currency, or Blot changes which result from these penalties, or which would require a different timing for such penalties. history: Infected and Amended(3) Substantially by Rule 1454, 8 January 1997 text: Penalties for a Crime are applied 72 hours after the CotC legally reports the penalty. If the CFJ alleging the Crime is appealed before this time, then application of the penalty is deferred until immediately after the resolution of the appeal. If an appeal finds that the Crime has occurred and the penalty has not yet been applied, then the penalty is applied immediately upon resolution of the appeal. If an appeal finds the Crime did not occur, the penalty shall not be applied. If the penalty has already been applied, then the penalty shall be reversed to the extent possible immediately upon resolution of the appeal. Penalties for Infractions are applied immediately upon their legal report. The Player so penalized is permitted to submit a CFJ alleging that the Infraction did not occur. If this CFJ is found TRUE, then the penalties are reversed, to the extent possible, 72 hours from the time of Judgement. If the CFJ is appealed before this time, this reversal is deferred until immediately after the appeal is resolved. If an appeal finds that the Infraction did not occur, and the penalty has not been reversed, the penalty is reversed to the extent possible immediately upon resolution of the appeal. If an appeal finds that the Infraction did occur, then the penalty shall not be reversed. If the penalty has been reversed, the penalty is immediately re-applied upon resolution of the appeal. Detecting and reporting the consequences of penalty reversals and re-applications due to this Rule shall be the duty of the Clerk of the Courts. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule that would require another Player to report Score, Currency, or Blot changes which result from these penalties, or which would require a different timing for such penalties. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: Penalties for a Crime are applied 72 hours after the CotC legally reports the penalty. If the CFJ alleging the Crime is appealed before this time, then application of the penalty is deferred until immediately after the resolution of the appeal. If an appeal finds that the Crime has occurred and the penalty has not yet been applied, then the penalty is applied immediately upon resolution of the appeal. If an appeal finds the Crime did not occur, the penalty shall not be applied. If the penalty has already been applied, then the penalty shall be reversed to the extent possible immediately upon resolution of the appeal. Penalties for Infractions are applied immediately upon their legal report. The Player so penalized is permitted to submit a CFJ alleging that the Infraction did not occur. If this CFJ is found TRUE, then the penalties are reversed, to the extent possible, 72 hours from the time of Judgement. If the CFJ is appealed before this time, this reversal is deferred until immediately after the appeal is resolved. If an appeal finds that the Infraction did not occur, and the penalty has not been reversed, the penalty is reversed to the extent possible immediately upon resolution of the appeal. If an appeal finds that the Infraction did occur, then the penalty shall not be reversed. If the penalty has been reversed, the penalty is immediately re-applied upon resolution of the appeal. Detecting and reporting the consequences of penalty reversals and re-applications due to this Rule shall be the duty of the Clerk of the Courts. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule that would require another Player to report Score, Currency, or Blot changes which result from these penalties, or which would require a different timing for such penalties. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: When a CFJ determines that a Player has committed a Crime, the Judge is required to issue an Injunction requiring the Clerk of the Courts to execute Payment Orders required to apply the penalty specified for that Crime. If an appeal finds the Crime did not occur, the penalty shall not be applied. If the penalty has already been applied, then the penalty shall be reversed to the extent possible immediately upon resolution of the appeal. Penalties for Infractions are applied immediately upon their legal report, and the Player making the report of the Infraction shall execute whatever Payment Order(s) are required to apply the penalty specified for that Infraction. If a CFJ later finds that the Infraction did not occur, the Judge of that CFJ is required to issue an Injunction requiring the Clerk of the Courts to vacate the Payment Order(s) originally executed to apply the penalty. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The imposition of penalties for the commission of a Crime shall be by Sentencing Order(s). Upon a judicial finding that an entity has committed a Crime, the Judge so finding shall execute Sentencing Orders sufficient to implement the penalty required by the Rules for that Crime. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: Upon a judicial finding that an entity has committed a Crime, the Judge so finding shall execute, as soon as possible, either: a) all and only those Sentencing Orders necessary and sufficient to impose the penalty for that Crime; or b) (Without Objection) an Order to Apologize. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Upon a finding in a Civil CFJ that the defendant has broken one or more Rules, the Trial Judge must execute exactly one of the following types of sentencing orders as punitive damages: (1) Without Objection and with 1 Support, an order the defendant to make a formal apology; (2) Without 2 Objections and with 2 Supporters, an order for the defendant to perform a specified service for the benefit of the Agoran community proportinate to the seriousness of the breach; (3) An order for the Herald to place the defendant in the Chokey for a number of months equal to the power of the highest powered Rule that was broken; (4) If and only if the trial judge finds the defendant to to have acted willfully in breaking the rules, an order for the Herald to place the defendant in the Chokey for twice number of months equal to the power of the highest-powered Rule that was broken; (5) If and only if the judge finds the defendant to have acted egregiously, maliciously, or with a consistent pattern of abuse, with Agoran Consent, an order for the Registrar to deregister the defendant in disgrace (make em lawless). An order to be made lawless is automatically appealed upon its initial execution. These punishments are considered ranked with "worse" punishments being later in the list. If an attempted sentencing order does not receive the proper support or receives too many objections, the trial judge must execute another type of sentencing order. No other punitive damages may be assessed for Rules violations. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: Upon a finding in a Civil CFJ that the defendant has broken one or more Rules, the Trial Judge must execute exactly one of the following types of sentencing orders as punitive damages: (1) Without Objection and with 1 Support, an order the defendant to make a formal apology; (2) Without 2 Objections and with 2 Supporters, an order for the defendant to perform a specified service for the benefit of the Agoran community proportionate to the seriousness of the breach; (3) An order for the Herald to place the defendant in the Chokey for a number of months equal to the power of the highest powered Rule that was broken; (4) If and only if the trial judge finds the defendant to have acted willfully in breaking the rules, an order for the Herald to place the defendant in the Chokey for twice number of months equal to the power of the highest-powered Rule that was broken; (5) If and only if the judge finds the defendant to have acted egregiously, maliciously, or with a consistent pattern of abuse, with Agoran Consent, an order for the Registrar to deregister the defendant in disgrace (make em lawless). An order to be made lawless is automatically appealed upon its initial execution. These punishments are considered ranked with "worse" punishments being later in the list. If an attempted sentencing order does not receive the proper support or receives too many objections, the trial judge must execute another type of sentencing order. No other punitive damages may be assessed for Rules violations. history: Retitled by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Power changed from 1 to 1.7 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any player, by announcement which clearly identifies the defendant and specifies the action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached the rules. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. The initiator and defendant are each unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the rules at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant has good reason why e could not avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active judgements. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5109 (Zefram; disi.), 2 August 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any player, by announcement which clearly identifies the defendant and specifies the action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached the rules. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. The initiator and defendant are each unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the rules at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant has good reason why e could not avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 5132 (Zefram), 13 August 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any player, by announcement which clearly identifies the defendant and specifies the action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached the rules. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. The initiator and defendant are each unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the rules at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant has good reason why e could not avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 5135 (Wooble), 17 August 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any player, by announcement which clearly identifies the defendant and specifies the action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached the rules. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase after the defendant has been informed, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and defendant are each unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the rules at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant has good reason why e could not avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 5153 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any player, by announcement which clearly specifies all of the following: a) The identity of the defendant. b) Exactly one rule allegedly breached by the defendant. c) The action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached this rule. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase after the defendant has been informed, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and defendant are each unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant, the same rule, and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the specified rule at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant has good reason why e could not avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5155 (root), 29 August 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any player, by announcement which clearly specifies all of the following: a) The identity of the defendant. b) Exactly one rule allegedly breached by the defendant. c) The action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached this rule. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and defendant are each unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant, the same rule, and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the specified rule at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant has good reason why e could not avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 5223 (root), 30 September 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any player, by announcement which clearly specifies all of the following: a) The identity of the defendant. b) Exactly one rule allegedly breached by the defendant. c) The action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached this rule. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. In the pre-trial phase the CotC SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and defendant are each unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant, the same rule, and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the specified rule at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant has good reason why e could not avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5294 (Murphy), 22 November 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any player, by announcement which clearly specifies all of the following: a) The identity of the defendant. b) Exactly one rule allegedly breached by the defendant. c) The action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached this rule. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. In the pre-trial phase the CotC SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and defendant are each unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant, the same rule, and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the specified rule at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act, but has good reason why e could not avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious * GUILTY, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act and none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5349 (Murphy), 13 December 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any player, by announcement which clearly specifies all of the following: a) The identity of the defendant. b) Exactly one rule allegedly breached by the defendant. c) The action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached this rule. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. In the pre-trial phase the CotC SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and defendant are each unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant, the same rule, and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the specified rule at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act, but has good reason why e could not avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious * GUILTY, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act and none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * FINE with an integer from 1 to 100, appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours destroy the specified number of Marks, or 1 VC, of the color(s) of eir choice. The ninny is only obliged to perform one destruction per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5371 (Zefram), 20 December 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any first-class person who is a member of the basis of any player, by announcement which clearly specifies all of the following: a) The identity of the defendant. b) Exactly one rule allegedly breached by the defendant. c) The action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached this rule. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. In the pre-trial phase the CotC SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and each member of the defendant's basis are unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant, the same rule, and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the specified rule at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act, but has good reason why e could not avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious * GUILTY, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act and none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * FINE with an integer from 1 to 100, appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours destroy the specified number of Marks, or 1 VC, of the color(s) of eir choice. The ninny is only obliged to perform one destruction per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5386 (Murphy, Zefram), 1 January 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any first-class person who is a member of the basis of any player, by announcement which clearly specifies all of the following: a) The identity of the defendant. b) Exactly one rule allegedly breached by the defendant. c) The action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached this rule. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. In the pre-trial phase the CotC SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and each member of the defendant's basis are unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant, the same rule, and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the specified rule at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * UNAWARE, appropriate if the defendant reasonably believed that the alleged act did not violate the specified rule * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant could not reasonably avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as that alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act and none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * FINE with an integer from 1 to 100, appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours destroy the specified number of Marks, or 1 VC, of the color(s) of eir choice. The ninny is only obliged to perform one destruction per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5404 (Murphy, pikhq, root), 16 January 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any first-class person who is a member of the basis of any player, by announcement which clearly specifies all of the following: a) The identity of the defendant. b) Exactly one rule allegedly breached by the defendant. c) The action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached this rule. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. In the pre-trial phase the CotC SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and each member of the defendant's basis are unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant, the same rule, and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the specified rule at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * UNAWARE, appropriate if the defendant reasonably believed that the alleged act did not violate the specified rule * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant could not reasonably avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as that alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act and none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * FINE, appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours destroy one of eir Notes. The ninny is only obliged to perform one destruction per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5436 (Murphy), 13 February 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any first-class person who is a member of the basis of any player, by announcement which clearly specifies all of the following: a) The identity of the defendant. b) Exactly one rule allegedly breached by the defendant. c) The action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached this rule. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. In the pre-trial phase the CotC SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and each member of the defendant's basis are unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant, the same rule, and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the specified rule at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * UNAWARE, appropriate if the defendant reasonably believed that the alleged act did not violate the specified rule * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant could not reasonably avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as that alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act and none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is thereafter either active or not. The sentence is inactive for the first week after it first takes effect. Thereafter, the sentence is active if and only if it is still in effect and sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * FINE, appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours destroy one of eir Notes. The ninny is only obliged to perform one destruction per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5493 (Murphy), 23 April 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as a criminal case. A criminal case's purpose is to determine the culpability of a particular person, known as the defendant, for an alleged breach of the rules, and to punish the guilty. A criminal case CAN be initiated by any first-class person who is a member of the basis of any player, by announcement which clearly specifies all of the following: a) The identity of the defendant. b) Exactly one rule allegedly breached by the defendant. c) The action (which may be a failure to perform another action) by which the defendant allegedly breached this rule. The initiation of a criminal case begins its pre-trial phase. In the pre-trial phase the CotC SHALL as soon as possible inform the defendant of the case and invite em to rebut the argument for eir guilt. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the defendant has been so informed. At any time during the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN end the pre-trial phase by announcement. The initiator and each member of the defendant's basis are unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. During the pre-trial phase, the defendant CAN disqualify one person from assignment as judge of the case, by announcement. If e disqualifies the judge, then the judge is recused. A criminal case has a judicial question on culpability, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are: * OVERLOOKED, appropriate if the alleged act allegedly occurred at least 200 days before the case was initiated * ALREADY TRIED, appropriate if judgement has already been reached in another criminal case with the same defendant, the same rule, and substantially the same alleged act * UNIMPUGNED, appropriate if the alleged act was not proscribed by the specified rule at the time it allegedly occurred * INNOCENT, appropriate if the defendant did not perform the alleged act * SLIPPERY, appropriate if the information available to the judge is insufficient to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not the defendant performed the alleged act * UNAWARE, appropriate if the defendant reasonably believed that the alleged act did not violate the specified rule * EXCUSED, appropriate if the defendant could not reasonably avoid breaching the rules in a manner at least as serious as that alleged * GUILTY, appropriate if the defendant breached the specified rule via the specified act and none of the above judgements is appropriate A criminal case has a judicial question on sentencing, which is applicable if the question on culpability is applicable and has a judgement of GUILTY. If a criminal case has an applicable question on sentencing which has a judgement, the defendant is hereafter known as the ninny, the judgement in the question on sentencing is known as the sentence, and the sentence is in effect. Some types of sentence include a duration known as the tariff. When a sentence with a tariff is in effect, the sentence is active while all of the following are true, inactive otherwise: 1) It is still in effect. 2) At least one week has elapsed since it first took effect. 3) Sentences of the same type on the same question on sentencing have been active for a total duration less than the tariff. (That is, if an active sentence is suspended and later reinstated or superseded by a similar sentence, then the defendant gets credit for time served prior to the suspension.) The CotC's report includes the status of all active sentences. The valid sentences are: * DISCHARGE, appropriate only in extraordinary circumstances, if any available non-null punishment would be manifestly unjust. Has no effect. * APOLOGY with a set of up to ten words (the prescribed words), appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours publish a formal apology of at least 200 words, including all the prescribed words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement. The ninny is only obliged to publish one apology per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * FINE, appropriate for rule breaches of small consequence. When in effect, the ninny SHALL within 72 hours destroy one of eir Notes. The ninny is only obliged to perform one destruction per question on sentencing, even if sentences of this type are assigned more than once or go into effect more than once. * CHOKEY with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for rule breaches of intermediate severity. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is in the chokey. No entity is in the chokey except as required by this rule. * EXILE with a duration (the tariff) up to 60 days multiplied by the power of the highest-power rule allegedly broken, appropriate if the severity of the rule breach is reasonably correlated with the length of the tariff, the middle of the tariff range being appropriate for severe rule breaches amounting to a breach of trust. While a sentence of this type is active, the ninny is exiled. No entity is exiled except as required by this rule. If an exiled entity is ever a player, e is deregistered. An exiled entity CANNOT register. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a criminal case within the past week CAN be initiated by the defendant by announcement. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1505 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1505 by Proposal 1682, 22 August 1995 text: The following Classes of Crime are defined, with the listed penalties: Class A Crime: The Player receives 20 Blots and loses 100 Points. Class B Crime: The Player receives 10 Blots and loses 50 Points. Class C Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots and loses 20 Points. Class D Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots and loses 10 Points. Class E Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot and loses 5 Points. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2431 (favor), 30 January 1996 text: The following Classes of Crime are defined, with the listed penalties: Class A Crime: The Player receives 20 Blots and loses 100 Points. Class B Crime: The Player receives 10 Blots and loses 50 Points. Class C Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots and loses 20 Points. Class D Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots and loses 10 Points. Class E Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot and loses 5 Points. Class 1 Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot. Class 2 Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots. Class 3 Crime: The Player receives 3 Blots. Class 4 Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: The following Classes of Crime are defined, with the listed penalties: Class A Crime: The Player receives 20 Blots and loses 100 Mils. Class B Crime: The Player receives 10 Blots and loses 50 Mils. Class C Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots and loses 20 Mils. Class D Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots and loses 10 Mils. Class E Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot and loses 5 Mils. Class 1 Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot. Class 2 Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots. Class 3 Crime: The Player receives 3 Blots. Class 4 Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: The following Classes of Crime are defined, with the listed penalties: Class A Crime: The Player receives 20 Blots and loses 100 Mil. Class B Crime: The Player receives 10 Blots and loses 50 Mil. Class C Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots and loses 20 Mil. Class D Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots and loses 10 Mil. Class E Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot and loses 5 Mil. Class 1 Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot. Class 2 Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots. Class 3 Crime: The Player receives 3 Blots. Class 4 Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: The following Classes of Crime are defined, with the listed penalties: Class A Crime: The Player receives 20 Blots and loses 20 VTs. Class B Crime: The Player receives 10 Blots and loses 10 VTs. Class C Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots and loses 4 VTs. Class D Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots and loses 2 VTs. Class E Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot and loses 1 VT. Class 1 Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot. Class 2 Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots. Class 3 Crime: The Player receives 3 Blots. Class 4 Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots. history: Infected and Amended(5) Substantially by Rule 1454, 23 December 1997 text: The following Classes of Crime are defined, with the listed penalties: Class A Crime: The Player receives 20 Blots and loses 20 VTs. Class B Crime: The Player receives 10 Blots and loses 10 VTs. Class C Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots and loses 4 VTs. Class D Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots and loses 2 VTs. Class E Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot and loses 1 VT. Class 1 Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot. Class 2 Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots. Class 3 Crime: The Player receives 3 Blots. Class 4 Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(6) by Rule 1505, 6 January 1998 text: The following Classes of Crime are defined, with the listed penalties: Class A Crime: The Player receives 20 Blots and loses 20 VTs. Class B Crime: The Player receives 10 Blots and loses 10 VTs. Class C Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots and loses 4 VTs. Class D Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots and loses 2 VTs. Class E Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot and loses 1 VT. Class 1 Crime: The Player receives 1 Blot. Class 2 Crime: The Player receives 2 Blots. Class 3 Crime: The Player receives 3 Blots. Class 4 Crime: The Player receives 4 Blots. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: A Class N Crime or Infraction, where N is replaced with a number, is a Crime or Infraction for which the penalty is N Blots. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: A Class N Crime or Infraction, where N is replaced with a number, is a Crime or Infraction for which the penalty is N Blots. Such a penalty is assessed upon the execution of a Sentencing or Ticketing Order that Orders the Herald to record the penalty. If such a Sentencing or Ticketing Order is vacated after the Herald has already recorded the penalty, then an equal number of Blots are expunged from the penalized entity. (If the entity has less Blots than the amount of the penalty, then all eir Blots are expunged.) history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4408 (OscarMeyr), 30 October 2002 text: A Class N Infraction (where N is replaced with a number) is an Infraction for which the penalty is N Blots. A Class N Crime (where N is replaced with a number) is a Crime for which the penalty is N Blots and a loss of 2*N Points. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4416 (OscarMeyr), 16 November 2002 text: A Class N Infraction (where N is replaced with a number) is an Infraction for which the penalty is N Blots. Such a penalty is assessed upon the execution of a Ticketing Order that Orders the Herald to record the penalty. A Class N Crime (where N is replaced with a number) is a Crime for which the penalty is N Blots and a loss of 2*N Points. Such a penalty is assessed upon the execution of a Sentencing Order that Orders the Herald to record the penalty, and a Notice of Award of the Points penalty. If such a Sentencing or Ticketing Order is vacated after the Herald has already recorded the penalty, then an equal number of Blots are expunged from the penalized entity. (If the entity has less Blots than the amount of the penalty, then all eir Blots are expunged.) In the case of a vacated Sentencing Order, the lost Points are to be Awarded back to the penalized entity, provided that the game has not been Won between the execution of the Sentencing Order and its vacation. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: A Class N Infraction (where N is replaced with a number) is an Infraction for which the penalty is N Blots. Such a penalty is assessed upon the execution of a Ticketing Order that Orders the Herald to record the penalty. A Class N Crime (where N is replaced with a number) is a Crime for which the penalty is N Blots. Such a penalty is assessed upon the execution of a Sentencing Order that Orders the Herald to record the penalty. If such a Sentencing or Ticketing Order is vacated after the Herald has already recorded the penalty, then an equal number of Blots are expunged from the penalized entity. (If the entity has less Blots than the amount of the penalty, then all eir Blots are expunged.) history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4672 (Manu), 9 April 2005 text: A Class N Infraction (where N is replaced with a number) is an Infraction for which the penalty is N Blots minus the number of Shares owned by the penalized entity at the time of the Infraction, with a minimum of 1. Such a penalty is assessed upon the execution of a Ticketing Order that Orders the Herald to record the penalty. A Class N Crime (where N is replaced with a number) is a Crime for which the penalty is N Blots. Such a penalty is assessed upon the execution of a Sentencing Order that Orders the Herald to record the penalty. If such a Sentencing or Ticketing Order is vacated after the Herald has already recorded the penalty, then an equal number of Blots are expunged from the penalized entity. (If the entity has less Blots than the amount of the penalty, then all eir Blots are expunged.) history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: When the Herald is ordered to place someone in the Chokey, e shall publically award em the patent title "In the Chokey". This title shall be automatically revoked after a length of time indicated by the sentencing order, and the Herald shall announce the revokation. If a sentencing order is executed against a defendant who already holds this title, the length of time of the new sentencing order shall be added to the time left on any previous ones. A person is considered to be In Disgrace while in the Chokey, between the execution and satisfaction of any sentencing orders binding em, or if deregistered for lawlessness. A person who leaves the game in disgrace shall be awarded the Patent Title Fugitive by the Herald. A Player may revoke the title Fugitive from emself as long as e is no longer in Disgrace. A non-player may have this title revoked by Agoran Consent. The rules may further specify actions prohibited to persons in particular types of disgrace. The Herald is encouraged to publish lists of those in disgrace separate from patent titles of honor, to indicate the disgrace. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1505 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1506 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1506 by Proposal 1683, 29 August 1995 text: Upon the adoption of the Proposal which Creates this Rule, all Players who voted FOR the Proposal are awarded 10 points, and all Players who voted AGAINST it are penalized 10 points. Ten days after this Rule is Created, it automatically Repeals itself. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1507 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1507 by Proposal 1690, 1 September 1995 text: Whenever a Player performs an action which is designated by the Rules as a Infraction, that Player shall be subject to the penalties for that Infraction, as defined by the Rules. An action is a Infraction only if there is a Rule which designates it to be a Infraction. The fact that an action is prohibited by the Rules is not sufficient to make it a Infraction. The designation of an action as a Infraction neither grants nor denies legal status to that action. A Rule which designates an action to be a Infraction must specify an explicit penalty for committing that Infraction. If a Rule designates an action to be a Infraction, but does not specify an explicit penalty, then that Infraction shall not have any associated penalty. A Rule which designates an action to be an Infraction must specify the Officer who is to detect and report that Infraction, and only that Officer and the Speaker are authorized to detect and report that Infraction. A report of an Infraction by a Player other than the Officer mandated to report such Infractions or the Speaker has no legal effect. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1508 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1508 by Proposal 1690, 1 September 1995 text: All penalties for Infractions take effect at the time the first report of the Infraction is posted by the Player who reported it, provided that report was made by a Player who is legally authorized to make it. The determination of the reporting Player is legally binding until and unless it is reversed by a Call for Judgement. Any second or subsequent report of an Infraction has no legal effect. A Player who disagrees with the determination that an action was an Infraction is permitted to submit a Call for Judgement alleging that the action was not an Infraction. If the Officer's determination is reversed by CFJ, then the penalties shall be reversed 72 hours after the Judgement is announced, unless the CFJ is itself appealed during this time, in which case the penalties are reversed immediately upon the announcement of the ruling of the Appeals Court, and then only if the Appeals Court sustains the original Judgement. If the CFJ is appealed, but not within 72 hours, and the Appeals Court does not sustain the original Judgement, the penalties shall be reapplied upon the time the Appeal Courts' Judgement is announced. The responsibilty for reporting all consequences of the application of a penalty falls unto the Player who makes the report of Infraction. The responsibility for reporting all consequences of the reversal or reapplication of a penalty as a result of the appeals process falls unto the Clerk of the Courts, or, in eir absence, the Speaker. This includes, but is not limited to, reporting any Blot Awards or Currency Transfers to the Tabulator or the appropriate Recordkeepors. Penalties for Infractions shall be limited to the loss of units of one or more Currencies, the award of one or more Blots, or both. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which requires another Player to report Score, Currency, or Blot changes which result from the commission of a Infraction, or which causes Score, Currency, or Blots changes resulting from the commission of a Infraction to take effect sooner than specified in this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: All penalties for Infractions take effect at the time the first report of the Infraction is posted by the Player who reported it, provided that report was made by a Player who is legally authorized to make it. The determination of the reporting Player is legally binding until and unless it is reversed by a Call for Judgement. Any second or subsequent report of an Infraction has no legal effect. A Player who disagrees with the determination that an action was an Infraction is permitted to submit a Call for Judgement alleging that the action was not an Infraction. If the Officer's determination is reversed by CFJ, then the penalties shall be reversed 72 hours after the Judgement is announced, unless the CFJ is itself appealed during this time, in which case the penalties are reversed immediately upon the announcement of the ruling of the Appeals Court, and then only if the Appeals Court sustains the original Judgement. If the CFJ is appealed, but not within 72 hours, and the Appeals Court does not sustain the original Judgement, the penalties shall be reapplied upon the time the Appeal Courts' Judgement is announced. The responsibility for reporting all consequences of the application of a penalty falls unto the Player who makes the report of Infraction. The responsibility for reporting all consequences of the reversal or reapplication of a penalty as a result of the appeals process falls unto the Clerk of the Courts, or, in eir absence, the Speaker. This includes, but is not limited to, reporting any Blot Awards or Currency Transfers to the Tabulator or the appropriate Recordkeepors. Penalties for Infractions shall be limited to the loss of units of one or more Currencies, the award of one or more Blots, or both. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which requires another Player to report Score, Currency, or Blot changes which result from the commission of a Infraction, or which causes Score, Currency, or Blots changes resulting from the commission of a Infraction to take effect sooner than specified in this Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2570, 16 April 1996 text: All penalties for Infractions take effect at the time the first report of the Infraction is posted by the Player who reported it, provided that report was made by a Player who is legally authorized to make it. The determination of the reporting Player is legally binding until and unless it is reversed by a Call for Judgement. Any second or subsequent report of an Infraction has no legal effect. A Player who disagrees with the determination that an action was an Infraction is permitted to submit a Call for Judgement alleging that the action was not an Infraction. If the Officer's determination is reversed by CFJ, then the penalties shall be reversed 72 hours after the Judgement is announced, unless the CFJ is itself appealed during this time, in which case the penalties are reversed immediately upon the announcement of the ruling of the Appeals Court, and then only if the Appeals Court sustains the original Judgement. If the CFJ is appealed, but not within 72 hours, and the Appeals Court does not sustain the original Judgement, the penalties shall be reapplied upon the time the Appeal Courts' Judgement is announced. The responsibility for reporting all consequences of the application of a penalty falls unto the Player who makes the report of Infraction. The responsibility for reporting all consequences of the reversal or reapplication of a penalty as a result of the appeals process falls unto the Clerk of the Courts. This includes, but is not limited to, reporting any Blot Awards or Currency Transfers to the Tabulator or the appropriate Recordkeepors. Penalties for Infractions shall be limited to the loss of units of one or more Currencies, the award of one or more Blots, or both. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which requires another Player to report Score, Currency, or Blot changes which result from the commission of a Infraction, or which causes Score, Currency, or Blots changes resulting from the commission of a Infraction to take effect sooner than specified in this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2638, 12 July 1996 text: All penalties for Infractions take effect at the time the first report of the Infraction is posted by the Player who reported it, provided that report was made by a Player who is legally authorized to make it. The determination of the reporting Player is legally binding until and unless it is reversed by a Call for Judgement. Any second or subsequent report of an Infraction has no legal effect. A Player who disagrees with the determination that an action was an Infraction is permitted to submit a Call for Judgement alleging that the action was not an Infraction. If the Officer's determination is reversed by CFJ, then the penalties shall be reversed 72 hours after the Judgement is announced, unless the CFJ is itself appealed during this time, in which case the penalties are reversed immediately upon the announcement of the ruling of the Appeals Court, and then only if the Appeals Court sustains the original Judgement. If the CFJ is appealed, but not within 72 hours, and the Appeals Court does not sustain the original Judgement, the penalties shall be reapplied upon the time the Appeal Courts' Judgement is announced. The responsibility for reporting all consequences of the application of a penalty falls unto the Player who makes the report of Infraction. The responsibility for reporting all consequences of the reversal or reapplication of a penalty as a result of the appeals process falls unto the Clerk of the Courts. This includes, but is not limited to, reporting any Blot Awards or Currency Transfers to the Tabulator or the appropriate Recordkeepors. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which requires another Player to report Score, Currency, or Blot changes which result from the commission of a Infraction, or which causes Score, Currency, or Blots changes resulting from the commission of a Infraction to take effect sooner than specified in this Rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1509 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1509 by Proposal 1690, 1 September 1995 text: Any Player who believes that an Infraction has occured, but which has not been reported by a Player authorized to report it, is permitted to make a Call for Judgement alleging thus. If the Judgement of the CFJ upholds the allegation, then the Judge of the CFJ shall be authorized to, and shall be obligated to, report the Infraction as provided by other Rules. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would otherwise prevent the Judge from reporting the Infraction. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1738, 15 October 1995 text: Any Player who believes that an Infraction has occured, but which has not been reported by a Player authorized to report it, is permitted to make a Call for Judgement alleging thus. If the Judgement of the CFJ upholds the allegation, then the Judge of the CFJ shall be authorized to, and shall be obligated to, report the Infraction as provided by other Rules. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent the Judge's report of an infraction from having legal effect. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 1754, 21 October 1995 text: Any Player who believes that an Infraction has occurred, but which has not been reported by a Player authorized to report it, is permitted to make a Call for Judgement alleging thus. If the Judgement of the CFJ upholds the allegation, then the Judge of the CFJ shall be authorized to, and shall be obligated to, report the Infraction as provided by other Rules. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent the Judge's report of an infraction from having legal effect. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Upon a judicial finding that a Player has failed to perform a duty required of em by the Rules, the Judge so finding shall execute an Order, requiring that Player to perform that duty as soon as possible. Such an Order is known as an Order to Compel. If the duty in question arises because the Player in question holds a specific Office or other position of official responsibility, the Order shall be directed to that Office or position. If the Player holding that Office fails to perform the duty in question as ordered, the Judge shall Order that that Player be removed from Office or position. If the duty in question arises for a reason not related to the Player in question holding a specific Office or official position, and that Player fails to perform the duty as ordered, the Judge shall amend the Order to require the Speaker to perform that duty instead. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: Upon a judicial finding that a Player has failed to perform a duty required of em by the Rules, the Judge so finding shall execute an Order, requiring that Player to perform that duty as soon as possible. Such an Order is known as an Order to Compel. If the duty in question arises because the Player in question holds a specific Office or other position of official responsibility, the Order shall be directed to that Office or position. If the Player holding that Office fails to perform the duty in question as ordered, the Judge shall Order that that Player be removed from Office or position. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1509 by Proposal 5013 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1510 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1510 by Proposal 1691, 1 September 1995 text: There shall be two Mark Exchange Rates: the primary exchange rate, which shall apply for most voluntary and involuntary trades of Points for Marks; and the secondary exchange rate, which shall apply when Points are automatically exchanged for Marks at the end of a Game. All Mark Exchange Rates shall be applicable to any quantity of Currency, within MUQ limits. The primary Mark Exchange Rate shall be 1 Point to 1 Mark. The secondary Mark Exchange Rate shall be 1.5 Points to 1 Mark. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1511 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1511 by Proposal 1691, 1 September 1995 text: A transfer of Points is legal only if the transfer is from the Bank and to a Player's Treasury, if it is from a Player's Treasury and to the Bank, or if the transfer is of the sort specifically required by this Rule. All other transfers of Points are illegal. If, for any reason, an Treasury belonging to an entity which is neither the Mint nor a Player contains a non-zero number of Points, all the Points in that Treasury shall be immediately transferred to the Bank, and a commensurate number of Marks computed using the primary Mark Exchange Rate shall be transferred from the Bank to that Treasury. Such transfers shall be detected and reported by the Scorekeepor. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules which determine the legality of Currency transfers. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1512 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1512 by Proposal 1699, 1 September 1995 text: There shall be a legal Directive to Install a Player in Office. Such a Directive shall specify the Office to be affected, and the Player who shall fill that Office, if the Directive takes effect. The AI of a Proposal which contains such a Directive shall be at least 1. If a Directive to Install a Player in Office takes effect, the Player specified in the Directive shall fill the specified Office beginning at the time the Directive takes effect, provided that that Player consents. This Rule defers to any Rule which prohibits the use of a Directive to install a Player into a specific Office. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2399, 20 January 1996 text: There shall be a legal Directive to Install a Player in Office. Such a Directive shall specify the Office to be affected, and the Player who shall fill that Office, if the Directive takes effect. If a Directive to Install a Player in Office takes effect, the Player specified in the Directive shall fill the specified Office beginning at the time the Directive takes effect, provided that that Player consents. This Rule defers to any Rule which prohibits the use of a Directive to install a Player into a specific Office. history: Infected and Amended(2) by Rule 1454, 17 March 1996 text: There shall be a legal Directive to Install a Player in Office. Such a Directive shall specify the Office to be affected, and the Player who shall fill that Office, if the Directive takes effect. If a Directive to Install a Player in Office takes effect, the Player specified in the Directive shall fill the specified Office beginning at the time the Directive takes effect, provided that that Player consents. This Rule defers to any Rule which prohibits the use of a Directive to install a Player into a specific Office. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1513 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1513 by Proposal 1704, 1 September 1995 text: It is legal for the Rules to grant the power to require Players to perform (or not perform) actions to Nomic Entities created in accordance with the Rules. Such Entities shall have whatever power is granted to them by the Rules. In the event that the requirements of such an Entity conflicts with the Rules, the Rules shall always take precedence. If two or more such Entities conflict with one another, then the relative precedence of the respective Rules which grant coercive Power to the Entities in conflict shall determine which requirements take precedence. If two or more Entities which are authorized by the same Rule conflict, then the Entity which was created first under the authority of that Rule takes precedence over the others. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2805 (Andre), 8 February 1997 text: It is legal for the Rules to grant the power to require Players to perform (or not perform) actions to Nomic Entities created in accordance with the Rules. Such Entities shall have whatever power is granted to them by the Rules. In the event that the requirements of such an Entity conflicts with the Rules, the Rules shall always take precedence. If two or more such Entities conflict with one another, then the relative precedence of the respective Rules which grant coercive Power to the Entities in conflict shall determine which requirements take precedence. If two or more Entities which are authorized by the same Rule conflict, then the Entity which was created first under the authority of that Rule takes precedence over the others. No Nomic Entity is permitted to require a Player to perform or not perform an action unless the information of which actions can be required of em by that Entity has been previously provided to that Player. Especially, no body of text is permitted to require Players to perform or not perform any actions unless said body of text has previously been made available to that Player. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3884 (harvel), 26 July 1999 text: It is legal for the Rules to grant the power to require Players to perform (or not perform) actions to Nomic Entities created in accordance with the Rules. Such Entities shall have whatever power is granted to them by the Rules. In the event that the requirements of such an Entity conflicts with the Rules, the Rules shall always take precedence. If two or more such Entities conflict with one another, then the relative precedence of the respective Rules which grant coercive Power to the Entities in conflict shall determine which requirements take precedence. If two or more Entities which are authorized by the same Rule conflict, then the Entity which was created first under the authority of that Rule takes precedence over the others. No entity (including any body of text) may require a Player to perform or refrain from performing any action unless that Player has previously been provided with the information of which actions may be required of or prohibited em by that entity. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3999 (harvel), 2 May 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3999 (harvel), 2 May 2000 text: The Rules may grant to certain entities the power to require Players to perform (or refrain from performing) actions. Such Entities shall have whatever power is granted to them by the Rules. In the event that the requirements of such an Entity conflicts with the Rules, the Rules shall always take precedence. If two or more such Entities conflict with one another, then the relative precedence of the respective Rules which grant coercive Power to the Entities in conflict shall determine which requirements take precedence. If two or more Entities authorized by the same Rule conflict, then the Entity mentioned first in that Rule takes precedence over the others. No entity (including any body of text) may require a Player to perform or refrain from performing any action unless that Player has previously been provided with the information of which actions may be required of or prohibited em by that entity. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1513 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1514 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1514 by Proposal 1714, 12 September 1995 text: The Ordinances of a Group are permitted to require Currency transfers, subject to the restriction that such a transfer must be made from the Treasury of the Group or of a Member of the Group. A Group's Ordinances are not permitted to require any other sort of Currency transfer. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit a transfer prohibited by this Rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1515 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1515 by Proposal 1714, 12 September 1995 text: The Regulations of a Contest are permitted to require Currency transfers, subject to the restriction that such a transfer must be made from the Treasury of the Contest, of the Contestmaster, or of a Contestant. A Contest's Regulations are not permitted to require any other sort of Currency transfer. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit a transfer prohibited by this Rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1516 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1516 by Proposal 1717, 19 September 1995 text: The Registrar shall keep track of all current Contests and their current Contestmasters, and shall include this information as part of eir Registrar's Report. Whenever the Contestmaster of a Contest changes, the new Contestmaster shall post an announcement to this effect to the Public Forum. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1517 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1517 by Proposal 1719, 19 September 1995 text: There is a class of Nomic Entities called the Powers. An Entity is a Power if and only if it designated by the Rules to be so. Powers are a Currency. The Mintor of the Powers is the Mint. The Recordkeepor for the Powers is the Assessor. Instances of Powers are called Cards. A Player may use a Power only if e possesses a Card of that Power. A Player uses a Power by 'casting' it upon an Active Player, which may be emself. Powers may only be cast by Active Players. A Player must inform the Assessor whenever e casts a Power, otherwise the Power is not legally cast. The casting Player is called the Caster. Rules which create specific Powers may specify that that Power may not be cast or may only be cast by certain Players, or on certain Players. If the casting of a Power requires the specification by the Caster of a Proposal or Proposals to which it applies, then all Proposals so specified by the Caster must be ones for which the Voting Period has commenced and not yet concluded, or the Power is not legally cast. If a Card of such a Power is legally cast, it is In Limbo until the Voting Periods of all specified Proposals have ended. The following are generally true of all Cards, unless a Rule defining a specific Power says otherwise of the Power which that Rule defines: 1) exactly one Card of a given type exists at any time. 2) when a Card is not held by any Player, it is held by the Bank. 3) provided that the Bank holds at least one Card of a given type, Players may purchase a Card of that type from the Bank. 4) the purchase price of a Card is 30 Marks. 5) when a Player uses a Card, or if e does not use it within a week of having acquired it, either from the Bank or from another Player, it is returned to the Bank. 6) a Player who possesses a Card but who has not yet made use of it may trade it to another Player as e sees fit. 7) Cards which are In Limbo may not be cast. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of the use of Powers. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2554 (Steve), 22 March 1996 text: There is a class of Nomic Entities called the Powers. An Entity is a Power if and only if it designated by the Rules to be so. Powers are a Currency. The Mintor of the Powers is the Mint. The Recordkeepor for the Powers is the Assessor. Instances of Powers are called Cards. A Player may use a Power only if e possesses a Card of that Power. A Player uses a Power by 'casting' it upon an Active Player, which may be emself. Powers may only be cast by Active Players. A Player must inform the Assessor whenever e casts a Power, otherwise the Power is not legally cast. The casting Player is called the Caster. Rules which create specific Powers may specify that that Power may not be cast or may only be cast by certain Players, or on certain Players. If the casting of a Power requires the specification by the Caster of a Proposal or Proposals to which it applies, then all Proposals so specified by the Caster must be ones for which the Voting Period has commenced and not yet concluded, or the Power is not legally cast. If a Card of such a Power is legally cast, it is In Limbo until the Voting Periods of all specified Proposals have ended. The following are generally true of all Cards, unless a Rule defining a specific Power says otherwise of the Power which that Rule defines: 1) exactly one Card of a given type exists at any time. 2) when a Card is not held by any Player, it is held by the Bank. 3) provided that the Bank holds at least one Card of a given type, Players may purchase a Card of that type from the Bank. 4) the purchase price of a Card is 10 Mil. 5) when a Player uses a Card, or if e does not use it within a week of having acquired it, either from the Bank or from another Player, it is returned to the Bank. 6) a Player who possesses a Card but who has not yet made use of it may trade it to another Player as e sees fit. 7) Cards which are In Limbo may not be cast. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of the use of Powers. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2613, 1 June 1996 text: There is a class of Nomic Entities called the Powers. An Entity is a Power if and only if it designated by the Rules to be so. Powers are a Currency. The Mintor of the Powers is the Mint. The Recordkeepor for the Powers is the Assessor. Instances of Powers are called Cards. A Player uses a Power by 'casting' it as provided by the Rule defining that Power. A Player may cast a Power only if e possesses a Card of that Power. Powers may only be cast by Active Players. A Player must inform the Assessor whenever e casts a Power, otherwise the Power is not legally cast. The casting Player is called the Caster. Rules which create specific Powers may specify that that Power may not be cast or may only be cast by certain Players, or on certain Players. If the casting of a Power requires the specification by the Caster of a Proposal or Proposals to which it applies, then all Proposals so specified by the Caster must be ones for which the Voting Period has commenced and not yet concluded, or the Power is not legally cast. If a Card of such a Power is legally cast, it is In Limbo until the Voting Periods of all specified Proposals have ended. The following are generally true of all Cards, unless a Rule defining a specific Power says otherwise of the Power which that Rule defines: 1) exactly one Card of a given type exists at any time. 2) when a Card is not held by any Player, it is held by the Bank. 3) provided that the Bank holds at least one Card of a given type, Players may purchase a Card of that type from the Bank. 4) the purchase price of a Card is 10 Mil. 5) when a Player uses a Card, or if e does not use it within a week of having acquired it, either from the Bank or from another Player, it is returned to the Bank. 6) a Player who possesses a Card but who has not yet made use of it may trade it to another Player as e sees fit. 7) Cards which are In Limbo may not be cast. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of the use of Powers. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by Proposal 2736 (Oerjan), 7 November 1996 text: There is a class of Nomic Entities called the Powers. An Entity is a Power if and only if it designated by the Rules to be so. Powers are a Currency. The Mintor of the Powers is the Mint. The Recordkeepor for the Powers is the Assessor. Instances of Powers are called Cards. A Player uses a Power by 'casting' it as provided by the Rule defining that Power. A Player may cast a Power only if e possesses a Card of that Power. Powers may only be cast by Active Players. A Player must inform the Assessor whenever e casts a Power, otherwise the Power is not legally cast. The casting Player is called the Caster. Rules which create specific Powers may specify that that Power may not be cast or may only be cast by certain Players, or on certain Players. If the casting of a Power requires the specification by the Caster of a Proposal or Proposals to which it applies, then all Proposals so specified by the Caster must be ones for which the Voting Period has commenced and not yet concluded, or the Power is not legally cast. If a Card of such a Power is legally cast, it is In Limbo until the Voting Periods of all specified Proposals have ended. The following are generally true of all Cards, unless a Rule defining a specific Power says otherwise of the Power which that Rule defines: 1) exactly one Card of a given type exists at any time. 2) when a Card is not held by any Player, it is held by the Bank. 3) provided that the Bank holds at least one Card of a given type, Players may purchase a Card of that type from the Bank. 4) the purchase price of a Card is 10 Mil. 5) If a Player does not use a Card within a week of having acquired it, either from the Bank or from another Player, it is returned to the Bank. 6) a Player who possesses a Card but who has not yet made use of it may trade it to another Player as e sees fit. 7) Cards which are In Limbo may not be cast. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of the use of Powers. history: ... history: Amended(4) text: There is a class of Nomic Entities called the Powers. An Entity is a Power if and only if it designated by the Rules to be so. Powers are a Currency. The Mintor of the Powers is the Mint. The Recordkeepor for the Powers is the Assessor. Instances of Powers are called Cards. A Player uses a Power by 'casting' it as provided by the Rule defining that Power. A Player may cast a Power only if e possesses a Card of that Power. Powers may only be cast by Active Players. A Player must inform the Assessor whenever e casts a Power, otherwise the Power is not legally cast. The casting Player is called the Caster. Rules which create specific Powers may specify that that Power may not be cast or may only be cast by certain Players, or on certain Players. If the casting of a Power requires the specification by the Caster of a Proposal or Proposals to which it applies, then all Proposals so specified by the Caster must be ones for which the Voting Period has commenced and not yet concluded, or the Power is not legally cast. If a Card of such a Power is legally cast, it is In Limbo until the Voting Periods of all specified Proposals have ended. The following are generally true of all Cards, unless a Rule defining a specific Power says otherwise of the Power which that Rule defines: 1) exactly one Card of a given type exists at any time. 2) when a Card is not held by any Player, it is held by the Bank. 3) provided that the Bank holds at least one Card of a given type, Players may purchase a Card of that type from the Bank. 4) the purchase price of a Card is 10 Mil. 5) If a Player does not use a Card within a week of having acquired it, either from the Bank or from another Player, it is returned to the Bank. 6) a Player who possesses a Card but who has not yet made use of it may trade it to another Player as e sees fit. 7) Cards which are In Limbo may not be cast. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of the use of Powers. At least once each Nomic week, the Assessor shall post a Report to the Public Forum, including a list of all transfers of Powers since the previous such Report, and the current ownership of all Powers. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1518 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1519 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1519 by Proposal 1722, 6 October 1995 text: Whenever a Proposal which contains no more than ten lines is adopted, its Proposer shall receive one Mark from the Bank. This transfer shall be detected and reported by the Assessor, and shall take place at the time the Assessor announces the Voting Results on that Proposal. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1520 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1520 by Proposal 1724 (Steve), 6 October 1995 text: There is a Power called the Power of Immunity. There are 4 Immunity Cards. A Player who possesses an Immunity Card may only cast the Power on emself. A Player upon whom the Power of Immunity is cast is called an Immune Player. The effect of the Power of Immunity is to neutralize the effects of Powers upon the Immune Player, other than those Powers cast by the Immune Player emself, for a period commencing three days prior to the casting of the Power, and concluding ten days after the Power is cast. A Power which is neutralized in this way is called a Neutralized Power. The Power of Immunity does not cancel the castings of Neutralized Powers upon an Immune Player; rather, it deprives them of any effects on an Immune Player which they might otherwise have. The purchase price of a Power which is Neutralized because a Player is Immune is transferred from the Bank to the Caster of the Neutralized Power. For a Neutralized Power which has been cast prior to the casting of the Power of Immunity, this transfer takes place when the Power of Immunity is cast. For a Neutralized Power which is cast after the Power of Immunity is cast, this transfer takes place at the time the Neutralized Power is cast. The Assessor is responsible for detecting these transfers and reporting them to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This Rules takes precedence over all other Rules which define specific Powers. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1778, 6 November 1995 text: There is a Power called the Power of Immunity. There are 4 Immunity Cards. A Player who possesses an Immunity Card may only cast the Power on emself. A Player upon whom the Power of Immunity is cast is called an Immune Player. A Card of the Power of Immunity is in Limbo for ten days after it is cast. The effect of the Power of Immunity is to neutralize the effects of Powers upon the Immune Player, other than those Powers cast by the Immune Player emself, for a period commencing three days prior to the casting of the Power, and concluding ten days after the Power is cast. A Power which is neutralized in this way is called a Neutralized Power. The Power of Immunity does not cancel the castings of Neutralized Powers upon an Immune Player; rather, it deprives them of any effects on an Immune Player which they might otherwise have. The purchase price of a Power which is Neutralized because a Player is Immune is transferred from the Bank to the Caster of the Neutralized Power. For a Neutralized Power which has been cast prior to the casting of the Power of Immunity, this transfer takes place when the Power of Immunity is cast. For a Neutralized Power which is cast after the Power of Immunity is cast, this transfer takes place at the time the Neutralized Power is cast. The Assessor is responsible for detecting these transfers and reporting them to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This Rules takes precedence over all other Rules which define specific Powers. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2520, 10 March 1996 text: There is a Power called the Power of Immunity. There are 4 Immunity Cards. A Player who possesses an Immunity Card may only cast the Power on emself. A Player upon whom the Power of Immunity is cast is called an Immune Player. A Card of the Power of Immunity is in Limbo for ten days after it is cast. The effect of the Power of Immunity is to neutralize the effects of Powers upon the Immune Player, other than those Powers cast by the Immune Player emself, for a period commencing three days prior to the casting of the Power, and concluding ten days after the Power is cast. A Power which is neutralized in this way is called a Neutralized Power. The Power of Immunity does not cancel the castings of Neutralized Powers upon an Immune Player; rather, it deprives them of any effects on an Immune Player which they might otherwise have. The purchase price of a Power which is Neutralized because a Player is Immune is transferred from the Bank to the Caster of the Neutralized Power. For a Neutralized Power which has been cast prior to the casting of the Power of Immunity, this transfer takes place when the Power of Immunity is cast. For a Neutralized Power which is cast after the Power of Immunity is cast, this transfer takes place at the time the Neutralized Power is cast. The Assessor is responsible for detecting these transfers and reporting them to the appropriate Recordkeepor. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2732, 30 October 1996 text: There is a Power called the Power of Immunity. There are 4 Immunity Cards. A Player who possesses an Immunity Card may only cast the Power on emself. A Player upon whom the Power of Immunity is cast is called an Immune Player. A Card of the Power of Immunity is in Limbo for ten days after it is cast. The effect of the Power of Immunity is to neutralize the effects of Powers upon the Immune Player, other than those Powers cast by the Immune Player emself, for a period commencing three days prior to the casting of the Power, and concluding ten days after the Power is cast. A Power which is neutralized in this way is called a Neutralized Power. The Power of Immunity does not cancel the castings of Neutralized Powers upon an Immune Player; rather, it deprives them of any effects on an Immune Player which they might otherwise have. The purchase price of a Power which is Neutralized because a Player is Immune is transferred from the Bank to the Caster of the Neutralized Power. For a Neutralized Power which has been cast prior to the casting of the Power of Immunity, this transfer takes place when the Power of Immunity is cast. For a Neutralized Power which is cast after the Power of Immunity is cast, this transfer takes place at the time the Neutralized Power is cast. The Assessor is responsible for detecting these transfers and reporting them to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules which define specific Powers. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. history: ... history: Amended(4) text: There is a Power called the Power of Immunity. There are 4 Immunity Cards. A Player who possesses an Immunity Card may only cast the Power on emself. A Player upon whom the Power of Immunity is cast is called an Immune Player. A Card of the Power of Immunity is in Limbo for ten days after it is cast. The effect of the Power of Immunity is to neutralize the effects of Powers upon the Immune Player, other than those Powers cast by the Immune Player emself, for a period commencing three days prior to the casting of the Power, and concluding ten days after the Power is cast. A Power which is neutralized in this way is called a Neutralized Power. The Power of Immunity does not cancel the castings of Neutralized Powers upon an Immune Player; rather, it deprives them of any effects on an Immune Player which they might otherwise have. If a Power purchased from the Bank is Neutralized because a a Player is Immune, the purchase price of the Neutralized Power is transferred from the Bank to its Caster. For a Neutralized Power which has been cast prior to the casting of the Power of Immunity, this transfer takes place when the Power of Immunity is cast. For a Neutralized Power which is cast after the Power of Immunity is cast, this transfer takes place at the time the Neutralized Power is cast. The Assessor is responsible for detecting these transfers and reporting them to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules which define specific Powers. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1521 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1521 by Proposal 1725, 6 October 1995 text: There is a Power called the Oracle Power. There are two Oracle Cards. The Player upon whom the Oracle Power is cast is called the Oracle. The Oracle Power may not be cast by or on the Assessor. When a Player is the Oracle, e must predict whether a particular Proposal, specified by the Caster, will pass or fail. This prediction must be made in a message to the Public Forum, before the end of the Voting Period on that Proposal. The Oracle may predict at most one of the outcomes, pass or fail. If the Oracle predicts the outcome of the vote on that Proposal correctly, then 10 points and are transferred from the Caster to the Oracle. If the prediction of the Oracle is incorrect, or if the Oracle makes no prediction before the close of the Voting Period, then 50 points and three Extra Votes are transferred from the Oracle to the Caster. The Caster casts the Oracle Power upon a Player by sending a message to the Public Forum specifying that that Player is to be the Oracle. In the same message, the Caster must also state on which Proposal the Oracle is to make eir prediction. This Proposal must be one for which the first half of the Voting Period has not yet finished, at the time the message appears in the Public Forum. Unless all these conditions are met, the Power is not legally cast. In the case where the casting of the Oracle Power conflicts in its effects with the casting of another Power, then unless the other Power explicitly claims precedence over all other Rules which define specific Powers, this Rule takes precedence over that other Rule if the Oracle Power was cast later than the Power defined by the other Rule, and defers to it if the Oracle Power was cast earlier than the Power defined in the other Rule. Otherwise, this Rule defers to the other Rule. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1765, 31 October 1995 text: There is a Power called the Oracle Power. There are two Oracle Cards. The Player upon whom the Oracle Power is cast is called the Oracle. The Oracle Power may not be cast by or on the Assessor. When a Player is the Oracle, e must predict whether a particular Proposal, specified by the Caster, will pass or fail. This prediction must be made in a message to the Public Forum, before the end of the Voting Period on that Proposal. The Oracle may predict at most one of the outcomes, pass or fail. If the Oracle predicts the outcome of the vote on that Proposal correctly, then 10 points and are transferred from the Caster to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Oracle. If the prediction of the Oracle is incorrect, or if the Oracle makes no prediction before the close of the Voting Period, then 3 Extra Votes are transferred from the Oracle to the Caster, and 50 points are transferred from the Oracle to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Caster. The Caster casts the Oracle Power upon a Player by sending a message to the Public Forum specifying that that Player is to be the Oracle. In the same message, the Caster must also state on which Proposal the Oracle is to make eir prediction. This Proposal must be one for which the first half of the Voting Period has not yet finished, at the time the message appears in the Public Forum. Unless all these conditions are met, the Power is not legally cast. In the case where the casting of the Oracle Power conflicts in its effects with the casting of another Power, then unless the other Power explicitly claims precedence over all other Rules which define specific Powers, this Rule takes precedence over that other Rule if the Oracle Power was cast later than the Power defined by the other Rule, and defers to it if the Oracle Power was cast earlier than the Power defined in the other Rule. Otherwise, this Rule defers to the other Rule. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2520, 10 March 1996 text: There is a Power called the Oracle Power. There are two Oracle Cards. The Player upon whom the Oracle Power is cast is called the Oracle. The Oracle Power may not be cast by or on the Assessor. When a Player is the Oracle, e must predict whether a particular Proposal, specified by the Caster, will pass or fail. This prediction must be made in a message to the Public Forum, before the end of the Voting Period on that Proposal. The Oracle may predict at most one of the outcomes, pass or fail. If the Oracle predicts the outcome of the vote on that Proposal correctly, then 10 points and are transferred from the Caster to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Oracle. If the prediction of the Oracle is incorrect, or if the Oracle makes no prediction before the close of the Voting Period, then 3 Extra Votes are transferred from the Oracle to the Caster, and 50 points are transferred from the Oracle to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Caster. The Caster casts the Oracle Power upon a Player by sending a message to the Public Forum specifying that that Player is to be the Oracle. In the same message, the Caster must also state on which Proposal the Oracle is to make eir prediction. This Proposal must be one for which the first half of the Voting Period has not yet finished, at the time the message appears in the Public Forum. Unless all these conditions are met, the Power is not legally cast. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: There is a Power called the Oracle Power. There are two Oracle Cards. The Player upon whom the Oracle Power is cast is called the Oracle. The Oracle Power may not be cast by or on the Assessor. When a Player is the Oracle, e must predict whether a particular Proposal, specified by the Caster, will pass or fail. This prediction must be made in a message to the Public Forum, before the end of the Voting Period on that Proposal. The Oracle may predict at most one of the outcomes, pass or fail. If the Oracle predicts the outcome of the vote on that Proposal correctly, then 10 Mils and are transferred from the Caster to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Oracle. If the prediction of the Oracle is incorrect, or if the Oracle makes no prediction before the close of the Voting Period, then 3 Extra Votes are transferred from the Oracle to the Caster, and 50 Mils are transferred from the Oracle to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Caster. The Caster casts the Oracle Power upon a Player by sending a message to the Public Forum specifying that that Player is to be the Oracle. In the same message, the Caster must also state on which Proposal the Oracle is to make eir prediction. This Proposal must be one for which the first half of the Voting Period has not yet finished, at the time the message appears in the Public Forum. Unless all these conditions are met, the Power is not legally cast. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: There is a Power called the Oracle Power. There are two Oracle Cards. The Player upon whom the Oracle Power is cast is called the Oracle. The Oracle Power may not be cast by or on the Assessor. When a Player is the Oracle, e must predict whether a particular Proposal, specified by the Caster, will pass or fail. This prediction must be made in a message to the Public Forum, before the end of the Voting Period on that Proposal. The Oracle may predict at most one of the outcomes, pass or fail. If the Oracle predicts the outcome of the vote on that Proposal correctly, then 10 Mil and are transferred from the Caster to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Oracle. If the prediction of the Oracle is incorrect, or if the Oracle makes no prediction before the close of the Voting Period, then 3 Extra Votes are transferred from the Oracle to the Caster, and 50 Mil are transferred from the Oracle to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Caster. The Caster casts the Oracle Power upon a Player by sending a message to the Public Forum specifying that that Player is to be the Oracle. In the same message, the Caster must also state on which Proposal the Oracle is to make eir prediction. This Proposal must be one for which the first half of the Voting Period has not yet finished, at the time the message appears in the Public Forum. Unless all these conditions are met, the Power is not legally cast. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 2748 (favor), 18 November 1996 text: There is a Power called the Oracle Power. There are two Oracle Cards. The Player upon whom the Oracle Power is cast is called the Oracle. The Oracle Power may not be cast by or on the Assessor. When a Player is the Oracle, e must predict whether a particular Proposal, specified by the Caster, will pass or fail. This prediction must be made in a message to the Public Forum, before the end of the Voting Period on that Proposal. The Oracle may predict at most one of the outcomes, pass or fail. If the Oracle predicts the outcome of the vote on that Proposal correctly, then 10 Mil and one Extra Vote are transferred from the Caster to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Oracle. If the prediction of the Oracle is incorrect, or if the Oracle makes no prediction before the close of the Voting Period, then 3 Extra Votes are transferred from the Oracle to the Caster, and 50 Mil are transferred from the Oracle to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Caster. The Caster casts the Oracle Power upon a Player by sending a message to the Public Forum specifying that that Player is to be the Oracle. In the same message, the Caster must also state on which Proposal the Oracle is to make eir prediction. This Proposal must be one for which the first half of the Voting Period has not yet finished, at the time the message appears in the Public Forum. Unless all these conditions are met, the Power is not legally cast. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1522 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1522 by Proposal 1728 (Steve), 6 October 1995 text: There is a Power called the Power of Influence. A Player on whom the Power of Influence is cast is called an Influential Player. The effect of the Power of Influence is to increase the maximum number of votes which the Influential Player may cast on a single Proposal, specified by the Caster, called the Influenced Proposal. The maximum number of votes which may be cast by the Influential Player on the Influenced Proposal may be increased to 3, 4, or 5 votes, depending on the price last paid to the Bank in order to purchase the Power. The purchase price of the Power of Influence increases according to the extent of the Influence granted by the use of the Power, and this greater influence is granted by the Power of Influence only if the Bank is paid for it, as set out below: A maximum of 3 votes : 30 Marks A maximum of 4 votes : 60 Marks A maximum of 5 votes : 120 Marks A Player casts the Power of Influence by sending a message to the Assessor specifying which player is to be the Influential Player, and which Proposal is to be the Influential Proposal. In the case where the casting of the Power of Influence conflicts in its effects with the casting of another Power, then unless the other Power explicitly claims precedence over all other Rules which define specific Powers, this Rule takes precedence over that other Rule if the Power of Influence was cast later than the Power defined by the other Rule, and defers to it if the Power of Influence was cast earlier than the Power defined in the other Rule. Otherwise, this Rule defers to the other Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2520, 10 March 1996 text: There is a Power called the Power of Influence. A Player on whom the Power of Influence is cast is called an Influential Player. The effect of the Power of Influence is to increase the maximum number of votes which the Influential Player may cast on a single Proposal, specified by the Caster, called the Influenced Proposal. The maximum number of votes which may be cast by the Influential Player on the Influenced Proposal may be increased to 3, 4, or 5 votes, depending on the price last paid to the Bank in order to purchase the Power. The purchase price of the Power of Influence increases according to the extent of the Influence granted by the use of the Power, and this greater influence is granted by the Power of Influence only if the Bank is paid for it, as set out below: A maximum of 3 votes : 30 Marks A maximum of 4 votes : 60 Marks A maximum of 5 votes : 120 Marks A Player casts the Power of Influence by sending a message to the Assessor specifying which player is to be the Influential Player, and which Proposal is to be the Influential Proposal. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2554, 22 March 1996 text: There is a Power called the Power of Influence. A Player on whom the Power of Influence is cast is called an Influential Player. The effect of the Power of Influence is to increase the maximum number of votes which the Influential Player may cast on a single Proposal, specified by the Caster, called the Influenced Proposal. The maximum number of votes which may be cast by the Influential Player on the Influenced Proposal may be increased to 3, 4, or 5 votes, depending on the price last paid to the Bank in order to purchase the Power. The purchase price of the Power of Influence increases according to the extent of the Influence granted by the use of the Power, and this greater influence is granted by the Power of Influence only if the Bank is paid for it, as set out below: A maximum of 3 votes : 10 Mil A maximum of 4 votes : 25 Mil A maximum of 5 votes : 50 Mil A Player casts the Power of Influence by sending a message to the Assessor specifying which player is to be the Influential Player, and which Proposal is to be the Influential Proposal. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1523 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1523 by Proposal 1729 (Steve), 6 October 1995 text: There is Power called the Power of Quiet. There are 3 Quiet Cards. The purchase price for each of these Cards is 10 Marks. The effect of this Power is to prevent the Player on whom it is cast, called the Quiet Player, from casting any Extra Votes on a Proposal specified by the Caster, called the Quiet Proposal. The Power of Quiet may not be cast by the Assessor. A Quiet Player is not permitted to cast Extra Votes on their Quiet Proposal. If a Quiet Player has already cast Extra Votes on their Quiet Proposal at the time they become Quiet, then these Extra Votes are without effect on the Quiet Proposal, and Extra Votes equal in number to those cast by the Quiet Player on the Quiet Proposal are transferred from the Bank to the Quiet Player. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting these transfers. The Caster casts the Power of Quiet by sending a message to the Assessor unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Quiet Player, and the Proposal which is to be the Quiet Proposal. Unless this condition is met, the Power is not legally cast. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which describe the circumstances in which Players may legally cast Extra Votes, with the exception of Rules which describe the effects of other Powers. This Rule also takes precedence over other Rules which describe the effects of legally cast Extra Votes on Proposals. In the case where the casting of the Quiet Power conflicts in its effects with the casting of another Power, then unless the other Power explicitly claims precedence over all other Rules which define specific Powers, this Rule takes precedence over that other Rule if the Quiet Power was cast later than the Power defined by the other Rule, and defers to it if the Quiet Power was cast earlier than the Power defined in the other Rule. Otherwise, this Rule defers to the Rule defining the other Power. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2520, 10 March 1996 text: There is Power called the Power of Quiet. There are 3 Quiet Cards. The purchase price for each of these Cards is 10 Marks. The effect of this Power is to prevent the Player on whom it is cast, called the Quiet Player, from casting any Extra Votes on a Proposal specified by the Caster, called the Quiet Proposal. The Power of Quiet may not be cast by the Assessor. A Quiet Player is not permitted to cast Extra Votes on their Quiet Proposal. If a Quiet Player has already cast Extra Votes on their Quiet Proposal at the time they become Quiet, then these Extra Votes are without effect on the Quiet Proposal, and Extra Votes equal in number to those cast by the Quiet Player on the Quiet Proposal are transferred from the Bank to the Quiet Player. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting these transfers. The Caster casts the Power of Quiet by sending a message to the Assessor unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Quiet Player, and the Proposal which is to be the Quiet Proposal. Unless this condition is met, the Power is not legally cast. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which describe the circumstances in which Players may legally cast Extra Votes, with the exception of Rules which describe the effects of other Powers. This Rule also takes precedence over other Rules which describe the effects of legally cast Extra Votes on Proposals. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2554, 22 March 1996 text: There is Power called the Power of Quiet. There are 3 Quiet Cards. The purchase price for each of these Cards is 5 Mil. The effect of this Power is to prevent the Player on whom it is cast, called the Quiet Player, from casting any Extra Votes on a Proposal specified by the Caster, called the Quiet Proposal. The Power of Quiet may not be cast by the Assessor. A Quiet Player is not permitted to cast Extra Votes on their Quiet Proposal. If a Quiet Player has already cast Extra Votes on their Quiet Proposal at the time they become Quiet, then these Extra Votes are without effect on the Quiet Proposal, and Extra Votes equal in number to those cast by the Quiet Player on the Quiet Proposal are transferred from the Bank to the Quiet Player. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting these transfers. The Caster casts the Power of Quiet by sending a message to the Assessor unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Quiet Player, and the Proposal which is to be the Quiet Proposal. Unless this condition is met, the Power is not legally cast. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which describe the circumstances in which Players may legally cast Extra Votes, with the exception of Rules which describe the effects of other Powers. This Rule also takes precedence over other Rules which describe the effects of legally cast Extra Votes on Proposals. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 2736 (Oerjan), 7 November 1996 text: There is Power called the Power of Quiet. There are 3 Quiet Cards. The purchase price for each of these Cards is 5 Mil. The effect of this Power is to prevent the Player on whom it is cast, called the Quiet Player, from casting any Extra Votes on a Proposal specified by the Caster, called the Quiet Proposal. The Power of Quiet may not be cast by the Assessor. A Quiet Player is not permitted to cast Extra Votes on their Quiet Proposal. If a Quiet Player has already cast Extra Votes on their Quiet Proposal at the time they become Quiet, then those Extra Votes are without effect on the Quiet Proposal, and their Limbo Period ends immediately without their being transferred to the Bank. The Caster casts the Power of Quiet by sending a message to the Assessor unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Quiet Player, and the Proposal which is to be the Quiet Proposal. Unless this condition is met, the Power is not legally cast. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which describe the circumstances in which Players may legally cast Extra Votes, with the exception of Rules which describe the effects of other Powers. This Rule also takes precedence over other Rules which describe the effects of legally cast Extra Votes on Proposals. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1524 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1524 by Proposal 1730, 10 October 1995 text: The name of a Rule Category may be changed by means of a Directive to change the name of a Rule Category. The Directive must explicitly state both the current name of the Category and the proposed new name. If a Proposal containing such a Directive is adopted, it has the effect of changing the name of the Rule Category in the manner specified. A Proposal containing such a Directive must have an Adoption Index of at least 2. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 1788, 13 November 1995 text: The name of a Rule Category may be changed by means of a Directive to change the name of a Rule Category. The Directive must explicitly state both the current name of the Category and the proposed new name. If a Proposal containing such a Directive is adopted, it has the effect of changing the name of the Rule Category in the manner specified. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1525 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1525 by Proposal 1745, 15 October 1995 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, every Player who had previously proposed a Proposal which was subsequently adopted during the Nomic Week immediately preceding shall receive one Extra Vote from the Bank. These transfers shall be detected and reported by the Assessor. history: ... history: Amended(1) text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, every Player who had previously proposed an Interested Proposal which was subsequently adopted during the Nomic Week immediately preceding shall receive one Extra Vote from the Bank. These transfers shall be detected and reported by the Assessor. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, every Player who had previously proposed a Proposal which was subsequently adopted during the Nomic Week immediately preceding shall receive one VT from the Bank for each Proposal of eirs which was adopted. These transfers shall be detected and reported by the Assessor. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1526 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1526 by Proposal 1749, 21 October 1995 text: During the prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal, the Banker may not use knowledge of pledges made to the Vototron which e would not have were e not the Banker, in an attempt to influence the way the Vototron casts its votes on a Proposal. If a Call for Judgment alleging a violation of this rule is found to be TRUE, the Banker violating this rule shall gain three (3) Blots. Reporting this gain to the Tabulator is the responsibility of the Player who called the CFJ. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1527 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1527 by Proposal 1750, 21 October 1995 text: Whenever a message contains more than one notification, report, or other communication in which the Rules place some legal significance, the communications in that message shall be taken to have been sent sequentially, separated by infinitesimal increments of time, in the order which they appear in the message. history: Infected and Amended(1) Substantially by Rule 1454, 2 February 1997 text: Whenever a message contains more than one notification, report, or other communication in which the Rules place some legal significance, the communications in that message shall be taken to have been sent sequentially, separated by infinitesimal increments of time, in the order which they appear in the message. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: Whenever a message contains more than one notification, report, or other communication in which the Rules place some legal significance, the communications in that message shall be taken to have been sent sequentially, separated by infinitesimal increments of time, in the order which they appear in the message. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4150 (Elysion), 13 May 2001 text: Whenever a message contains more than one action -- such as a notification, report, or other communication -- on which the Rules place some legal significance, the actions in that message shall be taken to have been sent sequentially in the order which they appear in the message. If a message attempts to perform multiple actions simultaneously without explicitly stating a specific order for the actions, then the attempt shall be considered ambiguous and without effect if the gamestate would be substantively different for any two orderings of the actions. For the purposes of this test, the actual order the actions are performed in is not considered substantive, but other differences may, at the discretion of a judge, be considered substantive. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4833 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: Whenever a message contains more than one note on which the rules place some legal significance, the notes shall be taken to have been sent sequentially in the order they appear in the message. A tangle is any set of two or more notes in a message, none of which can be determined to appear in the message before the others. If a message containing a tangle does not provide an order for the notes in that tangle, then the notes in that tangle shall be considered ambiguous and without effect if the effects of those notes on the gamestate would depend on the order in which they take effect, discounting the mere fact of their taking effect in a different order. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1527 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1528 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1528 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: Let there be a set of Nomic Entities known as Organizations. Every individual Organization has associated with it a body of text known as its Compact, a Player known as the Organization's Administrator, a set of Players who are within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's Compact, and a unique specific Name. In addition, any Organization which possesses Treasuries has a Player who is Executor of the Organization. An Organization only possess Treasuries if the Rules governing that Orginization specify so. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2421, 30 January 1996 text: Let there be a set of Nomic Entities known as Organizations. Every individual Organization has associated with it a body of text known as its Compact, a Player known as the Organization's Administrator, a set of Players who are within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's Compact, and a unique specific Name. In addition, any Organization which possesses Treasuries has a Player who is Executor of the Organization. An Organization only possess Treasuries if the Rules governing that Organization specify so. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: Let there be a class of entities called Organizations; any one member of this class is an Organization. An entity is an Organization only if the Rules make it an Organization. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: There are entities known as Organizations. An entity is only an Organization when specifically designated as such by the Rules. All Organizations consist of the following elements; i) An associated SLC. ii) A set of Players under the Jurisdiction of the associated SLC. iii) A Treasury. iv) A Name that is unique to that Organization. No Organization exists that is not of a class of Organization that is defined in the Rules. The class of an Organization is specified when it is formed, and can not change thereafter. If a class of Organization ever becomes undefined in the Rules, then all Organizations of that class are immediately dissolved. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: There are entities known as Organizations. An entity is only an Organization when specifically designated as such by the Rules. All Organizations consist of the following elements; i) An associated SLC. ii) A set of Players under the Jurisdiction of the associated SLC. iii) A Name that is unique to that Organization. No Organization exists that is not of a class of Organization that is defined in the Rules. The class of an Organization is specified when it is formed, and can not change thereafter. If a class of Organization ever becomes undefined in the Rules, then all Organizations of that class are immediately dissolved. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3889 (harvel), 9 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3889 (harvel), 9 August 1999 text: There are entities known as Organizations. An entity is only an Organization when specifically designated as such by the Rules. Each Organizations consists of the following elements: i) An associated SLC. ii) A set of Players under the Jurisdiction of the associated SLC. iii) A Name that is unique to that Organization. No Organization exists that is not of a class of Organization that is defined in the Rules. The class of an Organization is specified when it is formed, and can not change thereafter. If a class of Organization ever becomes undefined in the Rules, then all Organizations of that class are immediately dissolved. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4181 (Murphy), 9 July 2001 text: An Organization is an entity designated as such by the Rules. Each Organization shall have the following properties: a) A Name. b) A Class. c) A Charter. d) An Administrator. e) One or more Members. Any of these properties may be changed by unanimous agreement of all Members, except for Class which may never change. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1528 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1529 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1529 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: The Compact of an Organization consists of either or both of the following elements: i) Statutes; defined as that collective text which is legally binding under the Rules, and must be obeyed by Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction as if it was a part of the Ruleset. ii) Warranties; defined as that collective text which requires Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction to either obey it or suffer penalties defined within the Rules or the Compact. A Compact may only possess those elements allowed it by the Rules defining its Class of Organization. If these Rules do not specify, the Compact may only consist of Statutes. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2035, 4 December 1995 text: The Compact of an Organization is a text consisting of either or both of the following elements: i) Statutes; All Statutes must be obeyed by Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction as if those Statues were Rules. ii) Warranties; All Warranties shall be obeyed by Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction or those Players shall invoke penalties defined within the Rules or the Compact. A Compact can only possess those elements allowed it by the Rules defining its Class of Organization. If these Rules do not specify, the Compact may only consist of Warranties. If an Organization exists whose Class is not defined in the Rules, that Organization may not possess a Compact. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules referring to Compacts. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1530 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1530 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: The Jurisdiction of an Organization's Compact is a subset of the set of all Players. A Compact has no force to require, or oblige, anything of Players who are not within its Jurisdiction. (This does not absolve any Players of duties required of them by the Rules.) Within its Jurisdiction, a Compact's ability to dictate Players' activity is limited to the extent permitted by the Rules. A Compact can only have Jurisdiction over Players permitted to it by the Rules governing its Class of Organization. No Compact may have effect prior to its Creation, nor may it have effect subsequent to its dissolution. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule governing Compacts. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1531 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1531 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: The Administrator of an Organization must keep an accurate copy of its Compact and an accurate list of the Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction. E must record any and all changes to the Compact, and must, As Soon As Possible after such changes, distribute an up-to-date copy of the Compact to every Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction. E must also notify the Notary whenever the Executor (if any) of eir Organization Changes. When the Administrator of an Organization changes, the new Administrator must inform the Notary of this change. These notifications must be made As Soon As Possible. The Administrator of an Organization must come from within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's Compact unless otherwise specified by the Rules governing its Class. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: The Administrator of an Organization must be within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's Compact, unless the Rules specify otherwise for Organizations of that Organization's class. If an Organization has an Executor, e must also be within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's Compact, unless the Rules specify otherwise for Organizations of that Organization's class. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: The Administrator of an Organization shall be within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's Compact, be the Maintainer of the Organizations SLC, and be the Executor of that Organization. The Administrator shall inform the Notary of the following changes as soon as possible after they occur, and identify the nature of the change; i) The Name of the Organization changes. ii) The Administrator of the Organization changes. iii) The Executor of the Organization changes. iv) The Maintainer if the Organization's SLC changes. v) The Jurisdiction of the Organization's SLC changes. vi) The Organization undergoes a Voluntary Dissolution. The Administrator also shall be the Player required to maintain a record of the Players within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's SLC. This Rule shall defer to the Rules governing specific classes of Organizations if they specify differently. history: Infected and Amended(3) Substantially by Rule 1454, 20 July 1997 text: The Administrator of an Organization shall be within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's Compact, be the Maintainer of the Organizations SLC, and be the Executor of that Organization. The Administrator shall inform the Notary of the following changes as soon as possible after they occur, and identify the nature of the change; i) The Name of the Organization changes. ii) The Administrator of the Organization changes. iii) The Executor of the Organization changes. iv) The Maintainer if the Organization's SLC changes. v) The Jurisdiction of the Organization's SLC changes. vi) The Organization undergoes a Voluntary Dissolution. The Administrator also shall be the Player required to maintain a record of the Players within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's SLC. This Rule shall defer to the Rules governing specific classes of Organizations if they specify differently. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Rule 1531, 3 August 1997 text: The Administrator of an Organization shall be within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's Compact, be the Maintainer of the Organizations SLC, and be the Executor of that Organization. The Administrator shall inform the Notary of the following changes as soon as possible after they occur, and identify the nature of the change; i) The Name of the Organization changes. ii) The Administrator of the Organization changes. iii) The Executor of the Organization changes. iv) The Maintainer if the Organization's SLC changes. v) The Jurisdiction of the Organization's SLC changes. vi) The Organization undergoes a Voluntary Dissolution. The Administrator also shall be the Player required to maintain a record of the Players within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's SLC. This Rule shall defer to the Rules governing specific classes of Organizations if they specify differently. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The Administrator of an Organization shall be within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC, be the Maintainer of the Organization's SLC, and be the Executor of that Organization. The Administrator shall inform the Notary of the following changes as soon as possible after they occur, and identify the nature of the change; i) The Name of the Organization changes. ii) The Administrator of the Organization changes. iii) The Executor of the Organization changes. iv) The Maintainer of the Organization's SLC changes. v) The Jurisdiction of the Organization's SLC changes. vi) The Organization undergoes a Voluntary Dissolution. The Administrator also shall be the Player required to maintain a record of the Players within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's SLC. This Rule shall defer to the Rules governing specific classes of Organizations if they specify differently. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3889 (harvel), 9 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3950 (harvel), 8 December 1999 text: The Administrator of an Organization shall be within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC, be the Maintainer of the Organization's SLC, and be the Executor of that Organization. The Administrator shall inform the Notary of the following changes as soon as possible after they occur, and identify the nature of the change: i) The Name of the Organization changes. ii) The Administrator of the Organization changes. iii) The Executor of the Organization changes. iv) The Maintainer of the Organization's SLC changes. v) The Jurisdiction of the Organization's SLC changes. vi) The Organization undergoes a Voluntary Dissolution. The Administrator also shall be the Player required to maintain a record of the Players within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's SLC. Rules governing specific classes of Organizations may specify different duties for the Administrator. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4181 (Murphy), 9 July 2001 text: Each Organization shall have an Administrator, who must be a Member. The Administrator of an Organization may only change as specified by its Charter or by the Rules. The Administrator is Maintainer of the Charter, unless otherwise specified by its Charter or by the Rules. The Administrator is Executor of the Organization, unless otherwise specified by its Charter or by the Rules. The Administrator shall inform the Notary of the following changes as soon as possible after they occur, and identify the nature of the change: a) The Name changes. b) The Administrator changes. c) The Executor changes. d) The Maintainer of the Charter changes. e) The jurisdiction of the Charter changes. f) The Organization voluntarily dissolves. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4510 (Sherlock), 10 July 2003 text: Each Organization shall have an Administrator, who must be a Member. The Administrator of an Organization may only change as specified by its Charter or by the Rules. The Administrator is Maintainer of the Charter, unless otherwise specified by its Charter or by the Rules. The Administrator is Executor of the Organization, unless otherwise specified by its Charter or by the Rules. The Administrator shall inform the Notary of the following changes as soon as possible after they occur, and identify the nature of the change: a) The Name changes. b) The Administrator changes. c) The Executor changes. d) The Maintainer of the Charter changes. e) The jurisdiction of the Charter changes. f) The Organization voluntarily dissolves. g) The Charter changes. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4698 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: Each Organization shall have an Administrator, who must be a Member. The Administrator of an Organization may only change as specified by its Charter or by the Rules. The Administrator is Maintainer of the Charter, unless otherwise specified by its Charter or by the Rules. The Administrator is Executor of the Organization, unless otherwise specified by its Charter or by the Rules. The Administrator shall inform the Justiciar of the following changes as soon as possible after they occur, and identify the nature of the change: a) The Name changes. b) The Administrator changes. c) The Executor changes. d) The Maintainer of the Charter changes. e) The jurisdiction of the Charter changes. f) The Organization voluntarily dissolves. g) The Charter changes. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1531 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1532 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1532 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: The Executor of an Organization is the person legally responsible for reporting, to the appropriate Recordkeepors, any and all transfers out of the Organization's Treasury. The Executor may only transfer funds as permitted by the Rules governing the Class of the Organization e is Executor of, and e may be further bound by the Compact of eir Organization. The Executor of an Organization must come from within the Jurisdiction of the Organization's Compact unless otherwise specified by the Rules governing its Class. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1533 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1533 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Organizations (and, simultaneously, their initial Compacts) are created in the following manner: A set of Players, known as the Foundors, sends a message to the Notary containing the following information: i) The Class of the created Organization. ii) The Unique Name of the particular Organization being created. iii) The inital Compact for the proposed Orginization. iv) Any information required by Rules governing that specific Class of Organization. The Organization is created and is in force once the Notary receives the above information from all required Foundors. The set of required Foundors is specified within the Rules defining the particular Class of Organization, but they must be from within the Jurisdiction of the new Organization's Compact. Additional restrictions on the set of Foundors can be made by those Rules. This Rule defers when other Rules specifically claim precedence over its requirements. Otherwise, these requirements take precedence. text: Organizations (and, simultaneously, their initial Compacts) are created in the following manner: A set of Players, known as the Foundors, sends a message to the Notary containing the following information: i) The Class of the created Organization. ii) The Unique Name of the particular Organization being created. iii) The inital Compact for the proposed Orginization. iv) Any information required by Rules governing that specific Class of Organization. The Organization is created and is in force once the Notary receives the above information from all required Foundors. The set of required Foundors is specified within the Rules defining the particular Class of Organization, but they must be from within the Jurisdiction of the new Organization's Compact. Additional restrictions on the set of Foundors can be made by those Rules. This Rule defers when other Rules specifically claim precedence over its requirements. Otherwise, these requirements take precedence. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2035, 4 December 1995 text: Organizations (and, simultaneously, their initial Compacts) are created in the following manner: A set of Players, known as the Foundors, sends a message to the Notary containing the following information: i) The Class of the created Organization. ii) The Unique Name of the particular Organization being created. iii) The inital Compact for the proposed Orginization. iv) Any information required by Rules governing that specific Class of Organization. The Organization is created, and its Foundors enter the Jurisdiction of its Compact, once the Notary receives the above information from all Founders required by the Rules governing the Organization's Class. If such Foundors are not defined, the Organization cannot be created. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which does not explicitly state that it takes precedence over the default Rules for Organizations. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2421, 30 January 1996 text: Organizations (and, simultaneously, their initial Compacts) are created in the following manner: A set of Players, known as the Foundors, sends a message to the Notary containing the following information: i) The Class of the created Organization. ii) The Unique Name of the particular Organization being created. iii) The inital Compact for the proposed Organization. iv) Any information required by Rules governing that specific Class of Organization. The Organization is created, and its Foundors enter the Jurisdiction of its Compact, once the Notary receives the above information from all Founders required by the Rules governing the Organization's Class. If such Foundors are not defined, the Organization cannot be created. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which does not explicitly state that it takes precedence over the default Rules for Organizations. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2506, 3 March 1996 text: Organizations (and, simultaneously, their initial Compacts) are created in the following manner: A set of Players, known as the Foundors, sends a message to the Notary containing the following information: i) The Class of the created Organization. ii) The Unique Name of the particular Organization being created. iii) The initial Compact for the proposed Organization. iv) Any information required by Rules governing that specific Class of Organization. The Organization is created, and its Foundors enter the Jurisdiction of its Compact, once the Notary receives the above information from all Founders required by the Rules governing the Organization's Class. If such Foundors are not defined, the Organization cannot be created. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which does not explicitly state that it takes precedence over the default Rules for Organizations. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: Any Player is permitted to submit to the Notary, at any time, an Application to Create an Organization. Such an Application, to have legal effect, must specify the proposed class, name, and Compact of the prospective Organization, along with any other information that is required in order to create an Organization of the class specified. If, within a period of seven days, the Notary receives identical Applications to Create an Organization from as many distinct Players as required by the Rules pertaining to the class of the Organization to be created, the Organization is created. The Players who submitted the Applications in question are known as the Foundors of the new Organization. history: Infected and Amended(5) by Rule 1454, 23 May 1996 text: Any Player is permitted to submit to the Notary, at any time, an Application to Create an Organization. Such an Application, to have legal effect, must specify the proposed class, name, and Compact of the prospective Organization, along with any other information that is required in order to create an Organization of the class specified. If, within a period of seven days, the Notary receives identical Applications to Create an Organization from as many distinct Players as required by the Rules pertaining to the class of the Organization to be created, the Organization is created. The Players who submitted the Applications in question are known as the Foundors of the new Organization. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 2633, 4 July 1996 text: There exists a type of Application called an Application to Create an Organization. A valid Application to Create an Organization, in order to have effect upon Execution, must specify the proposed class, name, and Compact of the prospective Organization, along with any other information that is required in order to create an Organization of the class specified, and all of these specifications must not conflict with the Rules in any way; and the Application must bear the signatures of at least as many distinct Players as required by the Rules pertaining to the class of the Organization to be created, all of whom must be eligible to be members of the prospective Organization. An Application to Create an Organization is Executed by submitting it to the Notary. The effect of Executing an Application to Create an Organization which complies with the requirements of this and other Rules is to create the Organization named therein, with the Players who signed the Application as the Foundors of the new Organization, and also to make each of these Players a member of that new Organization. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: There is a type of Application called an Application to Create an Organization (ACO). A valid ACO, in order to have effect upon Execution, must include the following: i) A defined class for the prospective Organization. ii) A unique Name for the prospective Organization. iii) An SLC for the prospective Organization. iv) All additional information required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization. v) The signatures of at least as many distinct Players as required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization, (minimum one) all of whom must be eligible to be members of the prospective Organization. An valid ACO is Executed by submitting it to the Notary or by being sent to the Public Forum. The effect of Executing a valid ACO is to create the prospective Organization, with the signatories as its Foundors. The Foundors then come under the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC. An ACO shall only be valid if its contents are not in conflict with this or other Rules. An ACO that is not valid shall never be Executed. history: Infected and Amended(8) Substantially by Rule 1454, 24 August 1997 text: There is a type of Application called an Application to Create an Organization (ACO). A valid ACO, in order to have effect upon Execution, must include the following: i) A defined class for the prospective Organization. ii) A unique Name for the prospective Organization. iii) An SLC for the prospective Organization. iv) All additional information required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization. v) The signatures of at least as many distinct Players as required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization, (minimum one) all of whom must be eligible to be members of the prospective Organization. An valid ACO is Executed by submitting it to the Notary or by being sent to the Public Forum. The effect of Executing a valid ACO is to create the prospective Organization, with the signatories as its Foundors. The Foundors then come under the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC. An ACO shall only be valid if its contents are not in conflict with this or other Rules. An ACO that is not valid shall never be Executed. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Rule 1533, 7 September 1997 text: There is a type of Application called an Application to Create an Organization (ACO). A valid ACO, in order to have effect upon Execution, must include the following: i) A defined class for the prospective Organization. ii) A unique Name for the prospective Organization. iii) An SLC for the prospective Organization. iv) All additional information required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization. v) The signatures of at least as many distinct Players as required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization, (minimum one) all of whom must be eligible to be members of the prospective Organization. An valid ACO is Executed by submitting it to the Notary or by being sent to the Public Forum. The effect of Executing a valid ACO is to create the prospective Organization, with the signatories as its Foundors. The Foundors then come under the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC. An ACO shall only be valid if its contents are not in conflict with this or other Rules. An ACO that is not valid shall never be Executed. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: There is a type of Application called an Application to Create an Organization (ACO). A valid ACO, in order to have effect upon Execution, must include the following: i) A defined class for the prospective Organization. ii) A unique Name for the prospective Organization. iii) An SLC for the prospective Organization. iv) All additional information required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization. v) The signatures of at least as many distinct Players as required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization, (minimum one) all of whom must be eligible to be members of the prospective Organization. A valid ACO is Executed by submitting it to the Notary or by sending it to the Public Forum. The effect of Executing a valid ACO is to create the prospective Organization, with the signatories as its Foundors. The Foundors then come under the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC. An ACO shall only be valid if its contents are not in conflict with this or other Rules. An ACO that is not valid shall never be Executed. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: There is a type of Application called an Application to Create an Organization (ACO). A valid ACO, in order to have effect upon Execution, must include the following: i) A defined class for the prospective Organization. ii) A unique Name for the prospective Organization. iii) An SLC for the prospective Organization. iv) All additional information required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization. v) The signatures of at least as many distinct Players as required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization, (minimum one) all of whom must be eligible to be members of the prospective Organization. A valid ACO is Executed by submitting it to the Notary or by publishing it. The effect of Executing a valid ACO is to create the prospective Organization, with the signatories as its Foundors. The Foundors then come under the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC. An ACO shall only be valid if its contents are not in conflict with this or other Rules. An ACO that is not valid shall never be Executed. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4159 (Kelly), 5 June 2001 text: There is a type of Application called an Application to Create an Organization (ACO). A valid ACO, in order to have effect upon submission, must include the following: i) A defined class for the prospective Organization. ii) A unique Name for the prospective Organization. iii) An SLC for the prospective Organization. iv) All additional information required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization. v) The signatures of at least as many distinct Players as required by the Rules governing the class of the prospective Organization, (minimum one) all of whom must be eligible to be members of the prospective Organization. A valid ACO is submitted by submitting it to the Notary or by publishing it. The effect of submitting a valid ACO is to create the prospective Organization, with the signatories as its Foundors. The Foundors then come under the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC. An ACO shall only be valid if its contents are not in conflict with this or other Rules. An ACO that is not valid shall never be submitted. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4181 (Murphy), 9 July 2001 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: An Application to Create an Organization (ACO) shall be submitted to the Notary. To be valid, an ACO must specify all properties that an Organization is required to have. Other Rules may place further conditions on the validity of ACOs for a specific Class of Organization. The effect of submitting a valid ACO is to create the prospective Organization, with the Sponsor and signatories as Foundors and initial Members. text: An Application to Create an Organization (ACO) shall be submitted to the Notary. To be valid, an ACO must specify all properties that an Organization is required to have. Other Rules may place further conditions on the validity of ACOs for a specific Class of Organization. The effect of submitting a valid ACO is to create the prospective Organization, with the Sponsor and signatories as Foundors and initial Members. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4698 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: An Application to Create an Organization (ACO) shall be submitted to the Justiciar. To be valid, an ACO must specify all properties that an Organization is required to have. Other Rules may place further conditions on the validity of ACOs for a specific Class of Organization. The effect of submitting a valid ACO is to create the prospective Organization, with the Sponsor and signatories as Foundors and initial Members. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1533 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1534 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1534 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: An Organization's Compact may only require Currency transfers that are made from the Treasuries it possesses (if any such exist) or from a Player within the Jurisdiction of its Compact. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit a Compact to require a transfer prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2035, 4 December 1995 text: An Organization's Compact is empowered to require Currency transfers. If it does so, these transfers are reported by the Executor in the case of an Organization with Treasuries, or the Administrator Otherwise. An Organization's Compact is empowered to require Currency transfers that are made from the Treasuries it possesses (if any such exist) or from a Player within the Jurisdiction of its Compact. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit a Compact to require a transfer prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2475, 16 February 1996 text: The Compact of an Organization is permitted to require Currency transfers, but only those transfers where the Treasury transferred from is owned either by the Organization or by a Player within the Organization's Jurisdiction. The Compact of an Organization is not permitted to require Currency transfers except as described in this Rule. Any transfer required by the Compact of an Organization shall be detected and reported by the Organization's Executor, or, if it has no Executor, by its Administrator. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which permits a Compact to require a transfer prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: An Organization's Compact is empowered to initiate Currency transfers, subject to the restriction that any such transfer must originate from either the Treasury of a Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction, or from the Treasury of the Organization itself. Unless the Compact specifies otherwise, such transfers shall be detected and reported by the Organization's Executor, or, if it has no Executor, its Administrator. history: Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, 30 April 1996 text: An Organization's Compact is empowered to initiate Currency transfers, subject to the restriction that any such transfer must originate from either the Treasury of a Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction, or from the Treasury of the Organization itself. Unless the Compact specifies otherwise, such transfers shall be detected and reported by the Organization's Executor, or, if it has no Executor, its Administrator. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 2598, 11 May 1996 text: An Organization's Compact is empowered to initiate Currency transfers, subject to the restriction that any such transfer must originate from either the Treasury of a Player within the Compact's Jurisdiction, or from the Treasury of the Organization itself. The Player required to detect and report a transfer of this kind shall be whatever Player belonging to the Compact's Jurisidiction the Compact assigns this duty to, or if no such specification exists, the Organization's Executor; if it has no Executor, its Administrator. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 2745 (Swann), 18 November 1996 text: An Organization's SLC is empowered to require Currency transfers from the Organization's Treasury, in addition to other transfers its SLC is permitted to require. The Player required to detect and report any transfers required by the Organization's SLC shall be whatever Player within the SLC's Jurisdiction the SLC assigns this duty to, or the Organization's Executor if no specification is made. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1534 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1535 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1535 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: The Compact of an Organization can specify any or all of the following. i) How the Compact, and/or the Name of its Organization, can be Changed. If this is not specified, it may only be changed by unanimous consent of Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction. Consent is shown by a Player by sending an identical copy of the change to the Notary. The change takes effect when the last Player so consents. In all cases, when the Name of an Organization changes, the Administrator must inform the Notary of the new Name As Soon As Possible. ii) How the Organization can be dissolved. If this is not specified, the Organization cannot dissolve unless it is required to do so by the Rules. As Soon As Possible after an Organization's dissolution, the Player who was the last Administrator of that Organization must inform the Notary of that Organization's dissolution iii) How additional Players enter the Jurisdiction of the Compact. If this is not specified, the Compact cannot expand its Jurisdiction. iv) How individual Players leave the Jurisdiction of the Compact. If this is not specified, the Compact can only lose Jurisdiction over a Player when the Rules require it to do so. Whenever there is any change in a Compact's Jurisdiction, the Administrator of its Organization must inform the Notary of the change As Soon As Possible. These defaults defer to language applying to a specific Class of Organization. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1536 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1536 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: If an Organization is to dissolve, and if a provision exists within its Compact for dividing its Treasuries (if any) upon dissolution, the Treasuries are divided in accordance with this provision before its dissolution. Otherwise, the Treasuries are divided as evenly as possible among all Players within the Compact's Jurisdiction before its dissolution. The Executor of the Organization notifies all appropriate Recordkeepors of the above Transfers. If no Executor exists, and there is no provision in the Rules or the Compact for someone to act as Executor, all Treasuries' contents go to the Bank. (Detected by the relevant Recordkeepors.) This Rule takes precedence over other Rules demanding a different distribution of such Treasuries' assets. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: Immediately before an Organization which possesses a Treasury ceases to exist for any reason, the Currencies in its Treasury shall be divided up and transferred to the Players within its Compact's Jurisdiction. If the Compact specifies a manner in which this division is to take place, those specifications prevail, to the extent that the Rules permit it; otherwise, the Currencies are divided up as evenly as possible. The Executor of the Organization shall detect and report these transfers. If an Organization has no valid Executor at the time it dissolves, no disbursement of the Treasury takes place. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: Immediately before an Organization ceases to exist for any reason, the Currencies in its Treasury shall be divided up and transferred to the Players within its SLC's Jurisdiction. If its SLC specifies a manner in which this division is to take place, those specifications prevail, to the extent that the Rules permit it; otherwise, the Currencies are divided up as evenly as possible. The Executor of the Organization shall detect and report these transfers. If an Organization has no valid Executor at the time it ceased to exist, no disbursement of the Treasury takes place. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1536 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1537 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1537 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: If a Judge or Justice requires disclosure of part of any Organization's Compact to em for the purpose of Judging a CFJ, the Administrator of that Organization is required to provide a copy of that Compact to the Judge or Justice As Soon As Possible after the Judge's or Justice's request. If this involves a Compact from a Private Organization, the Judge or Justice receiving it is bound by the strictures governing the dissemination of the contents of that Compact, and is prohibited from attaching a copy of it to eir Judgement as evidence. This takes precedence over any Rule which would require a Judge or Justice to include the Compact of a Private Organization as part of the evidence justifying eir Ruling. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1538 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1538 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: Violation of a Compact means the failure to obey (insofar the Rules require) the text of a Compact by a Player within that Compact's Jurisdiction. Such a Violation is either Civil or Basic. Violations of a Statute are Basic Violations can also be Violations of the Rules empowering the Violated Statutes. Violations of a Warranty are Civil Violations are never, by themselves, Rule Violations. Any other Violation is Basic, unless the Rules define it otherwise. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2288, 29 December 1995 text: Violation of a Compact means the failure to obey (insofar the Rules require) the text of a Compact by a Player within that Compact's Jurisdiction. Such a Violation is either Civil or Basic. Violations of a Statute are Basic Violations can also be Violations of the Rules empowering the Violated Statutes. Violations of a Warranty are Civil Violations are never, by themselves, Rule Violations. Any other Violation is Basic, unless the Rules define it otherwise. No Player shall legally be in Violation of a Compact or any other body of text having Coercive Power over that Player if its text has not been made available to that Player at the time of the suspected Violation. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2453, 6 February 1996 text: If a Player performs an action which is prohibited by any Rule, or any other body of text which is defined to have the same force as a Rule, that action shall be known as a Rules Violation. Before a body of text is permitted to have the same force as a Rule with regards to a particular Player, said body of text shall have previously been made available to that Player. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1539 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1539 by Proposal 1760, 21 October 1995 text: A Contest's Regulations consist only of Statutes, any one of which is referred to as a Regulation. No Player within Jurisdiction of a Contest's Regulations is bound by a Regulation or combination of Regulations that conflict with the Rules. The Regulations can specify the following: i) How a Contestmaster is replaced. No person may become Contestmaster without eir consent. If left unspecified, the Contestmaster cannot change while the Contest exists. ii) How the Currencies in the Contest Fund shall be spent. If this is not specified, they may only be spent when the Rules require it. iii) The amount of the Entry Fee for the Contest, in the form of units of any specific Currency. iv) Additional restrictions on Players to become Contestants, and conditions under which Contestants cease to be Contestants. A Player becomes a Contestant by notifying the Contestmaster and paying the prescribed Entry Fee to the Contest Fund. A Contestant may quit a Contest at any time by so notifying the Contestmaster. A Contestmaster may resign at any time by posting a message to that effect to the Public Forum, at which time e ceases to be Contestmaster. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: No Player within Jurisdiction of a Contest's Regulations is bound to obey any Regulation or combination of Regulations that conflict with the Rules. The Regulations can specify the following: i) How a Contestmaster is replaced. No person may become Contestmaster without eir consent. If left unspecified, the Contestmaster cannot change while the Contest exists. ii) How the Currencies in the Contest Fund shall be spent. If this is not specified, they may only be spent when the Rules require it. iii) The amount of the Entry Fee for the Contest, in the form of units of any specific Currency. iv) Additional restrictions on Players to become Contestants, and conditions under which Contestants cease to be Contestants. A Player becomes a Contestant by notifying the Contestmaster and paying the prescribed Entry Fee to the Contest Fund. A Contestant may quit a Contest at any time by so notifying the Contestmaster. A Contestmaster may resign at any time by posting a message to that effect to the Public Forum, at which time e ceases to be Contestmaster. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: No Player within Jurisdiction of a Contest's Regulations is bound to obey any Regulation or combination of Regulations that conflict with the Rules. The Regulations can specify the following: i) How a Contestmaster is replaced. No person may become Contestmaster without eir consent. If left unspecified, the Contestmaster cannot change while the Contest exists. ii) How the Currencies in the Contest Fund shall be spent. If this is not specified, they may only be spent when the Rules require it. iii) The amount of the Entry Fee for the Contest, in the form of units of any specific Currency. iv) Additional restrictions on Players to become Contestants, and conditions under which Contestants cease to be Contestants. A Player becomes a Contestant by notifying the Contestmaster and paying the prescribed Entry Fee to the Contest Fund. A Contestant may quit a Contest at any time by so notifying the Contestmaster. A Contestmaster may publicly resign at any time, at which time e ceases to be Contestmaster. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4484 (OscarMeyr), 23 April 2003 text: No Player within Jurisdiction of a Contest's Regulations is bound to obey any Regulation or combination of Regulations that conflict with the Rules. The Regulations can specify the following: i) How a Contestmaster is replaced. No person may become Contestmaster without eir consent. If left unspecified, the Contestmaster cannot change while the Contest exists. ii) How the Currencies in the Contest Fund shall be spent. If this is not specified, they may only be spent when the Rules require it. iii) The amount of the Entry Fee for the Contest, in the form of units of any specific Currency. iv) Additional restrictions on Players to become Contestants, and conditions under which Contestants cease to be Contestants. A Player becomes a Contestant by notifying the Contestmaster. If the Contest Regulations specify an Entry Fee, the Player must also pay the prescribed Entry Fee to the Contest Fund. A Contestant may quit a Contest at any time by so notifying the Contestmaster. A Contestmaster may publicly resign at any time, at which time e ceases to be Contestmaster. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 text: The regulations of a contest may specify the following: a) How a contestmaster is replaced. No person may become contestmaster without eir consent. If left unspecified, the contestmaster cannot change while the contest exists. b) Restrictions on players to become contestants. c) Conditions under which contestants cease to be contestants. No player is bound to obey any regulation or combination of regulations that conflict with the Rules. A player becomes a contestant, or ceases to be a contestant, by notifying the contestmaster. A contestmaster may publicly resign at any time, at which time e ceases to be contestmaster. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1539 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1540 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1540 by Proposal 1762 (Steve), 31 October 1995 text: There is a Power called the Skeptic Power. There are two Skeptic Cards. The Caster of the Skeptic Power is called the Skeptic; the Player on whom the Skeptic Power is cast is called the Believer. The Skeptic Power may not be cast by or on the Assessor. A Player casts the Skeptic Power by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. In the same message, the Skeptic must give the number of a Proposal, called the Doubtful Proposal, which has been proposed by the Believer, for which the first half of the Voting Period has not yet finished, and state that e, the Skeptic, doubts that this Proposal will pass. Unless all these conditions are met, the Power is not legally cast. The Believer must, before the conclusion of the Voting Period of the Doubtful Proposal, indicate in a message to the Public Forum, whether e concurs with or dissents from the doubt of the Skeptic. If e makes no such indication, then e is assumed to have dissented. If the Believer indicates that e concurs with the doubt of the Skeptic, then the Believer is penalized 30 points, which are transferred to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Skeptic. If the Believer dissents from the doubt of the Skeptic, then if the Doubtful Proposal fails, the Believer is penalized 3 Extra Votes, which are transferred from the Believer to the Skeptic, and 50 points, which are transferred from the Believer to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Skeptic. If, however, the Doubtful Proposal passes, then the Skeptic is penalized 3 Extra Votes, which are transferred from the Skeptic to the Believer, and 20 points, which are transferred from the Skeptic to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Believer. In the case where the casting of the Skeptic Power conflicts in its effects with the casting of another Power, then unless the other Power explicitly claims precedence over all other Rules which define specific Powers, this Rule takes precedence over that other Rule if the Skeptic Power was cast later than the Power defined by the other Rule, and defers to it if the Skeptic Power was cast earlier than the Power defined in the other Rule. Otherwise, this Rule defers to the the Rule defining the other Power. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all Currency transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2520, 10 March 1996 text: There is a Power called the Skeptic Power. There are two Skeptic Cards. The Caster of the Skeptic Power is called the Skeptic; the Player on whom the Skeptic Power is cast is called the Believer. The Skeptic Power may not be cast by or on the Assessor. A Player casts the Skeptic Power by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. In the same message, the Skeptic must give the number of a Proposal, called the Doubtful Proposal, which has been proposed by the Believer, for which the first half of the Voting Period has not yet finished, and state that e, the Skeptic, doubts that this Proposal will pass. Unless all these conditions are met, the Power is not legally cast. The Believer must, before the conclusion of the Voting Period of the Doubtful Proposal, indicate in a message to the Public Forum, whether e concurs with or dissents from the doubt of the Skeptic. If e makes no such indication, then e is assumed to have dissented. If the Believer indicates that e concurs with the doubt of the Skeptic, then the Believer is penalized 30 points, which are transferred to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Skeptic. If the Believer dissents from the doubt of the Skeptic, then if the Doubtful Proposal fails, the Believer is penalized 3 Extra Votes, which are transferred from the Believer to the Skeptic, and 50 points, which are transferred from the Believer to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Skeptic. If, however, the Doubtful Proposal passes, then the Skeptic is penalized 3 Extra Votes, which are transferred from the Skeptic to the Believer, and 20 points, which are transferred from the Skeptic to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Believer. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all Currency transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: There is a Power called the Skeptic Power. There are two Skeptic Cards. The Caster of the Skeptic Power is called the Skeptic; the Player on whom the Skeptic Power is cast is called the Believer. The Skeptic Power may not be cast by or on the Assessor. A Player casts the Skeptic Power by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. In the same message, the Skeptic must give the number of a Proposal, called the Doubtful Proposal, which has been proposed by the Believer, for which the first half of the Voting Period has not yet finished, and state that e, the Skeptic, doubts that this Proposal will pass. Unless all these conditions are met, the Power is not legally cast. The Believer must, before the conclusion of the Voting Period of the Doubtful Proposal, indicate in a message to the Public Forum, whether e concurs with or dissents from the doubt of the Skeptic. If e makes no such indication, then e is assumed to have dissented. If the Believer indicates that e concurs with the doubt of the Skeptic, then the Believer is penalized 30 Mils, which are transferred to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Skeptic. If the Believer dissents from the doubt of the Skeptic, then if the Doubtful Proposal fails, the Believer is penalized 3 Extra Votes, which are transferred from the Believer to the Skeptic, and 50 Mils, which are transferred from the Believer to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Skeptic. If, however, the Doubtful Proposal passes, then the Skeptic is penalized 3 Extra Votes, which are transferred from the Skeptic to the Believer, and 20 Mils, which are transferred from the Skeptic to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Believer. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all Currency transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: There is a Power called the Skeptic Power. There are two Skeptic Cards. The Caster of the Skeptic Power is called the Skeptic; the Player on whom the Skeptic Power is cast is called the Believer. The Skeptic Power may not be cast by or on the Assessor. A Player casts the Skeptic Power by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. In the same message, the Skeptic must give the number of a Proposal, called the Doubtful Proposal, which has been proposed by the Believer, for which the first half of the Voting Period has not yet finished, and state that e, the Skeptic, doubts that this Proposal will pass. Unless all these conditions are met, the Power is not legally cast. The Believer must, before the conclusion of the Voting Period of the Doubtful Proposal, indicate in a message to the Public Forum, whether e concurs with or dissents from the doubt of the Skeptic. If e makes no such indication, then e is assumed to have dissented. If the Believer indicates that e concurs with the doubt of the Skeptic, then the Believer is penalized 30 Mil, which are transferred to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Skeptic. If the Believer dissents from the doubt of the Skeptic, then if the Doubtful Proposal fails, the Believer is penalized 3 Extra Votes, which are transferred from the Believer to the Skeptic, and 50 Mil, which are transferred from the Believer to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Skeptic. If, however, the Doubtful Proposal passes, then the Skeptic is penalized 3 Extra Votes, which are transferred from the Skeptic to the Believer, and 20 Mil, which are transferred from the Skeptic to the Bank, and from the Bank to the Believer. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting all Currency transfers which occur as a result of this Rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1541 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1541 by Proposal 1777, 6 November 1995 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week in which at least one Card of a Power is held by the Bank, the Assessor shall conduct a Powers Lottery, as set out below, and announce the results of the Lottery in the Public Forum. The Powers Lottery is conducted as follows: the Assessor randomly chooses one Card which is held by the Bank to be the prize of that week's Lottery. The Assessor also randomly chooses an Active Player to be winner of the week's Lottery. The chosen Card is transferred to the winner of the week's Lottery. If the Card chosen to be the prize is a Card of the Power of Influence, then the Card counts as a 3-vote Power of Influence Card. This Rule takes precedence over Rules which describe other ways of determining the influence granted by a Card of the Power of Influence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1542 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1542 by Proposal 2026, 28 November 1995 text: Style Points are a Currecncy. The MUQ of Style Points is 0.5. The RecordKeepor and Mintor for Style Points are theWizard. The Wizard shall not create or destroy Style Points except as specified in Rules defining that office. The Wizard is required to detect and report all Style Point transfers. Only a Player may possess Style Points. A transfer of Style Points is only legal if it is between The Wizard's Treasury and a Player's. If, for any reason, a Treasury belonging to an Entity that is not a Player contains a non-zero number of Style Points, all the Style Points in that Treasury are immediately destroyed. At the End of a Game, all Style Points in existence are immediately destroyed, including negative Style Points. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2057, 25 December 1995 text: Style Points are a Currency. The MUQ of Style Points is 0.5. The RecordKeepor and Mintor for Style Points are the Wizard. The Wizard shall not create or destroy Style Points except as specified in Rules defining that office. The Wizard is required to detect and report all Style Point transfers. Only a Player may possess Style Points. A transfer of Style Points is only legal if it is between The Wizard's Treasury and a Player's. If, for any reason, a Treasury belonging to an Entity that is not a Player contains a non-zero number of Style Points, all the Style Points in that Treasury are immediately destroyed. At the End of a Game, all Style Points in existence are immediately destroyed, including negative Style Points. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2524, 10 March 1996 text: There are Entities known as Style Points. All Players possess an integral number of Style Points that is positive, negative or zero. The number of Style Points a Player has is that Player's Style. Any new Player, or a Player with no recorded Style Points, begins with a Style of zero. At the time there is a legal and correct announcement of a End of the Game, all Players have their Style set to zero. Every time a Proposal is distributed, the Wizard has the option of changing the Style of the Player who submitted that Proposal, as long as that Player is not the Wizard. The Wizard may only change the Style of Players whose Proposals were distributed after e became Wizard. The Wizard may add or subtract up to three Style Points from the Proposer's Style for any reason having to do with the form, content, effects, or nature of the Proposal-- but, for the change to have effect, such reasons must be included in eir Wizard's Report, as provided for in other Rules. A Player's Style can only change as provided for in this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: There are Entities known as Style Points. All Players possess an integral number of Style Points that is positive, negative or zero. The number of Style Points a Player has is that Player's Style. Any new Player, or a Player with no recorded Style Points, begins with a Style of zero. At the beginning of every quarter, all Players have their Style set to zero. Every time a Proposal is distributed, the Wizard has the option of changing the Style of the Player who submitted that Proposal, as long as that Player is not the Wizard. The Wizard may only change the Style of Players whose Proposals were distributed after e became Wizard. The Wizard may add or subtract up to three Style Points from the Proposer's Style for any reason having to do with the form, content, effects, or nature of the Proposal-- but, for the change to have effect, such reasons must be included in eir Wizard's Report, as provided for in other Rules. A Player's Style can only change as provided for in this Rule. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3614 (Crito), 9 December 1997 text: There are Entities known as Style Points. All Players possess an integral number of Style Points that is positive, negative or zero. The number of Style Points a Player has is that Player's Style. Any new Player, or a Player with no recorded Style Points, begins with a Style of zero. Each Player also has a High Style Mark. Any new Player, or a Player with no recorded High Style Mark, begins with a High Style Mark of zero. Every time a Proposal is distributed, the Wizard has the option of changing the Style of the Player who submitted that Proposal, as long as that Player is not the Wizard. The Wizard may only change the Style of Players whose Proposals were distributed after e became Wizard. The Wizard may add or subtract up to three Style Points from the Proposer's Style for any reason having to do with the form, content, effects, or nature of the Proposal-- but, for the change to have effect, such reasons must be included in eir Wizard's Report, as provided for in other Rules. Whenever a Player's Style points exceeds eir High Style Mark by two or more points, the Wizard shall pay out to that Player a reward of one P-Note for every two points in excess of eir current High Style Mark and eir High Style Mark shall be increased by two times the number of P-Notes awarded. A Player's Style and High Style Mark can only change as provided for in this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1542 by Proposal 3790 (Steve), 6 October 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1543 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1543 by Proposal 2026, 28 November 1995 text: There is an Officer known as The Wizard. No Player shall be installed into that Office except as specified in this Rule. The weekly salary of The Wizard is 1 Extra Vote, but it is not awarded if the Player holding the Office has received an Extra Vote in the previous Nomic Week. Whenever a Proposal is Distributed, the Wizard may create up to 3 Style Points and cause them to be transferred to the Player who submitted that Proposal, or cause up to 3 Style Points to be transferred from that Player to emself and be destroyed. He shall report that transfer, including reasons for eir decision, to the Public Forum as soon as possible after a Proposal is Distributed. The Wizard may not award emself Style Points, i.e. any Style Points e creates must be transferred to another Player. After a Game ends, the Player who had the most Style Points just before the End of the Game and was not The Wizard becomes The Wizard. In the event of a tie, a Player sshall be randomly selected among the Players with the most Style Points and become The Wizard. The Wizard is responsible for such selection and must announce who has become The Wizard as soon as possible after the End of a Game. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2057, 25 December 1995 text: There is an Officer known as The Wizard. No Player shall be installed into that Office except as specified in this Rule. The weekly salary of The Wizard is 1 Extra Vote, but it is not awarded if the Player holding the Office has received an Extra Vote in the previous Nomic Week. Whenever a Proposal is Distributed, the Wizard shall create up to 3 Style Points and cause them to be transferred to the Player who submitted that Proposal, or cause up to 3 Style Points to be transferred from that Player to emself and be destroyed. He shall report that transfer, including reasons for eir decision, to the Public Forum as soon as possible after a Proposal is Distributed. The Wizard may not award emself Style Points, i.e. any Style Points e creates must be transferred to another Player. After a Game ends, the Player who had the most Style Points just before the End of the Game and was not The Wizard becomes The Wizard. In the event of a tie, a Player shall be randomly selected among the Players with the most Style Points and become The Wizard. The Wizard is responsible for such selection and must announce who has become The Wizard as soon as possible after the End of a Game. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2524, 10 March 1996 text: There is a Player known as the Wizard. The Wizard is the Player in charge of maintaining a record of each Player's Style. The Wizard must post in the Public Forum, at least once a week, a report which includes: i) The Style of every Player. ii) All Style changes, and the values of those changes, since the last Wizard's Report. iii) The Proposal numbers of every Proposal that merited a Style change. iv) The reasons for each change. The Player who is the Wizard, as compensation for his duties, receives one Extra Vote from the Bank every Nomic Week in which that Player produced a Wizard's Report. This transfer is reported to the Assessor by the Wizard. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3473 (Harlequin; disi.), 2 May 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3474 (Swann), 2 May 1997 text: There is a Player known as the Wizard. The Wizard is the Player in charge of maintaining a record of each Player's Style. The Wizard must post in the Public Forum, at least once a week, a report which includes: i) The Style of every Player. ii) All Style changes, and the values of those changes, since the last Wizard's Report. iii) The Proposal numbers of every Proposal that merited a Style change. iv) The reasons for each change. The Player who is the Wizard, as compensation for his duties, receives one P-Note from the Bank every Nomic Week in which that Player produced a Wizard's Report. This transfer is reported to the Promotor by the Wizard. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 3529 (Steve), 8 July 1997 text: There is an Office of Wizard. The Official Report for the Office Wizard, or Wizard's Report, shall include: i) The Style of every Player. ii) All Style changes, and the values of those changes, since the last Wizard's Report. iii) The change in Style, if any, merited by each Proposal distributed since the last Wizard's Report. iv) The reasons for each change. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3614 (Crito), 9 December 1997 text: There is an Office of Wizard. The Official Report for the Office Wizard, or Wizard's Report, shall include: i) The Style of every Player. ii) The High Style Mark of every Player. iii) All Style changes, and the values of those changes, since the last Wizard's Report. iv) The change in Style, if any, merited by each Proposal distributed since the last Wizard's Report. v) The reasons for each change. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1543 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1544 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1544 by Proposal 2033, 4 December 1995 text: Within the Terms of a Bearerbond, one or more of the Parties are identified only by unique abstract Role names. (such as Bearer, or Party of the First Part and Party of the Second Part, or Feduciacrator, Honker, and Trusiast, or whatever) At all times, exactly one Player is associated with each Role; the Player associated with a particular Role is known as the Rolebearer for that Role in that Bearerbond. When the Bearerbond is created, all Foundors must send the Notary a statement clearly identifying the initial Rolebearer for each Role in the Bearerbond. All these statements must identify the same Rolebearers for the same Roles. All Rolebearers are Parties of the Bearerbond as long as they are Rolebearers. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1545 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1545 by Proposal 2033, 4 December 1995 text: To change the Rolebearer for some Role in a Bearerbond, the current Rolebearer and the new Rolebearer notify the Notary of the transaction, clearly indicating the unique abstract Role name, and the Name of the Bearerbond. The Rolebearer for any Role may be changed in this way at any time, unless the Terms of the Bearerbond state differently. When any Rolebearer in a Bearerbond changes, the Notary shall notify all Parties to that Bearerbond of the change, the Role involved, and the identity of the new Rolebearer. This notification shall occur As Soon As Possible. The change of Rolebearer takes effect when the Notary sends this notification. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1546 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1546 by Proposal 2034, 4 December 1995 text: All Organizations have a property of belonging to one specific Class. No Class can exist which is not defined in the Rules. The Class of an existing Organization cannot change once that Organization is created. Each Organization within a specific Class can be properly referred to as a singular instance of that Class. (i.e. Every Organization within the Class "Groups" can be referred to as a Group.) This Rule takes precedence over every other Rule referring to Classes of Organizations. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: An entity is an Organization only if it is of a class of Organization specifically defined by the Rules. The class of an Organization is determined at the time the Organization is created and cannot be changed after that time. If the Rules are changed such that they no longer define a given class of Organization, all Organizations of that class are dissolved. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1547 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1548 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1548 by Proposal 2039, 4 December 1995 text: Let there be an Office called the Banker. The Banker has a weekly salary of 5 points. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2470, 16 February 1996 text: Let there be an Office called the Banker. The Banker has a weekly salary of 5 points. The Banker shall maintain a record of all existing Currencies and their respective MUQs, Recordkeepors, and Mintors. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: Let there be an Office called the Banker. The Banker has a weekly salary of 5 Mils. The Banker shall maintain a record of all existing Currencies and their respective MUQs, Recordkeepors, and Mintors. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Banker. The Banker shall receive a weekly salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Banker shall maintain a record of all existing Currencies and their respective MUQs, Recordkeepors, and Mintors. history: Null-Amended(4) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Banker. The Banker shall receive a weekly salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. The Banker shall maintain a record of all existing Currencies and their respective MUQs, Recordkeepors, and Mintors. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1549 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1549 by Proposal 2401, 20 January 1996 text: As soon as possible after a Contest is created, the Notary shall publish the name of the Contest and its initial Regulations to the Public Forum. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1550 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1550 by Proposal 2425, 30 January 1996 text: There is a Directive known as a Vote of Confidence (VOC). A Proposal containing a VOC Directive has an Adoption Index (AI) of one, or greater if another Rule requires a higher AI for the Proposal. A VOC Directive must unambiguously specify a valid Official Document of Agora Nomic, as specified in other Rules. If a VOC Directive specifies a Document that is not valid, or a Document that is no longer valid at the time of the Adoption of the Proposal containing the Directive, the Directive shall have no effect, even if its Proposal is Adopted. When the Rules refer to the "Adoption" of a VOC Directive, they mean that the VOC Directive was contained in a Proposal that was Adopted, and that the VOC Directive was allowed to have effect by this and other Rules. history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Proposal 2807 (Andre), 8 February 1997 text: There is a Directive known as a Vote of Confidence (VOC). A VOC Directive must unambiguously specify a valid Official Document of Agora Nomic, as specified in other Rules. If a VOC Directive specifies a Document that is not valid, or a Document that is no longer valid at the time of the Adoption of the Proposal containing the Directive, the Directive shall have no effect, even if its Proposal is Adopted. When the Rules refer to the "Adoption" of a VOC Directive, they mean that the VOC Directive was contained in a Proposal that was Adopted, and that the VOC Directive was allowed to have effect by this and other Rules. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: Any Official Document (as specified in other Rules) may be ratified by the operation of an adopted Proposal (but no other sort of instrument). The instrument must specify an Official Document (as specified in other Rules) which is subject to ratification. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1550 by Proposal 4759 (Manu, Sherlock), 15 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1551 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1552 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1552 by Proposal 2425, 30 January 1996 text: In order for an Official Document to be valid for the purpose of a Vote of Confidence (VOC) Directive, it must satisfy all the following criteria at the time the VOC Directive is Proposed: i) The Rules require some specific Player to produce and/or maintain the document. ii) The Rules required it to be published in the Public Forum. (A requirement that it be sent to all Players fulfills this criteria.) iii) It is not currently subject to a Claim of Error. (COE) iv) It is not currently subject to a pending Call for Judgement (CFJ), or a pending Appeal of a CFJ. v) The information within the Document has not been superseded by a subsequent Document. vi) The Document is not the Ruleset. The Ruleset is specifically excluded from all VOC Directives. Further, a Document can become invalid during the Voting Period of a VOC Directive if any of the following occurs: i) The Document is superseded by a subsequent Document which contradicts the information in the prior Document. This does not apply if there is a COE alleging the contradiction is an error, and the error is admitted before the end of the VOC Directive's Voting Period. ii) A COE is made on the Document, and the COE has not been denied before the end of the VOC Directive's Voting Period. iii) The Document becomes subject to a pending CFJ or a pending appeal of a CFJ. If another Document is issued during the Voting Period of a VOC Directive that does not contradict the prior Document it does not alter the validity of the prior Document. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3510 (Harlequin; disi.), 16 June 1997 text: In order for an Official Document to be valid for the purpose of a Ratification, it must satisfy all the following criteria at the time the Proposal which would Ratify it is Proposed: i) The Rules require some specific Player to produce and/or maintain the document. ii) The Rules required it to be published in the Public Forum. (A requirement that it be sent to all Players fulfills this criteria.) iii) It is not currently subject to a Claim of Error. (COE) iv) It is not currently subject to a pending Call for Judgement (CFJ), or a pending Appeal of a CFJ. v) The information within the Document has not been superseded by a subsequent Document. vi) The Document is not the Ruleset. The Ruleset is specifically excluded from Ratification. Further, a Document can become invalid during the Voting Period of a Proposal which would Ratify it if any of the following occurs: i) The Document is superseded by a subsequent Document which contradicts the information in the prior Document. This does not apply if there is a COE alleging the contradiction is an error, and the error is admitted before the end of the Proposal's Voting Period. ii) A COE is made on the Document, and the COE has not been denied before the end of the Proposal's Voting Period. iii) The Document becomes subject to a pending CFJ or a pending appeal of a CFJ. If, during the Voting Period of a Proposal to Ratify a Document, another Document is issued that does not contradict the prior Document, it does not alter the validity of the prior Document. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: In order for an Official Document to be valid for the purpose of a Ratification, it must satisfy all the following criteria at the time the Proposal which would Ratify it is Proposed: i) The Rules require some specific Player to produce and/or maintain the document. ii) The Rules required it to be published in the Public Forum. (A requirement that it be sent to all Players fulfills this criterion.) iii) It is not currently subject to a Claim of Error. (COE) iv) It is not currently subject to a pending Call for Judgement (CFJ), or a pending Appeal of a CFJ. v) The information within the Document has not been superseded by a subsequent Document. vi) The Document is not the Ruleset. The Ruleset is specifically excluded from Ratification. Further, a Document can become invalid during the Voting Period of a Proposal which would Ratify it if any of the following occurs: i) The Document is superseded by a subsequent Document which contradicts the information in the prior Document. This does not apply if there is a COE alleging the contradiction is an error, and the error is admitted before the end of the Proposal's Voting Period. ii) A COE is made on the Document, and the COE has not been denied before the end of the Proposal's Voting Period. iii) The Document becomes subject to a pending CFJ or a pending appeal of a CFJ. If, during the Voting Period of a Proposal to Ratify a Document, another Document is issued that does not contradict the prior Document, it does not alter the validity of the prior Document. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: In order for an Official Document to be valid for the purpose of a Ratification, it must satisfy all the following criteria at the time the Proposal which would Ratify it is Proposed: i) The Rules require some specific Player to produce and/or maintain the document. ii) The Rules required it to be published. (A requirement that it be sent to all Players fulfills this criterion.) iii) It is not currently subject to a Claim of Error. (COE) iv) It is not currently subject to a pending Call for Judgement (CFJ), or a pending Appeal of a CFJ. v) The information within the Document has not been superseded by a subsequent Document. vi) The Document is not the Ruleset. The Ruleset is specifically excluded from Ratification. Further, a Document can become invalid during the Voting Period of a Proposal which would Ratify it if any of the following occurs: i) The Document is superseded by a subsequent Document which contradicts the information in the prior Document. This does not apply if there is a COE alleging the contradiction is an error, and the error is admitted before the end of the Proposal's Voting Period. ii) A COE is made on the Document, and the COE has not been denied before the end of the Proposal's Voting Period. iii) The Document becomes subject to a pending CFJ or a pending appeal of a CFJ. If, during the Voting Period of a Proposal to Ratify a Document, another Document is issued that does not contradict the prior Document, it does not alter the validity of the prior Document. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4517 (Murphy), 18 July 2003 text: An Official Document is legally permissible to Ratify if and only if all of the following are true: a) The Rules required some specific Player to produce and/or maintain the document. b) The Rules required it to be published. (A requirement that it be sent to all Players fulfills this criterion.) c) It is not currently subject to a Claim of Error (COE). d) It is not currently subject to a pending Call for Judgement (CFJ), or a pending Appeal of a CFJ. e) The information within the Document has not been superseded by a subsequent Document that contradicts it. (This does not apply if a COE alleging the contradiction is in error is admitted.) f) The Document is not the Ruleset. The Ruleset is specifically excluded from Ratification. Ratification by Proposal is effective only if the Document is legally permissible to Ratify when the Proposal takes effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1552 by Proposal 4832 (Maud), 6 August 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1553 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1553 by Proposal 2429 (favor), 30 January 1996 text: Whenever a Player ceases to hold an Office, that Player shall make a reasonable effort to ensure that all materials necessary for the conduct of that Office, including any records the holder of that Office is required to maintain, are made available to the next Player to hold that Office. A Player who fails to do so violates this Rule, and commits a Class C Crime. history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Proposal 2831 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: Whenever a Player ceases to hold an Office, that Player shall make a reasonable effort to ensure that all materials necessary for the conduct of that Office, including any records the holder of that Office is required to maintain, are made available to the next Player to hold that Office. A Player who fails to do so violates this Rule, and commits the Crime of Improper Officer Transition, a Class C Crime. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: Whenever a Player ceases to hold an Office, that Player shall make a reasonable effort to ensure that all materials necessary for the conduct of that Office, including any records the holder of that Office is required to maintain, are made available to the next Player to hold that Office. A Player who fails to do so violates this Rule, and commits the Class 4 Crime of Improper Officer Transition. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: Whenever a Player ceases to hold an Office, that Player shall make a reasonable effort to ensure that all materials necessary for the conduct of that Office, including any records the holder of that Office is required to maintain, are made available to the next Player to hold that Office. A Player who fails to do so commits the Class 4 Crime of Improper Officer Transition. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1553 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1554 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1554 by Proposal 2430, 30 January 1996 text: Every Player is either a Miser or a non-Miser. Every Player is a non-Miser at the time e Registers, and every Player becomes a non-Miser whenever a new Game begins. A Player becomes a Miser by announcing to the Public Forum that e is doing so. Whenever a Miser's Treasury contains any Points, those Points are immediately, without any delay or intervening events, converted to Marks, at the primary Mark Exchange Rate. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2535, 13 March 1996 text: Every Player is either a Miser or a non-Miser. Every Player is a non-Miser at the time e Registers, and every Player becomes a non-Miser whenever a new Game begins. A Player becomes a Miser by announcing to the Public Forum that e is doing so. The Scorekeepor shall keep a record of which Players are Misers and shall publish this information in eir Weekly Report. Whenever a Miser's Treasury contains any Points, those Points are immediately, without any delay or intervening events, converted to Marks, at the primary Mark Exchange Rate. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2573, 12 April 1996 text: Every Player is either a Miser or a non-Miser. Every Player is a non-Miser at the time e Registers, and every Player becomes a non-Miser whenever a new Game begins. A Player becomes a Miser by announcing to the Public Forum that e is doing so. The Scorekeepor shall keep a record of which Players are Misers and shall publish this information in eir Weekly Report. Whenever a Miser's Treasury contains any Points, those Points are immediately, without any delay or intervening events, transferred to the Bank, and a commensurate number of Marks, computed using the primary Mark Exchange Rate, are transferred from the Bank to the Miser's Treasury. It is the responsibility of the Scorekeepor to detect and report these transfers. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1555 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1555 by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: When an Officer resigns from or is retired from an Office, e ceases to hold it in the normal fashion, but continues to hold the Office temporarily. When an Officer is removed from Office, the Speaker shall become the temporary holder of that Office, unless another Rule specifies a different Player who is to become the temporary holder of that Office. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2577, 21 April 1996 text: When an Officer resigns from or is retired from an Office, e ceases to hold it in the normal fashion, but continues to hold the Office temporarily. When an Officer is removed from Office, the Speaker shall become the temporary holder of that Office, unless another Rule specifies a different Player who is to become the temporary holder of that Office. If an Officer goes On Hold, deregisters, or is deregistered, e shall immediately be removed from every Office e holds. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 2781 (Steve), 15 January 1997 text: When an Officer is retired from an Office, e ceases to hold it in the normal fashion, but continues to hold the Office temporarily. When an Officer is removed from Office, the Speaker shall become the temporary holder of that Office, unless another Rule specifies a different Player who is to become the temporary holder of that Office. If an Officer goes On Hold, deregisters, or is deregistered, e shall immediately be removed from every Office e holds. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3742 (Harlequin), 8 May 1998 text: Any Player who holds an Office by virtue of having won an Election for that Office is called the Electee to that Office. When an Electee to an Office is retired from that Office, e ceases to be the Electee for that Office. When an Electee to an Office is removed from that Office, e ceases to be Electee to that Office, and if e currently holds the Office, the Speaker shall become the holder of that Office, unless another Rule specifies a different Player who is to become the temporary of that Office. When a non-Electee Player is removed from an Office, that Office shall become held normally by the Electee of that Office, if there is an Electee. Otherwise, the Office shall be held temporarily by the Speaker. If a Player goes On Hold, deregisters, or is deregistered, e shall be removed from all Offices e holds. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3853 (Blob), 19 April 1999 text: Any Player who holds an Office by virtue of having won an Election for that Office is called the Electee to that Office. When an Electee to an Office is retired from that Office, e ceases to be the Electee for that Office. When an Electee to an Office is removed from that Office, e ceases to be Electee to that Office, and if e currently holds the Office, the Speaker shall become the holder of that Office, unless another Rule specifies a different Player who is to become the temporary of that Office. When a non-Electee Player is removed from an Office, that Office shall become held normally by the Electee of that Office, if there is an Electee. Otherwise, the Office shall be held temporarily by the Speaker. If a Player goes On Hold, deregisters, is deregistered, or becomes a Zombie, e shall be removed from all Offices e holds. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3898 (Wes), 27 August 1999 text: Any Player who holds an Office by virtue of having won an Election for that Office, or by virtue of being installed in that Office through a Proposal, is called the Electee to that Office. When an Electee to an Office is retired from that Office, e ceases to be the Electee for that Office. When an Electee to an Office is removed from that Office, e ceases to be Electee to that Office, and if e currently holds the Office, the Speaker shall become the holder of that Office, unless another Rule specifies a different Player who is to become the temporary of that Office. When a non-Electee Player is removed from an Office, that Office shall become held normally by the Electee of that Office, if there is an Electee. Otherwise, the Office shall be held temporarily by the Speaker. If a Player goes On Hold, deregisters, is deregistered, or becomes a Zombie, e shall be removed from all Offices e holds. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4071 (Steve), 14 September 2000 text: A Player who wins an Election for an Office, or is installed into Office by a Proposal, becomes the Electee to that Office, as well as its holder. When the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office, e ceases to be the Electee to that Office, but continues to hold the Office. When the Electee to an Office is removed from that Office, e ceases to be Electee to that Office. Furthermore, if the Electee currently holds the Office, the Speaker becomes the holder of that Office, unless another Rule provides that a different Player is to hold the Office. When a non-Electee is removed from an Office and there is an Electee to that Office, then the Electee becomes the holder of the Office. If there is no Electee, the Office is held by the Speaker. If a Player goes On Hold, deregisters, is deregistered, or becomes a Zombie, e is removed from all Offices e holds. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 text: A Player who wins an Election for an Office, or is installed into Office by a Proposal, becomes the Electee to that Office, as well as its holder. When the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office, e ceases to be the Electee to that Office, but continues to hold the Office. When the Electee to an Office is removed from that Office, e ceases to be Electee to that Office. Furthermore, if the Electee currently holds the Office, the Speaker becomes the holder of that Office, unless another Rule provides that a different Player is to hold the Office. When a non-Electee is removed from an Office and there is an Electee to that Office, then the Electee becomes the holder of the Office. If there is no Electee, the Office is held by the Speaker. If a Player goes On Hold, deregisters, or is deregistered, e is removed from all Offices e holds. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: A Player who wins an Election for an Office, or is installed into Office by a Proposal, becomes the Electee to that Office, as well as its holder. When the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office, e ceases to be the Electee to that Office, but continues to hold the Office. When the Electee to an Office is removed from that Office, e ceases to be Electee to that Office. Furthermore, if the Electee currently holds the Office, the Speaker becomes the holder of that Office, unless another Rule provides that a different Player is to hold the Office. When a non-Electee is removed from an Office and there is an Electee to that Office, then the Electee becomes the holder of the Office. If there is no Electee, the Office is held by the Speaker. Whenever a player deregisters, is deregistered, or ceases to be active, e is removed from all Offices e holds. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1555 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1556 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1556 by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: Unless otherwise specified, the Term of Service for an Office shall expire on the first day of the third month following the month in which the Officer in question was elected to that Office. At the exhaustion of an Office's Term of Service, the Officer holding that Office shall be retired from that Office. This Rule defers to Rules which specify a different Term of Service for specific Offices. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3483 (favor), 19 May 1997 text: Unless otherwise specified, the Term of Service for an Office shall expire on the first day of the fourth month following the month in which the Officer in question was elected to that Office. At the exhaustion of an Office's Term of Service, the Officer holding that Office shall be retired from that Office. This Rule defers to Rules which specify a different Term of Service for specific Offices. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3950 (harvel), 8 December 1999 text: Unless otherwise specified, the Term of Service for an Office shall expire on the first day of the fourth month following the month in which the Officer in question was elected to that Office. At the exhaustion of an Office's Term of Service, the Officer holding that Office shall be retired from that Office. Other Rules may specify a different Term of Service for specific Offices. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4103 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: Unless otherwise specified, the Term of Service for an Office shall expire on the fifteenth day of the fourth month following the month in which the Officer in question was elected to that Office. At the exhaustion of an Office's Term of Service, the Officer holding that Office shall be retired from that Office. Other Rules may specify a different Term of Service for specific Offices. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1556 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1557 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1557 by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: If an Officer goes On Hold, deregisters, or is deregistered, e shall immediately be removed from every Office e holds. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1558 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1558 by Proposal 2442, 6 February 1996 text: When the Rules require that an Election be conducted to fill an Office, that Election shall be conducted in accordance with the usual Rules for Elections, except that the Vote Collector shall be the Registrar, and no Player may be Nominated who would not be permitted to hold the Office which the Election is seeking to fill. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2564, 6 April 1996 text: When the Rules require that an Election be conducted to fill an Office, that Election shall be conducted in accordance with the usual Rules for Elections, with the following exceptions: * The Vote Collector of the Election shall be the Registrar, unless the Office which the Election is seeking to fill is that of the Registrar, in which case the Vote Collector shall be the Speaker; and * No Player may be Nominated who would not be permitted to hold the Office which the Election is seeking to fill. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3628 (Murphy), 29 December 1997 text: When the Rules require that an Election be conducted to fill an Office, that Election shall be conducted in accordance with the usual Rules for Elections, with the following exceptions: * The Vote Collector of the Election shall be the Registrar, unless the Office which the Election is seeking to fill is that of the Registrar, in which case the Vote Collector shall be the Speaker; and * No Player may be Nominated who, at the time of attempted Nomination, would not be permitted to hold the Office which the Election is seeking to fill. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 text: When the Rules require that an Election be conducted to fill an Office, that Election shall be conducted in accordance with the usual Rules for Elections, with the following exceptions: * The Vote Collector of the Election shall be the Payroll Clerk, unless the Office which the Election is seeking to fill is that of the Payroll Clerk, in which case the Vote Collector shall be the Speaker; and * No Player may be Nominated who, at the time of attempted Nomination, would not be permitted to hold the Office which the Election is seeking to fill. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4053 (harvel), 21 August 2000 text: When the Rules require that an Election be conducted to fill an Office, that Election shall be conducted in accordance with the usual Rules for Elections, with the following exceptions: * The Vote Collector of the Election shall be the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy, unless the Office which the Election is seeking to fill is that of the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy, in which case the Vote Collector shall be the Speaker; and * No Player may be Nominated who, at the time of attempted Nomination, would not be permitted to hold the Office which the Election is seeking to fill. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4142 (Murphy), 15 April 2001 text: When the Rules require that an Election be conducted to fill an Office, that Election shall be conducted in accordance with the usual Rules for Elections, with the following exceptions: * The Vote Collector of the Election shall be the Assistant Director of Personnel, unless the Office which the Election is seeking to fill is that of the Assistant Director of Personnel, in which case the Vote Collector shall be the Speaker; and * No Player may be Nominated who, at the time of attempted Nomination, would not be permitted to hold the Office which the Election is seeking to fill. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4509 (Murphy), 10 July 2003 text: When the Rules require that an Election be conducted to fill an Office, that Election shall be conducted in accordance with the usual Rules for Elections, with the following exceptions: * The Vote Collector is the Assistant Director of Personnel at the time the Election begins, unless the Election seeks to fill the Office of Assistant Director of Personnel, in which case the Vote Collector is the Speaker at the time the Election begins. * No Player may be Nominated who, at the time of attempted Nomination, would not be permitted to hold the Office which the Election is seeking to fill. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4650 (Murphy), 22 March 2005 text: When the Rules require that an Election be conducted to fill an Office, that Election shall be conducted in accordance with the usual Rules for Elections, with the following exceptions: * The Vote Collector is the Assistant Director of Personnel at the time the Election begins, unless the Election seeks to fill the Office of Assistant Director of Personnel, in which case the Vote Collector is the Speaker at the time the Election begins. * No Player may be Nominated who, at the time of attempted Nomination, would not be permitted to hold the Office which the Election is seeking to fill. * If the Vote Collector fails to meet an ASAP requirement to publish a list of Candidates, or the identity of the winning Candidate, then the Election/Referendum does not fail, but becomes Stale. If a new Election for the same Office is initiated, then the stale Election/Referendum fails. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4768 (root), 25 May 2005 text: When the Rules require that an Election be conducted to fill an Office, that Election shall be conducted in accordance with the usual Rules for Elections, with the following exceptions: * The Vote Collector is the Associate Director of Personnel at the time the Election begins, unless the Election seeks to fill the Office of Associate Director of Personnel, in which case the Vote Collector is the Speaker at the time the Election begins. * No Player may be Nominated who, at the time of attempted Nomination, would not be permitted to hold the Office which the Election is seeking to fill. * If the Vote Collector fails to meet an ASAP requirement to publish a list of Candidates, or the identity of the winning Candidate, then the Election/Referendum does not fail, but becomes Stale. If a new Election for the same Office is initiated, then the stale Election/Referendum fails. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: When the rules require that an election be held to fill an office, that election shall be conducted in accordance with the usual rules for elections, with the following exceptions: (a) If the election would be held to fill the office of Associate Director of Personnel, then the election shall be initiated by the Speaker; otherwise, it shall be initiated by the Associate Director of Personnel. (b) A player who is not eligible to hold the office for which the election is being held is not a prospective. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1558 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1559 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1559 by Proposal 2466, 6 February 1996 text: If at any time any Treasury, which is not a Player's or the Bank's, contains a number of Win Tokens greater than zero, all such Win Tokens are immediately transferred to the Bank. This transfer is Class I. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2512, 3 March 1996 text: Only those Treasuries which are the personal Treasuries of Players may contain Win Tokens. This rule takes precedence over all rules which would otherwise allow this restriction to be contravened. history: Null-Amended(2) by Proposal 2537, 13 March 1996 text: Only those Treasuries which are the personal Treasuries of Players may contain Win Tokens. This rule takes precedence over all rules which would otherwise allow this restriction to be contravened. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2592, 5 May 1996 text: Only those Treasuries which are the personal Treasuries of Players may contain Win Tokens. This rule takes precedence over all rules which would otherwise allow this restriction to be contravened. No Player may possess a negative number of Win Tokens. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1560 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1560 by Proposal 2448, 6 February 1996 text: Upon the creation of this Rule, Wes, Vanyel, Steve and Kelly all simultaneously Win the Game, (that is, they all Win exactly one Game and no more than one Game, and they all Win the same Game), with Kelly becoming the Speaker-Elect. This Rules takes precedence over any other Rule for determining the identity of the Speaker-Elect when a Game has been Won. For the purposes of Rule 112, Wes, Vanyel, Steve and Kelly all count as having fulfilled a Win condition defined by this Rule. Furthermore, 2 Extra Votes are transferred from the Bank to the Treasury of each Player, excepting Wes, Vanyel, Steve and Kelly, who cast exactly one vote FOR and no votes AGAINST the Proposal whose adoption resulted in the creation of this Rule. Furthermore, 4 Extra Votes are transferred from the Bank to the Treasury of each Player, excepting Wes, Vanyel, Steve and Kelly, who cast exactly 2 votes FOR and no votes AGAINST the Proposal whose adoption resulted in the creation of this Rule. All transfers of Extra Votes occurring as a result of this Rule, including transfers of Extra Votes occurring as the result of the awarding of Champion's Rewards to Wes, Vanyel, Steve and Kelly, are to be detected and reported by the Assessor. This Rule repeals itself at 00:00:00 GMT, April 1, 1996. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1561 history: Enacted as MI=2 Rule 1561 by Proposal 2449, 6 February 1996 text: Proposals which contain clauses awarding, penalizing, or otherwise changing the Currency holdings of the Treasury of any Voting Entity based on the vote cast by that Entity on that Proposal shall not take effect even if adopted, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2627, 4 July 1996 text: Any Proposal which offers a bribe to a Player or Players to vote either FOR or AGAINST a Proposal (either itself or another Proposal) shall be completely without effect, even if it is adopted, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4640 (Quazie), 6 March 2005 text: Any Proposal which offers a bribe to a Player or Players to vote either FOR or AGAINST a Proposal (either itself or another Proposal) shall be completely without effect, even if it is adopted, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Proposing a card with an element of Grafty is not considered bribery. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1561 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1562 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1562 by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall dismiss without prejudice any CFJ made by a Player who has previously made five or more CFJs during that Nomic Week. Such a CFJ is called an "excess CFJ". The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 10 Marks. If the Clerk of the Courts fails to dismiss an excess CFJ, and instead assigns it to a Judge, then the CFJ shall not be dismissed for being an excess CFJ and shall be Judged (or dismissed) exactly as any other CFJ. Failing to dismiss an excess CFJ is an Infraction, to be reported by the Justiciar, and bearing a penalty of 10 Marks and two Blots. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2604, 26 May 1996 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall dismiss without prejudice any CFJ made by a Player who has previously made five or more CFJs during that Nomic Week. Such a CFJ is called an "excess CFJ". The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Mil. If the Clerk of the Courts fails to dismiss an excess CFJ, and instead assigns it to a Judge, then the CFJ shall not be dismissed for being an excess CFJ and shall be Judged (or dismissed) exactly as any other CFJ. Failing to dismiss an excess CFJ is an Infraction, to be reported by the Justiciar, and bearing a penalty of 2 Mil and two Blots. history: Amended(2) Cosmetically by Proposal 2830 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall dismiss without prejudice any CFJ made by a Player who has previously made five or more CFJs during that Nomic Week. Such a CFJ is called an "excess CFJ". The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits the Infraction of Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Mil. If the Clerk of the Courts fails to dismiss an excess CFJ, and instead assigns it to a Judge, then the CFJ shall not be dismissed for being an excess CFJ and shall be Judged (or dismissed) exactly as any other CFJ. Failing to dismiss an excess CFJ is the Infraction of Allowing Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Justiciar, and bearing a penalty of 2 Mil and two Blots. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall dismiss without prejudice any CFJ made by a Player who has previously made five or more CFJs during that Nomic Week. Such a CFJ is called an "excess CFJ". The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits the Infraction of Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 0.5 VT. If the Clerk of the Courts fails to dismiss an excess CFJ, and instead assigns it to a Judge, then the CFJ shall not be dismissed for being an excess CFJ and shall be Judged (or dismissed) exactly as any other CFJ. Failing to dismiss an excess CFJ is the Infraction of Allowing Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Justiciar, and bearing a penalty of 0.5 VT and two Blots. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3839 (Murphy), 8 March 1999 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall dismiss without prejudice any CFJ made by a person who has previously made five or more CFJs during that Nomic Week. Such a CFJ is called an "excess CFJ". A Player who submits an excess CFJ commits the Infraction of Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 0.5 VT. If the Clerk of the Courts fails to dismiss an excess CFJ, and instead assigns it to a Judge, then the CFJ shall not be dismissed for being an excess CFJ and shall be Judged (or dismissed) exactly as any other CFJ. Failing to dismiss an excess CFJ is the Infraction of Allowing Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Justiciar, and bearing a penalty of 0.5 VT and two Blots. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall dismiss without prejudice any CFJ made by a person who has previously made five or more CFJs during that Nomic Week. Such a CFJ is called an "excess CFJ". A Player who submits an excess CFJ commits the Class 1 Infraction of Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. If the Clerk of the Courts fails to dismiss an excess CFJ, and instead assigns it to a Judge, then the CFJ shall not be dismissed for being an excess CFJ and shall be Judged (or dismissed) exactly as any other CFJ. Failing to dismiss an excess CFJ is the Class 2 Infraction of Allowing Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Justiciar. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: A CFJ made by a person who has previously made five or more CFJs during the same Nomic Week is an Excess CFJ. The Caller of an Excess CFJ commits the Class 1 Infraction of Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk of the Courts shall dismiss all Excess CFJs. If e instead assigns one to a Judge, then the Judge shall Judge it, but the Clerk of the Courts commits the Class 2 Infraction of Allowing Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Justiciar. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: A CFJ made by a person who has previously made five or more CFJs during the same Agoran Week is an Excess CFJ. The Caller of an Excess CFJ commits the Class 1 Infraction of Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk of the Courts shall dismiss all Excess CFJs. If e instead assigns one to a Judge, then the Judge shall Judge it, but the Clerk of the Courts commits the Class 2 Infraction of Allowing Excess CFJing, to be reported by the Justiciar. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1562 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1563 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1564 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1564 by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: The Judgement returned by a Judge shall be subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such an appeal shall be initiated upon the insistence of any three Players. The matter of consideration of such an appeal is whether or not the Judgement is correct. If the Board of Appeals determines that the Judgement was not correct, it shall then order one of the following: * that the Judgement be reversed, so that the CFJ becomes Judged according to the majority opinion of the Board of Appeals; or * that the Judgement be set aside, and further that the CFJ be dismissed; or * that the Judgement be set aside, and a new Judge selected to Judge it. If a majority of the Justices agree that the Judgement was in error, but cannot agree as to which of the above actions should be taken, the Judgement shall be set aside and a new Judge selected to Judge it. For the purpose of this Rule, insistence of a Player consists of that Player posting a message to the Public Forum stating that e insists. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 19 May 1996 text: The Judgement returned by a Judge shall be subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such an appeal shall be initiated upon the insistence of any three Players. The matter of consideration of such an appeal is whether or not the Judgement is correct. If the Board of Appeals determines that the Judgement was not correct, it shall then order one of the following: * that the Judgement be reversed, so that the CFJ becomes Judged according to the majority opinion of the Board of Appeals; or * that the Judgement be set aside, and further that the CFJ be dismissed; or * that the Judgement be set aside, and a new Judge selected to Judge it. If a majority of the Justices agree that the Judgement was in error, but cannot agree as to which of the above actions should be taken, the Judgement shall be set aside and a new Judge selected to Judge it. For the purpose of this Rule, insistence of a Player consists of that Player posting a message to the Public Forum stating that e insists. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2685, 3 October 1996 text: Specific elements of a Judge's decision are subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such elements are limited to those specified in this Rule. In each case, the insistence of any three Players, posted in the Public Forum, shall initiate a particular appeal. The insistence of a single Player shall initiate an appeal if the appeal is of an Injunction which names the insisting Player, or if the appeal is of a Judgment that found a Crime had been committed by the insisting Player. The elements that are permitted to be appealed, what the Board is to consider, and what results from its findings, are as follows: i) The Judgement of the CFJ: The Board considers the correctness of the Judgment. If the Board finds it incorrect, the Board shall order one of the following: 1) Reversal of the Judgement, so the CFJ becomes Judged in accord with the majority of the Board. 2) The Judgement be set aside and the CFJ dismissed. 3) The Judgement be set aside and a new Judge selected to Judge the CFJ. Should the Judgement be found incorrect, and the Board cannot agree on action to be taken, this shall be the action taken. ii) The Dismissal of a CFJ: The Board considers the justification for the dismissal. If the Board finds it unjustified, the dismissal is set aside and the Judge forfeits eir Judicial Salary. iii) An Injunction issued with a Judgement: The Board considers the legality of the Injunction. If the Board finds that it was not made in accord with the Rules, the Injunction is set aside and the Judge is guilty of an Infraction whose penalty is 2 Blots detected and reported by the CotC. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by Proposal 2830 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: Specific elements of a Judge's decision are subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such elements are limited to those specified in this Rule. In each case, the insistence of any three Players, posted in the Public Forum, shall initiate a particular appeal. The insistence of a single Player shall initiate an appeal if the appeal is of an Injunction which names the insisting Player, or if the appeal is of a Judgment that found a Crime had been committed by the insisting Player. The elements that are permitted to be appealed, what the Board is to consider, and what results from its findings, are as follows: i) The Judgement of the CFJ: The Board considers the correctness of the Judgment. If the Board finds it incorrect, the Board shall order one of the following: 1) Reversal of the Judgement, so the CFJ becomes Judged in accord with the majority of the Board. 2) The Judgement be set aside and the CFJ dismissed. 3) The Judgement be set aside and a new Judge selected to Judge the CFJ. Should the Judgement be found incorrect, and the Board cannot agree on action to be taken, this shall be the action taken. ii) The Dismissal of a CFJ: The Board considers the justification for the dismissal. If the Board finds it unjustified, the dismissal is set aside and the Judge forfeits eir Judicial Salary. iii) An Injunction issued with a Judgement: The Board considers the legality of the Injunction. If the Board finds that it was not made in accord with the Rules, the Injunction is set aside and the Judge is guilty of the Infraction of Wrongful Injunction whose penalty is 2 Blots detected and reported by the CotC. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3454 (Harlequin), 7 April 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 3455 (Andre), 7 April 1997 text: Specific elements of a Judge's decision are subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such elements are limited to those specified in this Rule. In each case, the insistence of any three Players, posted in the Public Forum, shall initiate a particular appeal. The insistence of a single Player shall initiate an appeal if the appeal is of an Injunction which names the insisting Player, if the appeal is of a Judgment that found a Crime had been committed by the insisting Player, or if the insisting Player is the Judge who made the decision that is appealed. The elements that are permitted to be appealed, what the Board is to consider, and what results from its findings, are as follows: i) The Judgement of the CFJ; ii) The Dismissal of a CFJ; iii) An Injunction issued with a Judgement. The proper procedure for these Appeals is detailed in other rules. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3479 (Andre), 11 May 1997 text: Specific elements of a Judge's decision are subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such elements are limited to those specified in this Rule. In each case, the insistence of any three Players, posted in the Public Forum, shall initiate a particular appeal. The insistence of a single Player shall initiate an appeal if the appeal is of an Injunction which names the insisting Player, if the appeal is of a Judgment that found a Crime had been committed by the insisting Player, or if the insisting Player is the Judge who made the decision that is appealed. The elements that are permitted to be appealed, what the Board is to consider, and what results from its findings, are as follows: i) The Judgement of the CFJ; ii) The Dismissal of a CFJ; iii) An Injunction issued with a Judgement. The proper procedure for these Appeals is detailed in other rules. iv) Not including a specified Injunction with the Judgement: The Board considers both the legality and the appropriateness of issuing the specified Injunction with the Judgement. If the Board finds that the Injunction would have been both legal and appropriate, it issues the Injunction. This Paragraph takes precedence over any Rule that would make such an Injunction illegal, unless it would also make the Injunction illegal had it been added to the original Judgement. history: Amended(7) Cosmetically by Proposal 3489 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: Specific elements of a Judge's decision are subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such elements are limited to those specified in this Rule. In each case, the insistence of any three Players, posted in the Public Forum, shall initiate a particular appeal. The insistence of a single Player shall initiate an appeal if the appeal is of an Injunction which names the insisting Player, if the appeal is of a Judgement that found a Crime had been committed by the insisting Player, or if the insisting Player is the Judge who made the decision that is appealed. The elements that are permitted to be appealed, what the Board is to consider, and what results from its findings, are as follows: i) The Judgement of the CFJ; ii) The Dismissal of a CFJ; iii) An Injunction issued with a Judgement. The proper procedure for these Appeals is detailed in other rules. iv) Not including a specified Injunction with the Judgement: The Board considers both the legality and the appropriateness of issuing the specified Injunction with the Judgement. If the Board finds that the Injunction would have been both legal and appropriate, it issues the Injunction. This Paragraph takes precedence over any Rule that would make such an Injunction illegal, unless it would also make the Injunction illegal had it been added to the original Judgement. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3509 (Harlequin), 16 June 1997 text: Specific elements of a Judge's decision are subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such elements are limited to those specified in this Rule. In each case, the insistence of any three Players, posted in the Public Forum, shall initiate a particular appeal. The insistence of a single Player shall initiate an appeal if the appeal is of an Injunction which names the insisting Player, if the appeal is of a Judgement that found a Crime had been committed by the insisting Player, or if the insisting Player is the Judge who made the decision that is appealed. The elements that are permitted to be appealed, what the Board is to consider, and what results from its findings, are as follows: i) The Judgement of the CFJ; ii) The Dismissal of a CFJ; iii) An Injunction issued with a Judgement. The proper procedure for these Appeals is detailed in other rules. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The Judgement entered in any CFJ by its Judge, the grant or denial of any Motion, and the execution of any Judicial Order are all subject to review on appeal to a Board of Appeal. In addition, a Board of Appeal shall review any claim that a Judge has failed to perform any duty of a Judicial nature which e was required to perform. In all cases, the insistence of any three Players, posted in the Public Forum, is sufficient to initiate the appeal of a particular matter. In the case of the appeal of a Judicial Order, the insistence of any Player bound by the Order is sufficient. In the case of a Judgement which convicts a Player of a Crime, the insistence of the convicted Player is sufficient. In each cases before a Board of Appeal, it shall collectively decide whether to affirm or to reverse the matter under appeal, and shall execute whatever Appellate Orders are necessary to enforce its determination. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: The Judgement entered in any CFJ by its Judge, the grant or denial of any Motion, and the execution of any Judicial Order are all subject to review on appeal to a Board of Appeal. In addition, a Board of Appeal shall review any claim that a Judge has failed to perform any duty of a Judicial nature which e was required to perform. In all cases, the public insistence of any three Players is sufficient to initiate the appeal of a particular matter. In the case of the appeal of a Judicial Order, the insistence of any Player bound by the Order is sufficient. In the case of a Judgement which convicts a Player of a Crime, the insistence of the convicted Player is sufficient. In each cases before a Board of Appeal, it shall collectively decide whether to affirm or to reverse the matter under appeal, and shall execute whatever Appellate Orders are necessary to enforce its determination. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: The following are subject to Appeal: a) The Judgement of a Trial Judge. b) The grant or denial of a Motion. c) The execution of a Judicial Order. d) A claim that a Trial Judge has failed to perform a required judicial duty. A subject is Appealed when any of the following occurs: i) Three Players Appeal it. ii) A Player Appeals a Judicial Order binding em. iii) A Player Appeals a Trial Judgement convicting em of a Crime. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: The following are subject to Appeal: a) The Judgement of a Trial Judge. b) The grant or denial of a Motion. c) The execution of a Judicial or Sentencing Order. d) A claim that a Trial Judge has failed to perform a required judicial duty. A subject is Appealed when any of the following occurs: i) Three Players Appeal it. ii) A Player Appeals a Judicial or Sentencing Order binding em. iii) A Player Appeals a Trial Judgement convicting em of a Crime. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The following are subject to Appeal: a) The Judgement of a Trial Judge. b) The grant or denial of a Motion. c) The execution of a Judicial or Sentencing Order. d) A claim that a Trial Judge has failed to perform a required judicial duty. A subject is Appealed when any of the following occurs: i) Three Players Appeal it. ii) A Player Appeals a Judicial or Sentencing Order binding em. iii) A Player Appeals a Trial Judgement convicting em of a Crime. A single subject (e.g. a specific judgement, motion, or order) may only be appealed once. As soon as possible after an Appeal is initiated, or a Player becomes or ceases to be an Appellate judge, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce the event. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4937 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: The following are subject to Appeal: a) The Judgement of a Trial Judge. b) The grant or denial of a Motion. c) The execution of a Judicial or Sentencing Order. d) A claim that a Trial Judge has failed to perform a required judicial duty. A subject is Appealed when any of the following occurs: i) Three Players Appeal it. ii) A Player Appeals a Judicial or Sentencing Order binding em. iii) A Player Appeals a Trial Judgement convicting em of a Crime. A single subject (e.g. a specific judgement, motion, or order) may only be appealed once. As soon as possible after an Appeal is initiated, or a Player becomes or ceases to be an Appellate judge, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce the event. An Appeal may be accompanied by Arguments, Evidence, or other related material; the Board of Appeals is encouraged, but not required, to take notice of these things. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5017 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 text: The following are subject to Appeal: a) The Judgement of a Trial Judge. b) The grant or denial of a Motion. c) The execution of a Judicial Order. d) A claim that a Trial Judge has failed to perform a required judicial duty. A subject is Appealed when any of the following occurs: i) Three Players Appeal it. ii) A Player Appeals a Judicial Order binding em. iii) A Player Appeals a Trial Judgement convicting em of a Crime. A single subject (e.g. a specific judgement, motion, or order) may only be appealed once. As soon as possible after an Appeal is initiated, or a Player becomes or ceases to be an Appellate judge, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce the event. An Appeal may be accompanied by Arguments, Evidence, or other related material; the Board of Appeals is encouraged, but not required, to take notice of these things. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1564 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1565 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1565 by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: A Judge dismisses a CFJ by sending a message to the Clerk of the Courts stating that e dismisses the CFJ, and detailing the reason for dismissal. A dismissal returned after the end of the permitted deliberation period, or by a Player ineligible to be Judge of that CFJ, is not legal and shall not be accepted by the Clerk. A CFJ is dismissed when a legal dismissal has been received by the Clerk; however, if the dismissal is subsequently set aside, then that CFJ is no longer dismissed and shall again be considered. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal dismissal, the Clerk shall distribute the notice of dismissal and the Judge's reason for dismissal to the Public Forum. A Judge who dismisses a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Points. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: A Judge dismisses a CFJ by sending a message to the Clerk of the Courts stating that e dismisses the CFJ, and detailing the reason for dismissal. A dismissal returned after the end of the permitted deliberation period, or by a Player ineligible to be Judge of that CFJ, is not legal and shall not be accepted by the Clerk. A CFJ is dismissed when a legal dismissal has been received by the Clerk; however, if the dismissal is subsequently set aside, then that CFJ is no longer dismissed and shall again be considered. As soon as possible after the receipt of a legal dismissal, the Clerk shall distribute the notice of dismissal and the Judge's reason for dismissal to the Public Forum. A Judge who dismisses a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mils. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2683, 3 October 1996 text: A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Statement. ii) Its Statement can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Statement does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Statement fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Statement. The Judge does this by notifying the CotC of the CFJ's dismissal, and the reasons e is doing so. Dismissals are only legal when made for the reasons listed in this Rule, and when only when issued by the Judge within the permitted deliberation period. Dismissal occurs when the CotC is notified of a legal dismissal. As soon as possible after being notified of a legal dismissal, the CotC must post to the Public Forum a notice of the dismissal and the Judge's reasons for doing so. If the dismissal, upon appeal, is subsequently set aside, then that CFJ is no longer dismissed. It shall be considered again and can not again be legally dismissed for the same reasons. A Judge who dismisses a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mils. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Statement. ii) Its Statement can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Statement does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Statement fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Statement. The Judge does this by notifying the CotC of the CFJ's dismissal, and the reasons e is doing so. Dismissals are only legal when made for the reasons listed in this Rule, and when only when issued by the Judge within the permitted deliberation period. Dismissal occurs when the CotC is notified of a legal dismissal. As soon as possible after being notified of a legal dismissal, the CotC must post to the Public Forum a notice of the dismissal and the Judge's reasons for doing so. If the dismissal, upon appeal, is subsequently set aside, then that CFJ is no longer dismissed. It shall be considered again and can not again be legally dismissed for the same reasons. A Judge who dismisses a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 3 Mil. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3563 (General Chaos), 24 October 1997 text: A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Statement. ii) Its Statement can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Statement does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Statement fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Statement. The Judge does this by notifying the CotC of the CFJ's dismissal, and the reasons e is doing so. Dismissals are only legal when made for the reasons listed in this Rule, and when only when issued by the Judge within the permitted deliberation period. Dismissal occurs when the CotC is notified of a legal dismissal. As soon as possible after being notified of a legal dismissal, the CotC must post to the Public Forum a notice of the dismissal and the Judge's reasons for doing so. If the dismissal, upon appeal, is subsequently set aside, then that CFJ is no longer dismissed. It shall be considered again and can not again be legally dismissed for the same reasons. A Judge who dismisses a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT. history: Amended(5) Cosmetically by Proposal 3574 (Kolja A.), 30 October 1997 text: A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Statement. ii) Its Statement can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Statement does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Statement fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Statement. The Judge does this by notifying the CotC of the CFJ's dismissal, and the reasons e is doing so. Dismissals are only legal when made for the reasons listed in this Rule, and only when issued by the Judge within the permitted deliberation period. Dismissal occurs when the CotC is notified of a legal dismissal. As soon as possible after being notified of a legal dismissal, the CotC must post to the Public Forum a notice of the dismissal and the Judge's reasons for doing so. If the dismissal, upon appeal, is subsequently set aside, then that CFJ is no longer dismissed. It shall be considered again and can not again be legally dismissed for the same reasons. A Judge who dismisses a CFJ shall receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3645 (elJefe), 29 December 1997 text: A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Statement. ii) Its Statement can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Statement does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Statement fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Statement. The Judge does this by notifying the CotC of the CFJ's dismissal, and the reasons e is doing so. Dismissals are only legal when made for the reasons listed in this Rule. Dismissal occurs when the CotC is notified of a legal dismissal. As soon as possible after being notified of a legal dismissal, the CotC must post to the Public Forum a notice of the dismissal and the Judge's reasons for doing so. If the dismissal, upon appeal, is subsequently set aside, then that CFJ is no longer dismissed. It shall be considered again and can not again be legally dismissed for the same reasons. A Judge who dismisses a CFJ before the end of the assigned deliberation period shall receive a Judicial Salary of 1 VT. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Statement. ii) Its Statement can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Statement does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Statement fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Statement. The Judge does this by notifying the CotC of the CFJ's dismissal, and the reasons e is doing so. Dismissals are only legal when made for the reasons listed in this Rule. Dismissal occurs when the CotC is notified of a legal dismissal. As soon as possible after being notified of a legal dismissal, the CotC must post to the Public Forum a notice of the dismissal and the Judge's reasons for doing so. If the dismissal, upon appeal, is subsequently set aside, then that CFJ is no longer dismissed. It shall be considered again and can not again be legally dismissed for the same reasons. A Judge who dismisses a CFJ before the end of the assigned deliberation period shall receive a Judicial Salary of 20 Stems. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4140 (Wes), 15 April 2001 text: A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Statement. ii) Its Statement can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Statement does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Statement fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Statement. The Judge does this by notifying the CotC of the CFJ's dismissal, and the reasons e is doing so. Dismissals are only legal when made for the reasons listed in this Rule. Dismissal occurs when the CotC is notified of a legal dismissal. As soon as possible after being notified of a legal dismissal, the CotC must post to the Public Forum a notice of the dismissal and the Judge's reasons for doing so. If the dismissal, upon appeal, is subsequently set aside, then that CFJ is no longer dismissed. It shall be considered again and can not again be legally dismissed for the same reasons. A Judge who dismisses a CFJ before the end of the assigned deliberation period shall receive a Judicial Salary. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Statement. ii) Its Statement can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Statement does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Statement fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Statement. The Judge does this by notifying the CotC of the CFJ's dismissal, and the reasons e is doing so. Dismissals are only legal when made for the reasons listed in this Rule. Dismissal occurs when the CotC is notified of a legal dismissal. As soon as possible after being notified of a legal dismissal, the CotC must publicly post a notice of the dismissal and the Judge's reasons for doing so. If the dismissal, upon appeal, is subsequently set aside, then that CFJ is no longer dismissed. It shall be considered again and can not again be legally dismissed for the same reasons. A Judge who dismisses a CFJ before the end of the assigned deliberation period shall receive a Judicial Salary. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: A Judgement of DISMISSED should be delivered if and only if one or more of the following is true: i) The CFJ does not contain a single clearly-identified Statement. ii) After a reasonable effort to obtain all relevant information, the Judge can neither determine the Statement to be true nor determine it to be false. iii) The Statement does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) The CFJ lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1565 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1566 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1566 by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: The act of dismissing a CFJ shall be subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such an appeal shall be initiated upon the insistence of any three Players. The matter of consideration of such an appeal is whether or not the dismissal was justified. If the Appeal determines that the dismissal was not justified, then the dismissal shall be set aside. If this happens, the Judge who dismissed the CFJ forfeits eir judicial Salary. For the purpose of this Rule, insistence of a Player consists of that Player posting a message to the Public Forum stating that e insists. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1567 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1568 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1568 by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: Any Player who goes on Hold while selected as the Judge of one or more CFJs commits an Infraction for each such CFJ. This Infraction is to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts, and has a penalty of two Points per occurrence. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: Any Player who goes on Hold while selected as the Judge of one or more CFJs commits an Infraction for each such CFJ. This Infraction is to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts, and has a penalty of two Mils per occurrence. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: Any Player who goes on Hold while selected as the Judge of one or more CFJs commits an Infraction for each such CFJ. This Infraction is to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts, and has a penalty of two Mil per occurrence. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by Proposal 2830 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: Any Player who goes on Hold while selected as the Judge of one or more CFJs commits the Infraction of Judge Inactivity. This Infraction is to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts, and has a penalty of two Mil times the number of CFJs for which the Player was selected as Judge when e went On Hold. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: Any Player who goes on Hold while selected as the Judge of one or more CFJs commits the Infraction of Judge Inactivity. This Infraction is to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts, and has a penalty of 0.5 VT times the number of CFJs for which the Player was selected as Judge when e went On Hold. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: Any Player who goes on Hold while selected as the Judge of one or more CFJs commits the Infraction of Judge Inactivity. This Infraction is to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts, and has a penalty of 0.1 Indulgences times the number of CFJs for which the Player was selected as Judge when e went On Hold. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: A player who ceases to be active while selected as the judge of one or more calls for judgement (CFJs) commits the infraction of Judge Inactivity. This infraction is to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts, and has a penalty of 0.1 Indulgences for each CFJs for which the player was selected as judge when e ceased to be active. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: A player who ceases to be active while selected as the judge of one or more calls for judgement (CFJs) commits the infraction of Judge Inactivity. This infraction is to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts, and has a Class of 0.1 times the number of CFJs for which the player was selected as judge when e ceased to be active. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1568 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1569 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1569 by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: The Judge of a CFJ shall dismiss the CFJ when one (or more) of the following applies to that CFJ: * The CFJ contains no clearly-identifiable Statement to be Judged; * The CFJ's Statement does not logically admit to being either TRUE or FALSE; * The CFJ's Statement does not relate to a matter in which the Rules have bearing or concern; * The CFJ's Statement fails to comply with any other Rules pertaining to legal Statements in Calls for Judgement; or * The CFJ lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. In addition, the Judge is permitted to dismiss the CFJ if e lacks sufficient information to make a determination of TRUE or FALSE. The Judge is required to make a reasonable effort to obtain all information necessary to make a decision before dismissing a CFJ for this reason. No CFJ shall be dismissed for any reason other than those specified in this or other Rules. If a CFJ is dismissed for a given reason, but upon Appeal that dismissal is set aside, then that CFJ shall not again be dismissed for that same reason. A Judge who does so commits an Infraction, the penalty for which is 3 Blots, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1570 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1570 by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall make an announcement in the Public Forum as soon as possible after an Appeal has been initiated, including in eir announcement the matter of consideration of the Appeal and the identity of the Justices selected to serve on the Board of Appeals and which (if any) of these Players are ineligible to fill the positions to which they have been assigned. The Clerk shall also make an announcement to the Public Forum as soon as possible after any change in the identity of the Justices that takes place after the Board has been constituted. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: As soon as possible after an Appeal is initiated, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce the subject of the Appeal. As soon as possible after a Player becomes an Appelate Judge or ceases to be an Appelate Judge, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce the change. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 text: As soon as possible after an Appeal is initiated, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce the subject of the Appeal. As soon as possible after a Player becomes an Appellate Judge or ceases to be an Appellate Judge, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce the change. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1570 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1571 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1571 by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: An Injunction has legal force at the moment the Injunction is published to the Public Forum, unless one of the following occurs within 72 hours of this publication: 1) An appeal of the Judgement the Injunction accompanies is initiated; or 2) An appeal challenging the validity of the Injunction is initiated. If either of these occurs, the Injunction instead takes legal effect upon the publication of the decision(s) of the Board(s) of Appeals which hears the appeal(s), and then only if the Board(s) sustains all matters which are appealed with respect to that CFJ. If either of the above occurs but not within 72 hours of the publication of the Injunction, the Injunction remains in force during the Appeal(s). If a Judgement which is accompanied by an Injunction is appealed and the Judgement is overturned upon Appeal, then the Injunction is set aside as of the time of the publication of the determination of the Appeals Board. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2684, 3 October 1996 text: A legally made Injunction takes effect 72 hours from its publication in the Public Forum. If, before it takes effect, an appeal(s) is made either challenging its validity, or appealing the Judgement it accompanies, its effect is deferred until the resolution of the appeal(s). If an appeal challenging an Injunction's validity is found to uphold the Injunction; and if the Judgement accompanying the Injunction has either not been appealed, or has been upheld upon appeal; and the Injunction has yet to have effect; then the Injunction takes effect immediately upon resolution of the appeal. If an appeal challenging the Judgement an Injunction accompanies is found to uphold the Judgement; and if the validity of the Injunction has not been appealed, or has been upheld upon appeal; and the Injunction has yet to have effect; then the Injunction takes effect immediately upon resolution of the appeal. If an appeal fails to uphold the validity of an Injunction, or the Judgement it accompanies, the Injunction is set aside immediately upon resolution of that appeal. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3509 (Harlequin), 16 June 1997 text: A legally made Injunction takes effect 72 hours from its publication by the CotC in the Public Forum. If, before it takes effect, either the Injunction or the Judgement it accompanies is appealed, its effect is deferred until the resolution of the appeal(s). If an appeal involving an Injunction which has not taken effect, and which was originally attached to a Judgement, or the Judgement to which it is attached resolves, and neither the Injunction nor the Judgement has been overturned, and no other appeal is pending on the Injunction or the Judgement, the Injunction takes effect immediately upon resolution of the appeal. If an appeal fails to uphold an Injunction, or the Judgement it accompanies, the Injunction is set aside immediately upon resolution of that appeal. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1571 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1572 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1572 by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: The act of making an Injunction shall be subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such an appeal shall be initiated upon the insistence of any three Players, or upon the insistence of any single Player who is named in the Injunction. The matter of consideration of such an appeal is whether or not the Injunction has been made in accordance with the Rules. If the Appeal determines that the Injunction was not made in accordance with the Rules, then the Injunction shall be set aside, and the Judge who made the Injunction shall be penalized for an Infraction to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of both 1 Blot and 5 Points. For the purpose of this Rule, insistence of a Player consists of that Player posting a message to the Public Forum stating that e insists. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: The act of making an Injunction shall be subject to review by the Board of Appeals. Such an appeal shall be initiated upon the insistence of any three Players, or upon the insistence of any single Player who is named in the Injunction. The matter of consideration of such an appeal is whether or not the Injunction has been made in accordance with the Rules. If the Appeal determines that the Injunction was not made in accordance with the Rules, then the Injunction shall be set aside, and the Judge who made the Injunction shall be penalized for an Infraction to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of both 1 Blot and 5 Mils. For the purpose of this Rule, insistence of a Player consists of that Player posting a message to the Public Forum stating that e insists. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1573 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1573 by Proposal 2457, 16 February 1996 text: If an Injunction requires a Player to perform an Action, that Player must do so within 72 hours of when that Injunction takes effect, unless the Injunction is set aside prior to that time. A Player who fails to perform an Action required by an Injunction within 72 hours as required by this paragraph commits a Class C Crime. If an Injunction requires a Player to refrain from performing an Action, then that Player is forbidden from performing that action while the Injunction is in legal force. If the Player does perform the forbidden action, e commits a Class C Crime upon each such instance of performing the forbidden action. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules pertaining to Injunctions. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2684, 3 October 1996 text: A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Injunction within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Injunction is set aside prior to that time. Failure to do so is a Class C Crime. A Player is required to refrain from all actions prohibited eim by a legal Injunction, for the duration that it is in effect. Each performance of such an action is a Class C Crime. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules pertaining to Injunctions. history: Amended(2) Cosmetically by Proposal 2831 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Injunction within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Injunction is set aside prior to that time. Failure to do so is the Crime of Violating an Injunction by Omission, a Class C Crime. A Player is required to refrain from all actions prohibited eim by a legal Injunction, for the duration that it is in effect. Each performance of such an action is the Crime of Violating an Injunction by Commission, a Class C Crime. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules pertaining to Injunctions. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: A Player is required to perform all actions required of em by a legal Injunction within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Injunction is set aside prior to that time. Failure to do so is the Crime of Violating an Injunction by Omission, a Class C Crime. A Player is required to refrain from all actions prohibited em by a legal Injunction, for the duration that it is in effect. Each performance of such an action is the Crime of Violating an Injunction by Commission, a Class C Crime. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules pertaining to Injunctions. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1573 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1574 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1574 by Proposal 2464, 16 February 1996 text: There shall be a class of legal Referenda known as Referenda to Install. Such a Referendum, if it takes effect, has the effect of installing the named player in the stated position. Any Player is permitted to call such a Referendum at any time, by posting such to the Public Forum and meeting all other requirements listed in this Rule. A Referendum to Install must name exactly one Player to fill the stated position, and the position to be filled. The position named in such a Referendum must be one of the following: * the position of Speaker * the Office of Promotor * the Office of Assessor * the Office of Clerk of the Courts * the Office of Registrar. For such a Referendum the default procedure for Referenda is modified as follows: the Vote Collector is the Player who called for the Referendum. Every Player is a Voting Entity. The Adoption Ratio of a Referendum to Install is 2. Quorum for such a Referendum is 30% of all Players. A Referendum to Install takes effect if and only if all of the following conditions are true: * the Referendum passes * all requirements for such a Referendum are met * the Player named in the Referendum has, during the Duration of Voting, posted eir consent to fill the position named in the Referendum. When a Referendum to Install takes effect, the Player named therein immediately fills the position named therein. Any other Player holding that position simultaneously ceases to hold it. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1575 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1575 by Proposal 2469, 16 February 1996 text: A CFJ alleging that a Player has violated a Rule or committed a Crime shall not be judged TRUE unless the evidence is sufficient to be certain of that Judgement beyond reasonable doubt. In all other CFJs, the Judgement shall be consistent with the preponderance of the evidence at hand. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3603 (General Chaos), 9 December 1997 text: A CFJ alleging that a Player has violated a Rule or committed a Crime shall not be judged TRUE unless the evidence is sufficient to be certain of that Judgement beyond reasonable doubt. In all other CFJs, the Judgement shall be consistent with the preponderance of the evidence at hand. Furthermore, it is a defense to any accusation of a Crime that the Player reasonably believed that eir actions were not a Crime at the time e performed them, or that e reasonably did not know that e was required to perform an action, when such nonperformance is defined as a Crime. No Player shall be convicted of a Crime if this defense applies. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3653 (General Chaos), 1 January 1998 text: A CFJ alleging that a Player has violated a Rule or committed a Crime shall not be judged TRUE unless the evidence is sufficient to be certain of that Judgement beyond reasonable doubt. In all other CFJs, the Judgement shall be consistent with the preponderance of the evidence at hand. Furthermore, it is a defense to any accusation of a Crime that the Player reasonably believed that eir actions were not a Crime at the time e performed them, or that e reasonably did not know that e was required to perform an action, when such nonperformance is defined as a Crime. No Player shall be convicted of a Crime if this defense applies. Furthermore, it is a defense to any accusation of a Crime that the Player reasonably believed that eir actions were not a Crime at the time e performed them, or that e reasonably did not know that e was required to perform an action, when such nonperformance is defined as a Crime. No Player shall be convicted of a Crime if this defense applies. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: A CFJ alleging that a Player has violated a Rule or committed a Crime shall not be judged TRUE unless the evidence is sufficient to be certain of that Judgement beyond reasonable doubt. In all other CFJs, the Judgement shall be consistent with the preponderance of the evidence at hand. Furthermore, it is a defense to any accusation of a Crime that the Player reasonably believed that eir actions were not a Crime at the time e performed them, or that e reasonably did not know that e was required to perform an action, when such nonperformance is defined as a Crime. No Player shall be convicted of a Crime if this defense applies. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3968 (Harvel), 4 February 2000 text: A CFJ alleging that a Player has violated a Rule or committed a Crime shall not be judged TRUE unless the evidence is sufficient to be certain of that Judgement beyond reasonable doubt. In all other CFJs, the Judgement shall be consistent with the preponderance of the evidence at hand. Furthermore, it is a defense to any accusation of a Crime that the Player reasonably believed that eir actions were not a Crime at the time e performed them, or that e reasonably did not know that e was required to perform an action, when such nonperformance is defined as a Crime. A Player shall not be convicted of a Crime if this defense applies. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: Unless otherwise specified, all Judgements shall be consistent with the preponderance of the evidence. A Judge shall not find that a Player has failed to perform a duty unless the preponderance of evidence provided by the Caller supports the claim. A Judge shall not find that a Player has violated a Rule or committed a Crime unless the evidence provided by the Caller places its certainty beyond reasonable doubt. Furthermore, a Judge shall not find that a Player committed a Crime if that Player reasonably believed that eir action or inaction was not a Crime at the time it occurred. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Unless otherwise specified, all Judgements shall be consistent with the preponderance of the evidence. A defendant may not be assessed punitive damages for Rules Violations any worse than a formal apology, unless a Judge finds that evidence for the violation is beyond a reasonable doubt. The published Report of an Officer constitutes prima facie evidence of the truth of those matters reported therein which that Officer is required by law to report. This presumption may be set aside only by clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1575 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1576 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1576 by Proposal 2470, 16 February 1996 text: Each Currency shall have a name, which must be distinct from the name of every other Currency. Any attempt to create a Currency with the same name as an already existing Currency fails. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1577 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1577 by Proposal 2470, 16 February 1996 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Minimum Unit Quantity (MUQ). This quantity is the smallest amount of that Currency which is permitted to be transferred. All transfers, holdings, and calculations involving a given Currency shall be rounded off to the nearest multiple of its MUQ. The MUQ of a given Currency is 1 if no other specification exists. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 24 March 1996 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Minimum Unit Quantity (MUQ). This quantity is the smallest amount of that Currency which is permitted to be transferred. All transfers, holdings, and calculations involving a given Currency shall be rounded off to the nearest multiple of its MUQ. The MUQ of a given Currency is 1 if no other specification exists. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2716, 23 October 1996 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Minimum Unit Quantity (MUQ). This quantity is the smallest amount of that Currency which is permitted to be transferred. All transfers and holdings of a Currency shall be rounded off to the nearest multiple of its MUQ. The MUQ of a given Currency is 1 if no other specification exists. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1578 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1578 by Proposal 2470, 16 February 1996 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Recordkeepor, which must be a Player. The Recordkeepor of a Currency is required to maintain a record of the amounts of that Currency held in the various Treasuries which exist. If the designated Recordkeepor of a Currency ceases to be a Player, the Banker (or, in the absence of a Banker, the Speaker) shall fulfill that responsibilty until a new Recordkeepor is selected according to whatever procedure applies. If there is no procedure defined for selecting a new Recordkeepor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed and the Currency ceases to exist. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2571, 12 April 1996 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Recordkeepor, which must be a Player. The Recordkeepor of a Currency is required to maintain a record of the amounts of that Currency held in the various Treasuries which exist. If the designated Recordkeepor of a Currency ceases to be a Player, the Banker shall fulfill that responsibilty until a new Recordkeepor is selected according to whatever procedure applies. If there is no procedure defined for selecting a new Recordkeepor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed and the Currency ceases to exist. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Recordkeepor, which must be a Player. The Recordkeepor of a Currency is required to maintain a record of the amounts of that Currency held in the various Treasuries which exist. If the designated Recordkeepor of a Currency ceases to be a Player, the Speaker shall fulfill that responsibilty until a new Recordkeepor is selected according to whatever procedure applies. If there is no procedure defined for selecting a new Recordkeepor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed and the Currency ceases to exist. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Recordkeepor, which must be a Player. The Recordkeepor of a Currency is required to maintain a record of the amounts of that Currency held by the various entities which possess units of that Currency. If the designated Recordkeepor of a Currency ceases to be a Player, the Speaker shall fulfill that responsibilty until a new Recordkeepor is selected according to whatever procedure applies. If there is no procedure defined for selecting a new Recordkeepor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed and the Currency ceases to exist. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Recordkeepor, which must be a Player. The Recordkeepor of a Currency is required to maintain a record of the amounts of that Currency held by the various entities which possess units of that Currency. If the designated Recordkeepor of a Currency ceases to be a Player, the Speaker shall fulfill that responsibility until a new Recordkeepor is selected according to whatever procedure applies. If there is no procedure defined for selecting a new Recordkeepor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed and the Currency ceases to exist. history: ... history: Amended(5) text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Player (the Recordkeepor). The Recordkeepor of a Currency is required to maintain a record of the number of units of that Currency possessed by each entity which possesses them, along with recent transfers of that Currency, as detailed elsewhere. If one of the Official duties of an Officer is to be the Recordkeepor for a Currency, then eir Report shall include the record above, and any changes thereto since the last posting of the Report. If the designated Recordkeepor of a Currency ceases to be a Player, the Speaker shall fulfill that responsiblity until a new Recordkeepor is selected according to whatever procedure applies. If there is no procedure defined for selecting a new Recordkeepor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed and the Currency ceases to exist. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1579 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1579 by Proposal 2470, 16 February 1996 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Mintor, which must be an entity to which the Rules grant Mint Authority. An entity has Mint Authority if and only if the Rules grant it such. If the designated Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist or ceases to possess Mint Authority, all units of that Currency are destroyed and the Currency ceases to exist. The Mintor of a given Currency is the Mint if no other specification exists. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3502 (General Chaos), 8 June 1997 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Mintor, which must be an entity to which the Rules grant Mint Authority. An entity has Mint Authority if and only if the Rules grant it such. If the designated Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist or ceases to possess Mint Authority, all units of that Currency are destroyed and the Currency ceases to exist. The Mintor of a given Currency is the Mint if no other specification exists. Each Player has Mint Authority. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Mintor, which must be an entity to which the Rules grant Mint Authority. An entity has Mint Authority if and only if granted it by the Rules. If the Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist, or ceases to have the authority to be a Mintor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed, and that Currency ceases to exist. The Recordkeepor of that Currency shall publically announce when this happens. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3543 (Harlequin), 17 August 1997 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Mintor, which must be an entity to which the Rules grant Mint Authority. An entity has Mint Authority if and only if granted it by the Rules. If the Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist, or ceases to have the authority to be a Mintor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed, and that Currency ceases to exist. The Recordkeepor of that Currency shall publically announce when this happens. All Players have Mint Authority. history: Infected and Amended(4) Substantially by Rule 1454, 30 August 1997 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Mintor, which must be an entity to which the Rules grant Mint Authority. An entity has Mint Authority if and only if granted it by the Rules. If the Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist, or ceases to have the authority to be a Mintor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed, and that Currency ceases to exist. The Recordkeepor of that Currency shall publically announce when this happens. All Players have Mint Authority. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Rule 1579, 13 September 1997 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Mintor, which must be an entity to which the Rules grant Mint Authority. An entity has Mint Authority if and only if granted it by the Rules. If the Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist, or ceases to have the authority to be a Mintor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed, and that Currency ceases to exist. The Recordkeepor of that Currency shall publically announce when this happens. All Players have Mint Authority. text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Mintor, which must be an entity to which the Rules grant Mint Authority. An entity has Mint Authority if and only if granted it by the Rules. If the Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist, or ceases to have the authority to be a Mintor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed, and that Currency ceases to exist. The Recordkeepor of that Currency shall publically announce when this happens. All Players have Mint Authority. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: Each Currency shall have associated with it a Mintor, which must be an entity to which the Rules grant Mint Authority. An entity has Mint Authority if and only if granted it by the Rules. If the Mintor of a Currency ceases to exist, or ceases to have the authority to be a Mintor, then all units of that Currency are destroyed, and that Currency ceases to exist. The Recordkeepor of that Currency shall publicly announce when this happens. All Players have Mint Authority. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1579 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1580 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1580 by Proposal 2471, 16 February 1996 text: If two or more Players simultaneously acheive the same or different Win Conditions, all such Players Win the Game, except for those for which Win-Preventing Conditions are also true. history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: If two or more Players simultaneously achieve the same or different Win Conditions, all such Players Win the Game, except for those for which Win-Preventing Conditions are also true. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1580 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1581 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1581 by Proposal 2471, 16 February 1996 text: If there is already a Speaker-Elect at the time a Game Ends, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. When a Game Ends, the Winner with the greatest number of Points then becomes the Speaker-Elect; if two or more Winners are tied for the same number of Points, the Speaker shall randomly select one of them to become Speaker-Elect. If the application of this Rule would result in the Speaker becoming the Speaker-Elect, the Speaker shall instead remain Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect, if any, shall cease to be Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2661, 7 September 1996 text: Whenever there is a Game End, the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: Upon the commencement of each new quarter, the Player who holds the Office of Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3703, 9 March 1998 text: A Speaker Transition occurs upon the commencement of each new quarter. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1581 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1582 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1582 by Proposal 2471, 16 February 1996 text: Whenever a Game Ends, for every Treasury other than the Bank, if that Treasury possesses Points, a commensurate number of Marks computed using the secondary Mark Exchange Rate are transferred from the Bank to that Treasury, and all Points in that Treasury are transferred to the Bank. These transfers are to be detected and reported by the Scorekeepor. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 18 August 1996 text: Whenever a Game Ends, for every Treasury other than the Bank, if that Treasury possesses Points, a commensurate number of Marks computed using the secondary Mark Exchange Rate are transferred from the Bank to that Treasury, and all Points in that Treasury are transferred to the Bank. These transfers are to be detected and reported by the Scorekeepor. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1583 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1583 by Proposal 2477, 16 February 1996 text: All penalties that are a direct result of voting on Proposals are halved if the Player receiving the Penalty registered for the first time as a Player within the past five weeks. This Rule take precedence over all other Rules pertaining to penalties that are a direct result of voting. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2755 (Swann), 28 November 1996 text: All penalties that are a direct result of voting on Proposals are halved if the penalties are being applied to a Player during that Player's Grace Period. This Rule take precedence over all other Rules pertaining to penalties that are a direct result of voting. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: All penalties that are a direct result of voting on Proposals are halved if the penalties are being applied to a Player during that Player's Grace Period. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules pertaining to penalties that are a direct result of voting. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1583 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1584 history: Enacted as MI=2 Rule 1584 by Proposal 2479, 16 February 1996 text: An On Hold Player is not permitted to Vote on Proposals, make Proposals, or hold Office, and cannot be required by the Rules to perform any duty or action, unless that Rule specifically states that it can require On Hold Players to perform actions. This Rule takes precedence over every other Rule. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1584 by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1585 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1585 by Proposal 2480, 16 February 1996 text: Whenever the holder of an Office changes, any duties which the Rules had imposed upon the prior holder of that Office as a consequence of holding that Office which have not been fulfilled must instead be fulfilled by the new holder of that Office, as soon as possible and in the same order in which the prior holder of that Office had been required to fulfill them. The former holder of the Office is absolved of performing all such duties. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2567, 12 April 1996 text: Whenever the holder of an Office changes, any duties which the Rules had imposed upon the prior holder of that Office as a consequence of holding that Office which have not been fulfilled must instead be fulfilled by the new holder of that Office, as soon as possible after the change of Officer occurs and in the same order in which the prior holder of that Office had been required to fulfill them. The former holder of the Office is absolved of performing all such duties, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Mutated from MI=1 to MI=2 by Proposal 2617, 1 June 1996 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4135 (harvel), 5 April 2001 text: Whenever the holder of an Office changes, any duties which the Rules had imposed upon the prior holder of that Office as a consequence of holding that Office which have not been fulfilled must instead be fulfilled by the new holder of that Office, as soon as possible after the change of Officer occurs. The former holder of the Office is absolved of performing all such duties, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1585 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1586 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1586 by Proposal 2481, 16 February 1996 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: A "Nomic Entity" is any entity which has no discernible existence without the Rules, only existing by virtue of the Rules defining it to exist. When the Rules defining a given Nomic Entity are repealed or amended such that they no longer define that entity, that entity ceases to exist, along with any properties it may have possessed. When the Rules defining a given Nomic Entity are amended such that they still define the Entity but in a different way or with different properties, that entity and its properties continue to exist to whatever extent is possible under the new definition. text: A "Nomic Entity" is any entity which has no discernible existence without the Rules, only existing by virtue of the Rules defining it to exist. When the Rules defining a given Nomic Entity are repealed or amended such that they no longer define that entity, that entity ceases to exist, along with any properties it may have possessed. When the Rules defining a given Nomic Entity are amended such that they still define the Entity but in a different way or with different properties, that entity and its properties continue to exist to whatever extent is possible under the new definition. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2795 (Andre), 30 January 1997 text: A "Nomic Entity" is any entity which has no discernible existence without the Rules, only existing by virtue of the Rules defining it to exist. No two Nomic Entities (including Players) shall have the same name or nickname. When the Rules defining a given Nomic Entity are repealed or amended such that they no longer define that entity, that entity ceases to exist, along with any properties it may have possessed. When the Rules defining a given Nomic Entity are amended such that they still define the Entity but in a different way or with different properties, that entity and its properties continue to exist to whatever extent is possible under the new definition. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3999 (harvel), 2 May 2000 text: No two Rule-defined entities shall have the same name or nickname. If the Rules defining some entity are repealed or amended such that they no longer define that entity, then that entity along with all its properties shall cease to exist. If the Rules defining an entity are amended such that they still define that entity but with different properties, that entity and its properties shall continue to exist to whatever extent is possible under the new definitions. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 3999 (harvel), 2 May 2000 history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5077 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 text: Two Rule-defined entities CANNOT have the same name or nickname. If the Rules defining an entity are repealed or amended such that they no longer define that entity, then that entity and its properties cease to exist. If the Rules defining an entity are amended such that they still define that entity but with different properties, then that entity and its properties continue to exist to whatever extent is possible under the new definitions. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1587 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1587 by Proposal 2484, 16 February 1996 text: Upon the creation of this Rule, 10 Extra Votes are transferred from the Bank to each of Swann and Blob, in recognition of their wins of Dec 25, 1995, and Jan 19, 1996, respectively. These transfers are detected and reported by the Assessor. This Rule repeals itself at 00:00:00 GMT, April 1, 1996. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1588 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1588 by Proposal 2490, 16 February 1996 text: A Subordinate Legal Code (SLC) is a body of law organized under the Rules. A body of law is a SLC only if it is granted that status by the Rules and it meets all other requirements in the Rules for being a SLC. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1588 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1589 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1589 by Proposal 2490, 16 February 1996 text: A SLC shall not be changed except in accordance with the Rules. Notwithstanding any other method which may be defined, a SLC can always be changed by the adoption of a Directive to amend the SLC. The Proposal containing such a Directive shall have an AI of at least 1, and if adopted the Directive has the effect of modifying the SLC in the manner specified in the Directive. A SLC is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Proposal 2807 (Andre), 8 February 1997 text: A SLC shall not be changed except in accordance with the Rules. Notwithstanding any other method which may be defined, a SLC can always be changed by the adoption of a Directive to amend the SLC. If the Proposal containing such a Directive is adopted, the Directive has the effect of modifying the SLC in the manner specified in the Directive. A SLC is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: A SLC shall not be changed except in accordance with the Rules. Notwithstanding any other method which may be defined, a SLC may always be changed by the operation of an instrument of Power 1 or greater. A SLC is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1589 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1590 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1590 by Proposal 2490, 16 February 1996 text: For a SLC to be legally authorized, the Rules must specify a Player who is required to maintain a record of the content of that SLC; this Player is known as the Maintainer of that SLC. The Maintainer of a given SLC must provide a copy of it to any other Player who requests it, as soon as possible after the request is made. E must also provide an updated copy of the SLC to all Players within its Jurisdiction as soon as possible after the SLC changes for any reason.. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2575, 21 April 1996 text: For a SLC to be legally authorized, the Rules must specify a Player who is required to maintain a record of the content of that SLC; this Player is known as the Maintainer of that SLC. The Maintainer of a given SLC must provide a copy of it to any other Player who requests it, as soon as possible after the request is made. If the SLC has changed between the time of the request and the time the Maintainer fulfills the request, the Maintainer must provide the SLC as it existed at the time of the request and must additionally document every change made to the Compact between the time of the request and the time of its fulfillment. The Maintainer of an SLC must also provide an updated copy of the SLC to all Players within its Jurisdiction as soon as possible after the SLC changes for any reason. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: For a SLC to be legally authorized, the Rules must specify a Player who is required to maintain a record of the content of that SLC; this Player is known as the Maintainer of that SLC. The Maintainer of a given SLC must provide a copy of it to any other Player who requests it, as soon as possible after the request is made. If the SLC has changed between the time of the request and the time the Maintainer fulfills the request, the Maintainer must provide the SLC as it existed at the time of the request and must additionally document every change made to the SLC between the time of the request and the time of its fulfillment. The Maintainer of an SLC must also provide an updated copy of the SLC to all Players within its Jurisdiction as soon as possible after the SLC changes for any reason. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1590 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1591 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1591 by Proposal 2490, 16 February 1996 text: A SLC has the power to constrain the actions of Players in the same manner as the Rules. However, a SLC has power over only those Players within its Jurisdiction, as defined in the Rules authorizing that SLC. The Jurisdiction of a SLC must be specified by the Rules, either directly or indirectly. If the Jurisdiction of a SLC might vary over the course of the existence of the SLC, the Rules must specify a Player who is required to maintain a record of which Players are within the Jurisdiction of that SLC. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1591 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1592 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1592 by Proposal 2490, 16 February 1996 text: A SLC has the power to define the manner in which certain properties of entities are changed. This power shall be limited to any property solely defined by that SLC and to any other property to which the Rules grant that SLC this authority. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1592 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1593 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1593 by Proposal 2490, 16 February 1996 text: Each SLC is empowered to require Currency transfers, subject to the restriction that any such transfer must originate from the Treasury of a Player within the Jurisdiction of that SLC. This Rule defers to any Rule or Rules which grant certain SLCs broader power to require Currency transfers. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1593 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1594 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1594 by Proposal 2490, 16 February 1996 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: A Player who is within the Jurisdiction of a SLC is required to abide by it while e remains within its Jurisdiction, unless doing so would violate either the Rules or another SLC with higher precedence. A Player who fails to abide by a SLC is in violation of that SLC. A Player who is found by a CFJ to have violated a SLC shall suffer whatever penalties specified in the Rules authorizing the violated SLC, or, if there is no such penalty specified, a default penalty of three Blots, to be reported by the Judge of the CFJ. There shall be no additional penalty imposed upon a Player who violates this Rule by violating a SLC; this Rule takes precedence over any Rule which specifies penalties for violating Rules. text: A Player who is within the Jurisdiction of a SLC is required to abide by it while e remains within its Jurisdiction, unless doing so would violate either the Rules or another SLC with higher precedence. A Player who fails to abide by a SLC is in violation of that SLC. A Player who is found by a CFJ to have violated a SLC shall suffer whatever penalties specified in the Rules authorizing the violated SLC, or, if there is no such penalty specified, a default penalty of three Blots, to be reported by the Judge of the CFJ. There shall be no additional penalty imposed upon a Player who violates this Rule by violating a SLC; this Rule takes precedence over any Rule which specifies penalties for violating Rules. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: A Player who is within the Jurisdiction of a SLC is required to abide by it while e remains within its Jurisdiction, unless doing so would violate either the Rules or another SLC with higher precedence. A Player who fails to abide by a SLC is in violation of that SLC. A Player who is found by a CFJ to have violated a SLC shall suffer whatever penalties specified in the Rules authorizing the violated SLC, or, if there is no such penalty specified, a default penalty of one Blot, to be reported by the Judge of the CFJ. There shall be no additional penalty imposed upon a Player who violates this Rule by violating a SLC; this Rule takes precedence over any Rule which specifies penalties for violating Rules. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: While a Player remains within the Jurisdiction of a SLC, e is required to abide by it, unless doing so would violate either the Rules or another SLC with higher precedence. Violation of this requirement is the Class 1 Crime of Insubordination. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1594 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1595 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1595 by Proposal 2490, 16 February 1996 text: Unless otherwise specified by the Rules, older SLCs take precedence over younger ones. This ordering is based on the time the SLC is first created. This Rule does not in any way establish an order of precedence for the components, if any, within a given SLC. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1595 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1596 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1596 by Proposal 2493, 16 February 1996 text: Whenever a Rule directly requires a transfer of Currencies to take place, the transfer takes place as required by that Rule, provided that the transfer is otherwise permitted by the Rules. Such a transfer takes place at the time specified in the Rule which requires the transfer, or, if no time is specified, at the time when the Rule first begins to require the transfer. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2626, 29 June 1996 text: The Rules have the power to require the transfer of Currencies; no other Entity also has this power unless explicitly granted it by the Rules, and then only to the extent granted by the Rules. No Entity other than the Rules themselves has the power to require any transfer which would result in the Treasury being transferred from containing a negative quantity of the Currency transferred. Whenever an Entity requires a transfer of Currencies to take place, the transfer takes place as required, provided that the Entity which is requiring the transfer is permitted by the Rules to require that transfer, and provided that the transfer is otherwise permitted by the Rules. Such a transfer takes place at the time specified by the Entity which requires the transfer, or, if no time is specified, at the time when the Entity first begins to require the transfer. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit or require a transfer prohibited by this Rule. When another Rule would prohibit some transfer permitted by this Rule, this Rule defers to that Rule with respect to that transfer. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: A Payment Order is an order requiring an entity (the payor) to submit a Transfer Order transferring units of a Currency from itself to some other entity (the payee). A Payment Order specifies exactly one source entity, exactly one destination entity, exactly one Currency, and a number of units of that Currency which is a positive multiple of that Currency's MUQ. A Payment Order is executed when a Player with the authority to do so (as defined by the Rules) posts the Order to the Public Forum. A Player only has the authority to execute a Payment Order if e required to execute that Order by the Rules or by an Injunction, or if the Rules otherwise grant em authority to execute that Order. Each Recordkeepor shall maintain a record of all Payment Orders executed which specify the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor; this record shall also indicate, for each Order, whether that Order has been satisfied, is disputed, or has been vacated. However, the Recordkeepor need only maintain records of satisfied or vacated Orders for four weeks after they have been satisfied or vacated. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: A Payment Order is an Order requiring an entity (the payor) to submit a Transfer Order transferring units of a Currency from itself to some other entity (the payee). A Payment Order specifies exactly one source entity, exactly one destination entity, exactly one Currency, and a number of units of that Currency which is a positive multiple of that Currency's MUQ. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4037 (Oerjan), 7 August 2000 text: A "debt" is an obligation arising under these Rules for one entity (the "debtor") to make a transfer of one or more Properties to some other entity (the "creditor"). No debt shall be enforceable unless a notice sufficient to inform the debtor of the debt has been sent to the debtor. If a Rule requires a public notice of a debt be posted, the debt is not enforceable until and unless that notice is posted. A debt is satisfied when the debtor has transferred (or is deemed to have transferred) all the Properties named to the creditor (either as a single transfer or as the aggregate of multiple transfers). A debt is forgiven when the creditor of a debt sends a notice to the debtor that e is forgiving the debt. Forgiveness may be for the entire debt or for any part thereof. The effect forgiving a debt is as if the debtor had made a payment on the debt for the portion forgiven, except that no transfer of property takes place thereby. When a Notice of Transfer indicates a purpose to make payments upon debts owed to the transferee, but the Property transferred does not correspond to any debt owed by the transferor to the transferee, then the transferee shall either return that Property to the transferor, or retain them as payment against future debts, at the transferee's discretion. Any Properties thus retained shall be returned to the transferor upon demand, and a demand for return made under this Rule causes the transferee to incur a debt to the transferor for those Properties (excluding any subset of those Properties properly applied to subsequently incurred debts). history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4156 (Ian), 18 May 2001 text: (a) A "debt" is an obligation arising under the Rules for one entity (the "debtor") to make a transfer of one or more Properties to some other entity (the "creditor"). (b) No debt shall be enforceable unless a notice sufficient to inform the debtor of the debt has been sent to the debtor. If a Rule requires that a public notice of a debt be posted, the debt is not enforceable until and unless that notice is posted. (c) A debt is satisfied when the debtor has transferred (or is deemed to have transferred) all the Properties named to the creditor (either as a single transfer or as the aggregate of multiple transfers). (d) A debt is forgiven when the creditor of a debt sends a notice to the debtor that e is forgiving the debt. Forgiveness may be for the entire debt or for any part thereof. The effect forgiving a debt is as if the debtor had made a payment on the debt for the portion forgiven, except that no transfer of property takes place thereby. (e) An entity which receives Property as the result of an unauthorized transfer incurs a debt for the transferred Property to the entity that made the transfer. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4234 (Goethe), 29 November 2001 text: (a) A "debt" is an obligation arising under the Rules for one entity (the "debtor") to make a transfer of one or more Properties to some other entity (the "creditor"). (b) No debt shall be enforceable unless a notice sufficient to inform the debtor of the debt has been sent to the debtor. If a Rule requires that a public notice of a debt be posted, the debt is not enforceable until and unless that notice is posted. (c) A debt is satisfied when the debtor has transferred (or is deemed to have transferred) all the Properties named to the creditor (either as a single transfer or as the aggregate of multiple transfers). (d) A debt is forgiven when the creditor of a debt sends a notice to the debtor that e is forgiving the debt. Forgiveness may be for the entire debt or for any part thereof. The effect forgiving a debt is as if the debtor had made a payment on the debt for the portion forgiven, except that no transfer of property takes place thereby. (e) An entity which receives Property as the result of an unauthorized transfer incurs a debt for the transferred Property to the entity that made the transfer. (f) If two entities are each others' debtor, and all or part of their debts to each other are for the same quantity (equal portions) of the same fungible Property, then a public announcement of this mutual debt by either entity will have the effect of satisfying the equal portions of the debts for both debtors as in (c) above. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4259 (Murphy), 21 February 2002 text: (a) A "debt" is an obligation arising under the Rules for one entity (the "debtor") to make a transfer of one or more Properties to some other entity (the "creditor"). (b) No debt shall be enforceable unless a notice sufficient to inform the debtor of the debt has been sent to the debtor. If a Rule requires that a public notice of a debt be posted, the debt is not enforceable until and unless that notice is posted. (c) A debt is satisfied when the debtor has transferred (or is deemed to have transferred) all the Properties named to the creditor (either as a single transfer or as the aggregate of multiple transfers). (d) A debt is forgiven when the creditor of a debt sends a notice to the debtor that e is forgiving the debt. Forgiveness may be for the entire debt or for any part thereof. The effect forgiving a debt is as if the debtor had made a payment on the debt for the portion forgiven, except that no transfer of property takes place thereby. (e) If two entities are each others' debtor, and all or part of their debts to each other are for the same quantity (equal portions) of the same fungible Property, then a public announcement of this mutual debt by either entity will have the effect of satisfying the equal portions of the debts for both debtors as in (c) above. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4356 (Steve), 7 August 2002 text: (a) A "debt" is an obligation arising under the Rules for one entity (the "debtor") to make a transfer of one or more Properties to some other entity (the "creditor"). (b) No debt shall be enforceable unless a notice sufficient to inform the debtor of the debt has been sent to the debtor. If a Rule requires that a public notice of a debt be posted, the debt is not enforceable until and unless that notice is posted. (c) A debt is satisfied when the debtor has transferred (or is deemed to have transferred) all the Properties named to the creditor (either as a single transfer or as the aggregate of multiple transfers). (d) A debt is forgiven when the creditor of a debt sends a notice to the debtor that e is forgiving the debt. Forgiveness may be for the entire debt or for any part thereof. The effect of forgiving a debt is to relieve the debtor of the obligation arising from that part of the debt which has been forgiven to transfer Property to the creditor. (e) If two entities are each others' debtor, and all or part of their debts to each other are for the same quantity (equal portions) of the same fungible Property, then a public announcement of this mutual debt by either entity will have the effect of satisfying the equal portions of the debts for both debtors as in (c) above. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1596 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1597 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1597 by Proposal 2493, 16 February 1996 text: Whenever an Entity other than a Player to which the Rules have granted the authority to require Currency transfers directly requires a transfer of Currencies to take place, the transfer takes place as required by that Entity, provided that: a) the transfer would not result in the Treasury being transferred from containing a negative quantity of the Currency transferred, and b) the transfer is otherwise permitted by the Rules. Such a transfer takes place at the time specified by the Entity which requires the transfer, or, if no time is specified, at the time when the Entity first begins to require the transfer. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit or require a transfer prohibited by this Rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1598 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1598 by Proposal 2493, 16 February 1996 text: Any Player is permitted to require a transfer of Currency to take place, provided that: a) the transfer would not result in the Treasury from which the Currency is being transferred containing a negative quantity of the Currency being transferred, b) the Player requiring the transfer is the Executor of the Owner of the Treasury from which the Currency is being transferred, c) the Player requiring the transfer reports the transfer to the Recordkeepor of the Currency transferred, and d) the transfer is otherwise permitted by the Rules. Such a transfer takes place at the time the Player requiring it reports it to the Recordkeepor of the Currency transferred. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would permit or require a transfer prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2626, 29 June 1996 text: Players are empowered to require the transfer of Currencies, subject to the following limitations: a) the Player requiring the transfer is the Executor of the Owner of the Treasury from which the Currency is being transferred, b) the Player requiring the transfer reports the transfer to the Recordkeepor of the Currency transferred, and c) the Player requires the transfer to take place at the time e reports it. No Player-required transfer may take place at any time other than the time at which it is reported. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would allow a Player to require a transfer prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: A Transfer Order is an order requiring the Recordkeepor of a Currency to note the transfer of units of that Currency from one entity to another. An Transfer Order specifies exactly one source entity, exactly one destination entity, exactly one Currency, and a number of units of that Currency which is a positive multiple of that Currency's MUQ. A Transfer Order is submitted when the Executor of the source entity specified in the Order transmits the Order to the Recordkeepor of the Currency specified in the Order, or whenever the Rules otherwise state that a Transfer Order is submitted. Unless otherwise specified, a Transfer Order is executed upon being submitted. In no case may any Transfer Order be executed prior to its submission or without having ever been submitted. When a Transfer Order is executed, if the source possesses at least as many units of the specified Currency as specified in the Order, the number of units of that specified Currency shall be removed from the source entity and added to the destination entity. Such an Order is said to have been successfully executed. However, if the source entity does not possess sufficient units of the specified Currency, then no transfer occurs, and the Recordkeepor shall, as soon as possible, notify the Executors of the source and destination that the Transfer Order was not successfully executed. Each Recordkeepor shall maintain a record of all Transfer Orders submitted which specify the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor, for at least four weeks after their execution. history: Infected and Amended(3) Substantially by Rule 1454, 26 November 1997 text: A Transfer Order is an order requiring the Recordkeepor of a Currency to note the transfer of units of that Currency from one entity to another. An Transfer Order specifies exactly one source entity, exactly one destination entity, exactly one Currency, and a number of units of that Currency which is a positive multiple of that Currency's MUQ. A Transfer Order is submitted when the Executor of the source entity specified in the Order transmits the Order to the Recordkeepor of the Currency specified in the Order, or whenever the Rules otherwise state that a Transfer Order is submitted. Unless otherwise specified, a Transfer Order is executed upon being submitted. In no case may any Transfer Order be executed prior to its submission or without having ever been submitted. When a Transfer Order is executed, if the source possesses at least as many units of the specified Currency as specified in the Order, the number of units of that specified Currency shall be removed from the source entity and added to the destination entity. Such an Order is said to have been successfully executed. However, if the source entity does not possess sufficient units of the specified Currency, then no transfer occurs, and the Recordkeepor shall, as soon as possible, notify the Executors of the source and destination that the Transfer Order was not successfully executed. Each Recordkeepor shall maintain a record of all Transfer Orders submitted which specify the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor, for at least four weeks after their execution. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Rule 1598, 10 December 1997 text: A Transfer Order is an order requiring the Recordkeepor of a Currency to note the transfer of units of that Currency from one entity to another. An Transfer Order specifies exactly one source entity, exactly one destination entity, exactly one Currency, and a number of units of that Currency which is a positive multiple of that Currency's MUQ. A Transfer Order is submitted when the Executor of the source entity specified in the Order transmits the Order to the Recordkeepor of the Currency specified in the Order, or whenever the Rules otherwise state that a Transfer Order is submitted. Unless otherwise specified, a Transfer Order is executed upon being submitted. In no case may any Transfer Order be executed prior to its submission or without having ever been submitted. When a Transfer Order is executed, if the source possesses at least as many units of the specified Currency as specified in the Order, the number of units of that specified Currency shall be removed from the source entity and added to the destination entity. Such an Order is said to have been successfully executed. However, if the source entity does not possess sufficient units of the specified Currency, then no transfer occurs, and the Recordkeepor shall, as soon as possible, notify the Executors of the source and destination that the Transfer Order was not successfully executed. Each Recordkeepor shall maintain a record of all Transfer Orders submitted which specify the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor, for at least four weeks after their execution. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 3627 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: A Transfer Order is an order requiring the Recordkeepor of a Currency to note the transfer of units of that Currency from one entity to another. An Transfer Order specifies exactly one source entity, exactly one destination entity, exactly one Currency, and a number of units of that Currency which is a positive multiple of that Currency's MUQ. A Transfer Order is submitted when the Executor of the source entity specified in the Order transmits the Order to the Recordkeepor of the Currency specified in the Order, or whenever the Rules otherwise state that a Transfer Order is submitted. Unless otherwise specified, a Transfer Order is executed upon being submitted. In no case may any Transfer Order be executed prior to its submission or without having ever been submitted. When a Transfer Order is executed, if the source possesses at least as many units of the specified Currency as specified in the Order, the number of units of that specified Currency shall be removed from the source entity and added to the destination entity. Such an Order is said to have been successfully executed. However, if the source entity does not possess sufficient units of the specified Currency, then no transfer occurs, and the Recordkeepor shall, as soon as possible, notify the Executors of the source and destination that the Transfer Order was not successfully executed. Each Recordkeepor shall maintain a record of all Transfer Orders submitted which specify the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor, for at least four weeks after their execution. The determination, for the purpose of this Rule, of whether an entity has sufficient Currency to execute a transfer shall be made based on the Recordkeepor's records at the time the transfer is executed. A Recordkeepor's good faith determination that a transfer has succeeded or failed is definitive, even if it is based on erroneous information. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: A Transfer Order is an Order requiring the Recordkeepor of a Currency to note the transfer of units of that Currency from one entity to another. A valid Transfer Order specifies exactly one source entity, exactly one destination entity, exactly one Currency, and a number of units of that Currency which is a positive multiple of that Currency's MUQ. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3755 (Crito), 12 June 1998 text: A Transfer Order is an Order requiring the Recordkeepor of a Currency to note the transfer of units of that Currency from one entity to another. A valid Transfer Order specifies exactly one source entity, exactly one destination entity, exactly one Currency, and a number of units of that Currency which is a positive multiple of that Currency's MUQ. If a Transfer Order purports to satisfy a particular Payment Order and either that Payment Order does not exist or cannot be satisfied by the Transfer Order, then the Transfer Order is invalid. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3901 (Schneidster), 6 September 1999 text: A Transfer Order is an Order requiring the Recordkeepor of a Currency to note the transfer of units of that Currency from one entity to another. A valid Transfer Order specifies exactly one source entity, exactly one destination entity, exactly one Currency, and a number of units of that Currency which is a positive multiple of that Currency's MUQ. If a Transfer Order purports to satisfy a particular Payment Order and either that Payment Order does not exist or cannot be satisfied by the Transfer Order, then the Transfer Order is invalid. Other Rules may specify conditions which cause a Transfer Order to be deemed invalid. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: A Notice of Transfer is a message which sets forth the intent to transfer one or more Properties from one entity (the "transferor") to some other entity (the "transferee"). A valid Notice of Transfer must additionally: (1) specify one or more Properties all of which are owned by the transferor; (2) be sent by the Executor of the transferor, or by a Limited Executor of the transferor with the authority to execute transfers on behalf of that entity with respect to all of the Properties involved; and (3) describe a transfer which is not otherwise prohibited by the Rules. A transfer of a Property occurs only when its Recordkeepor receives a valid Notice of Transfer. The effect of a transfer of Properties is to cause the transferor to cease to possess the Properties transferred, and simultaneously to cause the transferee to possess them. The Recordkeepor of a Property shall maintain a record of all transfers of that Property. E shall retain a record of each Notice of Transfer which e receives (whether valid or not) involving that Property. E shall retain this record of each Notice of Transfer for at least four weeks after its receipt. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4156 (Ian), 18 May 2001 text: (a) A Notice of Transfer is a message which sets forth the intent to transfer one or more Properties from one entity (the "transferor") to some other entity (the "transferee"). (b) A valid Notice of Transfer must additionally: (1) specify one or more Properties all of which are owned by the transferor; and (2) be sent by the Executor of the transferor, or by a Limited Executor of the transferor with the authority to execute transfers on behalf of that entity with respect to all of the Properties involved. (c) A transfer of a Property occurs only when its Recordkeepor receives a valid Notice of Transfer. (d) The effect of a transfer of Properties is to cause the transferor to cease to possess the Properties transferred, and simultaneously to cause the transferee to possess them. (e) The Recordkeepor of a Property shall maintain a record of all transfers of that Property. E shall retain a record of each Notice of Transfer which e receives (whether valid or not) involving that Property. E shall retain this record of each Notice of Transfer for at least four weeks after its receipt. (f) If the transferor transfers Property to the transferee with the purpose of satisfying a debt, or of paying the Fee associated with performing an action, but the debt does not exist, or the action is not successfully performed, then the transferor's Executor may publicly demand the return of the Property. The effect of such a demand is to cause the transferee to incur a debt to the transferor for the Property transferred. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4190 (Steve), 18 July 2001 text: (a) A Notice of Transfer is a message which sets forth the intent to transfer one or more Properties from one entity (the "transferor") to some other entity (the "transferee"). (b) A valid Notice of Transfer must additionally: (1) specify one or more Properties all of which are owned by the transferor; and (2) be sent by the Executor of the transferor, or by a Limited Executor of the transferor with the authority to execute transfers on behalf of that entity with respect to all of the Properties involved. (c) A transfer of a Property occurs only when its Recordkeepor receives a valid Notice of Transfer. (d) The effect of a transfer of Properties is to cause the transferor to cease to possess the Properties transferred, and simultaneously to cause the transferee to possess them. (e) The Recordkeepor of a Property shall maintain a record of all transfers of that Property. E shall retain a record of each Notice of Transfer which e receives (whether valid or not) involving that Property. E shall retain this record of each Notice of Transfer for at least four weeks after its receipt. (f) If the transferor transfers Property to the transferee with the purpose of satisfying a debt, or of paying the Fee associated with performing an action, but the debt does not exist, or the action is not successfully performed, then the transferor may publicly demand the return of the Property. The effect of such a demand is to cause the transferee to incur a debt to the transferor for the Property transferred. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1598 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1599 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1599 by Proposal 2493, 16 February 1996 text: When a Rule requires a Player to report a Currency transfer to the Recordkeepor of a Currency, that Player is required to do so within seven days. The failure to do so is an Infraction, the penalty for which is 1 Blot, which shall be reported by the Recordkeepor of the Currency involved. The failure to report a Currency transfer as required by the Rules does not in any way deprive the transfer of legal force. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different time limit for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Proposal 2830 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: When a Rule requires a Player to report a Currency transfer to the Recordkeepor of a Currency, that Player is required to do so within seven days. The failure to do so is the Infraction of Swiss Banking, the penalty for which is 1 Blot, which shall be reported by the Recordkeepor of the Currency involved. The failure to report a Currency transfer as required by the Rules does not in any way deprive the transfer of legal force. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different time limit for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Whenever a Rule requires a Player execute a Payment Order, e is required to do so within seven days. If a Player who is required to execute a Payment Order by the Rules fails to do so in the time required by this and other Rules, and a CFJ determines that this has in fact happened, the Judge of that CFJ shall make an Injunction requiring emself to execute the Order required in the stead of the nonperforming Player. If a Player deregisters or goes On Hold without executing a Payment Order which e was required to execute, the Speaker shall execute it instead. If a Player who is required to execute a Payment Order executes it and then subsequently vacates it, e is still required to execute that Order, as if e had never executed it. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different time limit for executing Payment Orders. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3604 (General Chaos), 9 December 1997 text: Whenever a Rule requires a Player execute a Payment Order, e is required to do so within seven days. If a Player who is required to execute a Payment Order by the Rules fails to do so in the time required by this and other Rules, and a CFJ determines that this has in fact happened, the Judge of that CFJ shall make an Injunction requiring emself to execute the Order required in the stead of the nonperforming Player. If a Player deregisters or goes On Hold without executing a Payment Order which e was required to execute, the Speaker shall execute it instead. If a Player who is required to execute a Payment Order executes it and then subsequently vacates it, e is still required to execute that Order, as if e had never executed it, unless e was required by the Rules to vacate that particular Order. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different time limit for executing Payment Orders. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Whenever a Rule requires a Player to execute a Payment Order, e shall do so within seven days of when the requirement arises. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3851 (General Chaos), 12 April 1999 text: (a) Whenever a Rule requires a Player to execute a Payment Order, e shall do so within seven days of when the requirement arises. (b) The foregoing does not apply to any requirement to execute a Payment Order for zero units of any Currency. Such Payment Orders need not be executed, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: The Executor of the creditor of any unsatisfied debt may, at any time, Order the debtor to satisfy that debt; but e may not do so if any other Order neither satisfied nor vacated exists requiring the same debtor to satisfy the same debt, or if the debt is disputed. The debtor shall have seven days to satisfy the debt from the time the Order is executed. Any entity Ordered to satisfy a debt who fails to do so within the time allowed by this Rule commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness when that time first elapses, and further does so again every seven days after the time allowed has expired. Time during which the debt is disputed or the Order is stayed is not counted for the purpose of this Rule. If the Executor of the entity so Ordered is on Hold at the time the Order is issued, the time shall not begin to run until the Executor comes off Hold. These Infractions shall be reported by the creditor of the debt and carry a penalty of one Blot. No Order to satisfy a debt shall be enforced in any way after such time as the debt is satisfied, and the executor of any such Order shall vacate it as soon as the underlying debt is satisfied. If a debt becomes disputed, any Order to satisfy the disputed debt shall be stayed by its executor for the duration of the dispute. The Clerk of the Courts may stay, and a Judge stay or vacate, any Order which should properly be stayed or vacated (respectively) under this Rule in the event the executor of the Order neglects to do so. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4165 (Kelly), 11 June 2001 text: The Executor of the creditor of any unsatisfied debt may, at any time, demand the debtor to satisfy that debt, provided e has not already done so. E does so by sending a message to the debtor setting forth the demand. The debtor shall have seven days to satisfy the debt from the time the demand is sent, except that if the debtor's Executor is on Hold at the time the demand is sent, the debtor shall instead have seven days from when the debtor's Executor comes off Hold to satisfy the debt. Time during which a debt is disputed is not counted for any purpose of this Rule. A debt not satisfied within the time allowed by this Rule becomes delinquent when that time elapses. It ceases to be delinquent when it is satisfied. Any Player who is either: (a) the Executor of an entity which owes a delinquent debt, or (b) a Limited Executor of an entity which has no Executor and which owes a delinquent debt, where: (1) that Player has the authority to execute a transfer for that entity which would satisfy the delinquent debt, and (2) that entity possesses sufficient Property such that the delinquent debt can be satisfied; commits the Class 1 Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness when that debt first becomes delinquent, and commits it again every seven days thereafter for as long as the debt remains delinquent. This Infraction may be reported by the creditor of the delinquent debt. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: The Executor of the creditor of any unsatisfied debt may, at any time, demand the debtor to satisfy that debt, provided e has not already done so. E does so by sending a message to the debtor setting forth the demand. The debtor shall have seven days to satisfy the debt from the time the demand is sent, except that if the debtor's Executor is not active at the time the demand is sent, the debtor shall instead have seven days from the time eir Executor becomes active to satisfy the debt. Time during which a debt is disputed is not counted for any purpose of this Rule. A debt not satisfied within the time allowed by this Rule becomes delinquent when that time elapses. It ceases to be delinquent when it is satisfied. Any Player who is either: (a) the Executor of an entity which owes a delinquent debt, or (b) a Limited Executor of an entity which has no Executor and which owes a delinquent debt, where: (1) that Player has the authority to execute a transfer for that entity which would satisfy the delinquent debt, and (2) that entity possesses sufficient Property such that the delinquent debt can be satisfied; commits the Class 1 Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness when that debt first becomes delinquent, and commits it again every seven days thereafter for as long as the debt remains delinquent. This Infraction may be reported by the creditor of the delinquent debt. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4346 (Steve), 11 July 2002 text: (a) Provided that e has not already done so, the Executor of the creditor of any unsatisfied debt may demand that the debtor satisfy that debt, by notifying the debtor of the demand. (b) The debtor shall have seven days from the time of the notification to satisfy the debt, except that if the debtor is not active at the time the demand is sent, the debtor shall instead have seven days from the time e becomes active to satisfy the debt. Time during which a debt is disputed is not counted for the purposes of this Rule. (c) A debt not satisfied within the time allowed by this Rule becomes delinquent when that time elapses. It ceases to be delinquent when it is satisfied. (d) Any Player who is the Prime Executor of an entity with respect to the satisfaction of a debt owed by that entity commits the Class 1 Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness when that debt first becomes delinquent, and commits it again every seven days thereafter for as long as the debt remains delinquent. This Infraction may be reported by the creditor of the delinquent debt. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1599 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1600 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1600 by Proposal 2495, 16 February 1996 text: Except where the Rules explicitly state otherwise, any mathematical term in the Rules shall be construed to have the definition usually given to it in standard mathematics. In particular, "number" shall mean "real number." If a Judgment is made to the effect that the provisions of the first two sentences of this Rule would govern play even in the absence of this Rule, and the Game State is such that that Judgment cannot be overturned, then this Rule automatically repeals itself. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2547, 27 March 1996 text: Except where the Rules explicitly state otherwise, any mathematical term in the Rules shall be construed to have the definition usually given to it in standard mathematics. In particular, "number" shall mean "real number." history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1601 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1601 by Proposal 2496, 3 March 1996 text: Whenever an entity which is authorized to possess a Treasury is created, or an existing entity is granted the authority to possess a Treasury, a Treasury is created for that entity. Whenever an entity which possesses a Treasury is destroyed or ceases to have the authority to possess a Treasury, its Treasury is destroyed. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: No entity may be destroyed while it possesses any units of Currency; if an entity which possesses units of Currency would otherwise be destroyed, it shall instead be placed in Probate, and its destruction deferred until it leaves Probate. Such an entity is a "terminal estate" for the purpose of Probate. An entity leaves Probate when eir Executor in Probate announces that Probate is completed. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would destroy an entity while it possesses units of Currency. When a Player is deregistered, e shall be placed in Probate. A deregistered Player is a "terminal estate" for the purpose of Probate, but ceases to be such if e reregisters while still in Probate. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3611 (Andre), 12 December 1997 text: No entity may be destroyed while it possesses any units of Currency; if an entity which possesses units of Currency would otherwise be destroyed, it shall instead be placed in Probate, and its destruction deferred until it leaves Probate. Such an entity is a "terminal estate" for the purpose of Probate. An entity leaves Probate when eir Executor in Probate announces that Probate is completed, or when that entity becomes a Player. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would destroy an entity while it possesses units of Currency. When a Player is deregistered, e shall be placed in Probate. A deregistered Player is a "terminal estate" for the purpose of Probate, but ceases to be such if e reregisters while still in Probate. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3636 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: The Notary shall place in Probate any entity which possesses Units of Currency or which is named as the Payee or Payor of any Payment Order, which does not have an Executor, and which is not already in Probate, as soon as possible after being made aware of this condition. No entity may be destroyed while it possesses Units of Currency or while it is named as the Payee or Payor of any Payment Orders; any attempt to destroy an entity while it is in this condition shall be deferred until this condition no longer holds. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would destroy an entity while it possesses units of Currency. The following definitions apply with respect to entities in Probate: 1. Assets: all units of Currency held by the entity in Probate, along with all Payment Orders naming the entity in Probate as payee. 2. Debt: a Payment Orders naming the entity in Probate as payor. 3. Credit: a Payment Order naming the entity in Probate as payee. 4. Creditor: an entity which is the payee of a debt. 5. Debtor: an entity which is the payor of a credit. 6. Heir: an entity named in the Will (if any) of the entity in Probate. 7. Estate: the assets and debts of the entity in Probate. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3682 (Morendil), 12 February 1998 text: The Notary shall place in Probate any entity which possesses Units of Currency or which is named as the Payee or Payor of any Payment Order, which does not have an Executor, and which is not already in Probate, as soon as possible after being made aware of this condition. No entity may be destroyed while it possesses Units of Currency or while it is named as the Payee or Payor of any Payment Orders; any attempt to destroy an entity while it is in this condition shall be deferred until this condition no longer holds, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. An entity which would otherwise be destroyed but the destruction of which is being deferred due to the foregoing provisions is called 'terminal'. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would destroy an entity while it possesses units of Currency. The following definitions apply with respect to entities in Probate: 1. Assets: all units of Currency held by the entity in Probate, along with all Payment Orders naming the entity in Probate as payee. 2. Debt: a Payment Orders naming the entity in Probate as payor. 3. Credit: a Payment Order naming the entity in Probate as payee. 4. Creditor: an entity which is the payee of a debt. 5. Debtor: an entity which is the payor of a credit. 6. Heir: an entity named in the Will (if any) of the entity in Probate. 7. Estate: the assets and debts of the entity in Probate. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The Notary shall place in Probate any entity which possesses Units of Currency or which is named as the Payee or Payor of any Payment Order, which does not have an Executor, and which is not already in Probate, as soon as possible after being made aware of this condition. No entity may be destroyed while it possesses Units of Currency or while it is named as the Payee or Payor of any Payment Orders; any attempt to destroy an entity while it is in this condition shall be deferred until this condition no longer holds, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. An entity which would otherwise be destroyed but the destruction of which is being deferred due to the foregoing provisions is called 'terminal'. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would destroy an entity while it possesses units of Currency. The following definitions apply with respect to entities in Probate: 1. Assets: all units of Currency held by the entity in Probate, along with all Payment Orders naming the entity in Probate as payee. 2. Debt: a Payment Order naming the entity in Probate as payor. 3. Credit: a Payment Order naming the entity in Probate as payee. 4. Creditor: an entity which is the payee of a debt. 5. Debtor: an entity which is the payor of a credit. 6. Heir: an entity named in the Will (if any) of the entity in Probate. 7. Estate: the assets and debts of the entity in Probate. history: ... history: Amended(7) text: The Notary shall place in Probate any entity which possesses Units of Currency or which is named as the Payee or Payor of any Payment Order, which does not have an Executor, and which is not already in Probate, as soon as possible after being made aware of this condition. No entity may be destroyed while it possesses Units of Currency or while it is named as the Payee or Payor of any Payment Orders; any attempt to destroy an entity while it is in this condition shall be deferred until this condition no longer holds, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would destroy an entity while it possesses units of Currency. The following definitions apply with respect to entities in Probate: 1. Debt: a Payment Order naming the entity in Probate as payor. 2. Credit: a Payment Order naming the entity in Probate as payee. 3. Creditor: an entity which is the payee of a debt. 4. Debtor: an entity which is the payor of a credit. 5. Heir: an entity named in the Will (if any) of the entity in Probate. 6. Assets: the Currency holdings and credits of the entity in Probate. 7. Estate: the assets and debts of the entity in Probate. 8. Terminal: an entity in Probate is terminal unless another Rule states otherwise. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1602 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1602 by Proposal 2504, 3 March 1996 text: Whenever the Rules calls upon some Player to "announce", "post", or "distribute" some communication or notification, this shall be accomplished by posting the communication or notification to the Public Forum. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies some other means of announcing, posting, or distributing a communication or notification. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1603 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1603 by Proposal 2508 (Steve), 3 March 1996 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week in which at least one Card of a Power is held by the Bank, the Assessor shall conduct a Powers Lottery, as set out below, and announce the results of the Lottery in the Public Forum. The Powers Lottery is conducted as follows: the Assessor randomly chooses one Card which is held by the Bank to be the prize of that week's Lottery. The Assessor also randomly chooses an Active Player to be winner of the week's Lottery. The chosen Card is transferred to the winner of the week's Lottery. If the Card chosen to be the prize is a Card of the Power of Influence, then the Card counts as a 3-vote Power of Influence Card. This Rule takes precedence over Rules which describe other ways of determining the influence granted by a Card of the Power of Influence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1604 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1604 by Proposal 2515, 3 March 1996 text: Let there be an Entity known as a Petition which consists of any a body of text designated as a Petition. Let there be an Entity known as a Signature which shall exist only within a Petition, shall be associated with exactly one Player, and which shall be known as that Player's Signature. Any number of Signatures may be contained by a single Petition, but a single Petition may only contain exactly one Signature associated with any single Player. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1605 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1605 by Proposal 2522, 10 March 1996 text: Let there exist a type of entity called a Proposing Entity. Only Proposing Entities have the right to make Proposals, Each Player is a Proposing Entity. Other entities are Proposing Entities only if defined as such by the Rules. Any other Rule notwithstanding, in order to make a Proposal a Proposing Entity must either be a Player or have an Executor which is a Player, and must also possess a Treasury. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Let there exist a type of entity called a Proposing Entity. Only Proposing Entities have the right to make Proposals, Each Player is a Proposing Entity. Other entities are Proposing Entities only if defined as such by the Rules. Any other Rule notwithstanding, in order to make a Proposal, a Proposing Entity must have an Executor. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Let there exist a type of entity called a Proposing Entity. Only Proposing Entities have the right to make Proposals. Each Player is a Proposing Entity. Other entities are Proposing Entities only if defined as such by the Rules. Any other Rule notwithstanding, in order to make a Proposal, a Proposing Entity must have an Executor. history: ... history: Amended(3) text: Let there exist a type of entity called a Proposing Entity. Only Proposing Entities have the right to make Proposals. A Player or other entity is a Proposing Entity only if defined to be so by the Rules. Any other Rule notwithstanding, in order to make a Proposal, a Proposing Entity must have an Executor. history: ... history: Amended(5) text: Let there exist a type of entity called a Proposing Entity. Only Proposing Entities have the right to make Proposals. All Players with less than 10 Blots are Proposing Entities. Other entities are Proposing Entities only if defined to be so by the Rules. Any other Rule notwithstanding, in order to make a Proposal, a Proposing Entity must have an Executor. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1606 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1606 by Proposal 2522, 10 March 1996 text: The effect of the adoption of a Proposal shall be limited to the application of those legally defined Rule Changes and Directives which are contained within the Proposal and which can be clearly identified as such. This Rule defers to any Rule which requires some event to take place as a consequence of the adoption of a Proposal. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1607 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1607 by Proposal 2522, 10 March 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of the Promotor. The Promotor shall receive a weekly salary of 4 Points. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of the Promotor. The Promotor shall receive a weekly salary of 4 Mils. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of the Promotor. The Promotor shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Null-Amended(3) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of the Promotor. The Promotor shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3827 (Kolja A.), 4 February 1999 text: There shall exist the Office of the Promotor. The Promotor shall receive a salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: The Promotor There shall exist the Office of the Promotor. The Promotor shall receive a salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 text: There exists the Office of Promotor, whose responsibility it is to receive and distribute Proposals, and to be the Recordkeepor for P-Notes. The Promotor's Report includes the following information, for each Proposal in the Proposal Queue: i) Its title. ii) Its time of submission. iii) Its Priority, and any changes to its Priority since the last posting of the Queue. However, the actual text of the Proposals in the Queue need not be published. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: There exists the Office of Promotor, whose responsibility it is to receive and distribute Proposals, and to be the Recordkeepor for Proposal Notes. The Promotor's Report shall include the following information for each Proposal in the Proposal Queue: (i) its Title; (ii) its time of submission; (iii) its Priority, and any changes thereto since the last posting of the Report. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 text: There exists the Office of Promotor, whose responsibility it is to receive and distribute Proposals, and to be the Recordkeepor for Papyri. The Promotor's Report shall include a list of the titles and submission dates of all Proposals in the Proposal Pool. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Promotor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of Papyri and is responsible for receiving and distributing proposals. The Promotor's Weekly Report shall include a list of the titles and submission dates of all proposals in the proposal pool. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: The Promotor is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing proposals. The Promotor's Weekly Report shall include a list of the titles and submission dates of all proposals in the proposal pool. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The Promotor is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing proposals. The Promotor is permitted to distribute a proposal in the Proposal Pool at any time. During each week, the Promotor must distribute each proposal in the proposal pool which was in the Proposal Pool at the beginning of the week. The Promotor legally distributes a proposal by publishing it accompanied by an explicit indication that it is being distributed. When a proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. The distribution of a proposal initiates the Agoran decision of whether to adopt the proposal, as described elsewhere. The Promotor shall include with the distribution of each proposal the identity of its proposer, the proposal's coauthors, if any, its chamber, and its adoption index. However, the failure of the Promotor to include any of these with a proposal does not deprive the distribution of the proposal of any legal effect. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 5077 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 text: The Promotor is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing proposals. The Promotor MAY distribute a proposal in the Proposal Pool at any time. During each week, the Promotor SHALL distribute each proposal that has been in the Proposal Pool since the beginning of that week. The Promotor distributes a proposal by publishing it with the clear intent of distributing it. When a proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. The distribution of a proposal initiates the Agoran decision of whether to adopt the proposal, as described elsewhere. When distributing a proposal, the Promotor SHALL specify the following: a) Its author (and co-authors, if any). b) Its adoption index. c) Whether it is ordinary or democratic. d) Whether it is interested or disinterested. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: The Promotor is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing proposals. The Promotor MAY distribute a proposal in the Proposal Pool at any time. During each week, the Promotor SHALL distribute each proposal that has been in the Proposal Pool since the beginning of that week. The Promotor distributes a proposal by publishing it with the clear intent of distributing it. When a proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. The distribution of a proposal initiates the Agoran decision of whether to adopt the proposal, as described elsewhere. When distributing a proposal, the Promotor SHALL specify the following: a) Its author (and co-authors, if any). b) Its adoption index. c) Whether it is ordinary or democratic. d) Whether it is interested or disinterested. Distributed proposals have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Promotor. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5112 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: The Promotor is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing proposals. The Promotor MAY distribute a proposal in the Proposal Pool at any time. During each week, the Promotor SHALL distribute each proposal that has been in the Proposal Pool since the beginning of that week. The Promotor distributes a proposal by publishing it with the clear intent of distributing it. When a proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. The distribution of a proposal initiates the Agoran decision of whether to adopt the proposal, as described elsewhere. When distributing a proposal, the Promotor SHALL specify the following: a) Its author (and co-authors, if any). b) Its adoption index. c) Whether it is ordinary or democratic. d) Whether it is interested or disinterested. Distributed proposals have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Promotor. The Promotor's report includes a list of all proposals in the Proposal Pool. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 text: The Promotor is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing proposals. The Promotor MAY distribute a proposal in the Proposal Pool at any time. During each week, the Promotor SHALL distribute each proposal that has been in the Proposal Pool since the beginning of that week. The Promotor distributes a proposal by publishing it with the clear intent of distributing it. When a proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. The distribution of a proposal initiates the Agoran decision of whether to adopt the proposal, as described elsewhere. When distributing a proposal, the Promotor SHALL specify the following: a) Its author (and co-authors, if any). b) Whether it is interested or disinterested. Distributed proposals have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Promotor. The Promotor's report includes a list of all proposals in the Proposal Pool. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5457 (Murphy), 9 March 2008 text: The Promotor is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing proposals. The Promotor MAY distribute a proposal in the Proposal Pool at any time. During each week, the Promotor SHALL distribute each proposal that has been in the Proposal Pool since the beginning of that week. The Promotor distributes a proposal by publishing it with the clear intent of distributing it. When a proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. The distribution of a proposal initiates the Agoran decision of whether to adopt the proposal, as described elsewhere. For an Agoran decision of whether to adopt a proposal, the following are essential parameters: a) Its author (and co-authors, if any). b) Its interest index. Distributed proposals have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Promotor. The Promotor's report includes a list of all proposals in the Proposal Pool. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5485 (root), 9 April 2008 text: The Promotor is an office; its holder is responsible for receiving and distributing proposals. The Promotor MAY distribute a proposal in the Proposal Pool at any time. The Promotor's weekly duties include the distribution of each proposal that has been in the Proposal Pool since the beginning of that week. The Promotor distributes a proposal by publishing it with the clear intent of distributing it. When a proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. The distribution of a proposal initiates the Agoran decision of whether to adopt the proposal, as described elsewhere. For an Agoran decision of whether to adopt a proposal, the following are essential parameters: a) Its author (and co-authors, if any). b) Its interest index. Distributed proposals have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Promotor. The Promotor's report includes a list of all proposals in the Proposal Pool. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1608 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1608 by Proposal 2523, 10 March 1996 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Rule 1608, 15 March 1996 text: A Mil is a variable quantity of Marks. The 'ideal value' of the Mil is equal to one thousandth of all the Marks in existence which were not held by the Bank at the beginning of the current game. However, negative quantities of Marks do not exist for the purposes of this Rule. The 'posted value' of the Mil is the value of the Mil last posted by the Banker. The 'actual value' or 'legal value' of the Mil is the value of the Mil used for the purposes of calculating the sizes of various transfers made in Mil, and it is always equal to the last posted value of the Mil to become the actual value. A posted value of the Mil only becomes the actual value as specified in this Rule. As soon as possible after the legal and correct announcement that a Game has ended, the Banker shall calculate the ideal value of the Mil and post the result of eir calculation to the Public Forum. If the Banker's calculation of the ideal value of the Mil remains unchalleged by COE or CFJ for 72 hours after it is published, then the posted value of the Mil becomes the actual value, as of the end of the 72 hour period. If the posted value of the Mil is challenged by COE or CFJ within 72 hours of its publication, then the actual value of the Mil shall then be determined according to the following provisions: If it is determined as a result of the COE or CFJ that the posted value of the Mil differs from the ideal value by less than or equal to 5% of the ideal value, then the posted value of the Mil becomes the actual value. If it is determined as a result of the COE or CFJ that the posted value of the Mil differs from the ideal value by greater than 5% of the ideal value, the Banker shall, within 72 hours, recalculate the ideal value of the Mil and post the result of eir calculation to the Public Forum. This new posted value is subject to all the conditions set out in this Rule for a posted value of the Mil to become the actual value. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2688, 3 October 1996 text: A Mil is a variable quantity of Marks. The 'ideal value' of the Mil is equal to one thousandth of all the Marks in existence which were not held by the Bank at the beginning of the month. However, negative quantities of Marks do not exist for the purposes of this Rule. The 'posted value' of the Mil is the value of the Mil last posted by the Banker. The 'actual value' or 'legal value' of the Mil is the value of the Mil used for the purposes of calculating the sizes of various transfers made in Mil, and it is always equal to the last posted value of the Mil to become the actual value. A posted value of the Mil only becomes the actual value as specified in this Rule. As soon as possible after the beginning of the month, the Banker shall calculate the ideal value of the Mil and post the result of eir calculation to the Public Forum. If the Banker's calculation of the ideal value of the Mil remains unchalleged by COE or CFJ for 72 hours after it is published, then the posted value of the Mil becomes the actual value, as of the end of the 72 hour period. If the posted value of the Mil is challenged by COE or CFJ within 72 hours of its publication, then the actual value of the Mil shall then be determined according to the following provisions: If it is determined as a result of the COE or CFJ that the posted value of the Mil differs from the ideal value by less than or equal to 5% of the ideal value, then the posted value of the Mil becomes the actual value. If it is determined as a result of the COE or CFJ that the posted value of the Mil differs from the ideal value by greater than 5% of the ideal value, the Banker shall, within 72 hours, recalculate the ideal value of the Mil and post the result of eir calculation to the Public Forum. This new posted value is subject to all the conditions set out in this Rule for a posted value of the Mil to become the actual value. history: ... history: Amended(3) text: A Mil is a variable quantity of Marks. The 'ideal value' of the Mil is equal to the integral portion of the value equal to one thousandth of all the Marks in existence which were not held by the Bank at the beginning of the month. However, negative quantities of Marks do not exist for the purposes of this Rule. The 'posted value' of the Mil is the value of the Mil last posted by the Banker. The 'actual value' or 'legal value' of the Mil is the value of the Mil used for the purposes of calculating the sizes of various transfers made in Mil, and it is always equal to the last posted value of the Mil to become the actual value. A posted value of the Mil only becomes the actual value as specified in this Rule. As soon as possible after the beginning of the month, the Banker shall calculate the ideal value of the Mil and post the result of eir calculation to the Public Forum. If the Banker's calculation of the ideal value of the Mil remains unchalleged by COE or CFJ for 72 hours after it is published, then the posted value of the Mil becomes the actual value, as of the end of the 72 hour period. If the posted value of the Mil is challenged by COE or CFJ within 72 hours of its publication, then the actual value of the Mil shall then be determined according to the following provisions: If it is determined as a result of the COE or CFJ that the posted value of the Mil differs from the ideal value by less than or equal to 5% of the ideal value, then the posted value of the Mil becomes the actual value. If it is determined as a result of the COE or CFJ that the posted value of the Mil differs from the ideal value by greater than 5% of the ideal value, the Banker shall, within 72 hours, recalculate the ideal value of the Mil and post the result of eir calculation to the Public Forum. This new posted value is subject to all the conditions set out in this Rule for a posted value of the Mil to become the actual value. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1609 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1609 by Proposal 2524, 10 March 1996 text: Wizard Transition is the process by which one Player ceases to be Wizard while, at the same time, another Player becomes the Wizard. Wizard Transition occurs when any of the following happens: i) There is a legal and correct announcement of a Game End. ii) The Wizard goes (or is already) On Hold iii) The Wizard no longer wishes to be Wizard. The Wizard must initiate a Wizard Transition as soon as possible after any of these events by announcing the initiation in the Public Forum stating that a Wizard Transition is taking Place. The announcement must contain a Transition List containing the names of all Players who are not On Hold and not the Wizard, in descending order of their Style. If the Transition is occurring as a result of a Game End, the Style used for this ordering is the Style the Players had immediately prior to the legal announcement of the Game End. Otherwise, it is the Players' current Style. In the case of Players with the same Style, those Players' order is randomly determined by the Wizard. (As long as the list as a whole is ordered by descending Style.) Upon the announcement of the Transition, the first Player on the Transition List (The Player with the highest Style) immediately becomes the Wizard, and the Player who initiated the Transition ceases to be the Wizard. If a Player ever ceases to be Wizard before initiating a Wizard Transition, or if there is, for any reason, no Player legally designated as the Wizard, the Speaker shall immediately become the Wizard and, as soon as possible thereafter, initiate a Wizard Transition. A Player may only become the Wizard as provided for in this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: Wizard Transition is the process by which one Player ceases to be Wizard while, at the same time, another Player becomes the Wizard. Wizard Transition occurs when any of the following happens: i) A new quarter has begun. ii) The Wizard goes (or is already) On Hold iii) The Wizard no longer wishes to be Wizard. The Wizard must initiate a Wizard Transition as soon as possible after any of these events by announcing the initiation in the Public Forum stating that a Wizard Transition is taking Place. The announcement must contain a Transition List containing the names of all Players who are not On Hold and not the Wizard, in descending order of their Style. If the Transition is occurring as a result of the beginning of a new quarter, the Style used for this ordering is the Style the Players had immediately prior to the beginning of that quarter. Otherwise, it is the Players' current Style. In the case of Players with the same Style, those Players' order is randomly determined by the Wizard. (As long as the list as a whole is ordered by descending Style.) Upon the announcement of the Transition, the first Player on the Transition List (The Player with the highest Style) immediately becomes the Wizard, and the Player who initiated the Transition ceases to be the Wizard. If a Player ever ceases to be Wizard before initiating a Wizard Transition, or if there is, for any reason, no Player legally designated as the Wizard, the Speaker shall immediately become the Wizard and, as soon as possible thereafter, initiate a Wizard Transition. A Player may only become the Wizard as provided for in this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1609 by Proposal 3529 (Steve), 8 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1610 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1610 by Proposal 2524, 10 March 1996 text: When a Wizard Transition is initiated (as described in other Rules) Players have the option to decline becoming the Wizard. The new Wizard has the option of declining within 72 hours after becoming the Wizard by posting a message to the Public Forum saying e doesn't wish to be Wizard. If this decline is made, that Player's name is stricken from the Transition list (as if eir name never appeared upon it), and that Player ceases to be the Wizard. The next Player in descending order immediately becomes the first Player on the Transition list and becomes Wizard, with the same option of declining. A decline may also be done before a Player becomes Wizard, and any Player who does so has eir name stricken from the Transition list as if eir name had never appeared upon it. However, any decline by a Wizard that is not made within 72 hours of eir becoming Wizard is void and without effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1610 by Proposal 3529 (Steve), 8 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1611 history: Created, ca. Mar. 10 1996 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1612 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1612 by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: For each Organization, let there be a SLC associated with that Organization called its Compact. Unless otherwise specified in the Compact, a Compact can be changed by the unanimous consent of all the Players within its Jurisdiction. The Administrator of an Organization is the Maintainer of the Organization's Compact. The Jurisdiction of an Organization's Compact can vary over the period of its existence. the Administrator of the Organization shall maintain a record of the Compact's Jurisdiction. The Compact of an Organization ceases to exist when the Organization ceases to exist. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: Unless otherwise specified in an Organization's SLC, that SLC can be changed by the unanimous consent of all the Players within the SLCs Jurisdiction. The Jurisdiction of an Organization's SLC is permitted to vary over the period of its existence. The SLC of an Organization ceases to exist when the Organization ceases to exist. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4181 (Murphy), 9 July 2001 text: Each Organization has an associated SLC, known as its Charter. The Charter of an Organization may only change as specified by its Charter or by the Rules. A Member of an Organization is a Player within the jurisdiction of its Charter. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no Player shall ever involuntarily become a Member of an Organization. When an Organization ceases to exist, its Charter ceases to exist. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1612 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1613 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1613 by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: An Organization possesses a Treasury if and only if: a) the Rules specify that Organizations of its class possess one, and b) there is a Player who is that Organization's Executor. The Administrator of an Organization must notify the Notary as soon as possible after the identity of the Executor of that Organization, if any, changes. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 24 March 1996 text: An Organization possesses a Treasury if and only if: a) the Rules specify that Organizations of its class possess one, and b) there is a Player who is that Organization's Executor. The Administrator of an Organization must notify the Notary as soon as possible after the identity of the Executor of that Organization, if any, changes. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1614 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1614 by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: An entity is an Organization only if it has a name defined for it, and if that name is distinnct from the name of every other Organization. The name of an Organization cannot be changed in a manner such that if, after that change, two or more Organizations would have the same name. An Organization cannot be created if after that creation, two or more Organization would have the same name. Otherwise, the name of an Organization cany only be changed as specified by its Compact, or, in lieu of any specific procedure in its Compact, with the unanimous consent of all the Players within its Compact's Jurisdiction. The Administrator of an Organization shall notify the Notary as soon as possible after the Organization's name is changed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: The Name of all Organizations shall be unique. No action is permitted that would allow either a nameless Organization to exist, or a Organization to exist with a Name that duplicates that of another Nomic Entity. The Name of an Organization shall only be changed as specified by its SLC, or as specified in the Rules. If no other procedure is specified, the Name of any Organization shall change with the unanimous consent of all Players within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC. This Rule defers to Rules pertaining to a specific class of Organization. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The Name of all Organizations shall be unique. No action is permitted that would allow either a nameless Organization to exist, or an Organization to exist with a Name that duplicates that of another Nomic Entity. The Name of an Organization shall only be changed as specified by its SLC, or as specified in the Rules. If no other procedure is specified, the Name of any Organization shall change with the unanimous consent of all Players within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC. This Rule defers to Rules pertaining to a specific class of Organization. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3889 (harvel), 9 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3950 (harvel), 8 December 1999 text: The Name of each Organization shall be unique. No action is permitted that would allow either a nameless Organization to exist, or an Organization to exist with a Name that duplicates that of another Nomic Entity. The Name of an Organization shall only be changed as specified by its SLC, or as specified in the Rules. If no other procedure is specified, the Name of any Organization shall change with the unanimous consent of all Players within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3968 (harvel), 4 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3999 (harvel), 2 May 2000 text: Each Organization shall have a unique name. No action is permitted that would allow either a nameless Organization to exist. The Name of an Organization shall only be changed as specified by its SLC, or as specified in the Rules. If no other procedure is specified, the Name of any Organization shall change with the unanimous consent of all Players within the Jurisdiction of that Organization's SLC. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4181 (Murphy), 9 July 2001 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Each Organization has a unique Name. The Name of an Organization may only change as specified by its Charter or by the Rules. text: Each Organization has a unique Name. The Name of an Organization may only change as specified by its Charter or by the Rules. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1614 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1615 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1615 by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: An Organization shall only be dissolved when either the Rules require it or the Organization's Compact requires it. The event of an Organization being required to dissolve by the Rules is called an Administrative Dissolution. The Notary is required to detect when an Administrative Dissolution takes place. The event of an Organization being required to dissolve by its Compact is called a Voluntary Dissolution. The Administrator of an Organization is required to detect when a Voluntary Dissolution takes place and to report this to the Notary as soon as possible, as eir last duty as Administrator. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1616 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1616 by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: Upon the dissolution of an Organization, that Organization ceases to exist. As soon as possible after an Organization dissolves, for any reason, the Notary shall report that dissolution to the Public Forum. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 4 June 1996 text: Upon the dissolution of an Organization, that Organization ceases to exist. As soon as possible after an Organization dissolves, for any reason, the Notary shall report that dissolution to the Public Forum. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1617 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1617 by Proposal 2525, 10 March 1996 text: The Jurisdiction of a Compact shall only be changed in accordance with that Compact and the Rules. In any case, no Player shall ever be made part of the Jurisdiction of any Compact without eir consent. The Administrator of a Compact shall notify the Notary as soon as possible after that Compact's Jurisdiction changes. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2725, 23 October 1996 text: The Jurisdiction of an Organization's SLC shall only be changed in accordance with that SLC and with the Rules. If there are no provisions for changing such an SLC, then the SLC can not be changed. No Player shall ever be made part of the Jurisdiction of the SLC of any Organization without eir consent. This takes precedence over any Rule that would permit a Player to be involuntarily made part of the Jurisdiction of such a SLC. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1617 by Proposal 4181 (Murphy), 9 July 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1618 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1618 by Proposal 2520 (Steve), 10 March 1996 text: In the case where two or more Rules which define specific Powers conflict in their effects, then if one of the Rules claims to take precedence over all other Rules which define specific Powers, that Rule shall have precedence. Otherwise, precedence shall be determined by reverse order of casting, that is, the Rule defining the latest cast Power shall have precedence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1619 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1619 by Proposal 2546, 22 March 1996 text: No two Nomic Entities (including Players) shall have the same name or nickname. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1620 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1620 by Proposal 2563, 6 April 1996 text: Each Group has associated with it a Currency. This Currency is created when the Group is created. The Name of this Currency is formed by appending the word "Coins" to the Name of the Group. The Recordkeepor of this Currency is the Vizier of the Group. The Mintor of this Currency is the Group itself. Each Group has Mint Authority. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1621 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1621 by Proposal 2563, 6 April 1996 text: As soon as possible after a Group is created, the Notary shall publish the name of the Group, its initial Membership, and the identities of its Vizier and Ordinancekeepor to the Public Forum. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1622 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1622 by Proposal 2559, 12 April 1996 text: Players shall be permitted to forfeit the current Game by sending a notification to that effect to the Public Forum. Forfeiting the current Game is a Win-preventing condition which prevails from the time such notification is sent until the End of the current Game. Being the only Active Player who has not forfeited the current Game constitutes a Win condition. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2693, 3 October 1996 text: Players shall be permitted to forfeit the current Game by sending a notification to that effect to the Public Forum. Forfeiting the current Game is a Win-preventing condition which prevails from the time such notification is sent until the End of the current Game. Being the only Active Player who has not forfeited the current Game constitutes a Win condition. No Player already holding any Winner's Cup may Win in this manner. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2697, 10 October 1996 text: Players shall be permitted to forfeit the current Game by sending a notification to that effect to the Public Forum. Forfeiting the current Game is a Win-preventing condition which prevails from the time of such notification until either some other Player has won the Game, or until three months have elapsed from the time of the notification, whichever comes first. Being the only Active Player who has not forfeited the current Game constitutes a Win condition. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1622 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1623 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1623 by Proposal 2581, 21 April 1996 text: A Proposal is Disinterested if the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Disinterested Proposal. Whenever a Disinterested Proposal is distributed, it must be clearly marked as such. Whatever the outcome of voting on a Disinterested Proposal, no transfer of Currencies, Blots, or any other class of Entities which might occur solely as a result of voting upon such a Proposal, shall legally take place. In addition, no changes in Style shall result from Disinterested Proposals. Any penalties resulting from the act of submitting a Proposal, such as for excess Proposals, remain applicable. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule seeking to effect transfers prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2597, 11 May 1996 text: A Proposal is Disinterested if the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Disinterested Proposal. Whenever a Disinterested Proposal is distributed, it must be clearly marked as such. Whatever the outcome of voting on a Disinterested Proposal, no transfer of Currencies, Blots, or any other class of Entities which might occur solely as a result of the proto-proposing of, voting upon or adoption of such a Proposal, shall legally take place. In addition, no changes in Style shall result from Disinterested Proposals. Any penalties resulting from the act of submitting a Proposal, such as for excess Proposals, remain applicable. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule seeking to effect transfers prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2636, 12 July 1996 text: A Proposal is Disinterested if the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Disinterested Proposal. Whenever a Disinterested Proposal is distributed, it must be clearly marked as such. Whatever the outcome of voting on a Disinterested Proposal, no transfer of Currencies, Blots, or any other class of Entities which might occur solely as a result of the proto-proposing of, voting upon or adoption of such a Proposal, shall legally take place; unless the Rule which requires the transfer explicitly states that the transfer applies to a Disinterested Proposal. In addition, no changes in Style shall result from Disinterested Proposals. Any penalties resulting from the act of submitting a Proposal, such as for excess Proposals, remain applicable. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule seeking to effect transfers prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by Proposal 2738 (Swann), 7 November 1996 text: A Proposal is Disinterested if the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Disinterested Proposal. Whenever a Disinterested Proposal is distributed, it must be clearly marked as such. Whatever the outcome of voting on a Disinterested Proposal, no transfer of Currencies, Blots, or any other class of Entities which might occur solely as a result of the proto-proposing of, voting upon or adoption of such a Proposal, shall legally take place; unless the Rule which requires the transfer explicitly states that the transfer applies to a Disinterested Proposal. In addition, no changes in Style shall result from Disinterested Proposals. Any penalties resulting from the act of submitting a Proposal, such as for excess Proposals, remain applicable. All Amendments within a Disinterested Proposal shall be Unattributed. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule seeking to effect transfers prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 2815 (Zefram), 15 February 1997 text: A Proposal is Disinterested if the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Disinterested Proposal. Whenever a Disinterested Proposal is distributed, it must be clearly marked as such. No transfer of Currencies, Blots or other Entities which occur as a result of voting upon or adoption of such a Proposal, other than those caused by the Proposal taking effect, shall take place, unless the Rule which requires the transfer explicitly states that the transfer applies to Disinterested Proposals. All Amendments within a Disinterested Proposal shall be Unattributed. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule seeking to effect transfers prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 2829 (Zefram), 7 March 1997 text: Each Proposal is either Interested or Disinterested. A Proposal is Disinterested if the method by which it is submitted specifically states that it is Disinterested, otherwise it is Interested. All Rule Changes in Disinterested Proposals are Unattributed. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Proposal 3474 (Swann), 2 May 1997 text: A Proposal is Disinterested if either of the following is true of it: i) The text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Disinterested Proposal. ii) The Proposal's Petition fee (as described in other Rules) has not been paid to the Bank before the Proposal is distributed. Whenever a Disinterested Proposal is distributed, it must be clearly marked as such. No transfer of Currencies, Blots or other Entities which occur as a result of voting upon or adoption of such a Proposal, other than those caused by the Proposal taking effect, shall take place, unless the Rule which requires the transfer explicitly states that the transfer applies to Disinterested Proposals. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule seeking to effect transfers prohibited by this Rule. history: Amended(7) Substantially by Proposal 3487 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: A Proposal is Disinterested if its Petition fee has not been paid to the Bank by the time it is distributed. If a Proposal is not Disinterested, it is Interested. All Rule Changes in a Disinterested Proposal are Unattributed. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Proposal 3537 (Steve), 24 July 1997 text: A Proposal is Disinterested if its Petition fee has not been paid to the Bank by the time it is distributed. If a Proposal is not Disinterested, it is Interested. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 text: A Proposal is Disinterested if the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Disinterested Proposal. If a Proposal is not Disinterested, it is Interested. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3867 (Blob), 24 May 1999 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: A Proposal may be Interested or Disinterested. All Proposals are Interested when made. The Proposer of a Proposal may cause it to become Disinterested, without objection, but only if the Proposal has not yet been distributed. text: A Proposal may be Interested or Disinterested. All Proposals are Interested when made. The Proposer of a Proposal may cause it to become Disinterested, without objection, but only if the Proposal has not yet been distributed. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3968 (harvel), 4 February 2000 text: A Proposal may be Interested or Disinterested. Each Proposal is Interested when made. The Proposer of a Proposal may cause it to become Disinterested, without objection, but only if the Proposal has not yet been distributed. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4523 (Murphy), 28 August 2003 text: Interest is a stuck proposal switch with values interested and disinterested. A player may flip an undistributed proposal's interest to disinterested, without objection. When a proposal becomes disinterested, it becomes distributable, and its depth may not be flipped to undistributable while it remains disinterested. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1623 by Proposal 4753 (Sherlock), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1624 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1624 by Proposal 2582, 21 April 1996 text: At the beginning of every Nomic Week in which at least two Players hold more than one Win Token, the Tabulator shall randomly select one such Player. That Player loses a number of Points equal to eir Win Tokens, which shall be reported by the Tabulator at the time e publishes eir Report. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2595, 11 May 1996 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of any Nomic Week in which at least two Players hold more than one Win Token, the Tabulator shall randomly select one such Player. That Player loses a number of Points equal to eir Win Tokens, which shall be reported by the Tabulator no later than the time e publishes eir Report. This transfer takes effect when reported. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of any Nomic Week in which at least two Players hold more than one Win Token, the Tabulator shall randomly select one such Player. That Player loses a number of Mils equal to eir Win Tokens, which shall be reported by the Tabulator no later than the time e publishes eir Report. This transfer takes effect when reported. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of any Nomic Week in which at least two Players hold more than one Win Token, the Tabulator shall randomly select one such Player. That Player loses a number of Mil equal to eir Win Tokens, which shall be reported by the Tabulator no later than the time e publishes eir Report. This transfer takes effect when reported. history: Infected and Amended(4) by Rule 1454, 1 November 1996 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of any Nomic Week in which at least two Players hold more than one Win Token, the Tabulator shall randomly select one such Player. That Player loses a number of Mil equal to eir Win Tokens, which shall be reported by the Tabulator no later than the time e publishes eir Report. This transfer takes effect when reported. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 2749 (favor), 18 November 1996 text: As soon as possible after the end of any Nomic Week in which at least two Players hold more than one Win Token, the Tabulator shall randomly select one such Player. That Player loses a number of Mil equal to eir Win Tokens, which shall be reported by the Tabulator no later than the time e publishes eir Report. This transfer takes effect when reported. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1625 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1625 by Proposal 2590, 1 May 1996 text: A Player who discloses the Vote or Votes cast by a Voting Entity before the end of the Voting Period of a Proposal commits the Crime of Breach of Voting Secrecy, a Class C Crime, unless one or more of the following applies: a) that Player did not at any time during the Voting Period of that Proposal, hold the Office of Assessor; b) that Player is the Executor of the Voting Entity whose Vote(s) were disclosed; c) the disclosure is made only to the Voting Entity (or its Executor) whose Vote(s) were disclosed; or d) the disclosure is required by another Rule. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 11 May 1996 text: A Player who discloses the Vote or Votes cast by a Voting Entity before the end of the Voting Period of a Proposal commits the Crime of Breach of Voting Secrecy, a Class C Crime, unless one or more of the following applies: a) that Player did not at any time during the Voting Period of that Proposal, hold the Office of Assessor; b) that Player is the Executor of the Voting Entity whose Vote(s) were disclosed; c) the disclosure is made only to the Voting Entity (or its Executor) whose Vote(s) were disclosed; or d) the disclosure is required by another Rule. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: A Player who discloses the Vote or Votes cast by a Voting Entity before the end of the Voting Period of a Proposal commits the Crime of Breach of Voting Secrecy, a Class C Crime, unless one or more of the following applies: a) that Player did not at any time during the Voting Period of that Proposal, hold the Office of Assessor; b) that Player is the Executor of the Voting Entity whose Vote(s) were disclosed; c) the disclosure is made only to the Voting Entity (or its Executor) whose Vote(s) were disclosed; or d) the disclosure is required by another Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3758 (Steve), 19 June 1998 text: A Player who discloses the Vote or Votes cast by a Voting Entity before the end of the Voting Period of a Proposal commits the Crime of Breach of Voting Secrecy, a Class C Crime, unless one or more of the following applies: a) that Player did not at any time during the Voting Period of that Proposal, hold the Office of Assessor; b) that Player is the Executor of the Voting Entity whose Vote(s) were disclosed; c) the disclosure is made only to the Voting Entity (or its Executor) whose Vote(s) were disclosed; or d) the disclosure is required by another Rule. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, has no effect. Two months after this paragraph is added to this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3780 (Steve), 12 August 1998 text: A Player who discloses the Vote or Votes cast by a Voting Entity before the end of the Voting Period of a Proposal commits the Crime of Breach of Voting Secrecy, a Class C Crime, unless one or more of the following applies: a) that Player did not at any time during the Voting Period of that Proposal, hold the Office of Assessor; b) that Player is the Executor of the Voting Entity whose Vote(s) were disclosed; c) the disclosure is made only to the Voting Entity (or its Executor) whose Vote(s) were disclosed; or d) the disclosure is required by another Rule. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, has no effect. Two months after this paragraph is added to this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, has no effect. Two months after this paragraph is added to this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1625 by Proposal 3792 (Steve), 6 October 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1626 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1626 by Proposal 2605, 26 May 1996 text: An Application is any body of text designated as such by its creator, provided that its creator is a Player. Once created, an Application may not be changed, except by adding Signatures to it or striking Signatures from it. An Application is destroyed and ceases to exist 14 days after its creation unless Executed before that time. Once Executed, a Application cannot be changed in any way or destroyed except as required by the Rules. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3565 (General Chaos), 24 October 1997 text: An Application is any body of text designated as such by a Player. This Player is known as its Sponsor. A Player's Signature is added to an Application when e sends a message to that Application's Sponsor indicating that e wishes to sign it. A Player's Signature is stricken from the Application when e sends a message to the Sponsor of the Application stating that e wishes eir signature stricken. Further, the Sponsor of an Application may strike any Signature from the Application at any time. If an Application is amended in any way (except to add or strike a Signature), any and all Signatures which appear on it are stricken from it. An Application is Executed when its Sponsor submits it to whatever Officer or other Player is designated by the Rules to receive Applications of that particular type, with whatever effect is defined by the Rules for the Execution of that type of Application. However, any other Rule notwithstanding, the Execution of an Application shall have no effect unless Executed within 14 days of the time the oldest Signature which appears on it was added. If a Player Executes an Application which contains Signatures added to it in a manner inconsistent with this Rule, e commits the Crime of Application Fraud, a Class D Crime. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: An Application is any body of text designated as such by a Player. This Player is known as its Sponsor. A Player's Signature is added to an Application when e sends a message to that Application's Sponsor indicating that e wishes to sign it. A Player's Signature is stricken from the Application when e sends a message to the Sponsor of the Application stating that e wishes eir signature stricken. Further, the Sponsor of an Application may strike any Signature from the Application at any time. If an Application is amended in any way (except to add or strike a Signature), any and all Signatures which appear on it are stricken from it. An Application is Executed when its Sponsor submits it to whatever Officer or other Player is designated by the Rules to receive Applications of that particular type, with whatever effect is defined by the Rules for the Execution of that type of Application. However, any other Rule notwithstanding, the Execution of an Application shall have no effect unless Executed within 14 days of the time the oldest Signature which appears on it was added. If a Player Executing an Application claims that the Application contains certain Signatures, but the purported Signatures have not been added to it in a manner consistent with this Rule, e commits the Crime of Application Fraud, a Class D Crime. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: An Application is any body of text designated as such by a Player. This Player is known as its Sponsor. A Player's Signature is added to an Application when e sends a message to that Application's Sponsor indicating that e wishes to sign it. A Player's Signature is stricken from the Application when e sends a message to the Sponsor of the Application stating that e wishes eir signature stricken. Further, the Sponsor of an Application may strike any Signature from the Application at any time. If an Application is amended in any way (except to add or strike a Signature), any and all Signatures which appear on it are stricken from it. An Application is Executed when its Sponsor submits it to whatever Officer or other Player is designated by the Rules to receive Applications of that particular type, with whatever effect is defined by the Rules for the Execution of that type of Application. However, any other Rule notwithstanding, the Execution of an Application shall have no effect unless Executed within 14 days of the time the oldest Signature which appears on it was added. If a Player Executing an Application claims that the Application contains certain Signatures, but the purported Signatures have not been added to it in a manner consistent with this Rule, e commits the Class 4 Crime of Application Fraud. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4159 (Kelly), 5 June 2001 text: An Application is any document which has been clearly labeled as an Application and which has been submitted as an Application by some person. That person is known as the Application's Sponsor. The Sponsor of an Application may attach the signatures of other persons, or signatories, to the Application at the time e submits it. The Sponsor may not attach any signature to an Application without first having obtained the explicit consent of the signatory. A signatory may revoke eir consent, once granted, by informing the Sponsor. An Application is submitted by sending it to a Player designed by the Rules to receive Applications of that particular type, bearing a clear indication that the document in question is intended to be an Application and that it is being submitted by the Sponsor as an Application. If the Rules do not otherwise designate a Player to receive a particular type of Application, the Speaker shall do so. The effect of submitting an valid Application is determined by the Rules pertaining to Applications of that particular type. A person who submits an Application with signatures attached belonging to any person who has not consented to having eir signature attached to that Application commits the Class 4 Crime of Application Fraud. An Application submitted with attached signatures belonging to a person who did not consent to such attachment is invalid. Signatures are presumed to have been attached with the consent of the signatory. This presumption shall be rebutted only by a declaration from the alleged signatory, made within 60 days of the submission of the Application, stating that the signatory did not consent or that e consented and then subsequently revoked eir consent. The Sponsor bears the burden of proof to show that such a declaration, once made, is false. It shall be a defense to the Crime of Application Fraud that the Sponsor did not receive a signatory's notice of revocation. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: An Application is any document, which has been submitted as an Application by some person, to a Player designed by the Rules to receive Applications of that particular type. The submittor is known as the Application's Sponsor. The Sponsor of an Application may attach the signatures of other persons, or signatories, to the Application at the time e submits it. The Sponsor may not attach any signature to an Application without first having obtained the explicit consent of the signatory. A signatory may revoke eir consent, once granted, by informing the Sponsor before submission. Signatures are presumed to have been attached with the consent of the signatory. This presumption shall be rebutted only by a declaration from the alleged signatory, made within 60 days of the submission of the Application, stating that the signatory did not consent or that e consented and then subsequently revoked eir consent. The Sponsor bears the burden of proof to show that such a declaration, once made, is false. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: An Application is any document, which has been submitted as an Application by some person, to a Player designed by the Rules to receive Applications of that particular type. The submitter is known as the Application's Sponsor. The Sponsor of an Application may attach the signatures of other persons, or signatories, to the Application at the time e submits it. The Sponsor may not attach any signature to an Application without first having obtained the explicit consent of the signatory. A signatory may revoke eir consent, once granted, by informing the Sponsor before submission. Signatures are presumed to have been attached with the consent of the signatory. This presumption shall be rebutted only by a declaration from the alleged signatory, made within 60 days of the submission of the Application, stating that the signatory did not consent or that e consented and then subsequently revoked eir consent. The Sponsor bears the burden of proof to show that such a declaration, once made, is false. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1626 by Proposal 5025 (BobTHJ), 25 June 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1627 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1627 by Proposal 2605, 26 May 1996 text: A Player's Signature is added to an Application when e sends a message to the creator of that Application indicating that e is signing that Application. A Player's Signature is stricken from an Application when e sends a message to the creator of that Application indicating that e is striking eir signature from that Application. No Signature may be added or striken from an Application after it has been Executed. Signatures may not otherwise be added to or removed from an Application except as specified in the Rules. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2632, 4 July 1996 text: A Player's Signature is added to an Application when e sends a message to the creator of that Application indicating that e is signing that Application. A Player's Signature is stricken from an Application when e sends a message to the creator of that Application indicating that e is striking eir signature from that Application. No Signature may be added or stricken from an Application after it has been Executed. Signatures may not otherwise be added to or removed from an Application except as specified in the Rules. history: Infected and Amended(2) by Rule 1454, 18 September 1996 text: A Player's Signature is added to an Application when e sends a message to the creator of that Application indicating that e is signing that Application. A Player's Signature is stricken from an Application when e sends a message to the creator of that Application indicating that e is striking eir signature from that Application. No Signature may be added or stricken from an Application after it has been Executed. Signatures may not otherwise be added to or removed from an Application except as specified in the Rules. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: A Player's Signature is added to an Application when e sends a message to the creator of that Application indicating that e is signing that Application. A Player's Signature is stricken from an Application when e sends a message to the creator of that Application indicating that e is striking eir signature from that Application. No Signature may be added or stricken from an Application after it has been Executed. Signatures may not otherwise be added to or removed from an Application except as specified in the Rules. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1627 by Proposal 3565 (General Chaos), 24 October 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1628 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1628 by Proposal 2605, 26 May 1996 text: An Application is Executed when its creator sends it to the Officer or other Player specified in the Rules pertaining to that type of Application (or to the Public Forum), clearly indicating that e is Executing it at that time. An Application cannot be Executed in any other way. The effect of Executing an Application is determined by the Rules pertaining to that type of Application. Executing an Application of a type not defined by the Rules has no effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1628 by Proposal 3565 (General Chaos), 24 October 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1629 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1629 by Proposal 2605, 26 May 1996 text: If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Crime of Application Fraud, a Class D Crime. history: Infected and Amended(1) Substantially by Rule 1454, 7 July 1997 text: If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Crime of Application Fraud, a Class D Crime. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1629, 21 July 1997 text: If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Crime of Application Fraud, a Class D Crime. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1629 by Proposal 3565 (General Chaos), 24 October 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1630 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1630 by Proposal 2606, 26 May 1996 text: Any Player who knowingly attempts to act as, or purports to be, the Executor of an Entity, of which e is not the Executor, commits the Crime of Impersonation, a Class C Crime. history: Infected and Amended(1) Substantially by Rule 1454, 12 October 1997 text: Any Player who knowingly attempts to act as, or purports to be, the Executor of an Entity, of which e is not the Executor, commits the Crime of Impersonation, a Class C Crime. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1630, 26 October 1997 text: Any Player who knowingly attempts to act as, or purports to be, the Executor of an Entity, of which e is not the Executor, commits the Crime of Impersonation, a Class C Crime. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: Any Player who knowingly attempts to act as, or purports to be, the Executor of an Entity, of which e is not the Executor, commits the Class 4 Crime of Impersonation. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1630 by Proposal 4759 (Manu, Sherlock), 15 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1631 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1631 by Proposal 2607, 26 May 1996 text: The Game of Agora shall petition, in whatever manner the Liaison shall deem adequate, to be a member of InterNomic. As soon as possible after Agora becomes a member of InterNomic, the Liaison shall notify such to the Public Forum. This Rule shall than be amended so that this Paragraph reads "The Game of Agora shall be a member of InterNomic". There is an Office known as the Liaison. The duty of the Liaison is to be the contact between Agora and the Game of InterNomic. The Liaison must at least once per week issue a report, which must contain: - All Proposals of InterNomic which are up to vote at that moment - All Proposals of InterNomic for which the Voting Period has ended since the last report, and the outcome of these Votes - All Statements for Judgement that have been submitted in InterNomic since the last report, and which Nomic has been selected to judge it. - All Statements for Judgement that have been judged since the last report, and the outcome of the Judgement. However, the Liaison is only obliged to give information that could reasonably be known to em. Furthermore the Liaison is to maintain the following records: - The ruleset of InterNomic. history: Amended(1) by Rule 1631, 1 August 1996 text: The Game of Agora shall be a member of InterNomic. There is an Office known as the Liaison. The duty of the Liaison is to be the contact between Agora and the Game of InterNomic. The Liaison must at least once per week issue a report, which must contain: - All Proposals of InterNomic which are up to vote at that moment - All Proposals of InterNomic for which the Voting Period has ended since the last report, and the outcome of these Votes - All Statements for Judgement that have been submitted in InterNomic since the last report, and which Nomic has been selected to judge it. - All Statements for Judgement that have been judged since the last report, and the outcome of the Judgement. However, the Liaison is only obliged to give information that could reasonably be known to em. Furthermore the Liaison is to maintain the following records: - The ruleset of InterNomic. history: Amended(2) Substantially, 23 February 1997 text: The Game of Agora shall be a member of InterNomic. There is an Office known as the Liaison. The duty of the Liaison is to be the contact between Agora and the Game of InterNomic. The Liaison must at least once per week issue a report, which must contain: - All Proposals of InterNomic which are up to vote at that moment - All Proposals of InterNomic for which the Voting Period has ended since the last report, and the outcome of these Votes - All Statements for Judgement that have been submitted in InterNomic since the last report, and which Nomic has been selected to judge it. - All Statements for Judgement that have been judged since the last report, and the outcome of the Judgement. However, the Liaison is only obliged to give information that could reasonably be known to em. Furthermore, the Liaison shall maintain a record of the Ruleset of InterNomic, and shall post it to the Public Forum at least once a month. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by Proposal 2839 (Zefram), 11 March 1997 text: The Game of Agora shall be a member of InterNomic. There is an Office of Liaison. The duty of the Liaison is to be the contact between Agora and the Game of InterNomic. The Liaison's Report includes - All Proposals of InterNomic which are up to vote at that moment; - All Proposals of InterNomic for which the Voting Period has ended since the last posting of the Liaison's Report, and the outcome of these Votes; - All Statements for Judgement that have been submitted in InterNomic since the last posting of the Liaison's Report, and which Nomic has been selected to judge it; - All Statements for Judgement that have been judged since the last report, and the outcome of the Judgement; to the extent that could reasonably be known to the Liaison. Furthermore, the Liaison shall maintain a record of the Ruleset of InterNomic, and shall post it to the Public Forum at least once a month. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3491 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: It is the Ambassador's duty to ensure that Agora is a member of InterNomic, to the maximum extent possible, while and only while InterNomic is Friendly. Agora's liaison to InterNomic is the Ambassador. The Liaison's Report includes - All Proposals of InterNomic which are up to vote at that moment; - All Proposals of InterNomic for which the Voting Period has ended since the last posting of the Liaison's Report, and the outcome of these Votes; - All Statements for Judgement that have been submitted in InterNomic since the last posting of the Liaison's Report, and which Nomic has been selected to judge it; - All Statements for Judgement that have been judged since the last report, and the outcome of the Judgement; to the extent that could reasonably be known to the Ambassador. Furthermore, the Ambassador shall maintain a record of the Ruleset of InterNomic, and shall post it to the Public Forum at least once a month. history: Amended(5) Cosmetically by Proposal 3595 (Andre), 14 November 1997 text: It is the Ambassador's duty to ensure that Agora is a member of InterNomic, to the maximum extent possible, while and only while InterNomic is Friendly. Agora's liaison to InterNomic is the Ambassador. The Ambassador's Report includes - All Proposals of InterNomic which are up to vote at that moment; - All Proposals of InterNomic for which the Voting Period has ended since the last posting of the Ambassador's Report, and the outcome of these Votes; - All Statements for Judgement that have been submitted in InterNomic since the last posting of the Ambassador's Report, and which Nomic has been selected to judge it; - All Statements for Judgement that have been judged since the last report, and the outcome of the Judgement; to the extent that could reasonably be known to the Ambassador. Furthermore, the Ambassador shall maintain a record of the Ruleset of InterNomic, and shall post it to the Public Forum at least once a month. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1631 by Proposal 3805 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1632 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1633 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1633 by Proposal 2607, 26 May 1996 text: Any Player of Agora may make Proposals for the Game of InterNomic by sending a text to the Liaison, clearly labeled as a Proposal of InterNOmic. The Liaison then proposes them on the Game of InterNomic, on behalf of Agora, As Soon As Possible. However, no Player may make more than 1 such Proposal in any NomicWeek. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2694, 3 October 1996 text: Players are permitted to submit InterNomic Proposals, which are distinct from Proposals in Agora. Whenever a Player who has not previously submitted an InterNomic Proposal in the same Nomic Week posts to the Liaison a text which is clearly intended to become an InterNomic Proposal, the Liaison shall be required to submit it, as soon as possible, to InterNomic in conformance to InterNomic procedures. In no case shall such submission, or the distribution by the Liaison of text clearly labeled as InterNomic Proposals cause the Proposing of Proposals in Agora, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Infected and Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1454, 16 December 1996 text: Players are permitted to submit InterNomic Proposals, which are distinct from Proposals in Agora. Whenever a Player who has not previously submitted an InterNomic Proposal in the same Nomic Week posts to the Liaison a text which is clearly intended to become an InterNomic Proposal, the Liaison shall be required to submit it, as soon as possible, to InterNomic in conformance to InterNomic procedures. In no case shall such submission, or the distribution by the Liaison of text clearly labeled as InterNomic Proposals cause the Proposing of Proposals in Agora, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3491 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: Players are permitted to submit InterNomic Proposals, which are distinct from Proposals in Agora. Whenever a Player who has not previously submitted an InterNomic Proposal in the same Nomic Week posts to the Ambassador a text which is clearly intended to become an InterNomic Proposal, the Ambassador shall be required to submit it, as soon as possible, to InterNomic in conformance to InterNomic procedures. In no case shall such submission, or the distribution by the Ambassador of text clearly labeled as InterNomic Proposals cause the Proposing of Proposals in Agora, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3593 (Andre), 14 November 1997 text: Players are permitted to submit InterNomic Proposals, which are distinct from Proposals in Agora, by sending to the Ambassador a text which is clearly intended to become an InterNomic Proposal. If a Player does so, the Ambassador shall be required to submit it, as soon as possible, to InterNomic in conformance to InterNomic procedures. In no case shall such submission, or the distribution by the Ambassador of text clearly labeled as InterNomic Proposals cause the Proposing of Proposals in Agora, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1633 by Proposal 3805 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1634 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1634 by Proposal 2607, 26 May 1996 text: If the Game of Agora has been selected to judge on the Game of InterNomic, the Liaison shall make such a Judgement. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2694, 3 October 1996 text: Whenever the Game of Agora has been selected to Judge a Statement in the Game of InterNomic, the Liaison shall elicit Comments by means of a post to the Public Forum. Any text sent to the Liaison within three days, clearly marked as a Comment on the relevant Statement, shall be submitted by the Liaison to InterNomic as part of Agora's Judgement. Such Judgement shall contain any other arguments at the Liaison's discretion. The Judgement must be submitted to InterNomic as soon as possible after the three-day period is ended. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3491 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: Whenever the Game of Agora has been selected to Judge a Statement in the Game of InterNomic, the Ambassador shall elicit Comments by means of a post to the Public Forum. Any text sent to the Ambassador within three days, clearly marked as a Comment on the relevant Statement, shall be submitted by the Ambassador to InterNomic as part of Agora's Judgement. Such Judgement shall contain any other arguments at the Liaison's discretion. The Judgement must be submitted to InterNomic as soon as possible after the three-day period is ended. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by proposal 3595 (Andre), 14 November 1997 text: Whenever the Game of Agora has been selected to Judge a Statement in the Game of InterNomic, the Ambassador shall elicit Comments by means of a post to the Public Forum. Any text sent to the Ambassador within three days, clearly marked as a Comment on the relevant Statement, shall be submitted by the Ambassador to InterNomic as part of Agora's Judgement. Such Judgement shall contain any other arguments at the Ambassador's discretion. The Judgement must be submitted to InterNomic as soon as possible after the three-day period is ended. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1634 by Proposal 3805 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1635 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1635 by Proposal 2607, 26 May 1996 text: Any Player of Agora may submit Statements for Judgement for the Game of InterNomic. This is done by sending this Statement, clearly labelled as such, to the Liaison, who must submit it at the Game of Internomic As Soon As Possible. However, no Player may submit more than one such Statement in any single Nomic Week. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2694, 3 October 1996 text: Players are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. Whenever a Player who has not previously submitted such a Statement in the same Nomic Week posts to the Liaison a text clearly labeled as a Statement for Judgement in InterNomic, the Liaison shall be required to submit it, as soon as possible, to InterNomic in conformance to InterNomic procedures. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3491 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: Players are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. Whenever a Player who has not previously submitted such a Statement in the same Nomic Week posts to the Ambassador a text clearly labeled as a Statement for Judgement in InterNomic, the Ambassador shall be required to submit it, as soon as possible, to InterNomic in conformance to InterNomic procedures. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1635 by Proposal 3805 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1636 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1636 by Proposal 2607, 26 May 1996 text: The Liaison is absolved of all eir Duties, and receives no Salary. This Rule will repeal itself when and if the Game of Agora becomes a Member of the Game of InterNomic. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1637 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1637 by Proposal 2608, 26 May 1996 text: A Player's Will is an SLC, the Jurisdiction of which irrevocably consists of that Player. The Notary shall be the Maintainer of all such SLCs. Such an SLC shall only contain provisions specifying how the contents of that Player's Treasury shall be disposed of in the event of that Player's deregistering. Such an SLC is empowered to initiate all such transfers, as long as they are permitted by the Rules. These transfers shall occur immediately before that Player deregisters; however, any transfers required by the dissolution or destruction of another Entity of which that Player is the Executor shall occur before these. All transfers required by a Will shall be detected and reported by the Notary. A Will is created by sending to the Notary a collection of text clearly labeled as a Will, which shall then become that Player's Will if that Player didn't have a Will before. A Player can modify eir Will by sending a new version to the Notary, and only in this manner. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: A Will is an SLC. The Jurisdiction of a Will is always empty. Each Will is associated with exactly one entity. The Notary shall be the Maintainer of all Wills. A Will shall specify the heirs of the entity with which it is associated, and how the currencies possessed by that entity and its other assets will be divided amongst those heirs when that treasury is placed in Probate. When a entity's Will is executed, the Executor in Probate of that entity will first submit all the Transfer Orders required by the Will (excepting those which e cannot execute or cannot execute successfully, for whatever reason), and will then divide the remaining residual assets as provided by the Will. A Will is created or amended by the Execution of an Application to Create a Will. Such an Application must clearly identify the entity with which the Will is to be associated, requires the Signature of the Executor of the entity with which the Will is to be associated, and is Executed by submitting it to the Notary. The effect of Executing such an Application is to create a Will associated with that entity. Any prior Will associated with that entity is destroyed at the same time. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3599 (elJefe), 20 November 1997 text: A Will is an SLC. The Jurisdiction of a Will is always empty. Each Will belongs to exactly one entity. The Notary shall be the Maintainer of all Wills. A Will shall specify the heirs of the entity to which it belongs, and how the currencies possessed by that entity and its other assets will be divided amongst those heirs when that treasury is placed in Probate. When an entity's Will is executed, the Executor in Probate of that entity will first submit all the Transfer Orders required by the Will (excepting those which e cannot execute or cannot execute successfully, for whatever reason), and will then divide the remaining residual assets as provided by the Will. A Will is created or amended by the Execution of an Application to Create a Will. Such an Application must clearly identify the entity to which the Will is to belong, requires the Signature of the Executor of the entity to which the Will is to belong, and is Executed by submitting it to the Notary. The effect of Executing such an Application is to create a Will belonging to that entity. Any prior Will belonging to that entity is destroyed at the same time. A Will belonging to an Organization is not an SLC associated to that Organization, as defined elsewhere. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: A Will is an SLC. The Jurisdiction of a Will is always empty. Each Will belongs to exactly one entity. The Notary shall be the Maintainer of all Wills. A Will shall specify the heirs of the entity to which it belongs, and how the currencies possessed by that entity and its other assets will be divided amongst those heirs when that entity is placed in Probate. When an entity's Will is executed, the Executor in Probate of that entity will first submit all the Transfer Orders required by the Will (excepting those which e cannot execute or cannot execute successfully, for whatever reason), and will then divide the remaining residual assets as provided by the Will. A Will is created or amended by the Execution of an Application to Create a Will. Such an Application must clearly identify the entity to which the Will is to belong, requires the Signature of the Executor of the entity to which the Will is to belong, and is Executed by submitting it to the Notary. The effect of Executing such an Application is to create a Will belonging to that entity. Any prior Will belonging to that entity is destroyed at the same time. A Will belonging to an Organization is not an SLC associated to that Organization, as defined elsewhere. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1638 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1638 by Proposal 2616, 1 June 1996 text: Whenever a Player is required to report that a Win has occurred, or that a Game has ended for any other reason, e shall do so by posting to the Public Forum the following information : * the fact that a Game has Ended * the date of the Game End, correct to within 36 hours * the cause of the Game End * the identity of the Player or Players who Won the Game * the identity of the Speaker and Speaker-Elect Any communication pertaining to a Win shall be a legal and correct announcement of same if and only if it contains all required information. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: Whenever a Player is required to report that a Win has occurred, e shall do so by posting to the Public Forum the following information : i) The fact someone has won the Game ii) The date of the win, correct to within 36 hours iii) The cause of the win iv) The identity of the Player or Players who Won the Game Any communication pertaining to a Win shall be a legal and correct announcement of same if and only if it contains all required information. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3977 (Wes), 23 February 2000 text: When a Player possesses one or more Win Conditions and no Win-Preventing Conditions, any Player may Declare the Win by sending a message to the Public Forum containing the following information: a) The fact that someone has Won the Game b) The date of the Win, correct to within 36 hours c) The cause of the Win d) The identity of the Player or Players who Won the Game A Player shall Win the Game if and only if the message Declaring the Win contains all the required information. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4019 (t), 21 June 2000 text: When a Player possesses one or more Win Conditions and no Win-Preventing Conditions, e is eligible to Win. Any Player may then declare the Win by sending a message to the Public Forum containing the following information: a) The fact that one or more Players are eligible to Win b) The cause of the Win c) The identity of every Player who is eligible to Win at the time the message is sent When a message declaring the win is sent, if and only if the message contains all the required information, the Player or Players who, at that time, are eligible to Win immediately Win the Game. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 text: When one or more Win Conditions are true for a Player and no Win-Preventing Conditions are, e is eligible to Win. Any Player may then declare the Win by sending a message to the Public Forum containing the following information: a) The fact that one or more Players are eligible to Win b) The cause of the Win c) The identity of every Player who is eligible to Win at the time the message is sent When a message declaring the win is sent, if and only if the message contains all the required information, the Player or Players who, at that time, are eligible to Win immediately Win the Game. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: When one or more Win Conditions are true for a Player and no Win-Preventing Conditions are, e is eligible to Win. Any Player may then publish a Notice of Victory containing the following information: a) The fact that one or more Players are eligible to Win b) The cause of the Win c) The identity of every Player who is eligible to Win at the time the message is sent If and only if the information contained in the Notice of Victory is accurate, the Player or Players who are identified as being eligible to Win immediately Win the Game. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1638 by Proposal 4377 (Murphy), 11 September 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1639 history: Created, ca. Jun. 1996 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1640 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1640 by Proposal 2625, 29 June 1996 text: Any Player who knowingly attempts to act as, or purports to be, the Executor of an Entity, of which e is not the Executor, commits the Crime of Impersonation, a Class C Crime. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1641 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1641 by Proposal 2627, 4 July 1996 text: Upon the Creation of this Rule, the following events occur: (i) Chuck and Steve both become Immaculate Players, if they are not already Immaculate. Any change in Blots which occurs as a result of this Rule is detected and reported by the Tabulator; (ii) Chuck and Steve both win the game, with Chuck becoming Speaker-Elect. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would make a Player other than Chuck the Speaker-Elect upon his winning the game. (iii) Every Player, with the exception of Chuck and Steve, who cast exactly one vote FOR and no votes AGAINST the Proposal, proposed by Steve, the adoption of which resulted in the creation of the Rule entitled "A Win by Indirect Self-Reference II" receives 3 Extra Votes from the Bank. (iv) Every Player, with the exception of Chuck and Steve, who cast exactly two votes FOR and no votes AGAINST the Proposal, proposed by Steve, the adoption of which resulted in the Creation of the Rule entitled "A Win by Indirect Self-Reference II" receives 5 Extra Votes from the Bank. All transfers of Extra Votes which occur as a result of this Rule are detected and reported by the Assessor. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1642 history: Created, ca. Jul. 4 1996 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1643 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1643 by Proposal 2634, 4 July 1996 text: A document is a Statement of Policy if and only if it meets the following requirements : * it is posted to the Public Forum * it claims, in these exact terms, to be a "Statement of Policy" * it specifies, by name, an Office which it pertains to * that Office is held by its author. A Statement of Policy, when issued, becomes an SLC, the Jurisdiction of which irrevocably consists of the Player holding the Office named therein. That Player shall also be its Maintainer. An Officer shall be permitted to change eir own Statement of Policy by issuing a new version to the Public Forum. Further, any Statement of Policy ceases to exist whenever the Office it pertains to ceases to be held by the Player it constrains. Any violation of a SOP constitutes a Crime of Breach of Policy, the penalty for which shall be 2 Blots. history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Proposal 2831 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: A document is a Statement of Policy if and only if it meets the following requirements : * it is posted to the Public Forum * it claims, in these exact terms, to be a "Statement of Policy" * it specifies, by name, an Office which it pertains to * that Office is held by its author. A Statement of Policy, when issued, becomes an SLC, the Jurisdiction of which irrevocably consists of the Player holding the Office named therein. That Player shall also be its Maintainer. An Officer shall be permitted to change eir own Statement of Policy by issuing a new version to the Public Forum. Further, any Statement of Policy ceases to exist whenever the Office it pertains to ceases to be held by the Player it constrains. Any violation of a SOP constitutes a Crime of Breach of Policy, a Class 2 Crime. history: ... history: Repealed by Proposal 3957 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1644 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1644 by Proposal 2638 (Steve), 12 July 1996 text: A Player who: (i) holds an Office in the normal fashion whose duties include the weekly production of an Official Report, and (ii) fails in 3 consecutive weeks to produce the weekly Report for that Office commits the Infraction of Dereliction of Duty. The penalty for the commission of this Infraction is the same as that for a Class B Crime, in addition to which the Player is removed from the Office in the performance of whose duties e has been Derelict. The Registrar is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of Infractions of Dereliction of Duty. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2731 (Steve), 30 October 1996 text: A Player who: (i) holds an Office in the normal fashion whose duties include the weekly production of an Official Report, and (ii) fails in 3 consecutive weeks to produce the weekly Report for that Office commits the Infraction of Dereliction of Duty. The penalty for the commission of this Infraction is the same as that for a Class B Crime, in addition to which the Player is removed from the Office in the performance of whose duties e has been Derelict. The Registrar is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of Infractions of Dereliction of Duty by Officers other than the Registrar. The Clerk of the Courts is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Dereliction of Duty by the Registrar. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3742 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: A Player who: (i) is the Electee to an Office which e currently holds, and whose duties include the weekly production of an Official Report, and (ii) fails in 3 consecutive weeks to produce the weekly Report for that Office commits the Infraction of Dereliction of Duty. The penalty for the commission of this Infraction is the same as that for a Class B Crime, in addition to which the Player is removed from the Office in the performance of whose duties e has been Derelict. The Registrar is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of Infractions of Dereliction of Duty by Officers other than the Registrar. The Clerk of the Courts is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Dereliction of Duty by the Registrar. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 text: A Player who: (i) is the Electee to an Office which e currently holds, and whose duties include the weekly production of an Official Report, and (ii) fails in 3 consecutive weeks to produce the weekly Report for that Office commits the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty. Additionally, such a Player is removed from said Office. The Payroll Clerk is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of Infractions of Dereliction of Duty by Officers other than the Payroll Clerk. The Clerk of the Courts is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Dereliction of Duty by the Payroll Clerk. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4053 (harvel), 21 August 2000 text: A Player who: (i) is the Electee to an Office which e currently holds, and whose duties include the weekly production of an Official Report, and (ii) fails in 3 consecutive weeks to produce the weekly Report for that Office commits the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty. Additionally, such a Player is removed from said Office. The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of Infractions of Dereliction of Duty by Officers other than the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy. The Clerk of the Courts is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Dereliction of Duty by the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4142 (Murphy), 15 April 2001 text: A Player who: (i) is the Electee to an Office which e currently holds, and whose duties include the weekly production of an Official Report, and (ii) fails in 3 consecutive weeks to produce the weekly Report for that Office commits the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty. Additionally, such a Player is removed from said Office. The Assistant Director of Personnel is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of Infractions of Dereliction of Duty by Officers other than the Assistant Director of Personnel. The Clerk of the Courts is the Officer authorized to detect and report the commission of the Infraction of Dereliction of Duty by the Assistant Director of Personnel. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1644 by Proposal 4164 (Murphy), 11 June 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1645 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1645 by Proposal 2639 (Steve), 12 July 1996 text: A Player who holds an Office in the normal fashion is permitted to appoint another Player to perform the duties of that Office, for a Period not exceeding two weeks. This is called Delegation; the Player doing the appointing is herein referred to as the Delegating Player and the Player so appointed is herein referred to as the Delegated Player. An Office is legally Delegated if and only if the following conditions are met: (i) the Delegating Player has posted to the Public Forum a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office being Delegated and the Delegated Player; (ii) the Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (iii) the Delegated Player has posted, within the week immediately preceding or immediately following the posting of the Notice of Delegation, and to the Public Forum, a Notice of Consent to Delegation for that Office; (iv) the Delegating Player still holds the Office in the normal fashion at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (v) the Period of Delegation has commenced and not yet concluded. The Period of Delegation commences at the time the Notice of Delegation is posted, or at the time the Notice of Consent to Delegation is posted, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation concludes two weeks after the Period of Delegation commences, or at the end of the Term of Service for the Delegated Office, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is earliest. A Delegated Player holds the Delegated Office temporarily during the Period of Delegation, and earns the Salary for that Office as described in other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, the Delegating Player resumes holding the Delegated Office in the normal fashion, unless the Term of Service for that Office has expired, In that case, the Delegated Player continues to hold the Office temporarily, although the Office ceases to be a delegated Office. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2645, 15 August 1996 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: A Player who holds an Office in the normal fashion is permitted to appoint another Player to perform the duties of that Office, for a Period not exceeding two weeks. This is called Delegation; the Player doing the appointing is herein referred to as the Delegating Player and the Player so appointed is herein referred to as the Delegated Player. An Office is legally Delegated if and only if the following conditions are met: (i) the Delegating Player has posted to the Public Forum a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office being Delegated and the Delegated Player; (ii) the Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (iii) the Delegated Player has posted, within the week immediately preceding or immediately following the posting of the Notice of Delegation, and to the Public Forum, a Notice of Consent to Delegation for that Office; (iv) the Delegating Player still holds the Office in the normal fashion at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (v) the Period of Delegation has commenced and not yet concluded. The Period of Delegation commences at the time the Notice of Delegation is posted, or at the time the Notice of Consent to Delegation is posted, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation concludes two weeks after the Period of Delegation commences, or at the end of the Term of Service for the Delegated Office, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is earliest. During the Period of Delegation, the Delegating Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office; the Delegated Player holds the Office temporarily, and earns the Salary for that Office as described in other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, the Delegated Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office, and the Delegating Player resumes holding the Office in the normal fashion, unless the Term of Service for that Office has expired. text: A Player who holds an Office in the normal fashion is permitted to appoint another Player to perform the duties of that Office, for a Period not exceeding two weeks. This is called Delegation; the Player doing the appointing is herein referred to as the Delegating Player and the Player so appointed is herein referred to as the Delegated Player. An Office is legally Delegated if and only if the following conditions are met: (i) the Delegating Player has posted to the Public Forum a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office being Delegated and the Delegated Player; (ii) the Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (iii) the Delegated Player has posted, within the week immediately preceding or immediately following the posting of the Notice of Delegation, and to the Public Forum, a Notice of Consent to Delegation for that Office; (iv) the Delegating Player still holds the Office in the normal fashion at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (v) the Period of Delegation has commenced and not yet concluded. The Period of Delegation commences at the time the Notice of Delegation is posted, or at the time the Notice of Consent to Delegation is posted, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation concludes two weeks after the Period of Delegation commences, or at the end of the Term of Service for the Delegated Office, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is earliest. During the Period of Delegation, the Delegating Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office; the Delegated Player holds the Office temporarily, and earns the Salary for that Office as described in other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, the Delegated Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office, and the Delegating Player resumes holding the Office in the normal fashion, unless the Term of Service for that Office has expired. In that case, the Delegated Player continues to hold the Office temporarily, although the Office ceases to be a delegated Office. history: Infected and Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1454, 16 March 1997 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing seriously.] text: A Player who holds an Office in the normal fashion is permitted to appoint another Player to perform the duties of that Office, for a Period not exceeding two weeks. This is called Delegation; the Player doing the appointing is herein referred to as the Delegating Player and the Player so appointed is herein referred to as the Delegated Player. An Office is legally Delegated if and only if the following conditions are met: (i) the Delegating Player has posted to the Public Forum a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office being Delegated and the Delegated Player; (ii) the Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (iii) the Delegated Player has posted, within the week immediately preceding or immediately following the posting of the Notice of Delegation, and to the Public Forum, a Notice of Consent to Delegation for that Office; (iv) the Delegating Player still holds the Office in the normal fashion at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (v) the Period of Delegation has commenced and not yet concluded. The Period of Delegation commences at the time the Notice of Delegation is posted, or at the time the Notice of Consent to Delegation is posted, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation concludes two weeks after the Period of Delegation commences, or at the end of the Term of Service for the Delegated Office, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is earliest. During the Period of Delegation, the Delegating Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office; the Delegated Player holds the Office temporarily, and earns the Salary for that Office as described in other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, the Delegated Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office, and the Delegating Player resumes holding the Office in the normal fashion, unless the Term of Service for that Office has expired. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. text: A Player who holds an Office in the normal fashion is permitted to appoint another Player to perform the duties of that Office, for a Period not exceeding two weeks. This is called Delegation; the Player doing the appointing is herein referred to as the Delegating Player and the Player so appointed is herein referred to as the Delegated Player. An Office is legally Delegated if and only if the following conditions are met: (i) the Delegating Player has posted to the Public Forum a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office being Delegated and the Delegated Player; (ii) the Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (iii) the Delegated Player has posted, within the week immediately preceding or immediately following the posting of the Notice of Delegation, and to the Public Forum, a Notice of Consent to Delegation for that Office; (iv) the Delegating Player still holds the Office in the normal fashion at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (v) the Period of Delegation has commenced and not yet concluded. The Period of Delegation commences at the time the Notice of Delegation is posted, or at the time the Notice of Consent to Delegation is posted, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation concludes two weeks after the Period of Delegation commences, or at the end of the Term of Service for the Delegated Office, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is earliest. During the Period of Delegation, the Delegating Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office; the Delegated Player holds the Office temporarily, and earns the Salary for that Office as described in other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, the Delegated Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office, and the Delegating Player resumes holding the Office in the normal fashion, unless the Term of Service for that Office has expired. In that case, the Delegated Player continues to hold the Office temporarily, although the Office ceases to be a delegated Office. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3707 (Steve), 9 March 1998 text: A Player who holds an Office in the normal fashion is permitted to appoint another Player to perform the duties of that Office, for a Period not exceeding two weeks. This is called Delegation; the Player doing the appointing is herein referred to as the Delegating Player and the Player so appointed is herein referred to as the Delegated Player. An Office is legally Delegated if and only if the following conditions are met: (i) the Delegating Player has posted to the Public Forum a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office being Delegated and the Delegated Player; (ii) the Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (iii) the Delegated Player has posted, within the week immediately preceding or immediately following the posting of the Notice of Delegation, and to the Public Forum, a Notice of Consent to Delegation for that Office; (iv) the Delegating Player still holds the Office in the normal fashion at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (v) the Period of Delegation has commenced and not yet concluded. The Period of Delegation commences at the time the Notice of Delegation is posted, or at the time the Notice of Consent to Delegation is posted, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation concludes two weeks after the Period of Delegation commences, or at the end of the Term of Service for the Delegated Office, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is earliest. During the Period of Delegation, the Delegating Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office; the Delegated Player holds the Office temporarily, and earns the Salary for that Office as described in other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, the Delegated Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office, and the Delegating Player resumes holding the Office in the normal fashion, unless the Term of Service for that Office has expired, or a Revolt occurred during the Period of Delegation. If the Term of Service expired, the Delegated Player continues to hold the Office temporarily, although the Office ceases to be a delegated Office. If a Revolt occurred during the Period of Delegation, and at the end of the Period of Delegation no other Player is holding the Office in the normal fashion, the Delegating Player resumes holding the Office, but temporarily, This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3742 (Harlequin), 8 May 1998 text: An Electee to an Office who currently holds that Office is permitted to appoint another Player to perform the duties of that Office, for a Period not exceeding two weeks. This is called Delegation; the Player doing the appointing is herein referred to as the Delegating Player and the Player so appointed is herein referred to as the Delegated Player. An Office is legally Delegated if and only if the following conditions are met: (i) the Delegating Player has posted to the Public Forum a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office being Delegated and the Delegated Player; (ii) the Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (iii) the Delegated Player has posted, within the week immediately preceding or immediately following the posting of the Notice of Delegation, and to the Public Forum, a Notice of Consent to Delegation for that Office; (iv) the Delegating Player is still the Electee to the Office, and still holds the office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (v) the Period of Delegation has commenced and not yet concluded. The Period of Delegation commences at the time the Notice of Delegation is posted, or at the time the Notice of Consent to Delegation is posted, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation concludes two weeks after the Period of Delegation commences, or at the end of the Term of Service for the Delegated Office, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is earliest. During the Period of Delegation, the Delegating Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office; the Delegated Player holds the Office temporarily, and earns the Salary for that Office as described in other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, the Delegated Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office, and the Delegating Player resumes holding the Office, if e is permitted to do so. If not, the Speaker holds the Office. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: An Electee to an Office who currently holds that Office is permitted to appoint another Player to perform the duties of that Office, for a Period not exceeding two weeks. This is called Delegation; the Player doing the appointing is herein referred to as the Delegating Player and the Player so appointed is herein referred to as the Delegated Player. An Office is legally Delegated if and only if the following conditions are met: (i) the Delegating Player has posted publicly a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office being Delegated and the Delegated Player; (ii) the Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (iii) the Delegated Player has posted, within the week immediately preceding or immediately following the posting of the Notice of Delegation, and to the Public Forum, a Notice of Consent to Delegation for that Office; (iv) the Delegating Player is still the Electee to the Office, and still holds the office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (v) the Period of Delegation has commenced and not yet concluded. The Period of Delegation commences at the time the Notice of Delegation is posted, or at the time the Notice of Consent to Delegation is posted, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation concludes two weeks after the Period of Delegation commences, or at the end of the Term of Service for the Delegated Office, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is earliest. During the Period of Delegation, the Delegating Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office; the Delegated Player holds the Office temporarily, and earns the Salary for that Office as described in other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, the Delegated Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office, and the Delegating Player resumes holding the Office, if e is permitted to do so. If not, the Speaker holds the Office. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4022 (Taral), 25 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4071 (Steve), 14 September 2000 text: The Electee to an Office or the Speaker, if e holds that Office, is permitted to appoint another Player to perform the duties of that Office. This is called Delegation. The Player doing the appointing is herein referred to as the Delegating Player and the Player so appointed is herein referred to as the Delegated Player. An Office is legally Delegated if and only if the following conditions are met: (a) the Delegating Player has posted to the Public Forum a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office being Delegated and the Delegated Player; (b) the Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (c) the Delegated Player has posted, within the week immediately preceding or immediately following the posting of the Notice of Delegation, and to the Public Forum, a Notice of Consent to Delegation for that Office; (d) the Delegating Player is still permitted to Delegate the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (e) the Period of Delegation has commenced and not yet concluded. The Period of Delegation commences at the time the Notice of Delegation is posted, or at the time the Notice of Consent to Delegation is posted, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation concludes when any of the following occur: (a) a Player other than the Delegating Player becomes the Electee to the Office; (b) the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player as the end of the Period of Delegation is reached; or (c) the Delegated Office has been continuously Delegated for three weeks. During the Period of Delegation, the Delegating Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office; the Delegated Player holds the Office, and earns the Salary for that Office as described in other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, the Delegated Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office, and the Electee to the Office commences holding the Office, if the Office has an Electee. If the Office has no Electee, then the Delegated Player continues to hold the Office. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: The Electee to an Office or the Speaker, if e holds that Office, is permitted to appoint another Player to perform the duties of that Office. This is called Delegation. The Player doing the appointing is herein referred to as the Delegating Player and the Player so appointed is herein referred to as the Delegated Player. An Office is legally Delegated if and only if the following conditions are met: (a) the Delegating Player has published a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office being Delegated and the Delegated Player; (b) the Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (c) the Delegated Player has published a Notice of Consent to Delegation for that Office during the seven days immediately preceding or immediately following the publishing of the Notice of Delegation. (d) the Delegating Player is still permitted to Delegate the Office at the commencement of the Period of Delegation; (e) the Period of Delegation has commenced and not yet concluded. The Period of Delegation commences at the time the Notice of Delegation is posted, or at the time the Notice of Consent to Delegation is posted, or at the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation concludes when any of the following occur: (a) a Player other than the Delegating Player becomes the Electee to the Office; (b) the time (if any) specified by the Delegating Player as the end of the Period of Delegation is reached; or (c) the Delegated Office has been continuously Delegated for three weeks. During the Period of Delegation, the Delegating Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office; the Delegated Player holds the Office, and earns the Salary for that Office as described in other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, the Delegated Player ceases to hold the Delegated Office, and the Electee to the Office commences holding the Office, if the Office has an Electee. If the Office has no Electee, then the Delegated Player continues to hold the Office. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4271 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: An Office is Delegated when all of these conditions are met: (a) The holder (hereafter known as the Delegating Player) publishes a Notice of Delegation, naming the Office, another Player (hereafter known as the Delegated Player), and a Period of Delegation no longer than three weeks. (b) The Delegating Player is Electee to the Office, or is the Speaker. This condition must hold when e publishes the Notice of Delegation, and must also hold at the beginning of the Period of Delegation. (c) The Delegated Player is permitted by the Rules to hold the Office at the beginning of the Period of Delegation. (d) The Delegated Player consents to the Delegation within seven days of the publication of the Notice of Delegation. (e) The Period of Delegation has begun and not yet ended. The Period of Delegation begins when the Notice of Delegation is published, or when consent is given, or at the time (if any) specified in the Notice of Delegation, whichever is latest. The Period of Delegation ends after the duration specified in the Notice of Delegation has elapsed, or when a Player other than the Delegating Player becomes Electee to the Office. During the Period of Delegation, the Delegated Player holds the Office, and earns its Salary as specified by other Rules. At the end of the Period of Delegation, if the Office has an Electee, then the Electee holds the Office; otherwise, the Delegated Player continues to hold the Office. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1645 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1646 history: Created, ca. Aug. 1996 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1647 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1647 by Proposal 2661, 7 September 1996 text: Let there be the Office of Speaker-Elect. The Speaker-Elect has the duty to be the Speaker's successor. Whenever a Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect, even temporarily. When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be held temporarily by a Player because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker(or for any other reason,) the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession. The Speaker-Elect receives no salary for filling the Office of Speaker-Elect. This rule takes precidence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2681, 26 September 1996 text: Let there be the Office of Speaker-Elect. The Speaker-Elect has the duty to be the Speaker's successor. Whenever a Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect, even temporarily. The CotC and Justiciar may not Nominate for the Office of Speaker-Elect. When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be held temporarily by a Player because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker(or for any other reason,) the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession. The Speaker-Elect receives no salary for filling the Office of Speaker-Elect. This rule takes precidence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(2) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Let there be the Office of Speaker-Elect. The Speaker-Elect has the duty to be the Speaker's successor. Whenever a Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect, even temporarily. The CotC and Justiciar may not Nominate for the Office of Speaker-Elect. When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be held temporarily by a Player because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker(or for any other reason,) the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession. The Speaker-Elect receives no salary for filling the Office of Speaker-Elect. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Let there be the Office of Speaker-Elect. The Speaker-Elect has the duty to be the Speaker's successor. Whenever a Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect, even temporarily. The CotC and Justiciar may not Nominate for the Office of Speaker-Elect. When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be held temporarily by a Player because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker (or for any other reason,) the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession. The Speaker-Elect receives no salary for filling the Office of Speaker-Elect. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: Let there be the Office of Speaker-Elect. The Speaker-Elect has the duty to be the Speaker's successor. Whenever a Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect, even temporarily. The CotC and Justiciar may not Nominate for the Office of Speaker-Elect. When the Office of Speaker-Elect is to be held temporarily by a Player because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker (or for any other reason,) the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession. The Speaker-Elect shall receive a Salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3887 (Blob), 30 July 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 text: There exists the Office of Speaker-Elect, whose responsibility it is to be the Speaker's successor. Whenever the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect. The Clerk of the Courts and Justiciar cannot Nominate for the Office of Speaker-Elect. When the Office of Speaker-Elect has no Electee, because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker (or for any other reason), the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules, with the Speaker as Arbiter of Succession. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3974 (Elysion), 14 February 2000 text: There exists the Office of Speaker-Elect, whose responsibility it is to be the Speaker's successor. Whenever the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect. The Clerk of the Courts and Justiciar cannot Nominate for the Office of Speaker-Elect. When the Office of Speaker-Elect has no Electee, because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker (or for any other reason), the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4246 (Steve), 19 February 2002 text: There exists the Office of Speaker-Elect, whose responsibility it is to be the Speaker's successor. Whenever the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect, nor be the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect. If the Speaker somehow becomes the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect, e is immediately removed from that Office. The Clerk of the Courts and Justiciar cannot Nominate for the Office of Speaker-Elect. When the Office of Speaker-Elect has no Electee, because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker (or for any other reason), the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Speaker-Elect is an office; its holder is usually the Speaker's successor. Whenever the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect, nor be the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect. If the Speaker somehow becomes the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect, e is immediately removed from that Office. The Clerk of the Courts and Justiciar cannot Nominate for the Office of Speaker-Elect. When the Office of Speaker-Elect has no Electee, because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker (or for any other reason), the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4429 (The Goddess Eris), 16 January 2003 text: The Speaker-Elect is an office; its holder is usually the Speaker's successor. Whenever the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect, nor be the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect. If the Speaker somehow becomes the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect, e is immediately removed from that Office. The Clerk of the Courts and Justiciar cannot be Nominated for the Office of Speaker-Elect. When the Office of Speaker-Elect has no Electee, because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker (or for any other reason), the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: The Speaker-Elect is an office; its holder is usually the Speaker's successor. Whenever the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect, nor be the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect. If the Speaker somehow becomes the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect, e is immediately removed from that Office. The Clerk of the Courts, Justiciar and Assistant Director of Personnel cannot be Nominated for the Office of Speaker-Elect. When the Office of Speaker-Elect has no Electee, because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker (or for any other reason), the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4594 (Murphy), 4 July 2004 text: The Speaker-Elect is an office; its holder is usually the Speaker's successor. Whenever the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker-Elect. The Speaker can never hold the Office of Speaker-Elect, nor be the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect. If the Speaker somehow becomes the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect, e is immediately removed from that Office. When the Office of Speaker-Elect has no Electee, because of the Speaker-Elect becoming Speaker (or for any other reason), the Office is filled according to the Order of Succession, as defined by other Rules. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules defining the characteristics of the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: For seven days after a cardinal wins the game with no other players simultaneously winning, that cardinal may announce that e becomes a pope. Upon this announcement, that player becomes a pope, so please treat em right good forever. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1647 by Proposal 4836 (Goethe, Maud), 2 October 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1648 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1648 by Proposal 2661, 7 September 1996 text: The Speaker is Tainted whenever the Player who is Speaker became Speaker by any means other than a normal Speaker transition. A normal Speaker transition occurs whenever the Rules require the Speaker-Elect to become Speaker, and the Office of Speaker-Elect is held in normal fashion. If the Rules require the Speaker-Elect to become Speaker, and that Office is held temporarily, the Speaker-Elect still becomes Speaker, but the resulting Speaker is Tainted. A Tainted Speaker may remain Speaker only until some other Player holds the Office of Speaker-Elect in normal fashion, at which point, the Speaker-Elect shall become Speaker. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 22 September 1996 text: The Speaker is Tainted whenever the Player who is Speaker became Speaker by any means other than a normal Speaker transition. A normal Speaker transition occurs whenever the Rules require the Speaker-Elect to become Speaker, and the Office of Speaker-Elect is held in normal fashion. If the Rules require the Speaker-Elect to become Speaker, and that Office is held temporarily, the Speaker-Elect still becomes Speaker, but the resulting Speaker is Tainted. A Tainted Speaker may remain Speaker only until some other Player holds the Office of Speaker-Elect in normal fashion, at which point, the Speaker-Elect shall become Speaker. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: The Speaker is Tainted whenever the Player who is Speaker became Speaker by any means other than a normal Speaker transition. A normal Speaker transition occurs whenever the Rules require the Speaker-Elect to become Speaker, and the Office of Speaker-Elect is held in normal fashion. If the Rules require the Speaker-Elect to become Speaker, and that Office is held temporarily, the Speaker-Elect still becomes Speaker, but the resulting Speaker is Tainted. A Tainted Speaker may remain Speaker only until some other Player holds the Office of Speaker-Elect in normal fashion, at which point, the Speaker-Elect shall become Speaker. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3703 (Steve), 9 March 1998 text: If the Rules require that a Speaker Transition occur, and the Office of Speaker-Elect is not being held in the normal fashion at that time, then the Transition proceeds as set out in other Rules, but the new Speaker is Tainted. A Tainted Speaker may remain Speaker only until some other Player holds the Office of Speaker-Elect in normal fashion, at which point, a Speaker Transition occurs. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4071 (Steve), 14 September 2000 text: If the Rules require that a Speaker Transition occur, and there is no Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect, then the Transition proceeds as set out in other Rules, but the new Speaker is Tainted. A Tainted Speaker remains Speaker only until there is an Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect, at which point, a Speaker Transition occurs. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1648 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1649 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1649 by Proposal 2653, 7 September 1996 text: Agora will vote FOR on Internomic Proposal 301. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules regarding the voting on Proposals of Internomic, and will repeal itself on 3 September, at 00:00 GMT. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1650 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1650 by Proposal 2673, 26 September 1996 text: Each Nomic Week an eligible Player shall be designated the Silly Person. This Player shall be the eligible Player that had been so designated, in the Public Forum, by the prior Week's Silly Person. If, during the prior Week, the prior Silly Person failed to designate an eligible Player to be Silly, the Silly Person shall be the first eligible Player so designated-- by anyone-- in the Public Forum. Active Players are eligible to be Silly if they have not been Silly for at least the two prior Nomic Weeks. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1650 by Proposal 3688 (Repeal-O-Matic), 21 February 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1651 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1651 by Proposal 2673, 26 September 1996 text: During eis week of Silliness, the Silly Person is obligated to produce a Silly Proposal and publish it in the Public Forum, as well as submit it for a vote. The Silly Proposal is a Directive whose sole contents are one of the following; i) A limerick. ii) A rhymed poem no longer than fourteen lines. (No free verse!) iii) A joke of no more than a hundred words. iv) A truly hideous pun. The Silly Proposal has an AI=2 and has the effect of giving its Proposer 1 EV if adopted. (The Assessor shall take note and report this Silly EV.) If the Silly Proposal is adopted unanimously, then the Patent Title of Grande Foole is bestowed upon the Player who proposed it. This title is held by this Player until some other poor fool has it thrust upon them. If the Silly Person does not produce a Silly Proposal during eis week of Silliness, then he is guilty of the Infraction of Seriousness, with the penalty of 1 Mil. This is detected and reported by the first Player to notice. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 2702, 10 October 1996 text: During eis week of Silliness, the Silly Person is obligated to produce a Silly Proposal and publish it in the Public Forum, as well as submit it for a vote. No Proposals by players other than the Silly Player are Silly Proposals for the purpose of this Rule, nor are any further Proposals offered by the Silly Player in a Nomic Week in which e has already proposed a Silly Proposal. The Silly Proposal is a Directive whose sole contents are one of the following; i) A limerick. ii) A rhymed poem no longer than fourteen lines. (No free verse!) iii) A joke of no more than a hundred words. iv) A truly hideous pun. The Silly Proposal has an AI=2 and has the effect of giving its Proposer 1 EV if adopted. (The Assessor shall take note and report this Silly EV.) If the Silly Proposal is adopted unanimously, then the Patent Title of Grande Foole is bestowed upon the Player who proposed it. This title is held by this Player until some other poor fool has it thrust upon them. If the Silly Person does not produce a Silly Proposal during eis week of Silliness, then he is guilty of the Infraction of Seriousness, with the penalty of 1 Mil. This is detected and reported by the first Player to notice. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 2730, 30 October 1996 text: During eir week of Silliness, the Silly Person is obligated to produce a Silly Proposal and publish it in the Public Forum, as well as submit it for a vote. A Proposal is a Silly Proposal only if it is clearly marked as such when published and submitted. No Proposals by Players other than the Silly Person are Silly Proposals, nor are any further Proposals offered by the Silly Person in a Nomic Week in which e has already proposed a Silly Proposal. The Silly Proposal's sole contents must be one of the following: i) A limerick. ii) A rhymed poem no longer than fourteen lines. (No free verse!) iii) A joke of no more than a hundred words. iv) A truly hideous pun. The Silly Proposal has an AI=2 and has the effect of giving its Proposer 1 EV if adopted. (The Assessor shall take note and report this Silly EV.) If the Silly Proposal is adopted unanimously, then the Patent Title of Grande Foole is bestowed upon the Player who proposed it. This title is held by this Player until some other poor fool has it thrust upon them. If the Silly Person does not produce a Silly Proposal during eis week of Silliness, then he is guilty of the Infraction of Seriousness, with the penalty of 1 Mil. This is detected and reported by the first Player to notice. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 2813 (Andre; disi.), 15 February 1997 text: During the week in which e is a Silly Person, the Silly Person is obligated to produce a Silly Proposal and publish it in the Public Forum, as well as submit it for a vote. A Proposal is a Silly Proposal only if it is clearly marked as such when published and submitted. No Proposals by Players other than the Silly Person are Silly Proposals, nor are any further Proposals offered by the Silly Person in a Nomic Week in which e has already proposed a Silly Proposal. The Silly Proposal's sole contents must be one of the following: i) A limerick. ii) A rhymed poem no longer than fourteen lines. (No free verse!) iii) A joke of no more than a hundred words. iv) A truly hideous pun. The Silly Proposal has an AI=2 and has the effect of giving its Proposer 1 EV if adopted. (The Assessor shall take note and report this Silly EV.) If the Silly Proposal is adopted unanimously, then the Patent Title of Grande Foole is bestowed upon the Player who proposed it. This title is held by this Player until some other poor fool has it thrust upon them. If the Silly Person does not produce a Silly Proposal during the week in which e is the Silly Person, then he is guilty of the Infraction of Seriousness, with the penalty of 1 Mil. This may be detected and reported by any Player. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: During the week in which e is a Silly Person, the Silly Person is obligated to produce a Silly Proposal and publish it in the Public Forum, as well as submit it for a vote. A Proposal is a Silly Proposal only if it is clearly marked as such when published and submitted. No Proposals by Players other than the Silly Person are Silly Proposals, nor are any further Proposals offered by the Silly Person in a Nomic Week in which e has already proposed a Silly Proposal. The Silly Proposal's sole contents must be one of the following: i) A limerick. ii) A rhymed poem no longer than fourteen lines. (No free verse!) iii) A joke of no more than a hundred words. iv) A truly hideous pun. The Silly Proposal has an AI=2 and has the effect of giving its Proposer 1 VT if adopted. (The Assessor shall take note and report this Silly VT.) If the Silly Proposal is adopted unanimously, then the Patent Title of Grande Foole is bestowed upon the Player who proposed it. This title is held by this Player until some other poor fool has it thrust upon them. If the Silly Person does not produce a Silly Proposal during the week in which e is the Silly Person, then he is guilty of the Infraction of Seriousness, with the penalty of 0.5 VT. This may be detected and reported by any Player. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1651 by Proposal 3688 (Repeal-O-Matic), 21 February 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1652 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1652 by Proposal 2677, 26 September 1996 text: No Player shall be subject to the application of more than one penalty for each specific instance of a particular Crime or Infraction. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Infraction resulting from that act. If the penalties for any one Crime or Infraction are reversed upon appeal, such penalties may not be reinstated for that particular Crime or Infraction based upon that specific act. This Rule does not forbid the re-application of a penalty whose reversal is rescinded by CFJ or an appeal to a CFJ. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule that applies Crimes or Infractions, or the penalties thereof. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: No entity shall be subject to penalties more than once for a single instance of a particular Crime or Infraction, any other Rule notwithstanding. This Rule in no way bars the imposition of multiple penalties for the same act (or failure to act) if such action (or inaction) constitutes multiple Crimes, multiple Infractions, or any combination thereof. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1652 by Proposal 3785 (Steve), 2 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1653 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1653 by Proposal 2678, 26 September 1996 text: If a Group is entitled to cast Votes on a Proposal, its Vizier may elect to declare a Unity Vote on that Proposal. Notifying the Assessor that the Group is casting Unity Vote on the designated Proposal entitles the Group to cast three Votes on that Proposal, and additionally requires that : - the Group spend two Extra Votes at the time of casting Unity Vote - the Group vote either three times FOR or three times AGAINST the designated Proposal A Unity Vote is only legal if all the above conditions are met. If all Members of the Group Vote on the named Proposal, and all vote as specified by the Unity Vote, two Extra Votes shall be transferred from the Bank to the Group's Treasury. The Assessor shall report such transfers. If, on the other hand, not all Members Vote, or not all Vote the same way, the Group shall not be entitled to cast any Vote on that Proposal, and no vote cast by the Group on that Proposal shall be legal, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Infected and Amended(1) Substantially by Rule 1454, 6 April 1997 text: If a Group is entitled to cast Votes on a Proposal, its Vizier may elect to declare a Unity Vote on that Proposal. Notifying the Assessor that the Group is casting Unity Vote on the designated Proposal entitles the Group to cast three Votes on that Proposal, and additionally requires that : - the Group spend two Extra Votes at the time of casting Unity Vote - the Group vote either three times FOR or three times AGAINST the designated Proposal A Unity Vote is only legal if all the above conditions are met. If all Members of the Group Vote on the named Proposal, and all vote as specified by the Unity Vote, two Extra Votes shall be transferred from the Bank to the Group's Treasury. The Assessor shall report such transfers. If, on the other hand, not all Members Vote, or not all Vote the same way, the Group shall not be entitled to cast any Vote on that Proposal, and no vote cast by the Group on that Proposal shall be legal, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3467 (Harlequin; disi.), 2 May 1997 text: If a Group is entitled to cast Votes on a Proposal, its Vizier may elect to declare a Unity Vote on that Proposal. Notifying the Assessor that the Group is casting Unity Vote on the designated Proposal entitles the Group to cast three Votes on that Proposal, and additionally requires that : - the Group spend three VTs at the time of casting Unity Vote - the Group vote either three times FOR or three times AGAINST the designated Proposal A Unity Vote is only legal if all the above conditions are met. If all Members of the Group Vote on the named Proposal, and all vote as specified by the Unity Vote, three VTs shall be transferred from the Bank to the Group's Treasury. The Assessor shall report such transfers. If, on the other hand, not all Members Vote, or not all Vote the same way, the Group shall not be entitled to cast any Vote on that Proposal, and no vote cast by the Group on that Proposal shall be legal, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: If a Group, during the Voting Period of a Proposal, successfully executes a Transfer Order for 3 VTs from itself to the Bank for the purpose of declaring Unity on that Proposal, casts exactly 3 Votes FOR or 3 Votes AGAINST the Proposal in question, and informs the Assessor that it is electing to cast a Unity Vote on that Proposal, then that Group has declared Unity on that Proposal. If a Group declares Unity on a Proposal, and all of its Members Vote on that Proposal, and all of the Votes of its Members are the same as the Votes of the Group, then the Group is entitled to cast 3 Votes on that Proposal, at zero cost. Furthermore, the Assessor shall pay out 3 VTs to the Group. If a Group declares Unity on a Proposal, and not all of its Members express an Intent to Vote, or not all of the intended Votes of its Members are the same as the intended Votes of the Group, then the Group is not entitled to cast any Votes on that Proposal, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1653 by Proposal 3693 (Steve), 26 February 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1654 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1654 by Proposal 2682, 26 September 1996 text: Any Player who is awarded the Degree Doctor of Nomic History shall receive from the Bank a special remuneration of 50 Marks. The Assessor shall detect and report this transfer. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: Any Player who is awarded the Degree Doctor of Nomic History shall receive from the Bank a special remuneration of 10 VTs. The Assessor shall detect and report this transfer. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The Registrar shall pay out 10 VTs to any Player who is awarded the Degree of Doctor of Nomic History. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1654 by Proposal 3725 (Steve), 16 April 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1655 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1655 by Proposal 2687, 3 October 1996 text: If a Player has Marks in eir personal Treasury greater than or equal to 300 Mil in value, then that Player may Win a Game by transferring 300 Mil to the Bank, by means of a message sent to the Public Forum. This transfer cannot be for any other purpose (eg purchasing Powers). history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1656 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1656 by Proposal 2693, 3 October 1996 text: The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Patent Titles that have been awarded, and to whom they have been awarded, with the exception of any such events of which the Rules state that they have no Historical Significance. This list is known as the Gold Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1657 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1657 by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 text: There shall exist the Office of Nomic Archivist. The Archivist shall receive a weekly salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1657 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1658 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1658 by Proposal 2699, 10 October 1996 text: A Speaker shall become Tainted when a Referendum calling for the Tainting of the Speaker passes. Any Active Player is permitted to call such a Referendum at any time, by requesting such to the Public Forum. This Referendum must name the offending Speaker, and if that Player is Speaker upon passage of this Referendum, that Speaker is Tainted. For this Referendum the default procedure for Referenda is modified as follows: Vote Collector is the Registrar, Voting Entities do not include the Speaker, and its Adoption Ratio is 2. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3746 (Blob), 15 May 1998 text: A Speaker shall become Tainted when a Referendum calling for the Tainting of the Speaker passes. Any Active Player is permitted to call such a Referendum at any time, by requesting such to the Public Forum. This Referendum must name the offending Speaker, and if that Player is Speaker upon passage of this Referendum, that Speaker is Tainted. For this Referendum the default procedure for Referenda is modified as follows: * The Vote Collector is the Registrar * Voting Entities do not include the Speaker. * The Adoption Index is 2. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: A Speaker shall become Tainted when a Referendum calling for the Tainting of the Speaker passes. Any Active Player is authorized to call such a Referendum at any time, by requesting such to the Public Forum. This Referendum must name the offending Speaker, and if that Player is Speaker upon passage of this Referendum, that Speaker is Tainted. For this Referendum the default procedure for Referenda is modified as follows: * The Vote Collector is the Registrar * Voting Entities do not include the Speaker. * The Adoption Index is 2. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3972 (Peekee), 14 February 2000 text: A Speaker shall become Tainted when a Referendum calling for the Tainting of the Speaker passes. Any Active Player is authorized to call such a Referendum at any time, by requesting such to the Public Forum. This Referendum must name the offending Speaker, and if that Player is Speaker upon passage of this Referendum, that Speaker is Tainted. For this Referendum the default procedure for Referenda is modified as follows: * The Vote Collector is the Registrar * Voters do not include the Speaker. * The Adoption Index is 2. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Speaker shall become Tainted when a Referendum calling for the Tainting of the Speaker passes. Any Active Player is authorized to call such a Referendum at any time, by publicly requesting such. This Referendum must name the offending Speaker, and if that Player is Speaker upon passage of this Referendum, that Speaker is Tainted. For this Referendum the default procedure for Referenda is modified as follows: * The Vote Collector is the Registrar * Voters do not include the Speaker. * The Adoption Index is 2. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: The person holding the position of Speaker is untained as long as e holds that position lawfully. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4804 (Maud), 15 June 2005 text: The person holding the position of Speaker is untainted as long as e holds that position lawfully. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1658 by Proposal 4836 (Goethe, Maud), 2 October 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1659 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1659 by Proposal 2706, 12 October 1996 text: Any Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right to call Elections. This is the Right to declare any number of Offices to be held temporarily. This Right is exercised by posting an announcement in the Public Forum that both lists a number of Offices currently held in normal fashion, and declares that the Speaker is exercising eir Right to call these Elections. If the Speaker posts such a message, is not Tainted at the time of posting, and has not exercised this Right since e last became Speaker, all such Offices listed in this post are then held temporarily. history: Infected and Amended(1) by Rule 1454, 20 October 1996 text: Any Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right to call Elections. This is the Right to declare any number of Offices to be held temporarily. This Right is exercised by posting an announcement in the Public Forum that both lists a number of Offices currently held in normal fashion, and declares that the Speaker is exercising eir Right to call these Elections. If the Speaker posts such a message, is not Tainted at the time of posting, and has not exercised this Right since e last became Speaker, all such Offices listed in this post are then held temporarily. This Rule defers to all other Rules which do not contain this sentence. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3452 (Steve), 7 April 1997 text: Any Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right to call Elections. This is the Right to declare any number of Offices to be held temporarily. This Right is exercised by posting an announcement in the Public Forum that both lists a number of Offices currently held in normal fashion, and declares that the Speaker is exercising eir Right to call these Elections. If the Speaker posts such a message, is not Tainted at the time of posting, and has not exercised this Right since e last became Speaker, all such Offices listed in this post are then held temporarily. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3742 (Harlequin), 8 May 1998 text: Any Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right to call Elections. This is the Right to declare any number of Offices to be held temporarily. This Right is exercised by posting an announcement in the Public Forum that both lists a number of Offices currently held by their Electees, and declares that the Speaker is exercising eir Right to call these Elections. If the Speaker posts such a message, is not Tainted at the time of posting, and has not exercised this Right since e last became Speaker, the Electees of these Offices shall cease to be the Electees to those Offices. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4071 (Steve), 14 September 2000 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the right to call Elections. This right is exercised by posting an announcement in the Public Forum that lists a number of Offices, and declares that the Speaker is exercising eir right to call Elections for these Offices. If the Speaker posts such a message, is not Tainted at the time of posting, and has not exercised this right since e last became Speaker, the Electee of each Office on the list (assuming that the Office has an Electee) is retired from Office. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the right to call Elections. This right is exercised by posting a public announcement that lists a number of Offices, and declares that the Speaker is exercising eir right to call Elections for these Offices. If the Speaker posts such a message, is not Tainted at the time of posting, and has not exercised this right since e last became Speaker, the Electee of each Office on the list (assuming that the Office has an Electee) is retired from Office. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: The Speaker has the right to call elections, and e exercises this right by a publishing a notice listing a number of offices and declaring that e is exercising eir right to call elections for these offices. If e has not exercised this right since e last became Speaker, then upon the publication of this notice, the electee of each listed office is retired from office. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1659 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1660 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1660 by Proposal 2707, 12 October 1996 text: Any Speaker who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. This Rule does not increase the maximum allowable votes that can be cast by a Voting Entity. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1661 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1661 by Proposal 2708, 12 October 1996 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, order the award of specific currencies from the Bank to specific Players, only as specified in this Rule. Once each Nomic Week a Speaker can exercise this Right by sending a post to the Public Forum which contains the following information; i) A value of currency that is not in excess of either 5 Mils or 1 Extra Vote. These are the only permitted currencies. ii) The name of a Player who has not received such an award in the prior month, and who is not Speaker. iii) The reason for the transfer. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit of the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. The Speaker detects and reports the currency transfers due to this Rule, and the post exercising this Right shall also be the Speaker's notification of this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepor. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, order the award of specific currencies from the Bank to specific Players, only as specified in this Rule. Once each Nomic Week a Speaker can exercise this Right by sending a post to the Public Forum which contains the following information; i) A value of currency that is not in excess of either 1 VT. These are the only permitted currencies. ii) The name of a Player who has not received such an award in the prior month, and who is not Speaker. iii) The reason for the transfer. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit of the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. The Speaker detects and reports the currency transfers due to this Rule, and the post exercising this Right shall also be the Speaker's notification of this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepor. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, order the award of specific currencies from the Bank to specific Players, only as specified in this Rule. The Speaker exercises this right by posting to the Public Forum a Payment Order from the Bank to one Player in VTs for an amount not in excess of 1 VT. The Player to receive the award must not have received a Patronage award within the preceding four weeks, and the Speaker must provide a reason along with the Payment Order. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit of the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3644 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, order the award of specific currencies from the Bank to specific Players, only as specified in this Rule. The Speaker exercises this right by posting to the Public Forum a Payment Order from the Bank to one Player in VTs for not more than 1 unit of any one Currency Minted by the Bank. The Player to receive the award must not have received a Patronage award within the preceding four weeks, and the Speaker must provide a reason along with the Payment Order. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit of the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3660 (General Chaos), 17 January 1998 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, order the award of specific currencies from the Bank to specific Players, only as specified in this Rule. The Speaker exercises this right by posting to the Public Forum a Payment Order from the Bank to one Player for not more than 1 unit of any one Currency Minted by the Bank. The Player to receive the award must not have received a Patronage award within the preceding four weeks, and the Speaker must provide a reason along with the Payment Order. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit of the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, order the award of specific currencies from the Bank to specific Players, only as specified in this Rule. The Speaker exercises this right by posting to the Public Forum a Payment Order from the Bank to one Player for not more than 1 unit of any one Currency Minted by the Bank. The Player to receive the award must not have received a Patronage award within the preceding four weeks, and the Speaker must provide a reason along with the Payment Order. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit to the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, order the award of Stems from the Bank to specific Players, only as specified in this Rule. The Speaker exercises this right by posting to the Public Forum one or more Payment Orders from the Bank to Players for a total of not more than 30 Stems. The Players to receive the award must not have received a Patronage award within the preceding four weeks, and the Speaker must provide a reason along with the Payment Order. All such Patronage Awards in a single Week must be posted in a single message. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit to the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4033 (Chuck), 2 August 2000 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, order the award of Stems from the Bank to specific Players, only as specified in this Rule. The Speaker exercises this right by paying out Stems to one or more Players, with a total of not more than 30 Stems. The Players to receive the award must not have received a Patronage award within the preceding four weeks, and the Speaker must provide a reason along with the Notice of Transfer. All such Patronage Awards in a single Week must be posted in a single message. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit to the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4151 (Kelly), 13 May 2001 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, order the award of Stems from the Bank to specific Players, only as specified in this Rule. The Speaker exercises this right by paying out Stems to one or more Players, with a total of not more than one-half the Basic Officer Salary. The Players to receive the award must not have received a Patronage award within the preceding four weeks, and the Speaker must provide a reason along with the Notice of Transfer. All such Patronage Awards in a single Week must be posted in a single message. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit to the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: A Speaker who is not Tainted has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, award the Boon Gold Star to a single Player who has not received this award within the preceding four weeks. The Speaker must provide a reason along with the Notice of Award. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit to the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4836 (Goethe, Maud), 2 October 2005 text: A Speaker has the Right of Patronage. This Right is the authority to, once a week, award the Boon Gold Star to a single Player who has not received this award within the preceding four weeks. The Speaker must provide a reason along with the Notice of Award. Such awards are only permitted to recognize acts the Speaker believes to be of benefit to the Agora community, acts that the Speaker believes to exceed the call of duty, or acts that the Speaker believes to be of extreme sacrifice for the good of the Game. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1661 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1662 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1662 by Proposal 2709, 12 October 1996 text: Every month the Speaker shall receive a gratuity of two Extra Votes. This gratuity shall be awarded upon the end of each month in which a single Player served as Speaker. In any month where more than one Player served as Speaker, this gratuity shall not be awarded. This currency transfer is detected and reported by the Registrar. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3524 (Steve; disi.), 30 June 1997 text: Every month the Speaker shall receive a gratuity of two Voting Tokens. This gratuity shall be awarded upon the end of each month in which a single Player served as Speaker. In any month where more than one Player served as Speaker, this gratuity shall not be awarded. This currency transfer is detected and reported by the Registrar. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: At the end of every month, if the same Player was Speaker for that entire month, the Registrar shall pay out a Speaker's Gratuity of two VTs to the Speaker. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: After the end of every month, if the same Player was Speaker for that entire month, the Registrar shall pay out a Speaker's Gratuity of two VTs to the Speaker. history: ... history: Amended(4) text: The Speaker's Gratuity After the end of every month, if the same Player was Speaker for that entire month, the Registrar shall pay out a Speaker's Gratuity as set in the last Treasuror's budget. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1663 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1663 by Proposal 2711, 12 October 1996 text: A Player Wins the Game if three Proposals submitted by em in a row receive exactly the same number of FOR, AGAINST and ABSTAIN Votes. The Assessor is prohibited from Winning in this manner. history: Infected and Amended(1) Substantially by Rule 1454, 21 October 1997 text: A Player Wins the Game if three Proposals submitted by em in a row receive exactly the same number of FOR, AGAINST and ABSTAIN Votes. The Assessor is prohibited from Winning in this manner. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1663, 4 November 1997 text: A Player Wins the Game if three Proposals submitted by em in a row receive exactly the same number of FOR, AGAINST and ABSTAIN Votes. The Assessor is prohibited from Winning in this manner. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1663 by Proposal 3728 (Repeal-O-Matic), 16 April 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1664 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1664 by Proposal 2717, 23 October 1996 text: Any Player is either Abiding or Rebellious. At the time this Rule is created, all Players are Abiding. A new Player is always Abiding. A Player can switch from Abiding to Rebellious or from Rebellious to Abiding by sending a message to the Public Forum saying e does change so. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Players that are Rebellious, and shall publish this list weekly. If at any time at least 1/3 of all Players are Rebellious a Revolt occurs. The Registrar must post the fact that a Revolt has occured to the Public Forum as soon as possible. If a revolt occurs, then: - The Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker - All Players that hold one or more Offices in the normal fashion cease to hold those in a normal fashion and hold them temporarily instead. - All Rebellious Players become Abiding again history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2797 (Andre), 30 January 1997 text: Any Player is either Abiding or Rebellious. At the time this Rule is created, all Players are Abiding. A new Player is always Abiding. A Player can switch from Abiding to Rebellious or from Rebellious to Abiding by sending a message to the Public Forum saying e does change so. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Players that are Rebellious, and shall publish this list weekly. If at any time at least 1/3 of all Players are Rebellious a Revolt occurs. The Registrar must post the fact that a Revolt has occured to the Public Forum as soon as possible. If a revolt occurs, then: - The Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker - All Players that hold one or more Offices are retired from all such Offices. - All Rebellious Players become Abiding again history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), 11 May 1997 text: Any Player is either Abiding or Rebellious. At the time this Rule is created, all Players are Abiding. A new Player is always Abiding. A Player whose Location is the Beer Hall can switch from Abiding to Rebellious or from Rebellious to Abiding by sending a message to the Public Forum saying e does change so. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Players that are Rebellious, and shall publish this list weekly. If at any time at least 1/3 of all Players are Rebellious a Revolt occurs. The Registrar must post the fact that a Revolt has occured to the Public Forum as soon as possible. If a revolt occurs, then: - The Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker - All Players that hold one or more Offices are retired from all such Offices. - All Rebellious Players become Abiding again history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3685 (Steve), 12 February 1998 text: Any Player is either Abiding or Rebellious. At the time this Rule is created, all Players are Abiding. A new Player is always Abiding. A Player whose Location is the Beer Hall can switch from Abiding to Rebellious or from Rebellious to Abiding by sending a message to the Public Forum saying e does change so. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Players that are Rebellious, and shall publish this list weekly. If at any time at least 1/3 of all Players are Rebellious, and at least one month has passed since the last Revolt, a Revolt occurs. The Registrar must post the fact that a Revolt has occured to the Public Forum as soon as possible. If a revolt occurs, then: - The Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker - All Players that hold one or more Offices are retired from all such Offices. - All Rebellious Players become Abiding again history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3703 (Steve), 9 March 1998 text: Any Player is either Abiding or Rebellious. At the time this Rule is created, all Players are Abiding. A new Player is always Abiding. A Player whose Location is the Beer Hall can switch from Abiding to Rebellious or from Rebellious to Abiding by sending a message to the Public Forum saying e does change so. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Players that are Rebellious, and shall publish this list weekly. If at any time at least 1/3 of all Players are Rebellious, and at least one month has passed since the last Revolt, a Revolt occurs. The Registrar must post the fact that a Revolt has occured to the Public Forum as soon as possible. If a revolt occurs, then: - a Speaker Transition occurs. - All Players that hold one or more Offices are retired from all such Offices. - All Rebellious Players become Abiding again history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3713 (Blob), 19 March 1998 text: Any Player is either Abiding or Rebellious. A new Player is always Abiding when e becomes a player. A Player whose Location is the Beer Hall can switch from Abiding to Rebellious or from Rebellious to Abiding by sending a message to the Public Forum saying e does change so. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Players that are Rebellious. This list is known as the Red Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. A Player may Call for a Revolt at any time, by sending to the Public Forum saying e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if the following conditions are met: i) The player posting the Call is Rebellious, ii) No other effective Call for Revolt has been made that week, iii) A successful Revolt has not occured for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and post the result to the Public Forum. The result of a Revolt is determined as follows: The Registrar selects a random integer from 1 to the number of Players at the time of the Call for Revolt. If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious Players at the time of the Call for Revolt, then the Revolt succeeds, otherwise it fails. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur (in order): - The Registrar shall vacate all Blots of each Rebellious Player. - The Registrar shall pay out 2 VTs to each Rebellious Player. - A Speaker Transition occurs - All Players that hold one or more Offices in the normal fashion cease to hold those in a normal fashion and hold them temporarily instead. - All Rebellious Players become Abiding again If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious Players gain 2 Blots. - The Player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The Registrar shall execute all Payment Orders required by this rule. The Registrar is authorised to vacate any payment orders this rule requires em to vacate. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3740 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 May 1998 text: Any Player is either Abiding or Rebellious. A new Player is always Abiding when e becomes a player. A Player can switch from Abiding to Rebellious or from Rebellious to Abiding by sending a message to the Public Forum saying e does change so. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Players that are Rebellious. This list is known as the Red Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. A Player may Call for a Revolt at any time, by sending to the Public Forum saying e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if the following conditions are met: i) The player posting the Call is Rebellious, ii) No other effective Call for Revolt has been made that week, iii) A successful Revolt has not occured for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and post the result to the Public Forum. The result of a Revolt is determined as follows: The Registrar selects a random integer from 1 to the number of Players at the time of the Call for Revolt. If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious Players at the time of the Call for Revolt, then the Revolt succeeds, otherwise it fails. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur (in order): - The Registrar shall vacate all Blots of each Rebellious Player. - The Registrar shall pay out 2 VTs to each Rebellious Player. - A Speaker Transition occurs - All Players that hold one or more Offices in the normal fashion cease to hold those in a normal fashion and hold them temporarily instead. - All Rebellious Players become Abiding again If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious Players gain 2 Blots. - The Player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The Registrar shall execute all Payment Orders required by this rule. The Registrar is authorised to vacate any payment orders this rule requires em to vacate. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3794 (Kolja A.), 19 October 1998 text: Any Player is either Abiding or Rebellious. A new Player is always Abiding when e becomes a player. A Player can switch from Abiding to Rebellious or from Rebellious to Abiding by sending a message to the Public Forum saying e does change so. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Players that are Rebellious. This list is known as the Red Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. A Player may Call for a Revolt at any time, by sending to the Public Forum saying e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if the following conditions are met: i) The player posting the Call is Rebellious, ii) No other effective Call for Revolt has been made that week, iii) A successful Revolt has not occured for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and post the result to the Public Forum. The result of a Revolt is determined as follows: The Registrar selects a random integer from 1 to the number of Players at the time of the Call for Revolt. If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious Players at the time of the Call for Revolt, then the Revolt succeeds, otherwise it fails. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur (in order): - The Registrar shall vacate all Blots of each Rebellious Player. - The Registrar shall pay out 2 VTs to each Rebellious Player. - The Registrar is empowered and required to levy a tax of 75% on indulgences. The holder of the Patent Title "Robespierre" is exempt from this tax, even if other rules don't allow tax exemptions. - A Speaker Transition occurs - All Players that hold one or more Offices in the normal fashion cease to hold those in a normal fashion and hold them temporarily instead. - All Rebellious Players become Abiding again If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious Players gain 2 Blots. - The Player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The Registrar shall execute all Payment Orders required by this rule. The Registrar is authorised to vacate any payment orders this rule requires em to vacate. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3901 (Schneidster), 6 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3916 (harvel), 27 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3936 (Elysion), 31 October 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3951 (Elysion), 8 December 1999 text: Any Player is either Abiding or Rebellious. A new Player is always Abiding when e becomes a player. A Player can switch from Abiding to Rebellious or from Rebellious to Abiding if e has not does so during the current month by sending a message to the Public Forum saying e does change so. The Registrar shall include in the Registrar's Report a list of all Players that are Rebellious. A Player may Call for a Revolt at any time, by sending to the Public Forum saying e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if the following conditions are met: i) The player posting the Call is Rebellious, ii) No other effective Call for Revolt has been made that week, iii) A successful Revolt has not occured for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and post the result to the Public Forum. The Registar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of Players (plus 1 if Miscreant is held) at the time of the Call for Revolt. If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious Players (plus 1 if Miscreant is held by a Rebellious Player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur (in order): - The Registrar shall expunge all Blots of each Rebellious Player. - The Registrar shall pay out 40 Stems to each Rebellious Player. - All Abiding Players that hold one or more Offices in the normal fashion cease to hold those in a normal fashion and hold them temporarily instead. - All Rebellious Players become Abiding again - The Herald is empowered and required to levy a tax of 75% on indulgences. The holder of the Patent Title "Robespierre" is exempt from this tax, even if other rules don't allow tax exemptions. - A Speaker Transition occurs If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious Players gain 2 Blots. - The Player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots that have been gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 history: Amended(13) by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4075b (Steve), 10 October 2000 text: Any Player is either Abiding or Rebellious. A new Player is always Abiding when e becomes a player. A Player can switch from Abiding to Rebellious or from Rebellious to Abiding if e has not does so during the current month by sending a public message saying e does change so. The Registrar shall include in the Registrar's Report a list of all Players that are Rebellious. A Player may Call for a Revolt at any time, by publicly saying e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if the following conditions are met: i) The player posting the Call is Rebellious, ii) No other effective Call for Revolt has been made that week, iii) A successful Revolt has not occured for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and post the result to the Public Forum. The Registar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of Players (plus 1 if Miscreant is held) at the time of the Call for Revolt. If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious Players (plus 1 if Miscreant is held by a Rebellious Player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur (in order): - The Registrar shall expunge all Blots of each Rebellious Player. - The Registrar shall pay out 40 Stems to each Rebellious Player. - All positions in the Oligarchy become vacant. - All Abiding Players that hold one or more Offices in the normal fashion cease to hold those in a normal fashion and hold them temporarily instead. - All Rebellious Players become Abiding again - The Herald is empowered and required to levy a tax of 75% on indulgences. The holder of the Patent Title "Robespierre" is exempt from this tax, even if other rules don't allow tax exemptions. - A Speaker Transition occurs If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious Players gain 2 Blots. - The Player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots that have been gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4091 (Elysion), 18 December 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4098 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is held). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is held by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall pay out 40 Stems to each Rebellious player - All positions in the Oligarchy become vacant. - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - The Herald is empowered and required to levy a tax of 75% on Indulgences. The holder of the Patent Title "Robespierre" is exempt from this tax, even if other rules do not allow tax exemptions. - A Speaker Transition occurs - Any Indulgence Auction in progress is cancelled If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status and Indulgence holdings of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4128 (Murphy), 28 March 2001 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall pay out 40 Stems to each Rebellious player - All positions in the Oligarchy become vacant. - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - The Registrar shall levy a 75% Indulgence tax. For this levy, the Bearor of the Patent Title "Robespierre" is tax-exempt. - A Speaker Transition occurs - Any Indulgence Auction in progress is cancelled If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status and Indulgence holdings of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall pay out 40 Stems to each Rebellious player - The GWotO shall remove all Abiding Oligarchs from the Oligarchy - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - The Registrar shall levy a 75% Indulgence tax. For this levy, the Bearor of the Patent Title "Robespierre" is tax-exempt. - A Speaker Transition occurs - Any Indulgence Auction in progress is cancelled If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status, Oligarchy membership, and Indulgence holdings of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 4367 (Steve), 23 August 2002 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall pay out 8 Stems to each Rebellious player - The GWotO shall remove all Abiding Oligarchs from the Oligarchy - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - The Registrar shall levy a 75% Indulgence tax. For this levy, the Bearor of the Patent Title "Robespierre" is tax-exempt. - A Speaker Transition occurs - Any Indulgence Auction in progress is cancelled If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status, Oligarchy membership, and Indulgence holdings of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall grant the emphemeral Patent Title Rebel Hero to each Rebellious player. - The GWotO shall remove all Abiding Oligarchs from the Oligarchy - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - A Speaker Transition occurs - Any Indulgence Auction in progress is cancelled If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status, Oligarchy membership of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 4516 (Murphy), 18 July 2003 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall grant the ephemeral Patent Title Rebel Hero to each Rebellious player. - The GWotO shall remove all Abiding Oligarchs from the Oligarchy - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - A Speaker Transition occurs - Any Indulgence Auction in progress is cancelled If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status, Oligarchy membership of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 4554 (Elysion), 27 February 2004 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall grant the ephemeral Patent Title Rebel Hero to each Rebellious player. - The GWotO shall remove all Abiding Oligarchs from the Oligarchy - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - A Speaker Transition occurs If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status, Oligarchy membership of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(24) by Proposal 4555 (Elysion), 22 March 2004 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall grant the ephemeral Patent Title Rebel Hero to each Rebellious player. - The Lobbying Strength of each Abiding Player is set to 0 - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - A Speaker Transition occurs If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(25) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall grant the ephemeral Patent Title Rebel Hero to each Rebellious player. - All Stock Cards in the possession of Abiding Players are returned to the Deck - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - A Speaker Transition occurs If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(26) by Proposal 4624 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall grant the ephemeral Patent Title Rebel Hero to each Rebellious player. - All Stock Cards in the possession of Abiding Players are returned to the Deck, and all Abiding Players have their initiative switched to Gote. - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - A Speaker Transition occurs If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(27) by Proposal 4686 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall grant the ephemeral Patent Title Rebel Hero to each Rebellious player. - All Stock Cards in the possession of Abiding Players are returned to the Deck, and all Abiding Players have their initiative switched to Gote. - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - If the Speaker is not Rebellious, A Speaker Transition occurs If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(28) by Proposal 4691 (root), 18 April 2005 text: A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall grant the ephemeral Patent Title Rebel Hero to each Rebellious player. - All Stock Cards in the possession of Abiding Players are returned to the Deck, and the initiative of each Abiding Player is set to Gote. - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - If the Speaker is not Rebellious, A Speaker Transition occurs If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule. history: Amended(29) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: A Call for Revolt is a notice submitted by a player (the Agitator) which alleges, roughly, that the current government is corrupt, oppressive and self-serving, that rather than watching over the people it is watching the people, that action must be taken, and furthermore asserts that we do not need a key, because we can break in. The Call is valid only if: (a) the Agitator was rebellious when e submitted the Call; (b) no other Call has been made during the same week; and (c) no Revolt has been successful for the previous thirty days. As soon as possible after a valid Call for Revolt has been submitted, the Registrar shall perform the following events in order: (a) select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if a player bears Miscreant); (b) if the selected number is less than or equal to the number of rebellious players (plus 1 if a rebellious player bears Miscreant), then: (1) announce that the Revolt succeeds; (2) expunge the blots of each rebellious player; (3) grant the ephemeral patent title Rebel Hero to each rebellious player; (4) set the initiative of each abiding player to Goethe, and return all stock cards held by abiding players to the Deck; (5) retire each abiding electee from office; and (6) flip each rebellious player's orthodoxy to abiding; otherwise: (1) announce that the Call for Revolt has failed; (2) assess each rebellious player 2 blots; and (3) assess the Agitator an additional 2 blots. The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the orthodoxy of players at the time the Call was submitted. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all blots gained or expunged as a result of this rule, and is empowered to perform the actions this rule would require em to perform. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1664 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1665 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1665 by Proposal 2726, 23 October 1996 text: The Rules can give certain Officers latitude to make certain decisions and determinations based upon their judgement. When these decisions and determinations have effect on the Game State, Players shall always have the ability to make Claims of Error alleging that these decisions and determinations were made outside the authority given to the Officer. This Rule takes precidence over any Rule which otherwise defines a final arbiter for such decisions and determinations. If such a Claim is denied by the Officer, the Player making the Claim is then permitted to make a Call for Judgement alleging that the Officer is guilty of Abuse of Responsibility, a Class C Crime. This is the only time such a CFJ is permitted. In Judging such a CFJ, to find the Officer guilty the Judge must establish that the Officer did one of the following: i) Went beyond all reasonable interpretations of the Rules. ii) That e disregarded explicit instructions the Rules gave in regard to eir decisions and determinations. iii) That e showed a pathological lack of judgement in such decisions and determinations. The accused Officer must be given the opportunity to explain eir actions. And such Judgements shall be made in accord to the strictest possible standard of proof. history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The Rules can give certain Officers latitude to make certain decisions and determinations based upon their judgement. When these decisions and determinations have effect on the Game State, Players shall always have the ability to make Claims of Error alleging that these decisions and determinations were made outside the authority given to the Officer. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which otherwise defines a final arbiter for such decisions and determinations. If such a Claim is denied by the Officer, the Player making the Claim is then permitted to make a Call for Judgement alleging that the Officer is guilty of Abuse of Responsibility, a Class C Crime. This is the only time such a CFJ is permitted. In Judging such a CFJ, to find the Officer guilty the Judge must establish that the Officer did one of the following: i) Went beyond all reasonable interpretations of the Rules. ii) That e disregarded explicit instructions the Rules gave in regard to eir decisions and determinations. iii) That e showed a pathological lack of judgement in such decisions and determinations. The accused Officer must be given the opportunity to explain eir actions. And such Judgements shall be made in accord to the strictest possible standard of proof. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: The Rules can give certain Officers latitude to make certain decisions and determinations based upon their judgement. When these decisions and determinations have effect on the Game State, Players shall always have the ability to make Claims of Error alleging that these decisions and determinations were made outside the authority given to the Officer. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which otherwise defines a final arbiter for such decisions and determinations. If such a Claim is denied by the Officer, the Player making the Claim is then permitted to make a Call for Judgement alleging that the Officer is guilty of Abuse of Responsibility, a Class 4 Crime. This is the only time such a CFJ is permitted. In Judging such a CFJ, to find the Officer guilty the Judge must establish that the Officer did one of the following: i) Went beyond all reasonable interpretations of the Rules. ii) That e disregarded explicit instructions the Rules gave in regard to eir decisions and determinations. iii) That e showed a pathological lack of judgement in such decisions and determinations. The accused Officer must be given the opportunity to explain eir actions. And such Judgements shall be made in accord to the strictest possible standard of proof. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1665 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1666 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1666 by Proposal 2736 (Oerjan), 7 November 1996 text: An amount of Currency (necessarily a multiple of that Currency's MUQ) can be in Limbo for a specific time period, known as the current Limbo Period for that amount of Currency. Initially, no Currency is in Limbo. The Recordkeepor for a Currency shall keep records of all amounts of that Currency currently in Limbo, which Treasury each is in, and when the Limbo Period of each ends. These records are private, and during the Limbo Period, a Recordkeepor is prohibited from revealing any part of these records which e would not have knowledge of were e not the Recordkeepor for that Currency. Doing so is a Class C Crime. Unless another Rule specifies otherwise, whenever the Limbo period of an amount of Currency ends, that amount is no longer in Limbo, and is transferred to the Bank. These transfers shall be detected and reported by the Recordkeepor of the Currency. While in Limbo, an amount of Currency cannot be transferred. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would allow the transfer of amounts of Currencies in Limbo. history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Proposal 2831 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 text: An amount of Currency (necessarily a multiple of that Currency's MUQ) can be in Limbo for a specific time period, known as the current Limbo Period for that amount of Currency. Initially, no Currency is in Limbo. The Recordkeepor for a Currency shall keep records of all amounts of that Currency currently in Limbo, which Treasury each is in, and when the Limbo Period of each ends. These records are private, and during the Limbo Period, a Recordkeepor is prohibited from revealing any part of these records which e would not have knowledge of were e not the Recordkeepor for that Currency. Doing so is the Crime of Limbo Disclosure, a Class C Crime. Unless another Rule specifies otherwise, whenever the Limbo period of an amount of Currency ends, that amount is no longer in Limbo, and is transferred to the Bank. These transfers shall be detected and reported by the Recordkeepor of the Currency. While in Limbo, an amount of Currency cannot be transferred. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would allow the transfer of amounts of Currencies in Limbo. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1666 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1667 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1667 by Proposal 2738 (Swann), 7 November 1996 text: Every Rule has one Originator. The Originator of a Rule is the Entity responsible for that Rule's text as it first appeared in the Ruleset. The Originator of all Rules in theInitial Ruleset is Peter Suber. In the case of a Rule resulting from a proposed Rule Change, the Originator of that Rule is the Entity that proposed the Creation of the Rule. In the case of a Rule Created by a non-proposed Rule Change, the Originator of that Rule is the Rule that mandated the non-proposed Creation of the Rule. The Originator of a Rule shall not change. history: Infected and Amended(1) Substantially by Rule 1454, 18 May 1997 text: Every Rule has one Originator. The Originator of a Rule is the Entity responsible for that Rule's text as it first appeared in the Ruleset. The Originator of all Rules in theInitial Ruleset is Peter Suber. In the case of a Rule resulting from a proposed Rule Change, the Originator of that Rule is the Entity that proposed the Creation of the Rule. In the case of a Rule Created by a non-proposed Rule Change, the Originator of that Rule is the Rule that mandated the non-proposed Creation of the Rule. The Originator of a Rule shall not change. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1667, 1 June 1997 text: Every Rule has one Originator. The Originator of a Rule is the Entity responsible for that Rule's text as it first appeared in the Ruleset. The Originator of all Rules in theInitial Ruleset is Peter Suber. In the case of a Rule resulting from a proposed Rule Change, the Originator of that Rule is the Entity that proposed the Creation of the Rule. In the case of a Rule Created by a non-proposed Rule Change, the Originator of that Rule is the Rule that mandated the non-proposed Creation of the Rule. The Originator of a Rule shall not change. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Every Rule has one Originator. The Originator of a Rule is the Entity responsible for that Rule's text as it first appeared in the Ruleset. The Originator of all Rules in the Initial Ruleset is Peter Suber. In the case of a Rule resulting from a proposed Rule Change, the Originator of that Rule is the Entity that proposed the Creation of the Rule. In the case of a Rule Created by a non-proposed Rule Change, the Originator of that Rule is the Rule that mandated the non-proposed Creation of the Rule. The Originator of a Rule shall not change. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1667 by Proposal 3633 (Chuck), 29 December 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1668 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1668 by Proposal 2738 (Swann), 7 November 1996 text: Every Rule has one or more Authors. An Author of a Rule is an Entity responsible for some substantial portion of either the Rule's text, or its meaning, as it currently appears in the Ruleset. The first Author of any Rule is that Rule's Originator. Whenever a proposed Amendment makes more than a cosmetic change to a Rule, the Entity which proposed the Amendment becomes an Author of that Rule. If a non-proposed Amendment makes more than a cosmetic change to a Rule, the Rule that mandated the non-proposed Rule Change becomes an Author of that Rule. An Entity cannot become Author of a Rule as a result of an Amendment that did not apply to that Rule. An Entity also cannot become Author of a Rule as a result of an Amendment that the Rules explicitly state is to be Unattributed. All cosmetic Amendments are to be Unattributed. For Purpose of this Rule, the Rulekeepor shall be final arbiter of what constitutes a "substantial portion" of a Rule's text or meaning, and what constitutes only a "cosmetic" change. However, any change to a Rule that alters the way that Rule is applied, or alters more than half the text of a Rule, shall be deemed by the Rulekeepor as substantial, and any change that makes no alteration in either the semantic content or the application of a Rule shall be deemed by the Rulekeepor as cosmetic. If, after any Rule Change, the Rulekeepor feels that the contribution of any particular Author is completely absent from a Rule's text or meaning, then that Entity can be removed as an Author from that Rule. This shall be determined at the Rulekeepor's discretion. The Rulekeepor is permitted to follow any procedure e deems appropriate in making determinations required by this Rule. E is also permitted to reverse emself by changing the entries in the Logical Ruleset, if e feels the circumstances merit it. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2783 (Chuck), 15 January 1997 text: Every Rule has one or more Authors. An Author of a Rule is an Entity responsible for some substantial portion of either the Rule's text, or its meaning, as it currently appears in the Ruleset. The first Author of any Rule is that Rule's Originator. Whenever a proposed Amendment makes more than a cosmetic change to a Rule, the Entity which proposed the Amendment becomes an Author of that Rule. If a non-proposed Amendment makes more than a cosmetic change to a Rule, the Rule that mandated the non-proposed Rule Change becomes an Author of that Rule. An Entity cannot become Author of a Rule as a result of an Amendment that did not apply to that Rule. An Entity also cannot become Author of a Rule as a result of an Amendment that the Rules explicitly state is to be Unattributed. All cosmetic Amendments are to be Unattributed. For Purpose of this Rule, the Rulekeepor shall be final arbiter of what constitutes a "substantial portion" of a Rule's text or meaning, and what constitutes only a "cosmetic" change. However, any change to a Rule that alters the way that Rule is applied, or alters more than half the text of a Rule, shall be deemed by the Rulekeepor as substantial, and any change that makes no alteration in either the semantic content or the application of a Rule shall be deemed by the Rulekeepor as cosmetic. If, after any Rule Change, the Rulekeepor feels that the contribution of any particular Author is completely absent from a Rule's text or meaning, then that Entity can be removed as an Author from that Rule. This shall be determined at the Rulekeepor's discretion. The Rulekeepor is permitted to follow any procedure e deems appropriate in making determinations required by this Rule. E is also permitted to reverse emself if e feels the circumstances merit it. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1668 by Proposal 3633 (Chuck), 29 December 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1669 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1669 by Proposal 2738 (Swann), 7 November 1996 text: The Rulekeepor shal keep a record of the Originator of each Rule created after this Rule is in force. E shall indicate these Rules' Originators within the Logical Ruleset, in any unambiguous manner. The Rulekeepor shall keep a recor of the current Authors of every Rule created after this Rule is in force. E shall also keep a record of current Authors added to any Rule after this Rule is in force. E shall indicate these Rules' Authors within the Logical Ruleset, in any unambiguous manner. The Rulekeepor is permitted, at eir discretion, to record Originators and current Authors not otherwise required in this Rule, as long as such attributions are correct and done in an unambiguous manner. Once such Authors and Originators are noted in the Logical Ruleset, the Rulekeepor isequired to continue keeping a record of them as long at they are current. The collecton of recorded Authors, plus the recorded Originator, of any one Rule shall be known as the Attribution of that Rule. history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The Rulekeepor shall keep a record of the Originator of each Rule created after this Rule is in force. E shall indicate these Rules' Originators within the Logical Ruleset, in any unambiguous manner. The Rulekeepor shall keep a record of the current Authors of every Rule created after this Rule is in force. E shall also keep a record of current Authors added to any Rule after this Rule is in force. E shall indicate these Rules' Authors within the Logical Ruleset, in any unambiguous manner. The Rulekeepor is permitted, at eir discretion, to record Originators and current Authors not otherwise required in this Rule, as long as such attributions are correct and done in an unambiguous manner. Once such Authors and Originators are noted in the Logical Ruleset, the Rulekeepor is required to continue keeping a record of them as long at they are current. The collecton of recorded Authors, plus the recorded Originator, of any one Rule shall be known as the Attribution of that Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1669 by Proposal 3633 (Chuck), 29 December 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1670 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1670 by Proposal 2739 (Swann), 7 November 1996 text: There is a Patent Title of Distributor. It shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of the Public Forum, as designated by the Registrar. It shall be awarded without need for a proposal when the Registrar identifies this person in the Public Forum. The title shall be removed whenever the Registrar designates a new Distributor. If the Distributor is a Player, that person shall be awarded two Mil every Nomic Week in recognition of eir service. This Mark transfer shall be detected and Reported by the Registrar. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address changes as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: There is a Patent Title of Distributor. It shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of the Public Forum, as designated by the Registrar. It shall be awarded without need for a proposal when the Registrar identifies this person in the Public Forum. The title shall be removed whenever the Registrar designates a new Distributor. If the Distributor is a Player, that person shall be awarded one Voting Token every Nomic Week in recognition of eir service. This VT transfer shall be detected and Reported by the Registrar. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address changes as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Infected and Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1454, 2 May 1997 text: There is a Patent Title of Distributor. It shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of the Public Forum, as designated by the Registrar. It shall be awarded without need for a proposal when the Registrar identifies this person in the Public Forum. The title shall be removed whenever the Registrar designates a new Distributor. If the Distributor is a Player, that person shall be awarded one Voting Token every Nomic Week in recognition of eir service. This VT transfer shall be detected and Reported by the Registrar. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address changes as soon as possible after e learns of it. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Rule 1670, 16 May 1997 text: There is a Patent Title of Distributor. It shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of the Public Forum, as designated by the Registrar. It shall be awarded without need for a proposal when the Registrar identifies this person in the Public Forum. The title shall be removed whenever the Registrar designates a new Distributor. If the Distributor is a Player, that person shall be awarded one Voting Token every Nomic Week in recognition of eir service. This VT transfer shall be detected and Reported by the Registrar. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address changes as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: There is a Patent Title of Distributor. It shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of the Public Forum, as designated by the Registrar. It shall be awarded without need for a proposal when the Registrar identifies this person in the Public Forum. The title shall be removed whenever the Registrar designates a new Distributor. If the Distributor is a Player, the Registrar shall, at the beginning of each Nomic Week, pay out one Voting Token to the Distributor, in recognition of eir service. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address changes as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Infected and Amended(5) Substantially by Rule 1454, 4 December 1997 text: There is a Patent Title of Distributor. It shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of the Public Forum, as designated by the Registrar. It shall be awarded without need for a proposal when the Registrar identifies this person in the Public Forum. The title shall be removed whenever the Registrar designates a new Distributor. If the Distributor is a Player, the Registrar shall, at the beginning of each Nomic Week, pay out one Voting Token to the Distributor, in recognition of eir service. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address changes as soon as possible after e learns of it. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Rule 1670, 18 December 1997 text: There is a Patent Title of Distributor. It shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of the Public Forum, as designated by the Registrar. It shall be awarded without need for a proposal when the Registrar identifies this person in the Public Forum. The title shall be removed whenever the Registrar designates a new Distributor. If the Distributor is a Player, the Registrar shall, at the beginning of each Nomic Week, pay out one Voting Token to the Distributor, in recognition of eir service. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address changes as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3754 (Steve), 9 June 1998 text: There is a Patent Title of Distributor. It shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of the Public Forum, as designated by the Registrar. It shall be awarded without need for a proposal when the Registrar identifies this person in the Public Forum. The title shall be removed whenever the Registrar designates a new Distributor. If the Distributor is a Player, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week, pay out to the Distributor Voting Tokens equivalent to the Basic Officer Salary, in recognition of eir service. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address changes as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: There is a Patent Title of Distributor. It shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of the Public Forum, as designated by the Registrar. It shall be awarded without need for a proposal when the Registrar identifies this person in the Public Forum. The title shall be removed whenever the Registrar designates a new Distributor. If the Distributor is a Player, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week, pay out to the Distributor Voting Tokens equivalent to the Basic Officer Salary, in recognition of eir service. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address change as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3827 (Kolja A.), 4 February 1999 text: There is a Patent Title of Distributor. It shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of the Public Forum, as designated by the Registrar. It shall be awarded without need for a proposal when the Registrar identifies this person in the Public Forum. The title shall be removed whenever the Registrar designates a new Distributor. If the Distributor is a Player, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after the beginning of each month, pay out to the Distributor Voting Tokens equivalent to the Basic Officer Salary, in recognition of eir service. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address change as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(11) by Proposal 3916 (harvel), 27 September 1999 text: If the Distributor is a Player, the Registrar shall, as soon as possible after the beginning of each month, pay out to the Distributor an amount equivalent to the Basic Officer Salary, in recognition of eir service. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address change as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 3998 (harvel), 2 May 2000 text: The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address change as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4141 (Wes), 15 April 2001 text: The person who is most responsible for the maintainance of one or more Public Fora, in the opinion of the Registrar, shall be known as the Distributor. Any changes in the identity of the Distributor shall take effect when announced publicly by the Registrar. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of the e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any address change as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4511 (Murphy), 10 July 2003 text: The person who is most responsible for the maintainance of one or more Public Fora, in the opinion of the Registrar, shall be known as the Distributor. Any changes in the identity of the Distributor shall take effect when announced publicly by the Registrar. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of all listed e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any listing or unlisting as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 text: The person who is most responsible for the maintenance of one or more Public Fora, in the opinion of the Registrar, shall be known as the Distributor. Any changes in the identity of the Distributor shall take effect when announced publicly by the Registrar. The Registrar is obliged to keep the Distributor informed of all listed e-mail addresses of all Players, as well as to inform the Distributor of any listing or unlisting as soon as possible after e learns of it. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1670 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1671 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1671 by Proposal 2754 (Swann), 28 November 1996 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Rule 1673, 2 December 1996 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1673, 9 December 1996 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Frankenstein Monstr to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Rule 1673, 15 December 1996 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. A Player casts the Frankenstein Monstr by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Frankenstein Monstr to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Rule 1673, 23 December 1996 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. A Player casts the Frankenstein Monstr by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Frankenstein Monstr to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Rule 1673, 3 January 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Frankenstein Monster within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Frankenstein Monster is set aside prior to that time. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. A Player casts the Frankenstein Monstr by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Frankenstein Monstr to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(6) Substantially by Rule 1673, 11 January 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(7) Substantially by Rule 1673, 17 January 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Frankenstein Monster within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Frankenstein Monster is set aside prior to that time. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. A Player casts the Frankenstein Monstr by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Frankenstein Monstr to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. No Frankenstein Monster may have retroactive application. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(8) Substantially by Rule 1673, 25 January 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. Once a person possesses a Frankenstein Monster, e shall keep that Frankenstein Monster forever. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Frankenstein Monster within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Frankenstein Monster is set aside prior to that time. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. A Player casts the Frankenstein Monstr by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Frankenstein Monstr to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. No Frankenstein Monster may have retroactive application. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(9) Substantially by Rule 1673, 2 February 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. Once a person possesses a Frankenstein Monster, e shall keep that Frankenstein Monster forever. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Frankenstein Monster within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Frankenstein Monster is set aside prior to that time. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. A Player casts the Frankenstein Monstr by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Frankenstein Monstr to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. No Frankenstein Monster may have retroactive application. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(10) Substantially by Rule 1673, 4 February 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. Frankenstein Monster Transition occurs when any of the following happens: i) A new quarter has begun. ii) The Frankenstein Monster goes (or is already) On Hold iii) The Frankenstein Monster no longer wishes to be Frankenstein Monster . Once a person possesses a Frankenstein Monster, e shall keep that Frankenstein Monster forever. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Frankenstein Monster within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Frankenstein Monster is set aside prior to that time. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. A Player casts the Frankenstein Monstr by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Frankenstein Monstr to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. No Frankenstein Monster may have retroactive application. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(11) Substantially by Rule 1673, 23 February 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(12) Substantially by Rule 1673, 23 February 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(13) Substantially by Rule 1673, 23 February 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. Frankenstein Monster Transition occurs when any of the following happens: i) A new quarter has begun. ii) The Frankenstein Monster goes (or is already) On Hold iii) The Frankenstein Monster no longer wishes to be Frankenstein Monster. Once a person possesses a Frankenstein Monster, e shall keep that Frankenstein Monster forever. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Frankenstein Monster within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Frankenstein Monster is set aside prior to that time. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. A Player casts the Frankenstein Monstr by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Registrar shall send a copy of the Frankenstein Monstr to any Player who Registers for the first time, within a week of such Registration. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(14) Substantially by Rule 1673, 28 February 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. Frankenstein Monster Transition occurs when any of the following happens: i) A new quarter has begun. ii) The Frankenstein Monster goes (or is already) On Hold iii) The Frankenstein Monster no longer wishes to be Frankenstein Monster. Once a person possesses a Frankenstein Monster, e shall keep that Frankenstein Monster forever. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Frankenstein Monster within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Frankenstein Monster is set aside prior to that time. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. A Player casts the Frankenstein Monstr by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(15) Substantially by Rule 1673, 28 February 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. Frankenstein Monster Transition occurs when any of the following happens: i) A new quarter has begun. ii) The Frankenstein Monster goes (or is already) On Hold iii) The Frankenstein Monster no longer wishes to be Frankenstein Monster. Once a person possesses a Frankenstein Monster, e shall keep that Frankenstein Monster forever. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A CFJ alleging that a Player has violated a Rule or committed a Crime shall not be judged TRUE unless the Frankenstein Monster is sufficient to be certain of that Judgement beyond reasonable doubt. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Frankenstein Monster within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Frankenstein Monster is set aside prior to that time. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. A Player casts the Frankenstein Monstr by sending a message to the Public Forum clearly and unambiguously identifying the Player who is to be the Believer. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(16) Cosmetically by Proposal 2830 (Murphy), 7 March 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(17) Substantially by Rule 1673, 16 March 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(18) Substantially by Rule 1673, 16 March 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(19) Substantially by Rule 1673, 16 March 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(20) Substantially by Rule 1673, 16 March 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(21) Substantially by Rule 1673, 16 March 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(22) Substantially by Rule 1673, 16 March 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. Once a person possesses a Frankenstein Monster, e shall keep that Frankenstein Monster forever. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A CFJ alleging that a Player has violated a Rule or committed a Crime shall not be judged TRUE unless the Frankenstein Monster is sufficient to be certain of that Judgement beyond reasonable doubt. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. A Player is required to perform all actions required of eim by a legal Frankenstein Monster within 72 hours of it taking effect, unless the Frankenstein Monster is set aside prior to that time. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster detects and reports the currency transfers due to this Rule, and the post exercising this Right shall also be the Frankenstein Monster's notification of this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(23) Substantially by Rule 1673, 3 April 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(24) Substantially by Rule 1673, 3 April 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(25) Substantially by Rule 1673, 3 April 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(26) Substantially by Rule 1673, 3 April 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. The duty of the Frankenstein Monster is to be the contact between Agora and the Game of InterNomic. Once a person possesses a Frankenstein Monster, e shall keep that Frankenstein Monster forever. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. An ACO that attempts to form a Frankenstein Monster must contain, in addition to any information required elsewhere, a specification of the prospective initial Ordinancekeepor and Vizier of the Frankenstein Monster to be created. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster detects and reports the currency transfers due to this Rule, and the post exercising this Right shall also be the Frankenstein Monster's notification of this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(27) Substantially by Rule 1673, 9 April 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. The duty of the Frankenstein Monster is to be the contact between Agora and the Game of InterNomic. Once a person possesses a Frankenstein Monster, e shall keep that Frankenstein Monster forever. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster detects and reports the currency transfers due to this Rule, and the post exercising this Right shall also be the Frankenstein Monster's notification of this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(28) Substantially by Rule 1673, 9 April 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. The duty of the Frankenstein Monster is to be the contact between Agora and the Game of InterNomic. Once a person possesses a Frankenstein Monster, e shall keep that Frankenstein Monster forever. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster detects and reports the currency transfers due to this Rule, and the post exercising this Right shall also be the Frankenstein Monster's notification of this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(29) Substantially by Rule 1673, 20 April 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. The duty of the Frankenstein Monster is to be the contact between Agora and the Game of InterNomic. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster detects and reports the currency transfers due to this Rule, and the post exercising this Right shall also be the Frankenstein Monster's notification of this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(30) Substantially by Rule 1673, 20 April 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. The duty of the Frankenstein Monster is to be the contact between Agora and the Game of InterNomic. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster detects and reports the currency transfers due to this Rule, and the post exercising this Right shall also be the Frankenstein Monster's notification of this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(31) Substantially by Rule 1673, 23 April 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster detects and reports the currency transfers due to this Rule, and the post exercising this Right shall also be the Frankenstein Monster's notification of this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(32) Substantially by Rule 1673, 23 April 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Frankenstein Monster is 2. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. There is the Office of Frankenstein Monster. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster detects and reports the currency transfers due to this Rule, and the post exercising this Right shall also be the Frankenstein Monster's notification of this transfer to the appropriate Recordkeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(33) Substantially by Rule 1673, 4 May 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(34) Substantially by Rule 1673, 4 May 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(35) Substantially by Rule 1673, 10 May 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(36) Substantially by Rule 1673, 10 May 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Frankenstein Monster is 2. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. Any Speaker who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Frankenstein Monster (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Frankenstein Monster. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(37) Substantially by Rule 1673, 16 May 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Frankenstein Monster is 2. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(38) Substantially by Rule 1673, 16 May 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. The Registrar, in consultation with the Speaker, shall develop and maintain a Frankenstein Monster, welcoming a new player to Agora Nomic, explaining any subscriptions required to receive the Public Forum, how to obtain a current ruleset, and any other information, advice, and gossip as the Registrar sees fit. Frankenstein Monster is 2. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(39) Substantially by Rule 1673, 20 May 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Frankenstein Monster is 2. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(40) Substantially by Rule 1673, 20 May 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. A Vote is the name of exactly one of the Candidates for the given Frankenstein Monster. Frankenstein Monster is 2. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(41) Substantially by Rule 1673, 1 June 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Frankenstein Monster is 2. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(42) Substantially by Rule 1673, 1 June 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. If a Player is mandated by the Frankenstein Monster to maintain a set of records, these records must be available for public perusal, unless such records are designated by the Frankenstein Monster as private. Frankenstein Monster is 2. Let there be a Frankenstein Monster known as a Patent Title. It is permitted for a Call for Judgement to contain Arguments, Evidence, or other material placed there at the Frankenstein Monster's discretion. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Judge must dismiss a CFJ if one of the following is true of it: i) It contains no clearly-identifiable Frankenstein Monster. ii) Its Frankenstein Monster can not logically admit to either being TRUE or FALSE. iii) Its Frankenstein Monster does not relate to a matter relevant to the Rules. iv) Its Frankenstein Monster fails to comply with the Rules. v) It lacks standing, as defined elsewhere. vi) After a reasonable effort by the Judge to obtain all relevant information, no determination can be made of the truth or falsity of its Frankenstein Monster. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(43) Substantially by Rule 1673, 24 June 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(44) Substantially by Rule 1673, 24 June 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(45) Substantially by Rule 1673, 24 June 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(46) Substantially by Rule 1673, 24 June 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(47) Substantially by Rule 1673, 24 June 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(48) Substantially by Rule 1673, 24 June 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(49) Substantially by Rule 1673, 24 June 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(50) Substantially by Rule 1673, 24 June 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is ten days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Frankenstein Monsters. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. A "Nomic Entity" is any entity which has no discernible existence without the Frankenstein Monster, only existing by virtue of the Frankenstein Monster defining it to exist. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. An Organization shall be required to be dissolved whenever any of the following conditions are true: i) The Jurisdiction of its SLC becomes empty, and there is no provision for this to change. ii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Frankenstein Monster. iii) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Executor. iv) The continued existence of the Organization would require that the Organization have no legal Maintainer for its SLC. v) The SLC of the Organization requires the Organization to dissolve. This is a Voluntary Dissolution, all other dissolutions are Administrative Dissolutions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(51) Substantially by Rule 1673, 7 July 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is ten days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Frankenstein Monsters. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. A "Nomic Entity" is any entity which has no discernible existence without the Frankenstein Monster, only existing by virtue of the Frankenstein Monster defining it to exist. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(52) Substantially by Rule 1673, 7 July 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Any change to the game state which would result in this Frankenstein Monster becoming false is cancelled and does not take place, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is ten days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Frankenstein Monsters. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. A "Nomic Entity" is any entity which has no discernible existence without the Frankenstein Monster, only existing by virtue of the Frankenstein Monster defining it to exist. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. For any single act (or failure to act), a Player can only once be subject to the penalty of each Crime of Frankenstein Monster resulting from that act. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(53) Substantially by Rule 1673, 7 July 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Any change to the game state which would result in this Frankenstein Monster becoming false is cancelled and does not take place, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is ten days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Frankenstein Monsters. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. A "Nomic Entity" is any entity which has no discernible existence without the Frankenstein Monster, only existing by virtue of the Frankenstein Monster defining it to exist. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(54) Substantially by Rule 1673, 7 July 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. Any change to the game state which would result in this Frankenstein Monster becoming false is cancelled and does not take place, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is ten days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Frankenstein Monsters. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. A "Nomic Entity" is any entity which has no discernible existence without the Frankenstein Monster, only existing by virtue of the Frankenstein Monster defining it to exist. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(55) Substantially by Rule 1673, 14 July 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. Any change to the game state which would result in this Frankenstein Monster becoming false is cancelled and does not take place, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is ten days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Frankenstein Monsters. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(56) Substantially by Rule 1673, 14 July 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. Any change to the game state which would result in this Frankenstein Monster becoming false is cancelled and does not take place, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. The prescribed Voting Period for a Proposal is ten days, beginning at the time the Proposal is distributed to all Frankenstein Monsters. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(57) Substantially by Rule 1673, 21 July 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. Any change to the game state which would result in this Frankenstein Monster becoming false is cancelled and does not take place, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(58) Substantially by Rule 1673, 21 July 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. Any change to the game state which would result in this Frankenstein Monster becoming false is cancelled and does not take place, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(59) Substantially by Rule 1673, 28 July 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(60) Substantially by Rule 1673, 28 July 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. The Player who submits an excess CFJ commits an Infraction, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Frankenstein Monsters. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(61) Substantially by Rule 1673, 5 August 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(62) Substantially by Rule 1673, 5 August 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster who makes further play impossible by eir actions or lack thereof commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster Impossibility, a Class A Crime. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(63) Substantially by Rule 1673, 11 August 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(64) Substantially by Rule 1673, 11 August 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. Frankenstein Monster is 2. All Judgements must be in accordance with the Rules; however, if the Rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the Statement to be Judged, then the Judge shall consider Frankenstein Monster custom, commonsense, past Judgements, and the best interests of the Frankenstein Monster before applying other standards. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(65) Substantially by Rule 1673, 6 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. Frankenstein Monster is 2. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(66) Substantially by Rule 1673, 6 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. Frankenstein Monster is 2. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a Frankenstein Monster is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the Frankenstein Monsters, which is permitted only when a Frankenstein Monster or set of Frankenstein Monsters explicitly or implicitly permits it. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(67) Substantially by Rule 1673, 6 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a Frankenstein Monster is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the Frankenstein Monsters, which is permitted only when a Frankenstein Monster or set of Frankenstein Monsters explicitly or implicitly permits it. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(68) Substantially by Rule 1673, 6 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Frankenstein Monster which exists, detailing for each Frankenstein Monster the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Frankenstein Monster. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a Frankenstein Monster is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the Frankenstein Monsters, which is permitted only when a Frankenstein Monster or set of Frankenstein Monsters explicitly or implicitly permits it. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(69) Substantially by Rule 1673, 6 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a Frankenstein Monster is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the Frankenstein Monsters, which is permitted only when a Frankenstein Monster or set of Frankenstein Monsters explicitly or implicitly permits it. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(70) Substantially by Rule 1673, 6 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. This Rule defers to any Rule which specifies a different Frankenstein Monster for reporting a certain transfer or class of transfers. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a Frankenstein Monster is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the Frankenstein Monsters, which is permitted only when a Frankenstein Monster or set of Frankenstein Monsters explicitly or implicitly permits it. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. If a Proposal is adopted which, as part of all of its effect, repeals one or more Rules, and, immediately prior to the adoption of this Proposal there were more than 100 Rules, the Frankenstein Monster shall pay out 3 P-Notes to the Proposer of that Proposal. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(71) Substantially by Rule 1673, 13 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a Frankenstein Monster is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the Frankenstein Monsters, which is permitted only when a Frankenstein Monster or set of Frankenstein Monsters explicitly or implicitly permits it. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. If a Proposal is adopted which, as part of all of its effect, repeals one or more Rules, and, immediately prior to the adoption of this Proposal there were more than 100 Rules, the Frankenstein Monster shall pay out 3 P-Notes to the Proposer of that Proposal. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(72) Substantially by Rule 1673, 13 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a Frankenstein Monster is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the Frankenstein Monsters, which is permitted only when a Frankenstein Monster or set of Frankenstein Monsters explicitly or implicitly permits it. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. If a Proposal is adopted which, as part of all of its effect, repeals one or more Rules, and, immediately prior to the adoption of this Proposal there were more than 100 Rules, the Frankenstein Monster shall pay out 3 P-Notes to the Proposer of that Proposal. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(73) Substantially by Rule 1673, 22 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. If a Proposal is adopted which, as part of all of its effect, repeals one or more Rules, and, immediately prior to the adoption of this Proposal there were more than 100 Rules, the Frankenstein Monster shall pay out 3 P-Notes to the Proposer of that Proposal. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(74) Substantially by Rule 1673, 22 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. If a Proposal is adopted which, as part of all of its effect, repeals one or more Rules, and, immediately prior to the adoption of this Proposal there were more than 100 Rules, the Frankenstein Monster shall pay out 3 P-Notes to the Proposer of that Proposal. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. Any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, no action which is legal or permitted by the Rules when attempted by one set of Players shall be illegal or forbidden by the Rules when attempted by a different set of Players, due solely to the Frankenstein Monsters (or lack thereof) of the Players involved. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(75) Substantially by Rule 1673, 25 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. If a Proposal is adopted which, as part of all of its effect, repeals one or more Rules, and, immediately prior to the adoption of this Proposal there were more than 100 Rules, the Frankenstein Monster shall pay out 3 P-Notes to the Proposer of that Proposal. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(76) Substantially by Rule 1673, 25 September 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. If a Proposal is adopted which, as part of all of its effect, repeals one or more Rules, and, immediately prior to the adoption of this Proposal there were more than 100 Rules, the Frankenstein Monster shall pay out 3 P-Notes to the Proposer of that Proposal. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(77) Substantially by Rule 1673, 5 October 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(78) Substantially by Rule 1673, 5 October 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. This is a Win-Preventing Frankenstein Monster for that Player. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(79) Substantially by Rule 1673, 12 October 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(80) Substantially by Rule 1673, 12 October 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If a Player Executes an Application, claiming that the Application contains the signature of one or more Players who have in fact not signed it, e commits the Frankenstein Monster of Application Fraud, a Class D Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(81) Substantially by Rule 1673, 25 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(82) Substantially by Rule 1673, 25 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. The Frankenstein Monster shall make all random determinations required by the Rules except when the Rules specify another party to make the determination. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(83) Substantially by Rule 1673, 25 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(84) Substantially by Rule 1673, 25 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. This Frankenstein Monster, while it exists, shall guide application of that Rule. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. All Frankenstein Monsters are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(85) Substantially by Rule 1673, 26 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. All Frankenstein Monsters are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(86) Substantially by Rule 1673, 26 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(87) Substantially by Rule 1673, 26 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. A Frankenstein Monster is permitted to define its own mechanisms for changing its own content, and any change to a Frankenstein Monster adopted in accordance with its own mechanisms is legal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(88) Substantially by Rule 1673, 26 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(89) Substantially by Rule 1673, 26 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. The Frankenstein Monster may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(90) Substantially by Rule 1673, 26 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(91) Substantially by Rule 1673, 26 November 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Contest's Administrator is that Contest's Frankenstein Monster. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Frankenstein Monster. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Frankenstein Monster. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(92) Substantially by Rule 1673, 1 December 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Frankenstein Monster. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Frankenstein Monster. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(93) Substantially by Rule 1673, 1 December 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. All Frankenstein Monsters made in the proper way shall be voted upon. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Frankenstein Monster. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Frankenstein Monster. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(94) Substantially by Rule 1673, 7 December 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. All Frankenstein Monsters made in the proper way shall be voted upon. An On Hold Player is not permitted to Vote on Frankenstein Monsters, make Frankenstein Monsters, or hold Office, and cannot be required by the Rules to perform any duty or action, unless that Rule specifically states that it can require On Hold Players to perform actions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Frankenstein Monster. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Frankenstein Monster. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(95) Substantially by Rule 1673, 14 December 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters made in the proper way shall be voted upon. An On Hold Player is not permitted to Vote on Frankenstein Monsters, make Frankenstein Monsters, or hold Office, and cannot be required by the Rules to perform any duty or action, unless that Rule specifically states that it can require On Hold Players to perform actions. A Player who presents as correct information which e believes to be incorrect as part of any message sent to the Public Forum or in response to a request for information which that Player is required to provide commits the Crime of Frankenstein Monster, a Class C Crime. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Frankenstein Monster. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Frankenstein Monster. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(96) Substantially by Rule 1673, 14 December 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters made in the proper way shall be voted upon. An On Hold Player is not permitted to Vote on Frankenstein Monsters, make Frankenstein Monsters, or hold Office, and cannot be required by the Rules to perform any duty or action, unless that Rule specifically states that it can require On Hold Players to perform actions. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. If a Frankenstein Monster is defined as a Voting Entity then it is permitted to cast Voting Tokens on Proposals as if it were a Player. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Frankenstein Monster. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Frankenstein Monster. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(97) Substantially by Rule 1673, 14 December 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters made in the proper way shall be voted upon. An On Hold Player is not permitted to Vote on Frankenstein Monsters, make Frankenstein Monsters, or hold Office, and cannot be required by the Rules to perform any duty or action, unless that Rule specifically states that it can require On Hold Players to perform actions. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Frankenstein Monster. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Frankenstein Monster. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(98) Substantially by Rule 1673, 14 December 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Frankenstein Monster. All Frankenstein Monsters made in the proper way shall be voted upon. An On Hold Player is not permitted to Vote on Frankenstein Monsters, make Frankenstein Monsters, or hold Office, and cannot be required by the Rules to perform any duty or action, unless that Rule specifically states that it can require On Hold Players to perform actions. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Frankenstein Monster. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Frankenstein Monster. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent the Frankenstein Monster's report of an infraction from having legal effect. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(99) Substantially by Rule 1673, 17 December 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. All Frankenstein Monsters made in the proper way shall be voted upon. An On Hold Player is not permitted to Vote on Frankenstein Monsters, make Frankenstein Monsters, or hold Office, and cannot be required by the Rules to perform any duty or action, unless that Rule specifically states that it can require On Hold Players to perform actions. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Frankenstein Monster. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Frankenstein Monster. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent the Frankenstein Monster's report of an infraction from having legal effect. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Amended(100) Substantially by Rule 1673, 17 December 1997 text: There is a Nomic Entity known as a Frankenstein Monster. A Frankenstein Monster only has properties and effects as defined in this Rule. This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Rule, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This is the first paragraph. All Frankenstein Monsters made in the proper way shall be voted upon. A Voting Entity Votes upon a Frankenstein Monster when e, during the Voting Period of that Frankenstein Monster, informs the Assessor of the Vote (or Votes) e is casting upon that Frankenstein Monster. An On Hold Player is not permitted to Vote on Frankenstein Monsters, make Frankenstein Monsters, or hold Office, and cannot be required by the Rules to perform any duty or action, unless that Rule specifically states that it can require On Hold Players to perform actions. If that Player's Frankenstein Monster contains at least five Mil for each Blot to be removed, then that number of Mil is transferred from the Player's Frankenstein Monster, and the Blots are removed; otherwise, no Mil are transferred and no Blots are removed. Any Frankenstein Monster who is not Tainted is permitted to, once in any given Nomic Week, choose one specific Proposal (that e is otherwise eligible to vote for) and cast one vote in addition to any others e is permitted to cast on that Proposal. A SLC is permitted to define its own Frankenstein Monsters for changing its own content, and any change to a SLC adopted in accordance with its own Frankenstein Monsters is legal. Frankenstein Monsters are permitted to submit Statements for Judgement to the Game of InterNomic. A Group with fewer than three Frankenstein Monsters is not entitled to cast Votes. The Frankenstein Monster shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. There shall exist the Frankenstein Monster of Rulekeepor. The Notary's Report includes: i) The Name and class of each Frankenstein Monster. ii) The identities of the Administrator and Executor of each Frankenstein Monster. iii) The Players within the Jurisdiction of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. iv) The identity of the Maintainer of each Frankenstein Monster's SLC. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent the Frankenstein Monster's report of an infraction from having legal effect. This is the last paragraph. This Rule can only be subject to a Rule Change as described by the Frankenstein Generator. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules that would otherwise allow this Rule to be changed in any manner whatsoever. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1671 by Rule 1762, 1 January 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1672 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1672 by Proposal 2754 (Swann), 28 November 1996 text: This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Generator, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This Rule specifies the only ways in which the Frankenstein Rule can undergo a Rule Change. Rule Changes to the Frankenstein Rule must conform to the following restrictions: i) The Frankenstein Rule cannot be repealed. ii) No Rule Change can add text to the Frankenstein Rule unless it adds that text between the first and last paragraphs of the Rule. iii) No Rule Change can alter, add, or remove text from the first or last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. iv) If the Frankenstein Rule explicitly forbids a specific property or effect to the Frankenstein Monster, no Rule Change can be adopted that grants the Frankenstein Monster that property or effect. (Deletion of the language forbidding that property or effect does not grant that property or effect.) v) If the Frankenstein Rule explicitly grants a specific property or effect to the Frankenstein Monster, no Rule Change can be adopted that denies the Frankensein Monster that property or effect. (Deletion of the language granting that property or effect does not deny that property or effect.) vi) No Amendment can be applied to the Frankenstein Rule that is substantially the same as any prior successfully applied Amendment to the Frankenstein Rule. vii) All proposed Amendments to the Frankenstein Rule must consist of a single sentence of additional text specifying the properties and effects of a Frankenstein Monster, to be inserted between the first and last paragraphs. No proposed Amendment changing existing text beyond such an insertion shall be applied to the Frankenstein Rule, and no other proposed Rule Changes shall be applied to the Frankenstein Rule. viii) Whenever a Win by Pitchfork is legally announced by the Mad Scientist, all text between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule shall be deleted from the Frankenstein Rule. ix) Any Non-proposed Rule Changes not specified in this Rule, can only be applied to the Frankenstein Rule by the Frankenstein Mutator, as described by that Rule. x) The Frankenstein Rule shall have neither Amendment Numbers, nor Mandatory Rule Annotations. This Rule takes precedence over those Rules which would apply them to the Frankenstein Rule. No Rule Changes are permitted to this Rule that would alter, in any way, the restrictions this Rule makes on the Rule Changes that can be applied to the Frankenstein Rule. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule permitting Rule Changes to the Frankenstein Rule other than those described in this Rule, and over any Rule that would permit Rule Changes forbidden by this Rule. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2774 (Chuck), 22 December 1996 text: This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Generator, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This Rule specifies the only ways in which the Frankenstein Rule can undergo a Rule Change. Rule Changes to the Frankenstein Rule must conform to the following restrictions: i) The Frankenstein Rule cannot be repealed. ii) No Rule Change can add text to the Frankenstein Rule unless it adds that text between the first and last paragraphs of the Rule. iii) No Rule Change can alter, add, or remove text from the first or last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. iv) If the Frankenstein Rule explicitly forbids a specific property or effect to the Frankenstein Monster, no Rule Change can be adopted that grants the Frankenstein Monster that property or effect. (Deletion of the language forbidding that property or effect does not grant that property or effect.) v) If the Frankenstein Rule explicitly grants a specific property or effect to the Frankenstein Monster, no Rule Change can be adopted that denies the Frankensein Monster that property or effect. (Deletion of the language granting that property or effect does not deny that property or effect.) vi) No Amendment can be applied to the Frankenstein Rule that is substantially the same as any prior successfully applied Amendment to the Frankenstein Rule. vii) All proposed Amendments to the Frankenstein Rule must consist of a single sentence of additional text specifying the properties and effects of a Frankenstein Monster, to be inserted between the first and last paragraphs. No proposed Amendment changing existing text beyond such an insertion shall be applied to the Frankenstein Rule, and no other proposed Rule Changes shall be applied to the Frankenstein Rule. viii) Whenever a Win by Pitchfork is legally announced by the Mad Scientist, all text between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule shall be deleted from the Frankenstein Rule. ix) Any Non-proposed Rule Changes not specified in this Rule, can only be applied to the Frankenstein Rule by the Frankenstein Mutator, as described by that Rule. No Rule Changes are permitted to this Rule that would alter, in any way, the restrictions this Rule makes on the Rule Changes that can be applied to the Frankenstein Rule. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule permitting Rule Changes to the Frankenstein Rule other than those described in this Rule, and over any Rule that would permit Rule Changes forbidden by this Rule. history: Null-Amended(2) by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Generator, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This Rule specifies the only ways in which the Frankenstein Rule can undergo a Rule Change. Rule Changes to the Frankenstein Rule must conform to the following restrictions: i) The Frankenstein Rule cannot be repealed. ii) No Rule Change can add text to the Frankenstein Rule unless it adds that text between the first and last paragraphs of the Rule. iii) No Rule Change can alter, add, or remove text from the first or last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. iv) If the Frankenstein Rule explicitly forbids a specific property or effect to the Frankenstein Monster, no Rule Change can be adopted that grants the Frankenstein Monster that property or effect. (Deletion of the language forbidding that property or effect does not grant that property or effect.) v) If the Frankenstein Rule explicitly grants a specific property or effect to the Frankenstein Monster, no Rule Change can be adopted that denies the Frankensein Monster that property or effect. (Deletion of the language granting that property or effect does not deny that property or effect.) vi) No Amendment can be applied to the Frankenstein Rule that is substantially the same as any prior successfully applied Amendment to the Frankenstein Rule. vii) All proposed Amendments to the Frankenstein Rule must consist of a single sentence of additional text specifying the properties and effects of a Frankenstein Monster, to be inserted between the first and last paragraphs. No proposed Amendment changing existing text beyond such an insertion shall be applied to the Frankenstein Rule, and no other proposed Rule Changes shall be applied to the Frankenstein Rule. viii) Whenever a Win by Pitchfork is legally announced by the Mad Scientist, all text between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule shall be deleted from the Frankenstein Rule. ix) Any Non-proposed Rule Changes not specified in this Rule, can only be applied to the Frankenstein Rule by the Frankenstein Mutator, as described by that Rule. No Rule Changes are permitted to this Rule that would alter, in any way, the restrictions this Rule makes on the Rule Changes that can be applied to the Frankenstein Rule. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule permitting Rule Changes to the Frankenstein Rule other than those described in this Rule, and over any Rule that would permit Rule Changes forbidden by this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1672 by Rule 1762, 1 January 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1673 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1673 by Proposal 2754 (Swann), 28 November 1996 text: This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Mutator, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This Rule specifies the way in which the Frankenstein Rule shall undergo non-proposed Rule Changes. All Rule Changes mandated by this Rule shall be subject to the restrictions that the Frankenstein Generator makes on Rule Changes in general. Once a week the following Rule Changes shall occur to the Frankenstein Rule: i) If there are more than ten sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule, then one of those sentences, selected by the Mad Scientist at random, shall be deleted from the Rule for every ten sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. ii) One sentence shall be inserted between the first and last paragraph of the Frankenstein Rule in the following manner; 1) The Mad Scientist selects a Rule, at random, from among all Rules in the Ruleset. 2) The Mad Scieist shall select any one complete sentence e wishes from within the randomly selected Rule. 3) The Mad Scientist shall select any noun (which can be a compound of two or more words) e wishes from within the selected sentence. 4) The Mad Scientist shall replace each instance of the selected noun with the noun, "Frankenstein Monstr." (Or its plural, possessive, or other, form if appropriate.) 5) As long as the resulting sentence conforms to the restrictions that the Frankenstein Generator makes upon proposed Amendments, the sentence shall be inserted, at any point the Mad Scientist wishes, between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. The Mad Scientist shall make the above selections as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week. E shall publish the resulting Rule Changes in the Public Forum within 24 hours after these selections are made. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2774 (Chuck), 22 December 1996 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Mutator, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This Rule specifies the way in which the Frankenstein Rule shall undergo non-proposed Rule Changes. All Rule Changes mandated by this Rule shall be subject to the restrictions that the Frankenstein Generator makes on Rule Changes in general. Once a week the following Rule Changes shall occur to the Frankenstein Rule: i) If there are more than ten sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule, then one of those sentences, selected by the Mad Scientist at random, shall be deleted from the Rule for every ten sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. ii) One sentence shall be inserted between the first and last paragraph of the Frankenstein Rule in the following manner; 1) The Mad Scientist selects a Rule, at random, from among all Rules in the Ruleset. 2) The Mad Scieist shall select any one complete sentence e wishes from within the randomly selected Rule. 3) The Mad Scientist shall select any noun (which can be a compound of two or more words) e wishes from within the selected sentence. 4) The Mad Scientist shall replace each instance of the selected noun with the noun "Frankenstein Monster". (Or its plural, possessive, or other form if appropriate.) 5) As long as the resulting sentence conforms to the restrictions that the Frankenstein Generator makes upon proposed Amendments, the sentence shall be inserted, at any point the Mad Scientist wishes, between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. The Mad Scientist shall make the above selections as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week. E shall publish the resulting Rule Changes in the Public Forum within 24 hours after these selections are made. text: This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Mutator, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This Rule specifies the way in which the Frankenstein Rule shall undergo non-proposed Rule Changes. All Rule Changes mandated by this Rule shall be subject to the restrictions that the Frankenstein Generator makes on Rule Changes in general. Once a week the following Rule Changes shall occur to the Frankenstein Rule: i) If there are more than ten sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule, then one of those sentences, selected by the Mad Scientist at random, shall be deleted from the Rule for every ten sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. ii) One sentence shall be inserted between the first and last paragraph of the Frankenstein Rule in the following manner; 1) The Mad Scientist selects a Rule, at random, from among all Rules in the Ruleset. 2) The Mad Scieist shall select any one complete sentence e wishes from within the randomly selected Rule. 3) The Mad Scientist shall select any noun (which can be a compound of two or more words) e wishes from within the selected sentence. 4) The Mad Scientist shall replace each instance of the selected noun with the noun "Frankenstein Monster". (Or its plural, possessive, or other form if appropriate.) 5) As long as the resulting sentence conforms to the restrictions that the Frankenstein Generator makes upon proposed Amendments, the sentence shall be inserted, at any point the Mad Scientist wishes, between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. The Mad Scientist shall make the above selections as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week. E shall publish the resulting Rule Changes in the Public Forum within 24 hours after these selections are made. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3502 (Chuck), 9 June 1997 text: This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Mutator, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This Rule specifies the way in which the Frankenstein Rule shall undergo non-proposed Rule Changes. All Rule Changes mandated by this Rule shall be subject to the restrictions that the Frankenstein Generator makes on Rule Changes in general. Once a week the following Rule Changes shall occur to the Frankenstein Rule: i) If there are at least ten sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule, then N of those sentences shall be deleted as follows. Here, N is 1/10 of the number of sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule prior to the deletion, rounded down to the nearest integer. 1) The Mad Scientist shall randomly select 2N different sentences from those between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. 2) The Mad Scientist shall choose N of the sentences selected in step i.1, and those sentences shall be deleted from the Frankenstein Rule. ii) One sentence shall be inserted between the first and last paragraph of the Frankenstein Rule in the following manner; 1) The Mad Scientist selects a Rule, at random, from among all Rules in the Ruleset. 2) The Mad Scieist shall select any one complete sentence e wishes from within the randomly selected Rule. 3) The Mad Scientist shall select any noun (which can be a compound of two or more words) e wishes from within the selected sentence. 4) The Mad Scientist shall replace each instance of the selected noun with the noun "Frankenstein Monster". (Or its plural, possessive, or other form if appropriate.) 5) As long as the resulting sentence conforms to the restrictions that the Frankenstein Generator makes upon proposed Amendments, the sentence shall be inserted, at any point the Mad Scientist wishes, between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. The Mad Scientist shall make the above selections as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week. E shall publish the resulting Rule Changes in the Public Forum within 24 hours after these selections are made. history: Amended(3) Cosmetically by Proposal 3532 (General Chaos), 11 July 1997 text: This Rule shall be known as the Frankenstein Mutator, and can be referred to unambiguously in that manner. This Rule specifies the way in which the Frankenstein Rule shall undergo non-proposed Rule Changes. All Rule Changes mandated by this Rule shall be subject to the restrictions that the Frankenstein Generator makes on Rule Changes in general. Once a week the following Rule Changes shall occur to the Frankenstein Rule: i) If there are at least ten sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule, then N of those sentences shall be deleted as follows. Here, N is 1/10 of the number of sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule prior to the deletion, rounded down to the nearest integer. 1) The Mad Scientist shall randomly select 2N different sentences from those between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. 2) The Mad Scientist shall choose N of the sentences selected in step i.1, and those sentences shall be deleted from the Frankenstein Rule. ii) One sentence shall be inserted between the first and last paragraph of the Frankenstein Rule in the following manner; 1) The Mad Scientist selects a Rule, at random, from among all Rules in the Ruleset. 2) The Mad Scientist shall select any one complete sentence e wishes from within the randomly selected Rule. 3) The Mad Scientist shall select any noun (which can be a compound of two or more words) e wishes from within the selected sentence. 4) The Mad Scientist shall replace each instance of the selected noun with the noun "Frankenstein Monster". (Or its plural, possessive, or other form if appropriate.) 5) As long as the resulting sentence conforms to the restrictions that the Frankenstein Generator makes upon proposed Amendments, the sentence shall be inserted, at any point the Mad Scientist wishes, between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. The Mad Scientist shall make the above selections as soon as possible after the beginning of each Nomic Week. E shall publish the resulting Rule Changes in the Public Forum within 24 hours after these selections are made. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1673 by Rule 1762, 1 January 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1674 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1674 by Proposal 2754 (Swann), 28 November 1996 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) Cosmetically by Rule 1674, 28 November 1996 text: There is the Office of Mad Scientist. The Mad Scientist has the duty of the oversight of the Frankenstein Rules and the Frankenstein Monster. The Mad Scientist shall keep a Record of all successfully applied Proposed Amendments to the Frankenstein Rule, their Proposal Numbers, and the identity of the Entities who Proposed them. E shall keep a record of all successfully applied non-proposed Rule Changes to the Frankenstein Rule. And E shall also record the number of sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. The Mad Scientist shall determine whenever a Proposed Rule Change is eligible to be applied to the Frankenstein Rule or the Frankenstein Generator. If a Proposed Rule Change, in the Mad Scientist's estimation, cannot be applied, e shall identify it in the Public Forum as soon as possible after it is distributed, and identify and document the reason why the Proposed Rule Change cannot be applied. The Mad Scientist shall post, in the Public Forum, any non-proposed Rule Changes to the Frankenstein Rule as soon as possible after they occur. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 2774 (Chuck), 22 December 1996 text: There is the Office of Mad Scientist. The Mad Scientist has the duty of the oversight of the Frankenstein Rules and the Frankenstein Monster. The Mad Scientist shall keep a Record of all successfully applied Proposed Amendments to the Frankenstein Rule, their Proposal Numbers, and the identity of the Entities who Proposed them. E shall keep a record of all successfully applied non-proposed Rule Changes to the Frankenstein Rule. And E shall also record the number of sentences between the first and last paragraphs of the Frankenstein Rule. The Mad Scientist shall post, in the Public Forum, any non-proposed Rule Changes to the Frankenstein Rule as soon as possible after they occur. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1674 by Rule 1762, 1 January 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1675 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1675 by Proposal 2754 (Swann), 28 November 1996 text: There is a Win known as a Win by Pitchfork, and a Patent Title of Angry Villager, both are awarded as follows: When a CFJ finds that, at some specified time, all proposed Amendments to the Frankenstein Rule were made impossible by the Frankenstein Generator, the last Player (Other than the Mad Scientist or the Angry Villager) to have Proposed a successfully applied Amendment to the Frankenstein Rule, prior to the time specified in the CFJ, shall Win by Pitchfork-- provided that e has not before Won by Pitchfork for the Amendment in question. The Mad Scientist shall report such a Win as soon as possible after it occurs. When a Win by Pitchfork is legally announced by the Mad Scientist, the Player who Won by Pitchfork shall be awarded the Title of Angry Villager, and the last Player (if any) to hold the Title shall cease to hold it. The Patent Title of Angry Villager shall be awarded without need for a directive, only as specified in this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1675 by Proposal 3591 (Andre), 14 November 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1676 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1676 by Proposal 2755 (Swann), 28 November 1996 text: Whenever a person registers as a Player in Agora, and that person has not been registered as a Player in Agora at any time within the 12 months prior to this registration, e is subject to a Grace Period that begins at the time of eir registration and ends two months afterwards. A Player's Grace Period shall immediately end if that Player is elected to any Office. A Player is only subject to the Grace Period resulting from eir own registration. The Registrar shall record the time of the start and end of the Grace Periods for all Players whose Grace Periods are in force. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2816 (Zefram; disi.), 15 February 1997 text: Whenever a person registers as a Player in Agora, and that person has not been registered as a Player in Agora at any time within the 12 months prior to this registration, e is subject to a Grace Period that begins at the time of eir registration and ends two months afterwards. A Player's Grace Period shall immediately end if that Player is elected to any Office. A Player is only subject to the Grace Period resulting from eir own registration. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Grace Periods that are in progress. For each such Grace Period this list shall include the Player subject to the Grace Period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end. This list is known as the Pink Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 2833 (Crito), 11 March 1997 text: Whenever a person registers as a Player in Agora, and that person has not been registered as a Player in Agora at any time within the 12 months prior to this registration, e is subject to a Grace Period that begins at the time of eir registration and ends two months afterwards. A Player is only subject to the Grace Period resulting from eir own registration. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Grace Periods that are in progress. For each such Grace Period this list shall include the Player subject to the Grace Period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end. This list is known as the Pink Pages, and is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3914 (Elysion), 19 September 1999 text: Whenever a person registers as a Player in Agora, and that person has not been registered as a Player in Agora at any time within the 12 months prior to this registration, e is subject to a Grace Period that begins at the time of eir registration and ends two months afterwards. A Player is only subject to the Grace Period resulting from eir own registration. The Registrar shall maintain a list of all Grace Periods that are in progress. For each such Grace Period this list shall include the Player subject to the Grace Period, the time at which it started, and the time at which it will end. This list is part of the Registrar's Report. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: Whenever a person registers as a Player in Agora, and that person has not been registered as a Player in Agora at any time within the 12 months prior to this registration, e is subject to a Grace Period that begins at the time of eir registration and ends two months afterwards. A Player is only subject to the Grace Period resulting from eir own registration. history: ... history: Repealed by Proposal 4155 (harvel), 18 May 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1677 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1677 by Proposal 2757 (Swann), 28 November 1996 text: Upon the start of a Player's Grace Period, that player shall receive an award of 20 Mil from the Bank. Upon the end of a Player's Grace Period, that Player shall receive 3 EVs from the Bank. These awards are detected and reported by the Registrar. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: Upon the start of a Player's Grace Period, that player shall receive an award of 5 VTs from the Bank. This award is detected and reported by the Registrar. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3520 (Harlequin; disi.), 23 June 1997 text: Upon the start of a Player's Grace Period, that player shall receive an award of 5 VTs and 5 P-Notes from the Bank. This award is detected and reported by the Registrar. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Upon the start of a Player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall pay out to that Player an award of 5 Voting Tokens. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: As soon as possible after the start of a Player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall pay out 5 Voting Tokens, 1 P-Note, and 30 Ergs to that Player. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 text: As soon as possible after the start of a Player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall pay out 5 Voting Tokens and 1 P-Note to that Player. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: As soon as possible after the start of a Player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall pay out 150 Stems to that Player. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3998 (harvel), 25 April 2000 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of a Player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall pay out the New Player Award to that Player. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of a Player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall pay out to that Player the New Player Award as well as one Papyrus. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4155 (harvel), 18 May 2001 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of a Player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall Order the Treasuror to pay out the New Player Award for each Bank Currency to the new Player. Whenever the Rules indicate that the Bank incurs a debt to an entity equal to the New Player Award, the Bank shall instead incur for each Bank Currency a debt to that entity equal to the New Player Award for that Currency. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4344 (Goethe), 11 July 2002 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of a Player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall pay out the New Player Award for each Bank Currency to the new Player. Whenever the Rules indicate that the Bank incurs a debt to an entity equal to the New Player Award, the Bank shall instead incur for each Bank Currency a debt to that entity equal to the New Player Award for that Currency. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of a Player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall announce eir Arrival. This Announcement shall have the effect of setting that Player's kudos to twice the Tabla Rasa. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4520 (Goethe), 30 July 2003 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of a Player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall announce eir Arrival. This Announcement shall have the effect of setting that Player's kudos to twice the Tabla Rasa. If a Player joins the game, but is neither subject to a Grace Period nor been a Player at any time since the last Turning of a New Parchment, then the Herald shall set eir Kudos to half the Tabla Rasa (rounded up). history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4802 (Maud), 15 June 2005 text: Readiness is a stuck player switch with values unready and ready. A player may flip eir readiness to ready. Whenever a player registers who has not been registered within the previous year, e becomes unready and is subject to a Grace Period beginning immediately and lasting for sixty days, not including Holidays. At the end of eir Grace Period, e becomes ready. As soon as possible after the beginning of a player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall announce eir arrival. This announcement shall have the effect of setting that player's kudos to twice the Tabla Rasa. If a player joins the game, but is neither subject to a Grace Period nor has been a player at any time since the last Turning of a New Parchment, then the Herald shall set eir kudos to half the Tabla Rasa (rounded up). history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4840 (Goethe), 27 October 2005 text: Readiness is a stuck player switch with values unready and ready. A player may flip eir readiness to ready. Whenever a player registers who has not been registered within the previous year, e becomes unready and is subject to a Grace Period beginning immediately and lasting for sixty days, not including Holidays. At the end of eir Grace Period, e becomes ready. As soon as possible after the beginning of a player's Grace Period, the Registrar shall announce eir arrival. This announcement grants the player three free pending draws. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1677 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1678 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1678 by Proposal 2758 (Swann), 28 November 1996 text: If a Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then that Player shall receive an award of 10 Mil and 1 EV, over and above all legal awards to that Player. This Rule takes precedence over Rules that would prevent this award. These Transfers are detected and reported by the Assessor as soon as possible after the distribution of the results of that Proposal. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2829 (Zefram), 7 March 1997 text: If an Interested Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then that Player shall receive an award of 10 Mil and 1 EV, over and above all legal awards to that Player. This Rule takes precedence over Rules that would prevent this award. These Transfers are detected and reported by the Assessor as soon as possible after the distribution of the results of that Proposal. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: If an Interested Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then that Player shall receive an award of 3 VTs, over and above all legal awards to that Player. This Rule takes precedence over Rules that would prevent this award. These Transfers are detected and reported by the Assessor as soon as possible after the distribution of the results of that Proposal. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: If an Interested Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then the Assessor shall pay out to that Player an award of 3 Voting Tokens, over and above any other award that Player might also receive for that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over Rules that would prevent this award. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: If an Interested Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then the Assessor shall pay out to that Player an award of 60 Stems, over and above any other award that Player might also receive for that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over Rules that would prevent this award. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 text: If an Interested Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then the Assessor shall pay out to that Player an award of one Papyrus, over and above any other award that Player might also receive for that Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over Rules that would prevent this award. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4365 (Steve), 23 August 2002 text: If a Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then the Assessor shall pay out to that Player an award of one Papyrus if the Proposal was Interested, or 0.2 Papyri if the Proposal was Disinterested. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: If a Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then the Assessor shall award the Proposor the Boon of Prodigy. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1678 by Proposal 4696 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1679 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1679 by Proposal 2776 (Swann), 28 December 1996 text: The Banker has the duty of recording the median of the total Marks in all Treasuries other than the Bank, this value is the Median Tax Threshold (MTT). If, at the beginning of a Nomic week, the amount of currency in the Bank is below twice the MTT, the Banker shall assess a fifteen-percent Income Tax on all taxable Treasuries. A Treasury is taxable unless the Rules specifically designate it as non-taxable. The Bank is non-taxable. These Taxes shall be paid from each taxable Treasury, to the Bank, detected and reported by the Banker as soon as possible after the beginning of the Nomic Week in which they occur. history: ... history: Amended(1) text: The Banker has the duty of recording the median of the total Marks in all Treasuries other than the Bank which contain a positive non-zero number of Marks; this value is the Median Tax Threshold (MTT). If, at the beginning of a Nomic week, the amount of currency in the Bank is below twice the MTT, the Banker shall assess a fifteen-percent Income Tax on all taxable Treasuries. A Treasury is taxable unless the Rules specifically designate it as non-taxable. The Bank is non-taxable. These Taxes shall be paid from each taxable Treasury, to the Bank, detected and reported by the Banker as soon as possible after the beginning of the Nomic Week in which they occur. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1680 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1680 by Proposal 2780 (Swann), 27 December 1996 text: There is a Power called the Power of Democracy. It can be cast on any one Proposal, specified by the Caster, and called the Democratic Proposal. The effect of the Power of Democracy is to limit the Votes cast on the Democratic Proposal. The Card of the Power of Democracy is in Limbo for ten days after it is cast. The price of the Democracy Card is 30 Mil. The Caster can only cast the Power of Democracy by sending a message to the Assessor unambiguously identifying the Proposal which is to be the Democratic Proposal, otherwise the Power is not legally cast. The Votes cast on a Democratic Proposal are limited in the following manner: The Assessor shall only record one Vote from each non-Immune Active Player who chooses to Vote. Extra Votes cast by any Entity other than an Immune Player, and Votes from non-Player entities are not counted in determining the results of a Vote on a Democratic Proposal. If an entity other than an Immune Player has already cast Extra Votes on the Democratic Proposal at the time it became Democratic, then these Extra Votes are without effect on the Democratic Proposal, and their Limbo Period ends immediately without their being transferred to the Bank. Players who are Immune are not bound by the limitations set by this Rule as long as any Extra Votes they cast were done so during the duration of their Immunity. If the casting of this Power conflicts with the casting of any Power other than the Powers of Immunity and Neutralize, the Power of Democracy takes precedence, the other Power is nullified and has no effect. If another Power is nullified because of the precedence of the Democracy Card, the cost of the nullified Power is transferred to the Player who cast it. This transfer occurs at the end of the Voting Period for the Democratic Proposal. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting these transfers. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which describe the circumstances in which Players may legally cast Extra Votes, over Rules which describe the effects of legally cast Extra Votes on Proposals, and over Rules describing what Entities are permitted to cast Votes on Proposals in general. If this Rule conflicts in its effects with those of another Rule defining a specific Power, then the conflict shall be resolved according to the Rule for determining precedence among Powers. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1681 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1681 by Proposal 2783 (Chuck), 15 January 1997 text: There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each Rule is assigned to a Rule Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Categories must be listed, even if no Rules are currently assigned to the Category. The listing of each Rule in the SLR must include: * The Rule Number * The Rule's Amendment Number * The Rule's Mutability Index * The Rule's Title * The Rule's text * Any annotations to the Rule required by Injunction. The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, Rules are assigned to the same Category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, as well as: * A brief description of each Category * The Attribution of each Rule * Any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the Ruleset in the FLR. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3500 (Crito; disi.), 3 June 1997 text: There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each Rule is assigned to a Rule Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Categories must be listed, even if no Rules are currently assigned to the Category. The listing of each Rule in the SLR must include: * The Rule Number * The Rule's Amendment Number * The Rule's Power * The Rule's Title * The Rule's text * Any annotations to the Rule required by Injunction. The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, Rules are assigned to the same Category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, as well as: * A brief description of each Category * The Attribution of each Rule * Any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the Ruleset in the FLR. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3624 (Chuck), 29 December 1997 text: There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each Rule is assigned to a Rule Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Categories must be listed, even if no Rules are currently assigned to the Category. The listing of each Rule in the SLR must include: * The Rule Number * The Rule's Amendment Number * The Rule's Power * The Rule's Title * The Rule's text * Any annotations to the Rule required by Injunction. The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, Rules are assigned to the same Category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, as well as: * A brief description of each Category * Any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the Ruleset in the FLR. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each Rule is assigned to a Rule Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Categories must be listed, even if no Rules are currently assigned to the Category. The listing of each Rule in the SLR must include: * The Rule Number * The Rule's Amendment Number * The Rule's Power * The Rule's Title * The Rule's text * Any annotations to the Rule required by Order The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, Rules are assigned to the same Category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, as well as: * A brief description of each Category * Any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the Ruleset in the FLR. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 text: There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each Rule is assigned to a Rule Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Categories must be listed, even if no Rules are currently assigned to the Category. The listing of each Rule in the SLR must include: * The Rule Number * The Rule's Amendment Number * The Rule's Power * The Rule's Title * The Rule's text * Any annotations to the Rule required by Order The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, Rules are assigned to the same Category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, as well as: * A brief description of each Category * Any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the Ruleset in the FLR. The Rulekeepor shall post the Full Logical Ruleset to the Public Forum at least once each month. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each Rule is assigned to a Rule Category, and the Rules are grouped according to their Category. Within a Category, the ordering of Rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing Rule Categories must be listed, even if no Rules are currently assigned to the Category. The listing of each Rule in the SLR must include: * The Rule Number * The Rule's Amendment Number * The Rule's Power * The Rule's Title * The Rule's text * Any annotations to the Rule required by Order The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the Ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, Rules are assigned to the same Category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, as well as: * A brief description of each Category * Any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the Ruleset in the FLR. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: There is a format of the ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each rule is assigned to a category, and the rules are grouped according to their category. Within a category, the ordering of rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. All existing categories must be listed, even if no rules are currently assigned to the category. The listing of each rule in the SLR must include the rule's number, revision number, power, title, and text, and must also include any annotations to the rule required by order. The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, rules are assigned to the same category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, as well as a brief description of each category and any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the ruleset in the FLR. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4841 (Goethe), 27 October 2005 text: There is a format of the ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each rule is assigned to a category, and the rules are grouped according to their category. Within a category, the ordering of rules is decided by the Rulekeepor. A new Rule is assigned to a category as the Rulekeepor sees fit. The Rulekeepor may, without 2 objections, move Rules between categories, change the name of a category, and add or remove empty categories. The listing of each rule in the SLR must include the rule's number, revision number, power, title, and text, and must also include any annotations to the rule required by order. The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, rules are assigned to the same category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, as well as a brief description of each category and any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the ruleset in the FLR. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: There is a format of the ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each rule is assigned to a category, and the rules are grouped according to their category. Rules are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Rulekeepor sees fit. The listing of each rule in the SLR must include the rule's number, revision number, power, title, and text, and must also include any annotations to the rule required by order. The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, rules are assigned to the same category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, and any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the ruleset in the FLR. Whenever a rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeeper shall record a historical annotation to the rule indicating the type of change, the date on which the change took effect, the mechanism which specified the change, and if the rule was changed due to a proposal, a reference to that proposal, its proposer, and any coauthors explicitly named in that proposal. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: There is a format of the ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each rule is assigned to a category, and the rules are grouped according to their category. Rules are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Rulekeepor sees fit. The listing of each rule in the SLR must include the rule's number, revision number, power, title, and text, and must also include any annotations to the rule required by order. The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, rules are assigned to the same category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, and any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the ruleset in the FLR. Whenever a rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor shall record a historical annotation to the rule indicating the type of change, the date on which the change took effect, the mechanism which specified the change, and if the rule was changed due to a proposal, a reference to that proposal, its proposer, and any coauthors explicitly named in that proposal. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5006 (Zefram), 18 June 2007 text: There is a format of the ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each rule is assigned to a category, and the rules are grouped according to their category. Rules are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Rulekeepor sees fit. The listing of each rule in the SLR must include the rule's number, revision number, power, title, and text. The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, rules are assigned to the same category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, and any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the ruleset in the FLR. Whenever a rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor shall record a historical annotation to the rule indicating the type of change, the date on which the change took effect, the mechanism which specified the change, and if the rule was changed due to a proposal, a reference to that proposal, its proposer, and any coauthors explicitly named in that proposal. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: There is a format of the ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each rule is assigned to a category, and the rules are grouped according to their category. Rules are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Rulekeepor sees fit. The listing of each rule in the SLR must include the rule's ID number, revision number, power, title, and text. The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, rules are assigned to the same category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, and any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the ruleset in the FLR. Whenever a rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor shall record a historical annotation to the rule indicating the type of change, the date on which the change took effect, the mechanism which specified the change, and if the rule was changed due to a proposal, a reference to that proposal, its proposer, and any coauthors explicitly named in that proposal. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 5334 (Murphy), 5 December 2007 text: There is a format of the ruleset known as the Short Logical Ruleset (SLR). In this format, each rule is assigned to a category, and the rules are grouped according to their category. Rules are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Rulekeepor sees fit. The listing of each rule in the SLR must include the rule's ID number, revision number, power, title, and text. The Rulekeepor is strongly encouraged not to include any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. There is a format of the ruleset known as the Full Logical Ruleset (FLR). In this format, rules are assigned to the same category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, and any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor is also free to include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the ruleset in the FLR. Whenever a rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor shall record a historical annotation to the rule indicating: a) The type of change. b) The date on which the change took effect. c) The mechanism that specified the change. d) If the rule was changed due to a proposal, then that proposal's ID number, author, and co-author(s) (if any). history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1682 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1682 by Proposal 2785 (Murphy), 15 January 1997 text: Let there exist the Patent Title of "Boor". Whenever a Player's Style becomes negative, that Player is automatically awarded the Patent Title of Boor. The Patent Title of Boor is revoked automatically from any Player whose Style becomes nonnegative. This Patent Title shall never be awarded or revoked by Directive. The Herald shall announce in the Public Forum whenever a Player receives or loses this Title, as soon as possible after such award or revocation occurs. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 2790 (Zefram), 30 January 1997 text: Let there exist the Patent Title of "Boor". Whenever a Player's Style becomes negative, that Player is automatically awarded the Patent Title of Boor. The Patent Title of Boor is revoked automatically from any Player whose Style becomes nonnegative. This Patent Title shall never be awarded or revoked by Directive. The Wizard shall announce in the Public Forum whenever a Player receives or loses this Title, as soon as possible after such award or revocation occurs. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1682 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1683 history: Created [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) text: The Herald's Report includes the number of Blots posessed by each Entity that posesses Blots, the changes thereof since the last posting of the Herald's Report, and the reason for each such change. The Herald shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. If any Rule mandates a change in Blots, but does not also specifically state the Player who is Legally Responsible for detecting the change and reporting it to the Herald, then the change in Blots is canceled. If a Blot change is not reported within four Weeks of its occurrence, or by the end of the Game in which it occurred, whichever is sooner, the change in Blots is cancelled. history: ... [orphaned text: As well as any other responsibilities e may have due to other Rules, the Herald is responsible for keeping track of the Blots possessed by each Player, as well as all ex-Players who have Blots. Once a Week the Herald shall post to the Public Forum a report of the Blots held by each Player. If a Player has earned Blots since the last report, this report must publicize the reason for the gain in Blots. The Herald shall receive a weekly salary equal to 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary. If any Rule mandates a change in Blots, but does not also specifically state the Player who is Legally Responsible for detecting the change and reporting it to the Herald, then the change in Blots is canceled. If a Blot change is not reported within four Weeks of its occurrence, or by the end of the Game in which it occurred, whichever is sooner, the change in Blots is cancelled. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1684 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1684 by Proposal 2817 (Blob), 23 February 1997 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, 8 Extra Votes shall be transfered from the Bank to each Active Player. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting these transfers. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, 8 Voting Tokens shall be transfered from the Bank to each Active Player. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting these transfers. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3466 (Steve), 26 April 1997 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, 8 Voting Tokens shall be transferred from the Bank to each Active Player. This transfer is known as the weekly Voting Token Stipend. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting these transfers. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3475 (Oerjan), 11 May 1997 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, 2/3 as many Voting Tokens as there were Proposals distributed during the previous Week, or 8 Voting Tokens, whichever is less, shall be transfered from the Bank to each Active Player. This transfer is called the Weekly Voting Token Stipend. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting these transfers. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3515 (Steve), 16 June 1997 text: When the last Voting Period on a Proposal distributed in a given Nomic Week ends, 2/3 as many Voting Tokens as there were Proposals distributed in that Week (rounded down to the nearest integer), or 8 Voting Tokens, whichever is less, are transferred from the Bank to each Player who cast a vote on any Proposal distributed during that Nomic Week. The Assessor is responsible for detecting and reporting these transfers. history: Amended(5) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: When the last Voting Period on a Proposal distributed in a given Nomic Week ends, the Assessor shall pay out to each each Player who cast a vote on any Proposal distributed during that Nomic Week 2/3 as many Voting Tokens as there were Proposals distributed in that Week (rounded down to the nearest integer), or 8 Voting Tokens, whichever is less. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1684 by Proposal 3664 (Steve), 22 January 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1685 history: Created, ca. Mar. 1 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1686 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1686 by Proposal 2839 (Zefram), 11 March 1997 text: For each Office, the Rules may designate a set of information to be the corresponding Officer's Report. All such Reports are Official Reports. The only information that is part of an Official Report is that which the Rules specifically state is part of that Official Report. The holder of an Office for which there is an Official Report shall maintain all information in the Report, and shall post it to the Public Forum at least once every Nomic Week. Failure to post the Official Report is the Infraction of Failure to Report, the penalty for which is the same as the penalty for a Class D Crime. The Registrar and the Speaker are authorised to detect and report commissions of this Infraction. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), 6 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3918 (Murphy), 27 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 text: For each Office, the corresponding Officer's Report is the set of information designated as such by the Rules. If no information is so designated, then that Office has no Officer's Report. All Officer's Reports are Official Reports. The holder of an Office for which there is an Officer's Report shall maintain all information in the Report, and shall post it to the Public Forum at least once every Nomic Week. Failure to post the Official Report in a Nomic Week is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. The Payroll Clerk and the Speaker are authorised to detect and report commissions of this Infraction. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: For each Office, the Rules may designate certain information to be part of the corresponding Officer's Weekly Report or Monthly Report. Any information designated to be part of the Officer's Report but not explicitly designated part of the Monthly Report shall be part of the Weekly Report. If no information is designated to be part of the Weekly (or Monthly) Report, then that Office has no Weekly (or, respectively, Monthly) Report. Each Officer's Report is an Official Report. The holder of an Office for which there is an Officer's Report shall maintain all information in the Report. E shall post the Weekly Report at least once each Nomic Week and the Monthly Report at least once each month. Failure to post the Weekly Report (if there is one) in a Nomic Week or the Monthly Report (if there is one) in a month is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. The Payroll Clerk and the Speaker are authorized to detect and report this Infraction. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4053 (harvel), 21 August 2000 text: For each Office, the Rules may designate certain information to be part of the corresponding Officer's Weekly Report or Monthly Report. Any information designated to be part of the Officer's Report but not explicitly designated part of the Monthly Report shall be part of the Weekly Report. If no information is designated to be part of the Weekly (or Monthly) Report, then that Office has no Weekly (or, respectively, Monthly) Report. Each Officer's Report is an Official Report. The holder of an Office for which there is an Officer's Report shall maintain all information in the Report. E shall post the Weekly Report at least once each Nomic Week and the Monthly Report at least once each month. Failure to post the Weekly Report (if there is one) in a Nomic Week or the Monthly Report (if there is one) in a month is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy and the Speaker are authorized to detect and report this Infraction. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4142 (Murphy), 15 April 2001 text: For each Office, the Rules may designate certain information to be part of the corresponding Officer's Weekly Report or Monthly Report. Any information designated to be part of the Officer's Report but not explicitly designated part of the Monthly Report shall be part of the Weekly Report. If no information is designated to be part of the Weekly (or Monthly) Report, then that Office has no Weekly (or, respectively, Monthly) Report. Each Officer's Report is an Official Report. The holder of an Office for which there is an Officer's Report shall maintain all information in the Report. E shall post the Weekly Report at least once each Nomic Week and the Monthly Report at least once each month. Failure to post the Weekly Report (if there is one) in a Nomic Week or the Monthly Report (if there is one) in a month is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. The Assistant Director of Personnel and the Speaker are authorized to detect and report this Infraction. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: For each Office, the Rules may designate certain information to be part of that Office's Weekly Report or Monthly Report. All Weekly Reports and Monthly Reports shall also be known as Official Reports. All information which is part of an Officer's Official Report(s) shall be maintained by that Officer. Each Officer with a Weekly Report is required to publish that Report during each Nomic Week, else e shall be Guilty of the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. Each Officer with a Monthly Report is required to publish that Report during each Nomic Month, else e shall be Guilty of the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. The Infraction of Failure to Report may be detected and reported by the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy or the Speaker. If an Officer with a Weekly Report fails to publish that Report during three consecutive Nomic Weeks, e commits the Class 10 Crime of Dereliction of Duty. If an Officer with a Monthly Report fails to publish that Report during three consecutive Nomic Months, e commits the Class 10 Crime of Dereliction of Duty. Any Officer found Guilty of Dereliction of Duty shall be immediately retired from Office. No player may be found Guilty of Dereliction of Duty more than once each quarter for any particular Office. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4164 (Murphy), 11 June 2001 text: For each Office, the Rules may designate certain information to be part of that Office's Weekly Report or Monthly Report. All Weekly Reports and Monthly Reports shall also be known as Official Reports. All information which is part of an Officer's Official Report(s) shall be maintained by that Officer. Each Officer with a Weekly Report is required to publish it during each Nomic Week; each Officer with a Monthly Report is required to publish it during each Nomic Month. Failure to do so is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. Failure to do so for three consecutive Nomic (Weeks/Months) is instead the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty; any Officer found guilty of this Infraction is automatically retired. These Infractions may be detected and reported by the Assistant Director of Personnel and the Speaker. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Rules may designate certain information to be part of an Office's Weekly Report or Monthly Report. An Office's Weekly Reports and Monthly Reports constitute the Office's Official Report. All information that is part of an Office's Official Report shall be maintained by the corresponding officer. The rules may specify conditions under which a player is marvy; that player is not marvy unless the rules explicitly state at least one such condition and all such conditions are satisfied. As soon as possible after a player becomes marvy, the Speaker shall announce this fact. The only condition for marviness is membership in the Outer Cabinet. Each officer with a Weekly Report must publish it weekly; each officer with a Monthly Report must publish it monthly. Failure to do so is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. If an officer fails to do so for at least three consecutive reporting periods, e may be cited for either Failure to Report or the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty but not both. Any officer cited for Derelicition of Duty is immediately retired. The Assistant Director of Personnel and the Speaker may report these Infractions. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4489 (root), 6 May 2003 text: The Rules may designate certain information to be part of an Office's Weekly Report or Monthly Report. An Office's Weekly Reports and Monthly Reports constitute the Office's Official Report. All information that is part of an Office's Official Report shall be maintained by the corresponding officer. The rules may specify conditions under which a player is mauve; that player is not mauve unless the rules explicitly state at least one such condition and all such conditions are satisfied. As soon as possible after a player becomes mauve, the Speaker shall announce this fact. The only condition for mauveness is being nicknamed Blob. Each officer with a Weekly Report must publish it weekly; each officer with a Monthly Report must publish it monthly. Failure to do so is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. If an officer fails to do so for at least three consecutive reporting periods, e may be cited for either Failure to Report or the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty but not both. Any officer cited for Dereliction of Duty is immediately removed from that office. The Assistant Director of Personnel and the Speaker may report these Infractions. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4655 (Kolja), 29 March 2005 text: The Rules may designate certain information to be part of an Office's Weekly Report or Monthly Report. An Office's Weekly Reports and Monthly Reports constitute the Office's Official Report. All information that is part of an Office's Official Report shall be maintained by the corresponding officer. The rules may specify conditions under which a player is mauve; that player is not mauve unless the rules explicitly state at least one such condition and all such conditions are satisfied. As soon as possible after a player becomes mauve, the Speaker shall announce this fact. The only condition for mauveness is being nicknamed Blob. Each officer with a Weekly Report must publish it weekly unless the content of the report would substantially be the same as in the previously published report. In this case, a report must only be published within one week of the next substantial change to the report's content. Each officer with a Monthly Report must publish it monthly. Failure to do so is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. If an officer fails to do so for at least three consecutive reporting periods, e may be cited for either Failure to Report or the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty but not both. Any officer cited for Dereliction of Duty is immediately removed from that office. The Assistant Director of Personnel and the Speaker may report these Infractions. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4695 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: The Rules may designate certain information to be part of an Office's Weekly Report or Monthly Report. An Office's Weekly Reports and Monthly Reports constitute the Office's Official Report. All information that is part of an Office's Official Report shall be maintained by the corresponding officer. The rules may specify conditions under which a player is mauve; that player is not mauve unless the rules explicitly state at least one such condition and all such conditions are satisfied. As soon as possible after a player becomes mauve, the Speaker shall announce this fact. The only condition for mauveness is being nicknamed Blob. Each officer with a Weekly Report must publish it weekly unless the content of the report would substantially be the same as in the previously published report. In this case, a report must only be published within one week of the next substantial change to the report's content, but must at least be published once per month. Each officer with a Monthly Report must publish it monthly. Failure to do so is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. If an officer fails to do so for at least three consecutive reporting periods, e may be cited for either Failure to Report or the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty but not both. Any officer cited for Dereliction of Duty is immediately removed from that office. The Assistant Director of Personnel and the Speaker may report these Infractions. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4768 (root), 25 May 2005 text: The Rules may designate certain information to be part of an Office's Weekly Report or Monthly Report. An Office's Weekly Reports and Monthly Reports constitute the Office's Official Report. All information that is part of an Office's Official Report shall be maintained by the corresponding officer. The rules may specify conditions under which a player is mauve; that player is not mauve unless the rules explicitly state at least one such condition and all such conditions are satisfied. As soon as possible after a player becomes mauve, the Speaker shall announce this fact. The only condition for mauveness is being nicknamed Blob. Each officer with a Weekly Report must publish it weekly unless the content of the report would substantially be the same as in the previously published report. In this case, a report must only be published within one week of the next substantial change to the report's content, but must at least be published once per month. Each officer with a Monthly Report must publish it monthly. Failure to do so is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. If an officer fails to do so for at least three consecutive reporting periods, e may be cited for either Failure to Report or the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty but not both. Any officer cited for Dereliction of Duty is immediately removed from that office. The Associate Director of Personnel and the Speaker may report these Infractions. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4769 (Sherlock), 25 May 2005 text: The Rules may designate certain information to be part of an Office's Weekly Report, Bi-Weekly Report or Monthly Report. An Office's Weekly Reports, Bi-Weekly Reports and Monthly Reports constitute the Office's Official Report. All information that is part of an Office's Official Report shall be maintained by the corresponding officer. Each officer with a Weekly Report must publish it weekly unless the content of the report would substantially be the same as in the previously published report. In this case, a report must only be published within one week of the next substantial change to the report's content, but must at least be published once per month. Each officer with a Bi-Weekly Report must publish it once every two weeks and each officer with a Monthly Report must publish it monthly. Failure to do so is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. If an officer fails to do so for at least three consecutive reporting periods, e may be cited for either Failure to Report or the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty but not both. Any officer cited for Dereliction of Duty is immediately removed from that office. The Assistant Director of Personnel and the Speaker may report these Infractions. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4822 (OscarMeyr), 17 July 2005 text: The Rules may designate certain information to be part of an Office's Weekly Report, Bi-Weekly Report or Monthly Report. An Office's Weekly Reports, Bi-Weekly Reports and Monthly Reports constitute the Office's Official Report. All information that is part of an Office's Official Report shall be maintained by the corresponding officer. Each officer with a Weekly Report must publish it weekly unless the content of the report would substantially be the same as in the previously published report. In this case, a report must only be published within one week of the next substantial change to the report's content, but must at least be published once per month. Each officer with a Bi-Weekly Report must publish it once every two weeks and each officer with a Monthly Report must publish it monthly. Failure to do so is the Class 2 Infraction of Failure to Report. If an officer fails to do so for at least three consecutive reporting periods, e may be cited for either Failure to Report or the Class 10 Infraction of Dereliction of Duty but not both. Any officer cited for Dereliction of Duty is immediately removed from that office. The Associate Director of Personnel and the Speaker may report these Infractions. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1686 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1687 history: Enacted as MI=1 Rule 1687 by Proposal 2841 (elJefe), 18 March 1997 text: Immediately after an Official Report by the Recordkeepor of a Currency, containing a record of the holdings of that Currency in a Treasury, that Treasury is adjusted to hold the reported amount (modified by any transfers occurring subsequent to the effective date of the Report). Such an adjustment is not a transfer. However, this adjustment shall not take place if, within two weeks of the Report, any player makes a successful COE claiming that the given record is in error. If a successful COE is made later (after two weeks) claiming that the given record is in error, then it has the effect at that time of making an adjustment to the Treasury equal and opposite to the adjustment caused by the Report. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1687 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1688 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 1688 by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: There shall exist a property of entities known as Power. The Power of an entity is an Index, as described elsewhere. An "instrument" is any entity with Power greater than zero. The Power of any given entity is zero until and unless it is set to another value in accordance with the Rules. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3994 (harvel), 20 April 2000 text: Power is an Index. An Instrument is an entity with nonzero Power. The Power of a given entity is zero unless otherwise defined by the Rules. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: The power of an entity is a natural number, which is zero unless otherwise defined or modified according to procedures defined by the rules. An instrument is an entity with positive power. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4940 (Zefram), 29 April 2007 text: The power of an entity is a non-negative rational number. An instrument is an entity with positive power. The power of an entity cannot be set or modified except as stipulated by the rules. All entities have power zero except where specifically allowed by the rules. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5276 (Murphy, Pavitra, Zefram), 7 November 2007 text: The power of an entity is a non-negative rational number. An instrument is an entity with positive power. The power of an entity cannot be set or modified except as stipulated by the rules. All entities have power zero except where specifically allowed by the rules. A rule that secures a change (hereafter the securing rule) thereby makes it IMPOSSIBLE to perform that change except as allowed by an instrument with power greater than or equal to the change's power threshold. This threshold defaults to the securing rule's power, but CAN be lowered as allowed by that rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1689 history: Created, ca. Mar. 26 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1690 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1690 by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: The Power of a new Rule shall be as specified by the instrument which causes the creation of that Rule; if no such specification exists, the Power of the new Rule shall be 1. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1690 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1691 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1691 by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: A new Rule shall be assigned to whatever Rule Category is specified by the instrument which created it, if the Rule Category specified exists. If there is no such specification or a category which does not exist is specified, the Rulekeepor shall assign the Rule to an appropriate Rule Category of eir own choice. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1692 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1692 by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), 26 March 1997 text: No Rule may have Power less than 1 or greater than 4. history: Infected and Amended(1) Substantially by Rule 1454, 16 May 1997 text: No Rule may have Power less than 1 or greater than 4. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1692, 30 May 1997 text: No Rule may have Power less than 1 or greater than 4. history: Infected and Amended(3) Substantially by Rule 1454, 22 June 1997 text: No Rule may have Power less than 1 or greater than 4. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Rule 1692, 6 July 1997 text: No Rule may have Power less than 1 or greater than 4. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1693 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1693 by Proposal 3454 (Harlequin), 7 April 1997 text: If the Judgement of a CFJ is Appealed, the Board of Appeals shall consider the correctness of that Judgement. They may rule that the original Judgement was either correct or incorrect. If the Judgement is found to be correct, the original Judge of the CFJ shall retain eir Judicial Salary and the original Judgement will have legal effect. If the Judgement is found to be incorrect, the original Judge of the CFJ shall forfeit eir Judicial Salary. The Board may then act in one of three ways: i) Reversal of the Judgement. In this case, the CFJ shall be treated as if it were Judged normally, with the Judgement being that which the Justices unanimously agree on. ii) Dismissal of the CFJ. The CFJ shall be considered dismissed. iii) Re-assignment of the CFJ. In this case, the original Judgement shall be ignored, and the CotC shall reassign the CFJ to a new Judge in the same fashion as it was originally assigned; the original Judge will be considered Ineligible. The new Judge cannot make the same Judgement as the original Judge for the same reason. If the Justices find that the original Judgement was incorrect but do not unanimously agree on an action to take within the deliberation period, the CFJ shall be re-assigned as described above. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3573 (Steve), 30 October 1997 text: If the Judgement of a CFJ is Appealed, the Board of Appeals shall consider the correctness of that Judgement. The Board may rule that the original Judgement was either correct or incorrect. If a majority of the Justices find that the original Judgement was correct, then the Board's ruling is that the original Judgement was correct. In that case, the original Judge of the CFJ shall retain eir Judicial Salary and the original Judgement has legal effect. If a majority of the Justices find that the original Judgement was incorrect, then the Board's ruling is that the original Judgement was incorrect. In that case, the original Judge of the CFJ shall forfeit eir Judicial Salary. The Board may then act in one of three ways, provided that a majority of the Justices agree: i) Reversal of the Judgement. In this case, the CFJ shall be treated as if it were Judged normally, with the Judgement being that which a majority of the Justices agree on. ii) Dismissal of the CFJ. The CFJ shall be considered dismissed. iii) Re-assignment of the CFJ. In this case, the original Judgement shall be ignored, and the CotC shall reassign the CFJ to a new Judge in the same fashion as it was originally assigned; the original Judge will be considered Ineligible. The new Judge cannot make the same Judgement as the original Judge for the same reason. If a majority of the Justices find that the original Judgement was incorrect, but no majority of the Justices agree on what action to take, then the CFJ shall be re-assigned as above. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: If a Judgement of TRUE or FALSE is Appealed, the Board of Appeals shall consider the correctness of that Judgement. If a Judgement of DISMISSED is Appealed, the Board shall not consider the truth or falsity of the original CFJ; they shall only consider whether a Judgement of DISMISSED should have been delivered. For an Appelate Judge assigned to the Appeal of a Judgement, a Judgement is exactly one of the following: SUSTAIN, REVERSE, REASSIGN, or REMAND. When a Judgement is overturned: a) If a majority of the Appelate Judges Judge REVERSE, then the CFJ shall be treated as if it were Judged normally, with the Judgement being that which a majority of the Appelate Judges agree on. b) If a majority of the Appelate Judges Judge REASSIGN, then the original Judgement is ignored, the original Judge is recused, and the Clerk of the Courts shall reassign the CFJ to a new Judge in the same fashion as it was originally assigned. The new Judge cannot make the same Judgement as the original Judge for the same reason. c) If a majority of the Appelate Judges Judge REMAND, then the original Judgement shall be ignored, and the Clerk of the Courts shall reassign the CFJ to the original Judge as if it were being originally assigned. The Judge may not make the same Judgement for the same reason. d) If none of the above is true, then the CFJ shall be reassigned as described above. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1693 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1694 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1694 by Proposal 3454 (Harlequin), 7 April 1997 text: If the dismissal of a CFJ is Appealed, the Board shall not consider the truth or falsity of the original CFJ; they shall only consider whether the dismissal was properly made. An illegal dismissal shall not be considered "properly made." If the Board finds the dismissal to have been properly made, the original Judge of the CFJ shall retain eir Judicial Salary, and the CFJ shall remain dismissed. If the Board finds the dismissal to have been made improperly, the original Judge of the CFJ shall have eir Judicial Salary revoked. The CotC shall reassign the CFJ to a new Judge in the same fashion as originally assigned; the new Judge cannot dismiss it for the same reasons as given by the original Judge. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1694 by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1695 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1695 by Proposal 3454 (Harlequin), 7 April 1997 text: If an Injuction issued with a Judgement is Appealed, the Board shall consider the legality of the Injunction. If the Board finds that the Injuction was made legally, it shall have normal effect. If the Board finds that the Injunction was made illegally, the Injunction shall be set aside. The original Judge is guilty of the Infraction of Wrongful Injunction, the penalty for which is 2 Blots; the CotC shall detect and report this penalty. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3509 (Harlequin), 16 June 1997 text: If an Injuction issued with a Judgement is Appealed, the Board shall consider the legality and appropriateness of the Injunction. If the Board finds that the Injuction was made legally, and was appropriate for the situation, it shall have normal effect. If the Board finds that the Injunction was made illegally, or that it was inappropriate for the situation, the Injunction shall be set aside. The original Judge is guilty of the Infraction of Wrongful Injunction, the penalty for which is 2 Blots; the CotC shall detect and report this penalty. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: In the appeal of a Judicial Order, the Board shall consider whether the Order in question was both legally made and appropriate for the situation. If the Board finds that the Order was made legally, and was appropriate for the situation, it shall affirm the Order. If an Order staying the execution of the appealed Order was entered, it shall vacate this stay. If the Board finds that the Order was made illegally, or that it was inappropriate for the situation, it shall vacate the original Order. Should the Board further find that the Order was made without reasonable justification or for a clearly improper purpose, it shall (at its discretion) impose a penalty of 2 Blots upon the Judge who made the original Order. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1695 by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1696 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1696 by Proposal 3463 (Harlequin), 17 April 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3471 (Harlequin), 2 May 1997 text: Voting Tokens (VTs) are a Currency. The MUQ of VTs is 0.1. The Recordkeepor for VTs is the Assessor. The Mintor of VTs is the Mint. At least once each Nomic week, the Assessor shall post a Report to the Public Forum, including a list of all transfers of VTs since the previous such Report, and the current ownership of all VTs. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3488 (Zefram; disi.), 19 May 1997 text: Voting Tokens (VTs) are a Currency. The MUQ of VTs is 0.1. The Recordkeepor for VTs is the Assessor. The Mintor of VTs is the Mint. The Assessor's Report includes the number of VTs in each Treasury, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Assessor's Report. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Voting Tokens (VTs) are a Currency. The MUQ of VTs is 0.1. The Recordkeepor for VTs is the Assessor. The Mintor of VTs is the Bank. The Assessor's Report includes the number of VTs possessed by each entity which possesses them, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Assessor's Report. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3693 (Steve), 26 February 1998 text: Voting Tokens (VTs) are a Currency. The MUQ of VTs is 0.1. The Recordkeepor for VTs is the Accountor. The Mintor of VTs is the Bank. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3788 (Steve), 8 September 1998 text: Voting Tokens (VTs) are a Currency. The MUQ of VTs is 0.01. The Recordkeepor for VTs is the Accountor. The Mintor of VTs is the Bank. history: ... history: Amended(7) text: Positive Voting Tokens (+VTs) are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of +VTs is 0.01. The Recordkeepor for +VTs is the Accountor. +VTs are a Basic Currency. Negative Voting Tokens (-VTs) are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of -VTs is 0.01. The Recordkeepor for -VTs is the Accountor. -VTs are a Basic Currency. The Rules may require that a Payment Order be issued for Voting Tokens (VTs) without specifying whether the Payment Order is to be issued for +VTs or -VTs. In such a case, the Player who is to issue the Order is free to decide whether to issue the Order in +VTs, -VTs, or as two Orders, one for +VTs and one for -VTs, the sum of whose amounts is to be the total amount specified by the Rules. The Rules may require that an Entity be billed in VTs without specifying +VTs or -VTs. In that case the Player who is to execute the billing may issue a Payment Order, from the Entity to be billed, to the Bank, either in +VTs or -VTs (for the amount to be billed); or e may issue two Payment Orders, one for +VTs and one for -VTs, the sum of whose amounts is to be the total amount specified by the Rules. history: ... history: Amended(9) text: Voting Tokens (VTs) are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of VTs is 1. The Recordkeepor for VTs is the Accountor. VTs are a Basic Currency. history: ... [orphaned text: Voting Tokens (VTs) are a Currency. The MUQ of VTs is 0.5. The Recordkeepor for VTs is the Assessor. The Mintor of VTs is the Mint. At least once each Nomic week, the Assessor shall post a Report to the Public Forum, including a list of all transfers of VTs since the previous such Report, and the current ownership of all VTs. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1697 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1697 by Proposal 3464 (Michael), 26 April 1997 text: Any Player who has Won twice within a given seven day period is prohibited from Winning again during that period. This is a Win-Preventing condition for that Player. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1697 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1698 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 1698 by Proposal 3465 (Steve), 26 April 1997 text: It must always be possible to adopt Proposals within a 4 week period. Any change to the game state which would result in this condition becoming false is cancelled and does not take place, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Retitled by Proposal 5536 (Murphy), 7 June 2008 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5536 (Murphy), 7 June 2008 text: In the interest of safeguarding Agora's nomic-ness, if a change to the gamestate would otherwise make it IMPOSSIBLE to make arbitrary rule changes and/or adopt arbitrary proposals within a four-week period by any combinations of actions by players, then that change is canceled and does not occur, any rule to the contrary notwithstanding. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1699 history: Created text: At the end of the Nomic Week, each Player who, at the beginning of that week, received the weekly Voting Token Stipend, and who did not cast any votes during that week, shall lose Voting Tokens equivalent to the Stipend e received that week. These transfers are detected and reported by the Assessor. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1700 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1700 by Proposal 3470 (favor), 2 May 1997 text: Any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, no action which is legal or permitted by the Rules when attempted by one set of Players shall be illegal or forbidden by the Rules when attempted by a different set of Players, due solely to the sexes (or lack thereof) of the Players involved. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1700 by Proposal 3672 (Repeal-O-Matic), 30 January 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1701 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1701 by Proposal 3474 (Swann), 2 May 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3520 (Harlequin; disi.), 23 June 1997 text: Proposal Notes (P-Notes) are a currency, their MUQ is one, and their Recordkeepor is the Promotor. The Promotor has the duty to publish, at least once a week in the Public Forum, a report of the number of P-Notes in each treasury that possesses P-Notes, and a list of all the changes in P-Note holdings since the last such report with the reason for those changes. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Proposal Notes (P-Notes) are a currency, their MUQ is one, and their Recordkeepor is the Promotor. The Promotor has the duty to publish, at least once a week in the Public Forum, a report of the number of P-Notes in each treasury that possesses P-Notes, and a list of all the changes in P-Note holdings since the last such report with the reason for those changes. Whenever there exists a Player who has never before possessed any P-Notes, the Promotor shall pay out 5 P-Notes to that Player. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3543 (Harlequin), 17 August 1997 text: Proposal Notes (P-Notes) are a currency, their MUQ is one, their Recordkeepor is the Promotor, and their Mintor is the Bank. The Promotor has the duty to publish, at least once a week in the Public Forum, a report of the number of P-Notes in each treasury that possesses P-Notes, and a list of all the changes in P-Note holdings since the last such report with the reason for those changes. Whenever there exists a Player who has never before possessed any P-Notes, the Promotor shall pay out 5 P-Notes to that Player. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3569 (Zefram), 30 October 1997 text: Proposal Notes (P-Notes) are a Currency. The MUQ of P-Notes is 1. The Recordkeepor for P-Notes is the Promotor. The Mintor of P-Notes is the Bank. The Promotor's Report includes the number of P-Notes possessed by each entity which possesses them, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Promotor's Report. Whenever a Player registers who has never before possessed any P-Notes, the Promotor shall pay out 5 P-Notes to that Player. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: Proposal Notes (P-Notes) are a Currency. The MUQ of P-Notes is 1. The Recordkeepor for P-Notes is the Promotor. The Mintor of P-Notes is the Bank. The Promotor's Report includes the number of P-Notes possessed by each entity which possesses them, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Promotor's Report. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3841 (Blob), 15 March 1999 text: Proposal Notes (P-Notes) are a Currency. The MUQ of P-Notes is 0.1. The Recordkeepor for P-Notes is the Promotor. The Mintor of P-Notes is the Bank. The Promotor's Report includes the number of P-Notes possessed by each entity which possesses them, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Promotor's Report. history: ... history: Amended(7) text: Proposal Notes (P-Notes) are a Currency. The MUQ of P-Notes is 0.01. The Recordkeepor for P-Notes is the Promotor. The Mintor of P-Notes is the Bank. The Promotor's Report includes the number of P-Notes possessed by each entity which possesses them, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Promotor's Report. history: ... history: Amended(9) text: Proposal Notes (P-Notes) are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of P-Notes is 0.01. The Recordkeepor for P-Notes is the Promotor. P-Notes are a Basic Currency. The Promotor's Report includes the number of P-Notes possessed by each entity which possesses them, and the changes thereof since the last posting of the Promotor's Report. history: ... history: Amended(11) text: Proposal Notes (P-Notes) are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of P-Notes is 1. The Recordkeepor for P-Notes is the Promotor. P-Notes are a Basic Currency. history: ... [orphaned text: Proposal Notes (P-Notes) are a currency, their MUQ is one, and their Recordkeepor is the Promotor. The Promotor has the duty to publish, at least once a week in the Public Forum, a report of the number of P-Notes in each treasury that possesses P-Notes, and a list of all the changes in P-Note holdings since the last such report with the reason for those changes. Whenever there exists a Player who has never before possessed any P-Notes, 5 P-Notes shall be transferred from the Bank to that Player. The Promotor shall detect and report this transfer. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1702 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1702 by Proposal 3474 (Swann), 2 May 1997 text: All Proposals other than Disinterested Proposals have associated with them a Petition fee. This fee must be paid to the Bank between the submission of the Proposal and its distribution, otherwise the Proposal shall become Disinterested, as specified in other Rules. This fee must be made by sending a message to the Promotor, unambiguously specifying the Proposal whose fee is being paid, and ordering the transfer of the required P-Notes specifically for that Proposal. The Player transferring these P-Notes must have at least as many P-Notes as e is attempting to transfer, or no transfer of P-Notes is made, nor is the fee paid. The Petition fee for any Proposal is one P-Note unless another Rule specifies a higher fee. This rule takes precedence over any Rule that would require a lower fee, no fee, or a fee paid in Currency other than P-Notes, for Proposals that are not Disinterested. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3487 (Zefram; disi.), 19 May 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3492 (Morendil), 19 May 1997 text: All Proposals have associated with them a Petition fee. The Petition fee for any Proposal is one P-Note unless another Rule specifies a higher fee. This rule takes precedence over any Rule that would require a lower fee, no fee, or a fee paid in Currency other than P-Notes. The Petition fee is paid by sending a message to the Promotor, unambiguously specifying the Proposal whose fee is being paid, and ordering the transfer of the required P-Notes specifically for that Proposal. The Player transferring these P-Notes must have at least as many P-Notes as e is attempting to transfer, or no transfer of P-Notes is made, nor is the fee paid. The Promotor shall detect and report transfers required by this Rule. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3497 (Morendil; disi.), 3 June 1997 text: All Proposals have associated with them a Petition fee. The Petition fee for any Proposal is one P-Note unless another Rule specifies a higher fee. This rule takes precedence over any Rule that would require a lower fee, no fee, or a fee paid in Currency other than P-Notes. A Petition Fee is paid when a Player sends a message to the Promotor, unambiguously specifying the Proposal for which the fee is being paid, as well as the amount of P-Notes corresponding to the Petition Fee required for this Proposal. If the Player paying the Fee has at least as many P-Notes as the required amount, that amount is transferred and the fee is paid; otherwise, no transfer of P-Notes occurs, nor is the fee paid. Further, no payment of a Petition Fee shall be valid if there already is a Payor for the corresponding Proposal. The Promotor shall detect and report transfers required by this Rule. The Promotor shall detect and report transfers required by this Rule. history: Amended(4) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: All Proposals have associated with them a Petition fee. The Petition fee for any Proposal is one P-Note, unless another Rule specifies a higher fee. This rule takes precedence over any Rule that would require a lower fee, no fee, or a fee paid in Currency other than P-Notes. The Petition Fee for a Proposal is paid when an entity successfully executes a Transfer Order for the amount of that Proposal's Petition Fee, provided that e indicates clearly that the Transfer Order is being executed to pay the Petition fee for that Proposal. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1702 by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1703 history: Created text: There shall be modifications to the Petition fee for the following categories of proposal, these modifications are cumulative and occur in order. A Proposal shall have its fee increased by one P-Note for every Proposal in excess of five that Proposal's Proposer has submitted in the week prior to its submission. A Proposal that contains an excess of three Rule Changes shall have its fee increased by one P-Note. A Proposal that contains an excess of ten Rule Changes shall have its fee increased by one P-Note. A Proposal submitted by a new Player during eir Grace Period shall have its fee reduced by half, rounded down. If this results in a fee less than one P-Note, the fee shall be one P-Note. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1705 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1705 by Proposal 3474 (Swann), 2 May 1997 text: Upon the first of every month, all Players who have positive Style Point ratings shall receive a number of P-Notes equal to half their Style, rounded down. The Wizard shall detect and report these transfers. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Upon the first of every month, the Wizard shall pay out to each Player with a positive Style Point rating a number of P-Notes equal to half their Style, rounded down. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1705 by Proposal 3614 (Crito), 9 December 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1706 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1706 by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), 11 May 1997 text: There is a class of Entities called Locations. Each Location has a unique name. The Agoraverse is the set of all Locations. There is a Property called Position, the value of which is a Location. The Position of a Location is itself. "An Entity's Location" is an unambiguous reference to that Entity's Position, and the Entity is said to be "at that Location". There is a Location named "the Origin". The initial Location of any Entity with a Location is the Origin, unless otherwise specified. If a Location ceases to be a Location, then the Location of all Entities at that Location becomes the Origin. All Players have a Location. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3521 (Chuck), 23 June 1997 text: There is a class of Entities called Locations. Each Location has a unique name. The Agoraverse is the set of all Locations. There is a Property called Position, the value of which is a Location. The Position of a Location is itself. "An Entity's Location" is an unambiguous reference to that Entity's Position, and the Entity is said to be "at that Location". There is a Location named "the Origin". The initial Location of any Entity with a Location is the Origin, unless otherwise specified. If a Location ceases to be a Location, then the Location of all Entities at that Location becomes the Origin. All Players have a Location. The Cartographor is authorized to change the name of any Location not specifically mentioned by name in the Rules Without Objection. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1706 by Proposal 3740 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 May 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1707 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1707 by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), 11 May 1997 text: Any change in an Entity's Location is known as Movement. An Entity Moves when its Executor tells the Cartographor where it Moves to, given that the Movement is otherwise permitted by the Rules. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3560 (Murhpy), 24 October 1997 text: Any change in an Entity's Location is known as Movement. An Entity Moves when its Executor tells the Cartographor which Location it Moves to, given that the Movement is otherwise permitted by the Rules. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1707 by Proposal 3740 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 May 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1708 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1708 by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), 11 May 1997 text: Two Locations may be Adjacent. Adjacency is commutative and antireflexive. Entities may Move to a Location Adjacent to their current Location, unless prohibited by another Rule. history: Infected and Amended(1) Substantially by Rule 1454, 25 July 1997 text: Two Locations may be Adjacent. Adjacency is commutative and antireflexive. Entities may Move to a Location Adjacent to their current Location, unless prohibited by another Rule. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1708, 8 August 1997 text: Two Locations may be Adjacent. Adjacency is commutative and antireflexive. Entities may Move to a Location Adjacent to their current Location, unless prohibited by another Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1708 by Proposal 3740 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 May 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1709 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1709 by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), 11 May 1997 text: A Path is an ordered sequence of one or more Locations such that each Location in the Path is Adjacent to both the Location preceding it (if any) and the Location following it (if any). A Path is said to be "from" the first Location in the sequence and "to" the last Location in the sequence. The Length of a Path is one less than the number of Locations in it. The Distance between two Locations (which may be identical) is the minimum Length of a Path from the first to the second. If there is no such Path, then the Distance between them is undefined. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1709 by Proposal 3740 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 May 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1710 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1710 by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), 11 May 1997 text: There is an Office of Cartographor. At least once each Nomic Week, the Cartographor shall post a Report to the Public Forum containing the following information: * all Locations, and which Locations are Adjacent to which others * the Location of all Entities that have a Location * all Movement since the previous such Report (if any) history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1710 by Proposal 3740 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 May 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1711 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1711 by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), 11 May 1997 text: A Degree that has been Granted becomes awarded when the recipient's Location is the University. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1711 by Proposal 3740 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 May 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1712 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1712 by Proposal 3476 (Oerjan), 11 May 1997 text: For each positive Indulgence in the Bank at the beginning of a Nomic Week, the Herald shall as soon as possible randomly select an Active Player, and one Indulgence shall then be transferred from the Bank to that Player. This Transfer shall be detected and reported by the Herald. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Herald shall, for each Indulgence in the Bank, pay out one Indulgence to a randomly selected Active Player. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3543 (Harlequin), 17 August 1997 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Herald shall randomly distribute a number of Indulgences equal to the number of Blots executed in the past Week, minus the number of Blots vacated in the past Week, among all Players: for each such Indulgence, the Herald shall randomly select one Player and issue a Payment Order from the Bank to that Player for one Indulgence. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3618 (General Chaos), 9 December 1997 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Herald shall randomly distribute a number of Indulgences equal to the number of Blots executed in the past Week, less the number of Blots vacated in the past Week, among all Players: for each such Indulgence, the Herald shall randomly select one Player and issue a Payment Order from the Bank to that Player for one Indulgence. If this number is negative, no distribution occurs. history: Null-Amended(???) by Proposal 3655 (General Chaos), 1 January 1998 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Herald shall randomly distribute a number of Indulgences equal to the number of Blots executed in the past Week, less the number of Blots vacated in the past Week, among all Players: for each such Indulgence, the Herald shall randomly select one Player and issue a Payment Order from the Bank to that Player for one Indulgence. If this number is negative, no distribution occurs. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3714 (Crito), 19 March 1998 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Herald shall randomly distribute a number of Indulgences equal to one less than the difference of the total number of Blots held by all Players minus the total number of Indulgences held by all Players: for each such Indulgence, the Herald shall randomly select one Player and issue a Payment Order from the Bank to that Player for one Indulgence. If this number is not greater than zero, no distribution occurs. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Herald shall randomly distribute a number of Indulgences equal to one less than the difference of the total number of Blots held by all Players minus the total number of Indulgences held by all Players: for each such Indulgence, the Herald shall randomly select one Player and issue a Payment Order from the Bank to that Player for one Indulgence. If this number is not greater than zero, no distribution occurs. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3938 (Murphy), 7 November 1999 text: As soon as possible after the start of each month, the Priest shall Auction a number of Indulgences equal to the number of Players, plus the sum of the Blots of all Players, minus the sum of the Expected Indulgences of all entities except the Bank, minus the number of Outstanding Indulgence Auction Payment Orders, and with fractions rounded up to the next integer. (Note that the third term, the sum of the Expected Indulgences of all entities except the Bank, may well be negative.) The Expected Indulgences of entities shall be determined from the most recently published Herald's report; other values in this formula shall be determined as of the time of the start of the Auction. However, if the Priest makes an error in determining the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned, in good faith, that number shall be allowed to stand. If the number of Indulgences so caclulated is non-positive, the Priest shall not conduct such an auction in that month. The items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned. The Auctioneer shall be the Priest, and the Auction shall be conducted in Indulgence Auction Tokens (IATs). Upon completion of the Auction, the POs associated with the Winning Bids shall be known as Indulgence Auction Payment Orders (IAPOs). The Priest shall note which IAT POs are IAPOs. When an IAPO is satisfied, the Priest shall pay out one Indulgence to the Payor of that IAPO. If an IAPO remains unsatisfied three weeks after it is issued, the Priest shall vacate the IAPO. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4074 (Elysion), 26 September 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 text: The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is the number of registered Players, plus the total number of Blots held by Players. The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Indulgence Auctions but not yet paid for. As soon as possible after the start of each month, the Herald shall Auction a number of Indulgences equal to the difference between the AICL and the IICL. If the AICL is equal to or greater than the IICL, no auction shall be held. To calculate the difference, the Herald shall determine the number of Blots and the number of Indulgences owned as published in the most recent Herald's Report; other values in the formula shall be determined as of the time of the start of the auction. However, if the Herald makes an error in determining the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned, in good faith, that number shall be allowed to stand. The items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned. The Auctioneer shall be the Herald, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Acolytes may bid. Upon the satisfaction of a debt arising from an Indulgence Auction, the Herald shall pay out one Indulgence to the debtor of the satisfied debt. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4162 (Elysion), 11 June 2001 text: The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is the number of registered Players, plus the total number of Blots held by Players. The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Indulgence Auctions but not yet paid for. As soon as possible after the start of each month, the Herald shall calculate the Indulgence Differential, which is equal to the IICL minus the AICL, rounded down to the nearest integer. To calculate the Indulgence Differential, the Herald shall determine the number of Blots and the number of Indulgences owned as published in the most recent Herald's Report; other values in the formula shall be determined as of the time of the calculation. If the Herald makes an error in determining the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned, in good faith, that number shall be allowed to stand. If the Indulgence Differential is greater than zero, then the Herald shall, as soon as possible after the start of that month, auction a number of Indulgences equal to the Indulgence Differential; if the Indulgence Differential is not greater than zero, the Herald shall not auction any Indulgences that month. In an Indulgence Auction held in accordance with this rule, the items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned. In addition, the Auctioneer shall be the Herald, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems with only Acolytes being allowed to bid. Upon the satisfaction of a debt arising from an Indulgence Auction, the Herald shall pay out one Indulgence to the debtor of the satisfied debt. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4188 (Goethe), 18 July 2001 text: The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is the number of registered Players, plus the total number of Blots held by Players. The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Indulgence Auctions but not yet paid for. The Monthly Bank Indulgence Gain (MBIG) is the number of Indulgences transferred from other entities to the Bank during a given Nomic Month, less the number of Indulgences transferred from the Bank to other entities during that same Nomic Month. As soon as possible after the start of each month, the Herald shall calculate the Indulgence Differential, which is equal to the IICL minus the AICL, rounded down to the nearest integer. To calculate the Indulgence Differential, the Herald shall determine the number of Blots and the number of Indulgences owned as published in the most recent Herald's Report; other values in the formula shall be determined as of the time of the calculation. If the Herald makes an error in determining the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned, in good faith, that number shall be allowed to stand. If the Indulgence Differential is greater than zero, then the Herald shall, as soon as possible after the start of that month, auction a number of Indulgences equal to the Indulgence Differential; if the Indulgence Differential is not greater than zero, the Herald shall auction a whole number of Indulgences equal to or less than one half the MBIG for the preceeding month, with a minimum of 0 Indulgences. In an Indulgence Auction held in accordance with this rule, the items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned. In addition, the Auctioneer shall be the Herald, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems with only Acolytes being allowed to bid. Upon the satisfaction of a debt arising from an Indulgence Auction, the Herald shall pay out one Indulgence to the debtor of the satisfied debt. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4203 (neil), 28 August 2001 text: The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is the number of registered Players, plus the total number of Blots held by Players. The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Indulgence Auctions but not yet paid for. The Monthly Bank Indulgence Gain (MBIG) is the number of Indulgences transferred from other entities to the Bank during a given Nomic Month, less the number of Indulgences transferred from the Bank to other entities during that same Nomic Month. As soon as possible after the start of each month, the Herald shall calculate the Indulgence Differential, which is equal to the IICL minus the AICL, rounded down to the nearest integer. To calculate the Indulgence Differential, the Herald shall determine the number of Blots and the number of Indulgences owned as published in the most recent Herald's Report; other values in the formula shall be determined as of the time of the calculation. If the Herald makes an error in determining the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned, in good faith, that number shall be allowed to stand. If the Indulgence Differential is greater than zero, then the Herald shall, as soon as possible after the start of that month, auction a number of Indulgences equal to the Indulgence Differential; if the Indulgence Differential is not greater than zero, the Herald shall auction a whole number of Indulgences equal to or less than one half the MBIG for the preceeding month, with a minimum of 0 Indulgences. In an Indulgence Auction held in accordance with this rule, the items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned. In addition, the Auctioneer shall be the Herald, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems with only Acolytes being allowed to bid. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4249 (Murphy), 19 February 2002 text: The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is the number of registered Players, plus the total number of Blots held by Players. The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Indulgence Auctions but not yet paid for. The Monthly Bank Indulgence Gain (MBIG) is the number of Indulgences transferred from other entities to the Bank during a given Nomic Month, less the number of Indulgences transferred from the Bank to other entities during that same Nomic Month. As soon as possible after the start of each month, the Herald shall calculate the Indulgence Differential, which is equal to the IICL minus the AICL, rounded down to the nearest integer. To calculate the Indulgence Differential, the Herald shall determine the number of Blots and the number of Indulgences owned as published in the most recent Herald's Report; other values in the formula shall be determined as of the time of the calculation. If the Herald makes an error in determining the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned, in good faith, that number shall be allowed to stand. If the Indulgence Differential is greater than zero, then the Herald shall, as soon as possible after the start of that month, auction a number of Indulgences equal to the Indulgence Differential; if the Indulgence Differential is not greater than zero, the Herald shall auction a whole number of Indulgences equal to or less than one half the MBIG for the preceeding month, with a minimum of 0 Indulgences. In an Indulgence Auction held in accordance with this rule, the items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned. In addition, the Auction shall be conducted in Stems with only Acolytes being allowed to bid. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4272 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is the number of registered Players, plus the total Stain of all Players. The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Indulgence Auctions but not yet paid for. The Monthly Bank Indulgence Gain (MBIG) is the number of Indulgences transferred from other entities to the Bank during a given Nomic Month, less the number of Indulgences transferred from the Bank to other entities during that same Nomic Month. As soon as possible after the start of each month, the Herald shall calculate the Indulgence Differential, which is equal to the IICL minus the AICL, rounded down to the nearest integer. To calculate the Indulgence Differential, the Herald shall determine the number of Blots and the number of Indulgences owned as published in the most recent Herald's Report; other values in the formula shall be determined as of the time of the calculation. If the Herald makes an error in determining the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned, in good faith, that number shall be allowed to stand. If the Indulgence Differential is greater than zero, then the Herald shall, as soon as possible after the start of that month, auction a number of Indulgences equal to the Indulgence Differential; if the Indulgence Differential is not greater than zero, the Herald shall auction a whole number of Indulgences equal to or less than one half the MBIG for the preceeding month, with a minimum of 0 Indulgences. In an Indulgence Auction held in accordance with this rule, the items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned. In addition, the Auction shall be conducted in Stems with only Acolytes being allowed to bid. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4281 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is the number of registered Players, plus the total Stain of all Players. The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Indulgence Auctions but not yet paid for. The Monthly Bank Indulgence Gain (MBIG) is the number of Indulgences transferred from other entities to the Bank during a given Nomic Month, less the number of Indulgences transferred from the Bank to other entities during that same Nomic Month. As soon as possible after the start of each month, the Herald shall calculate the Indulgence Differential, which is equal to the IICL minus the AICL, rounded down to the nearest integer. To calculate the Indulgence Differential, the Herald shall determine the number of Blots and the number of Indulgences owned as published in the most recent Herald's Report; other values in the formula shall be determined as of the time of the calculation. If the Herald makes an error in determining the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned, in good faith, that number shall be allowed to stand. If the Indulgence Differential is greater than zero, then the Herald shall, as soon as possible after the start of that month, auction a number of Indulgences equal to the Indulgence Differential; if the Indulgence Differential is not greater than zero, the Herald shall auction a whole number of Indulgences equal to or less than one half the MBIG for the preceeding month, with a minimum of 0 Indulgences. In an Indulgence Auction held in accordance with this rule, the items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned. The Auction shall be conducted in Stems. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4356 (Steve), 7 August 2002 text: The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is the number of registered Players, plus the total Stain of all Players. The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Indulgence Auctions but not yet paid for. The Monthly Bank Indulgence Gain (MBIG) is the number of Indulgences transferred from other entities to the Bank during a given Nomic Month, less the number of Indulgences transferred from the Bank to other entities during that same Nomic Month. As soon as possible after the start of each month, the Herald shall calculate the Indulgence Differential, which is equal to the IICL minus the AICL, rounded down to the nearest integer. To calculate the Indulgence Differential, the Herald shall determine the number of Blots and the number of Indulgences owned as published in the most recent Herald's Report; other values in the formula shall be determined as of the time of the calculation. If the Indulgence Differential is greater than zero, then the Herald shall, as soon as possible after the start of that month, auction a number of Indulgences equal to the Indulgence Differential; if the Indulgence Differential is not greater than zero, the Herald shall auction a whole number of Indulgences equal to or less than one half the MBIG for the preceeding month, with a minimum of 0 Indulgences. In an Indulgence Auction held in accordance with this rule, the items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned. The Auction shall be conducted in Stems. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is the number of registered Players, plus the total Stain of all Players. The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Indulgence Auctions but not yet paid for. The Monthly Bank Indulgence Gain (MBIG) is the number of Indulgences transferred from other entities to the Bank during a given Agoran Month, less the number of Indulgences transferred from the Bank to other entities during that same Agoran Month. As soon as possible after the start of each month, the Herald shall calculate the Indulgence Differential, which is equal to the IICL minus the AICL, rounded down to the nearest integer. To calculate the Indulgence Differential, the Herald shall determine the number of Blots and the number of Indulgences owned as published in the most recent Herald's Report; other values in the formula shall be determined as of the time of the calculation. If the Indulgence Differential is greater than zero, then the Herald shall, as soon as possible after the start of that month, auction a number of Indulgences equal to the Indulgence Differential; if the Indulgence Differential is not greater than zero, the Herald shall auction a whole number of Indulgences equal to or less than one half the MBIG for the preceeding month, with a minimum of 0 Indulgences. In an Indulgence Auction held in accordance with this rule, the items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Indulgences to be Auctioned. The Auction shall be conducted in Stems. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4423 (Murphy), 16 December 2002 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: (a) The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is equal to the number of Players plus the total Stain of all Players. (b) The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which either: (1) are already being Auctioned by the Bank in prior Indulgence Auctions that have not yet concluded; or (2) have been auctioned in prior Indulgence Auctions that have concluded, but where the debts arising from Winning Bids have neither been paid nor defaulted upon; or (3) have been Auctioned in prior Indulgence Auctions that have concluded, and the debts arising from the Winning Bids have been paid, but the Indulgences have not been transferred to the Winning Bidders. (c) The Indulgence Surplus is the difference between the IICL and the AICL; if the AICL is greater than the IICL, the Indulgence Surplus is zero. (d) If the Indulgence Surplus is positive at the beginning of the month, the Herald shall as soon as possible auction off the surplus Indulgences. The items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences; the number of items is equal to the Indulgence Surplus, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Herald, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. (e) The Monthly Bank Indulgence Gain (MBIG) is the number of Indulgences transferred from other entities to the Bank during a given Nomic Month, less the number of Indulgences transferred from the Bank to other entities during that same Nomic Month. (f) If the Indulgence Surplus is zero or negative at the beginning of the month, the Herald may still conduct an Indulgence auction, but only if e initiates it within one week after the beginning of the month. The items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences; the number of items is chosen by the Herald, with a minimum of 1 and a maximum of half the MBIG, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Herald, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. text: (a) The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is equal to the number of Players plus the total Stain of all Players. (b) The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which either: (1) are already being Auctioned by the Bank in prior Indulgence Auctions that have not yet concluded; or (2) have been auctioned in prior Indulgence Auctions that have concluded, but where the debts arising from Winning Bids have neither been paid nor defaulted upon; or (3) have been Auctioned in prior Indulgence Auctions that have concluded, and the debts arising from the Winning Bids have been paid, but the Indulgences have not been transferred to the Winning Bidders. (c) The Indulgence Surplus is the difference between the IICL and the AICL; if the AICL is greater than the IICL, the Indulgence Surplus is zero. (d) If the Indulgence Surplus is positive at the beginning of the month, the Herald shall as soon as possible auction off the surplus Indulgences. The items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences; the number of items is equal to the Indulgence Surplus, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Herald, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. (e) The Monthly Bank Indulgence Gain (MBIG) is the number of Indulgences transferred from other entities to the Bank during a given Nomic Month, less the number of Indulgences transferred from the Bank to other entities during that same Nomic Month. (f) If the Indulgence Surplus is zero or negative at the beginning of the month, the Herald may still conduct an Indulgence auction, but only if e initiates it within one week after the beginning of the month. The items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences; the number of items is chosen by the Herald, with a minimum of 1 and a maximum of half the MBIG, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Herald, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 4463 (Cecilius), 17 March 2003 text: (a) The Ideal Indulgence Circulation Level (IICL) is equal to the number of Players plus the total Stain of all Players. (b) The Actual Indulgence Circulation Level (AICL) is the total number of Indulgences owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Indulgences owned by the Bank which either: (1) are already being Auctioned by the Bank in prior Indulgence Auctions that have not yet concluded; or (2) have been auctioned in prior Indulgence Auctions that have concluded, but where the debts arising from Winning Bids have neither been paid nor defaulted upon; or (3) have been Auctioned in prior Indulgence Auctions that have concluded, and the debts arising from the Winning Bids have been paid, but the Indulgences have not been transferred to the Winning Bidders. (c) The Indulgence Surplus is the difference between the IICL and the AICL; if the AICL is greater than the IICL, the Indulgence Surplus is zero. (d) If the Indulgence Surplus is positive at the beginning of the month, the Herald shall as soon as possible auction off the surplus Indulgences. The items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences; the number of items is equal to the Indulgence Surplus, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Herald, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. (e) The Monthly Bank Indulgence Gain (MBIG) is the number of Indulgences transferred from other entities to the Bank during a given Nomic Month, less the number of Indulgences transferred from the Bank to other entities during that same Nomic Month. (f) If the Indulgence Surplus is less than one at the beginning of the month, the Herald may still conduct an Indulgence auction, but only if e initiates it within one week after the beginning of the month. The items to be auctioned are individual Indulgences; the number of items is chosen by the Herald, with a minimum of 1 and a maximum of half the MBIG, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Herald, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1712 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1713 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1713 by Proposal 3476 (Oerjan), 11 May 1997 text: For each Currency there is an Infraction of "X Debt", where "X" is replaced by the name of the Currency. Such an Infraction is committed by an Active Player when at the beginning of a Nomic Week e possesses a negative amount of that Currency. Recordkeepors of the Currencies are authorized to detect and report these Infractions, which carry a penalty of 1 Blot each. If the Infraction is committed by the Recordkeepor, all Players are so authorized. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: An Overdue Payment Order is a Payment Order which was executed more than seven days ago, which has been neither satisfied nor vacated, and which is not subject to dispute. The Executor of an entity for which, at the beginning of a given Nomic week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order naming it as Payor commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness at the beginning of that Week. If an entity has more than one Overdue Payment Order naming it as payor, its Executor commits as many such Infractions are there are different Currencies named in all these Overdue Payment Orders. Each Recordkeepor is authorized to report this Infraction, which carries a penalty of one Blot. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3568 (General Chaos), 24 October 1997 text: An Overdue Payment Order is a Payment Order which was executed more than seven days ago, which has been neither satisfied nor vacated, and which is not subject to dispute. The Executor of an entity for which, at the beginning of a given Nomic week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order naming it as Payor commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness at the beginning of that Week. If an entity has more than one Overdue Payment Order naming it as payor, its Executor commits as many such Infractions are there are different Currencies named in all these Overdue Payment Orders. Each Recordkeepor is authorized to report this Infraction, which carries a penalty of one Blot. With the exception of this paragraph, this Rule shall have no effect prior to the first day of December, 1997. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3606 (General Chaos), 9 December 1997 text: An Overdue Payment Order is a Payment Order which was executed more than seven days ago, which has been neither satisfied nor vacated, and which is not subject to dispute. The Executor of an entity for which, at the beginning of a given Nomic week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order naming it as Payor commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness at the beginning of that Week. If an entity has more than one Overdue Payment Order naming it as payor, its Executor commits as many such Infractions are there are different Currencies named in all these Overdue Payment Orders. The Recordkeepor of each Currency is authorized to report this Infraction with respect to the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor. This Infraction carries a penalty of one Blot. With the exception of this paragraph, this Rule shall have no effect prior to the first day of December, 1997. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: An Overdue Payment Order is a Payment Order which is presently effective, has been effective for more than seven days, and has not been satisfied. The Executor of an entity for which, at the beginning of a given Nomic week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order naming it as Payor commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness at the beginning of that Week. If an entity has more than one Overdue Payment Order naming it as payor, its Executor commits as many such Infractions are there are different Currencies named in all these Overdue Payment Orders. The Recordkeepor of each Currency is authorized to report this Infraction with respect to the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor. This Infraction carries a penalty of one Blot. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3734 (Kolja A.), 24 April 1998 text: An Overdue Payment Order is a Payment Order which is presently effective, has been effective for more than seven days, and has not been satisfied. If the Executor of an entity for which, at the beginning of a given Nomic week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order naming it as Payor is not on hold, e commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness at the beginning of that Week. If the Executor of such an entity comes off hold, e commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness. If an entity has more than one Overdue Payment Order naming it as payor, its Executor commits as many such Infractions are there are different Currencies named in all these Overdue Payment Orders. The Recordkeepor of each Currency is authorized to report this Infraction with respect to the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor. This Infraction carries a penalty of one Blot. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3774 (Crito), 25 July 1998 text: An Overdue Payment Order is a Payment Order which is presently effective, has been effective for more than seven days, and has not been satisfied, unless the Payment Order was issued while the Payor was On Hold, in which case the Payment Order becomes overdue if it has been effective and unsatisfied for more than seven days after the Payor first comes Off Hold. If the Executor of an entity for which, at the beginning of a given Nomic week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order naming it as Payor is not on hold, e commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness at the beginning of that Week. If the Executor of such an entity comes off hold, e commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness. If an entity has more than one Overdue Payment Order naming it as payor, its Executor commits as many such Infractions are there are different Currencies named in all these Overdue Payment Orders. The Recordkeepor of each Currency is authorized to report this Infraction with respect to the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor. This Infraction carries a penalty of one Blot. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: An Overdue Payment Order is a Payment Order which is presently effective, has been effective for more than seven days, and has not been satisfied, unless the Payment Order was issued while the Payor was On Hold, in which case the Payment Order becomes overdue if it has been effective and unsatisfied for more than seven days after the Payor first comes Off Hold. If the Executor of an entity for which, at the beginning of a given Nomic week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order naming it as Payor is not on hold, e commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness at the beginning of that Week. If the Executor of such an entity comes off hold, e commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness. If an entity has more than one Overdue Payment Order naming it as payor, its Executor commits as many such Infractions as there are different Currencies named in all these Overdue Payment Orders. The Recordkeepor of each Currency is authorized to report this Infraction with respect to the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor. This Infraction carries a penalty of one Blot. history: ... history: Amended(9) text: An Overdue Payment Order is a Payment Order which is presently effective, has been effective for more than seven days, and has not been satisfied, unless the Payment Order was issued while the Payor was On Hold, in which case the Payment Order becomes overdue if it has been effective and unsatisfied for more than seven days after the Payor first comes Off Hold. If the Executor of an entity for which, at the beginning of a given Nomic week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order naming it as Payor is not on hold, e commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness at the beginning of that Week. If the Executor of such an entity comes off hold, e commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness. If an entity has more than one Overdue Payment Order naming it as payor, its Executor commits as many such Infractions as there are different Currencies named in all these Overdue Payment Orders. The Recordkeepor of each Currency is authorized to report this Infraction with respect to the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor. Persistent Indebtedness is a Class 1 Infraction. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1714 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1714 by Proposal 3476 (Oerjan), 11 May 1997 text: A Lawless Player is a Player who has less than -30 Indulgences. Whenever a Player correctly alleges in the Public Forum that another Player is Lawless, the Lawless Player is removed from any Offices e holds, deregistered, and cannot reregister until a month has passed. If the Lawless Player was the Speaker, the Speaker-Elect first immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. To incorrectly allege in the Public Forum that a Player is Lawless is the Crime of Persecution, a Class A Crime. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prohibit a Lawless Player from being deregistered, or which would allow em to reregister. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: A Lawless Player is a Player who has more than 30 Blots. Whenever a Player correctly alleges in the Public Forum that another Player is Lawless, the Lawless Player is removed from any Offices e holds, deregistered, and cannot reregister until a month has passed. If the Lawless Player was the Speaker, the Speaker-Elect first immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. To incorrectly allege in the Public Forum that a Player is Lawless is the Crime of Persecution, a Class A Crime. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prohibit a Lawless Player from being deregistered, or which would allow em to reregister. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3577 (Zefram), 6 November 1997 text: An Overdue Payment Order that is a number of Blots is that number of Overdue Blots. A Lawless Player is a Player who has more than 30 Overdue Blots. Whenever a Player correctly alleges in the Public Forum that another Player is Lawless, the Lawless Player is removed from any Offices e holds, deregistered, and cannot reregister until a month has passed. If the Lawless Player was the Speaker, the Speaker-Elect first immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. To incorrectly allege in the Public Forum that a Player is Lawless is the Crime of Persecution, a Class A Crime. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prohibit a Lawless Player from being deregistered, or which would allow em to reregister. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: An Overdue Payment Order that is a number of Blots is that number of Overdue Blots. A Lawless Player is a Player who has more than 30 Overdue Blots. Whenever a Player correctly alleges in the Public Forum that another Player is Lawless, the Lawless Player is removed from any Offices e holds, deregistered, and cannot reregister until a month has passed. If the Lawless Player was the Speaker, the Speaker-Elect first immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. To incorrectly allege in the Public Forum that a Player is Lawless is the Crime of Persecution, a Class A Crime. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prohibit a Lawless Player from being deregistered. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3901 (Schneidster), 6 September 1999 text: A Lawless Player is a Player who has more than 30 Blots staining eir record. Whenever a Player correctly alleges in the Public Forum that another Player is Lawless, the Lawless Player is removed from any Offices e holds, deregistered, and cannot reregister until a month has passed. If the Lawless Player was the Speaker, the Speaker-Elect first immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. To incorrectly allege in the Public Forum that a Player is Lawless is the Class 20 Crime of Persecution. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prohibit a Lawless Player from being deregistered. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3990, "Harsher Blot Penalties", (Elysion), 30 March 2000 text: A Lawless Player is a Player who has more than 20 Blots staining eir record. Whenever a Player correctly alleges in the Public Forum that another Player is Lawless, the Lawless Player is removed from any Offices e holds, deregistered, and cannot reregister until a month has passed. If the Lawless Player was the Speaker, the Speaker-Elect first immediately becomes Speaker, and the old Speaker ceases to be Speaker. To incorrectly allege in the Public Forum that a Player is Lawless is the Class 15 Crime of Persecution. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prohibit a Lawless Player from being deregistered. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4136 (harvel), 5 April 2001 text: A Player is Lawless if more than 20 Blots stain eir record. Any Player may at any time publicly allege that another Player is Lawless. If the allegation is incorrect, the Player who made the allegation commits the Class 15 Crime of Persecution. Otherwise, the following events occur in order: (i) if the Lawless Player is the Speaker, the Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker, and the Lawless Player ceases to be Speaker; (ii) the Lawless Player is removed from any Offices e holds; and (iii) the Lawless Player is deregistered. If a Player is deregistered according to the provisions of this Rule, e may not register again until a month has passed from eir deregistration. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule that would prohibit a Lawless Player from being deregistered. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4272 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: A Lawless Player is a Player with more than 20 Blots. Any Player may at any time publicly allege that another Player is Lawless. If the allegation is incorrect, the Player who made the allegation commits the Class 15 Crime of Persecution. Otherwise, the following events occur in order: (i) if the Lawless Player is the Speaker, the Speaker-Elect immediately becomes Speaker, and the Lawless Player ceases to be Speaker; (ii) the Lawless Player is removed from any Offices e holds; and (iii) the Lawless Player is deregistered. If a Player is deregistered according to the provisions of this Rule, e may not register again until a month has passed from eir deregistration. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule that would prohibit a Lawless Player from being deregistered. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: A player is lawless while e has more than 20 blots. A notice of lawlessness is an allegation by one player (the Inquisitor) that a specified player (the Scofflaw) is lawless. As soon as possible after the publication of such a notice, the Herald shall publicly confirm or deny the allegation. If the Herald confirms the allegation, then the following events occur in order: (a) if the Scofflaw is the Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker; (b) the Scofflaw is removed from any offices e holds; and (c) the Scofflaw is deregistered. If the Herald denies the allegation, then the Inquisitor should be punished. You know what to do. If a player is deregistered according to the provisions of this rule, e may not register again until a month has passed from eir deregistration. This rule takes precedence over any Rule that would prohibit a lawless player from being deregistered. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1714 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1715 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1715 by Proposal 3481 (General Chaos), 11 May 1997 text: A Player may declare that e is PRESENT on that Proposal, by sending a message to the Assessor stating this. Players who declare themselves PRESENT on a Proposal during the Voting Period of that Proposal are, solely for the purpose of determining if that Proposal meets Quorum, considered to have voted on that Proposal, but a Player who both declares emself PRESENT and also Votes on a Proposal is counted only once toward Quorum. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which determine Quorum or whether a Proposal has met Quorum. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3519 (Steve), 23 June 1997 text: A Player may declare that e is PRESENT on a Proposal, Election or Referendum, by sending a message to the Assessor to that effect. Players who declare themselves PRESENT on a Proposal, Election or Referendum during the Voting Period of that Proposal, Election or Referendum are, solely for the purpose of determining Quorum, considered to have voted, but a Player who both declares emself PRESENT and also Votes on the Proposal, Election or Referendum is counted only once toward Quorum. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which determine Quorum or whether a Proposal, Election or Referendum has met Quorum. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3596 (Kolja A.), 14 November 1997 text: A Player may declare that e is PRESENT on a Proposal, Election or Referendum, by sending a message to that effect to the Vote Collector of this Proposal, Election or Referendum. Players who declare themselves PRESENT on a Proposal, Election or Referendum during the Voting Period of that Proposal, Election or Referendum are, solely for the purpose of determining Quorum, considered to have voted, but a Player who both declares emself PRESENT and also Votes on the Proposal, Election or Referendum is counted only once toward Quorum. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which determine Quorum or whether a Proposal, Election or Referendum has met Quorum. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3756 (Steve), 12 June 1998 text: A Player may declare that e is PRESENT on a Proposal, Election or Referendum, by sending a message to that effect to the Vote Collector of this Proposal, Election or Referendum. Players who declare themselves PRESENT on a Proposal, Election or Referendum during the Voting Period of that Proposal, Election or Referendum are, solely for the purpose of determining Quorum, considered to have voted, but a Player who both declares emself PRESENT and also Votes on the Proposal, Election or Referendum is counted only once toward Quorum. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which determine Quorum or whether a Proposal, Election or Referendum has met Quorum. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, has no effect. Two months after this paragraph is added to this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(4) by Rule 1715, 12 August 1998 text: A Player may declare that e is PRESENT on a Proposal, Election or Referendum, by sending a message to that effect to the Vote Collector of this Proposal, Election or Referendum. Players who declare themselves PRESENT on a Proposal, Election or Referendum during the Voting Period of that Proposal, Election or Referendum are, solely for the purpose of determining Quorum, considered to have voted, but a Player who both declares emself PRESENT and also Votes on the Proposal, Election or Referendum is counted only once toward Quorum. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which determine Quorum or whether a Proposal, Election or Referendum has met Quorum. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3946 (harvel), 28 December 1999 text: A Player may declare that e is PRESENT on an Issue by sending a message to that effect to the Issue's Vote Collector. Solely for the purpose of determining Quorum, this Player is considered to have voted on that Issue. If e also casts a Vote on that Issue, e is counted only once toward Quorum. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 text: A Player may declare that e is PRESENT on an Issue which is not an Ordinary Proposal by sending a message to that effect to the Issue's Vote Collector. Solely for the purpose of determining Quorum, this Player is considered to have voted on that Issue. If e also casts a Vote on that Issue, e is counted only once toward Quorum. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1715 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1716 history: Created text: The Liaison shall post to the Internomic mailing list, the following text: Agora finds itself unjustly insulted by the Rishonomic rule 314. It requests of Rishonomic to withdraw this rule. If no reaction to the satisfaction of Agora is received by the first of June, Agora will be forced to use stronger methods. The Liaison will post the reaction, if any, of Rishonomic to the Public Forum, as soon as possible after 1 June. This Rule will repeal itself on 1 July. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1717 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1717 by Proposal 3490 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for the immediately preceding two months. At any time during a Proposal's Voting Period, the Speaker may make it a Senate Proposal, by stating so in the Public Forum. If that does not happen, the Proposal is not a Senate Proposal. Entities other than Senators cannot Vote on Senate Proposals. If any Entity other than a Senator has already Voted on a Proposal by the time it becomes a Senate Proposal, their Votes on that Proposal change to ABSTAIN, and cannot change thereafter, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, and at the end of the Voting Period, the cost of casting those Votes is transferred to them. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3693 (Steve), 26 February 1998 text: A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for the immediately preceding two months. At any time during a Proposal's Voting Period, the Speaker may make it a Senate Proposal, by stating so in the Public Forum. If that does not happen, the Proposal is not a Senate Proposal. Entities other than Senators cannot Vote on Senate Proposals. If an Entity other than a Senator has already voted on a Proposal by the time it becomes a Senate Proposal, eir votes on that Proposal are cancelled. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3884 (harvel), 26 July 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3891 (Blob), 9 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3956 (harvel), 28 December 1999 text: A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for the immediately preceding two months. At any time during the Voting Period of an Issue, the Speaker may make it a Senate Vote, by stating so in a Public Forum. An Issue is not a Senate Vote otherwise. Only Senators can Vote on Senate Votes. When an Issue becomes a Senate Vote, all Votes cast on that Issue by non-Senators are cancelled. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for the immediately preceding two months. At any time during the Voting Period of an Issue which is not an Ordinary Proposal, the Speaker may make it a Senate Vote, by publicly stating so. An Issue is not a Senate Vote otherwise. Only Senators can Vote on Senate Votes. When an Issue becomes a Senate Vote, all Votes cast on that Issue by non-Senators are cancelled. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1717 by Proposal 4759 (Manu, Sherlock), 15 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1718 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1718 by Proposal 3491 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: There is an Office of Ambassador. It is the Ambassador's duty to seek out foreign nomics, and conduct diplomatic relations with Friendly nomics. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1718 by Proposal 3811 (Kolja A.), 21 December 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1719 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1719 by Proposal 3491 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: All nomics are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. This status is known as the Friendliness of a nomic. If a nomic's Friendliness is not otherwise determined, it is Neutral. Agora is Friendly. The Ambassador's Report includes a list of all non-Neutral nomics, and the Friendliness of each. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3521 (Chuck), 23 June 1997 text: All nomics are exactly one of Neutral, Friendly or Hostile. This status is known as the Friendliness of a nomic. If a nomic's Friendliness is not otherwise determined, it is Neutral. Agora is Friendly. The Ambassador is authorized to change the Friendliness of a nomic Without Objection. The Ambassador's Report includes a list of all non-Neutral nomics, and the Friendliness of each. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1719 by Proposal 3811 (Kolja A.), 21 December 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1720 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1720 by Proposal 3491 (Zefram), 19 May 1997 text: There is an Office of Commander-in-Chief. The Commander-in-Chief does not receive a weekly Salary. It is the Commander-in-Chief's duty to oversee contact with Hostile nomics, and post reports relevant to eir duties as e sees fit. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1720 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1721 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1721 by Proposal 3502 (General Chaos), 8 June 1997 text: There shall exist the Office of Chancellor. The Chancellor shall retain a schedule, listing every Currency which exists, detailing for each Currency the Name, Mintor, Recordkeepor, and MUQ of that Currency. This schedule shall be posted to the Public Forum by the Chancellor at least once in each Month. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: For each Currency, the Treasuror shall keep a record of: a) its name, b) its Mintor, c) its Recordkeepor, d) its MUQ, e) whether it is a Basic Currency, and f) if a Basic Currency, when it became a Basic Currency. The Treasuror shall post the above information to the Public Forum at least once per month. This document is called the Schedule of Currencies. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1722 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1722 by Proposal 3502 (General Chaos), 8 June 1997 text: A new Currency is created when an entity which has Mint Authority posts to the Public Forum a message stating that e is doing so, provided that also e states in that message the values of all properties which the Rules require of Currencies. The Mintor of a Currency created in this way is the entity which created it, any specification to the contrary notwithstanding. If the Recordkeepor of the Currency to be created is not the Executor of the Mintor, the proposed Recordkeepor must first consent to being its Recordkeepor before the Currency is created. A Currency is destroyed when Mintor of that Currency posts in the Public Forum stating that e is doing so, unless this destruction would be prohibited by the Rules. The Mintor of a Currency may not destroy that Currency if that Currency exists by virtue of being required to exist by the Rules. The Recordkeepor of a Currency created by the procedure in this Rule is changed when the Mintor of that Currency announces the change; but if the new Recordkeepor is not the Executor of the Mintor, the new Recordkeepor must first consent to being made Recordkeepor. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: A new Currency is created when an entity which has Mint Authority posts to the Public Forum a message stating that e is doing so, provided that also e states in that message the values of all properties which the Rules require of Currencies. The Mintor of a Currency created in this way is the entity which created it, any specification to the contrary notwithstanding. If the Recordkeepor of the Currency to be created is not the Executor of the Mintor, the proposed Recordkeepor must first consent to being its Recordkeepor before the Currency is created. A Currency is destroyed when the Mintor of that Currency posts in the Public Forum stating that e is doing so, unless this destruction would be prohibited by the Rules. The Mintor of a Currency may not destroy that Currency if that Currency exists by virtue of being required to exist by the Rules. The Recordkeepor of a Currency created by the procedure in this Rule is changed when the Mintor of that Currency announces the change; but if the new Recordkeepor is not the Executor of the Mintor, the new Recordkeepor must first consent to being made Recordkeepor. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A new Currency is created when an entity which has Mint Authority publicly posts a message stating that e is doing so, provided that also e states in that message the values of all properties which the Rules require of Currencies. The Mintor of a Currency created in this way is the entity which created it, any specification to the contrary notwithstanding. If the Recordkeepor of the Currency to be created is not the Executor of the Mintor, the proposed Recordkeepor must first consent to being its Recordkeepor before the Currency is created. A Currency is destroyed when the Mintor of that Currency publicly states that e is doing so, unless this destruction would be prohibited by the Rules. The Mintor of a Currency may not destroy that Currency if that Currency exists by virtue of being required to exist by the Rules. The Recordkeepor of a Currency created by the procedure in this Rule is changed when the Mintor of that Currency announces the change; but if the new Recordkeepor is not the Executor of the Mintor, the new Recordkeepor must first consent to being made Recordkeepor. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1722 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1723 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1723 by Proposal 3507 (Harlequin), 16 June 1997 text: A Proposal is Sane if the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Sane Proposal, and it is not Disinterested. The Petition Fee for a Sane Proposal is increased by three. Players may cast no more than one vote on a Sane Proposal. Non-Player Voting Entities may not vote on Sane Proposals. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would allow non-Player Voting Entities to vote on Sane Proposals, or which would allow Players to cast more than one vote on a Sane Proposal. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 text: A Proposal is Sane if all the following conditions are met: i) the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Sane Proposal, ii) The Proposal is Interested, iii) The Proposer has paid 2 P-Notes to the Bank, expressly for this purpose (and not for any other). In order for this payment to have effect, it must be made before the Proposal is distributed. Players may cast no more than one vote on a Sane Proposal. Non-Player Voting Entities may not vote on Sane Proposals. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would allow non-Player Voting Entities to vote on Sane Proposals, or which would allow Players to cast more than one vote on a Sane Proposal. history: ... history: Amended(3) text: A Proposal is Sane if all the following conditions are met: i) the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Sane Proposal, ii) The Proposal is Interested. A Sane Proposal has its Priority Cost increased by 1. Players may cast no more than one vote on a Sane Proposal. Non-Player Voting Entities may not vote on Sane Proposals. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would allow non-Player Voting Entities to vote on Sane Proposals, or which would allow Players to cast more than one vote on a Sane Proposal. history: ... history: Amended(5) text: A Proposal is Sane if all the following conditions are met: i) the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Sane Proposal, ii) The Proposal is Interested. iii) The Proposal is Democratic. A Sane Proposal has its Priority Cost increased by 1. Players may cast no more than one vote on a Sane Proposal. Non-Player Voters may not vote on Sane Proposals. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would allow non-Player Voters to vote on Sane Proposals, or which would allow Players to cast more than one vote on a Sane Proposal. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1724 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1724 by Proposal 3508 (Harlequin), 16 June 1997 text: A Proposal is Emergency if the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is an Emergency Proposal, and it is not Disinterested. The Petition Fee for an Emergency Proposal is increased by two. The Voting Period of an Emergency Proposal is five Nomic Days. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would specify the Voting Period for Emergency Proposals. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 text: A Proposal is Urgent if all the following conditions are met: i) the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is an Urgent Proposal, ii) The Proposal is Interested, iii) The Proposer has paid 1 P-Note to the Bank, expressly for this purpose (and not for any other). In order for this payment to have effect, it must be made before the Proposal is distributed. The Voting Period of an Urgent Proposal is five days. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would specify the Voting Period for Urgent Proposals. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3921 (Wes), 3 October 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3922 (Wes), 3 October 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3945 (Peekee), 20 November 1999 text: A Proposal is Urgent if all the following conditions are met: i) the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is an Urgent Proposal, ii) The Proposal is Interested. An Urgent Proposal has its Priority Cost increased by 0.5. The Voting Period of an Urgent Proposal is five days, and furthermore the Proposal may be distributed by the Promotor immediately without waiting for the next scheduled Batch to be distributed. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4072 (Steve), 20 September 2000 text: A Proposal is Urgent if all the following conditions are met: i) the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is an Urgent Proposal, ii) The Proposal is Interested. An Urgent Proposal has its Distribution Cost increased by 1. The Promotor may distribute an Urgent Proposal as soon as it becomes Distributable, and e is required to do so within five days. Failure to do so is the Class 1 Infraction of Lack of Urgency, which may be detected and reported by any Player. The Voting Period of an Urgent Proposal is five days from the time the Proposal is distributed. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: A Proposal is Urgent if all the following conditions are met: i) the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is an Urgent Proposal, ii) The Proposal is Interested. An Urgent Proposal has its Distribution Cost increased by 1. The Promotor may distribute an Urgent Proposal as soon as it becomes Distributable, and e is required to do so within five days. Failure to do so is the Class 1 Infraction of Lack of Urgency, which may be reported by any Player. The Voting Period of an Urgent Proposal is five days from the time the Proposal is distributed. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4753 (Sherlock), 5 May 2005 text: A Proposal is Urgent if the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is an Urgent Proposal. An Urgent Proposal has its Distribution Cost increased by 1. The Promotor may distribute an Urgent Proposal as soon as it becomes Distributable, and e is required to do so within five days. Failure to do so is the Class 1 Infraction of Lack of Urgency, which may be reported by any Player. The Voting Period of an Urgent Proposal is five days from the time the Proposal is distributed. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1724 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1725 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1725 by Proposal 3509 (Harlequin), 16 June 1997 text: If a Judgement issued without an Injunction is Appealed to Append an Injunction, the Board shall consider whether an Injunction would be appropriate. If the Board rules that an Injunction on the Judgement in question would be appropriate, and all members of the Board agree as to what Injunction to Append, the Injunction is made. Such an Injunction is legal if and only if it would have been legal, had it been made by the original judge. If the Board rules that an Injunction would not be appropriate, or does not agree as to which Injunction should be made, no Injunction is made. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1725 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1726 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1726 by Proposal 3512 (Zefram), 16 June 1997 text: There is a type of Application known as a Guillotine Application. Such an Application is Executed by submitting it to the Assessor. A Guillotine Application may specify when it is to take effect; if it does not do so, or specifies a time prior to its Execution, it takes effect when Executed. For a Guillotine Application to take effect: * it must state that it is a Guillotine Application; * it must clearly identify exactly one Proposal to which it applies; * that Proposal's Voting Period must be in progress; * the ratio of the number of Active Senators whose signatures it bears to the number of Active Senators whose signatures it does not bear must exceed the Adoption Index of the Proposal; and * it must bear the signatures of at least two Senators. When a Guillotine Application takes effect, the Voting Period of the Proposal to which it applies immediately ends. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules governing the Voting Period of Proposals. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4159 (Kelly), 5 June 2001 text: There is a type of Application known as a Guillotine Application. Such an Application is submitted by submitting it to the Assessor. A Guillotine Application may specify when it is to take effect; if it does not do so, or specifies a time prior to its submission, it takes effect when submitted. For a Guillotine Application to take effect: * it must state that it is a Guillotine Application; * it must clearly identify exactly one Proposal to which it applies; * that Proposal's Voting Period must be in progress; * the ratio of the number of Active Senators whose signatures it bears to the number of Active Senators whose signatures it does not bear must exceed the Adoption Index of the Proposal; and * it must bear the signatures of at least two Senators. When a Guillotine Application takes effect, the Voting Period of the Proposal to which it applies immediately ends. This Rule takes precedence over all other Rules governing the Voting Period of Proposals. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1726 by Proposal 4759 (Manu, Sherlock), 15 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1727 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1727 by Proposal 3513 (Chuck), 16 June 1997 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3530 (Chuck), 30 June 1997 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that prior to, but not more than seven days before, Agora's Birthday, the Ambassador shall announce Agora's upcoming Birthday to all Friendly nomics; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that at 00:04:30 GMT +1200 on Agora's Birthday, each Player shall receive 3 VTs, and such transfers shall be detected and reported by the Assessor; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that each Player who posts to the Public Forum a message recognizing Agora's Birthday, on Agora's Birthday, shall receive 1 P-Note at the end of Agora's Birthday, and such transfers shall be detected and reported by the Promotor; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Notary may select up to three Contests, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which have as their purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday; and which Contests, in the Notary's estimation, are worthy of recognition for this effort; and such Contests shall receive 5 VTs each, and their Contestmasters 2 P-Notes each, and such transfers shall be detected and reported by the Notary; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player Execute an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that prior to, but not more than seven days before, Agora's Birthday, the Ambassador shall announce Agora's upcoming Birthday to all Friendly nomics; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, not less than seven days prior to Agora's Birthday, the Chancellor shall, on behalf of the Bank, submit delayed Transfer Orders to be executed at 00:04:30 GMT +1200 on Agora's Birthday to each Player for the amount of 3 VTs each; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chancellor shall, on behalf of the Bank, submit Transfer Orders for one P-note each from the Bank to each Player who posts to the Public Forum during Agora's BIrth a message recognizing Agora's Birthday; these Transfer Orders to be executed as soon as possible after Agora's Birthday ends; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Notary may select up to three Contests, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which have as their purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday; and which Contests, in the Notary's estimation, are worthy of recognition for this effort; and shall pay out to each such Contest 5 VTs, and to their Contestmasters 2 P-Notes each; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player Execute an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(3) Substantially by Proposal 3543 (Harlequin), 17 August 1997 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that prior to, but not more than seven days before, Agora's Birthday, the Ambassador shall announce Agora's upcoming Birthday to all Friendly nomics; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, not less than seven days prior to Agora's Birthday, the Chancellor shall, on behalf of the Bank, submit delayed Transfer Orders to be executed at 00:04:30 GMT +1200 on Agora's Birthday to each Player for the amount of 3 VTs each; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chancellor shall, on behalf of the Bank, submit Transfer Orders for one P-note each from the Bank to each Player who posts to the Public Forum during Agora's Birthday a message recognizing Agora's Birthday; these Transfer Orders to be executed as soon as possible after Agora's Birthday ends; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Notary may select up to three Contests, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which have as their purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday; and which Contests, in the Notary's estimation, are worthy of recognition for this effort; and shall pay out to each such Contest 5 VTs, and to their Contestmasters 2 P-Notes each; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player Execute an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3915 (harvel), 27 September 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, not less than seven days prior to Agora's Birthday, the Payroll Clerk shall, on behalf of the Bank, submit delayed Transfer Orders to be executed at 00:04:30 GMT +1200 on Agora's Birthday to each Player for the amount of 50 Stems each; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Payroll Clerk shall, on behalf of the Bank, submit Transfer Orders for 25 Stems each from the Bank to each Player who posts to the Public Forum during Agora's Birthday a message recognizing Agora's Birthday; these Transfer Orders to be executed as soon as possible after Agora's Birthday ends; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Notary may select up to three Contests, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which have as their purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday; and which Contests, in the Notary's estimation, are worthy of recognition for this effort; and shall pay out to the Contestmaster of each such Contest 100 Stems; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player Execute an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as close as practical to Agora's Birthday (June 30 at 00:04:30 GMT+1200), the Payroll Clerk shall transfer 50 Stems from the Bank to each Player; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Payroll Clerk shall transfer 25 Stems from the Bank to each Player who, during Agora's Birthday, posts to the Public Forum a message recognizing Agora's Birthday; but no Player shall receive more than one such transfer during each year's Birthday Celebration; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Notary may select up to three Contests, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which have as their purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday; and which Contests, in the Notary's estimation, are worthy of recognition for this effort; and shall pay out to the Contestmaster of each such Contest 100 Stems; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player Execute an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as close as practical to Agora's Birthday (June 30 at 00:04:30 GMT+1200), the Payroll Clerk shall transfer 50 Stems from the Bank to each Player; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Payroll Clerk shall transfer 25 Stems from the Bank to each Player who, during Agora's Birthday, publicly recognizes Agora's Birthday; but no Player shall receive more than one such transfer during each year's Birthday Celebration. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Notary may select up to three Contests, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which have as their purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday; and which Contests, in the Notary's estimation, are worthy of recognition for this effort; and shall pay out to the Contestmaster of each such Contest 100 Stems; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player Execute an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4159 (Kelly), 5 June 2001 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as close as practical to Agora's Birthday (June 30 at 00:04:30 GMT+1200), the Payroll Clerk shall transfer 50 Stems from the Bank to each Player; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Payroll Clerk shall transfer 25 Stems from the Bank to each Player who, during Agora's Birthday, publicly recognizes Agora's Birthday; but no Player shall receive more than one such transfer during each year's Birthday Celebration. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Notary may select up to three Contests, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which have as their purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday; and which Contests, in the Notary's estimation, are worthy of recognition for this effort; and shall pay out to the Contestmaster of each such Contest 100 Stems; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4367 (Steve), 23 August 2002 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as close as practical to Agora's Birthday (June 30 at 00:04:30 GMT+1200), the Payroll Clerk shall transfer 10 Stems from the Bank to each Player; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Payroll Clerk shall transfer 5 Stems from the Bank to each Player who, during Agora's Birthday, publicly recognizes Agora's Birthday; but no Player shall receive more than one such transfer during each year's Birthday Celebration. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Notary may select up to three Contests, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which have as their purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday; and which Contests, in the Notary's estimation, are worthy of recognition for this effort; and shall pay out to the Contestmaster of each such Contest 20 Stems; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4376 (Steve), 6 September 2002 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as soon as possible after the beginning of Agora's Birthday, the Registrar shall pay out 10 Stems to each Player; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as soon as possible after the end of Agora's Birthday, the Speaker shall pay out 5 Stems to each Player who, during Agora's Birthday, publicly recognized Agora's Birthday; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Notary may select up to three Contests, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which have as their purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday; and which Contests, in the Notary's estimation, are worthy of recognition for this effort; and shall pay out to the Contestmaster of each such Contest 20 Stems; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as soon as possible after the end of Agora's Birthday, the Herald shall award the boon of celebration to each Player who, during Agora's Birthday, publicly recognized Agora's Birthday; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Herald may select one Contest, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which has as its purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday. Within the month following Agora's Birthday, that Contest may award its Members the Patent Title Nth Anniversary Ribbon, where N is the number of years of Agora's existence; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as soon as possible after the end of Agora's Birthday, the Herald shall award the boon of celebration to each Player who, during Agora's Birthday, publicly recognized Agora's Birthday; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Herald may select one Contract, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which has as its purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday. Within the month following Agora's Birthday, that Contract may award its Members the Patent Title Nth Anniversary Ribbon, where N is the number of years of Agora's existence; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. history: Amended(???) by Proposal 4839 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year, and as soon as possible after the end of Agora's Birthday, the Herald shall award the boon of celebration to each Player who, during Agora's Birthday, publicly recognizes this Grand Event. history: Amended(???) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by FIRST SPEAKER Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its OFFICAL NAME of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year, and as soon as possible after the end of Agora's Birthday, the Herald shall award the boon of celebration to each Player who, during Agora's Birthday, publicly recognizes this Grand Event. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4880 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by FIRST SPEAKER Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its OFFICAL NAME of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by FIRST SPEAKER Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its OFFICIAL NAME of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5364 (Murphy), 20 December 2007 text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT +1200, with a message sent by FIRST SPEAKER Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its OFFICIAL NAME of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT +1200, of each year. BE IT FURTHERMORE RESOLVED that Agora's Unbirthday is defined to be the entire day of December 30, GMT +1200, of each year; but, since that falls within a Holiday, is observed during the entire days of January 12 through 14, GMT +1200, of each year. history: ... [orphaned text: WHEREAS, in June 1993, the world's only MUD-based nomic, Nomic World, had recently collapsed; yet, many of its players enjoyed nomic and did not wish to forego such a noble pursuit; And WHEREAS, Originator Chuck Carroll therefore composed an Initial Ruleset for an email nomic, based on the Initial Rulesets of Peter Suber, inventor of Nomic, and on the Rulesets of Nomic World and other nomics, And WHEREAS, a nomic thus rose like a phoenix from the ashes of Nomic World, played on the mailing list originally set up for discussion of Nomic World, and coming into existence at June 30, 1993, 00:04:30 GMT -1200, with a message sent by First Speaker Michael Norrish, which read, in part, "I see no reason to let this get bogged down; there are no precedents or rules that cover this situation, so I think we may as well begin directly.... Proposals for new rules are invited. In accordance with the rules, these will be published, numbered and distributed by me at my earliest convenience." And WHEREAS, this nomic began as a humble and nameless nomic, known unofficially as yoyo, after the mailing list it was played on, until its Players, much later, gave it its official name of Agora, And WHEREAS, Agora has now become the wisest, noblest, eldest, and most interesting of all active email nomics, due to the hard work and diligence of Agorans as well as the frequent advice of Agoraphobes, And WHEREAS, Agorans desire to joyously commemorate Agora's founding, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that Agora's Birthday is defined to be the entire day of June 30, GMT -1200, of each year; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that prior to, but not more than seven days before, Agora's Birthday, the Ambassador shall announce Agora's upcoming Birthday to all Friendly nomics; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that at 00:04:30 GMT -1200 on Agora's Birthday, each Player shall receive 3 VTs, and such transfers shall be detected and reported by the Assessor; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that each Player who posts to the Public Forum a message recognizing Agora's Birthday, on Agora's Birthday, shall receive 1 P-Note at the end of Agora's Birthday, and such transfers shall be detected and reported by the Promotor; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Notary may select up to three Contests, in existence on Agora's Birthday, which have as their purpose encouraging the celebration of Agora's Birthday; and which Contests, in the Notary's estimation, are worthy of recognition for this effort; and such Contests shall receive 5 VTs each, and their Contestmasters 2 P-Notes each, and such transfers shall be detected and reported by the Notary; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Courts shall be closed on Agora's Birthday; that is, the Clerk of the Courts shall not publish any Calls For Judgement, Judgements, notices of Appeals, Decisions of Appeals Boards, or Opinions, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player submit to the Clerk of the Courts a Call For Judgement, notice of ineligibility to Judge, Judgement, call for Appeal, or Appellate Decision, on Agora's Birthday; nor shall any Player Execute an Application to Submit an Opinion on Agora's Birthday; however, if any of the above do take place on Agora's Birthday, in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1728 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1728 by Proposal 3521 (Chuck), 23 June 1997 text: Certain changes to Nomic Properties may be made Without Objection. Only those changes explicitly allowed by other Rules may be so made, and in order for such a change to take effect, the Rule allowing the change must explicitly state which Player or Players are authorized to make the change. In order to make a change Without Objection, a Player authorized to make a given change Without Objection must first post to the Public Forum eir intent to make such a change, unambiguously describing the change to be made. The change then takes place when a Player authorized to make that change Without Objection (who need not be the same player who posted eir intent to make the change) posts to the Public Forum that that change is made, and the following conditions are fulfilled: * The post announcing the change is made no fewer than four days after, nor more than fourteen days after, the post annoucing the intent to make the change. * Between the two posts, no Player has posted to the Public Forum eir objection to the change. This Rule defers to Rules which place further restrictions on the effectiveness of changes made Without Objection. history: Infected and Amended(1) Substantially by Rule 1454, 2 November 1997 text: Certain changes to Nomic Properties may be made Without Objection. Only those changes explicitly allowed by other Rules may be so made, and in order for such a change to take effect, the Rule allowing the change must explicitly state which Player or Players are authorized to make the change. In order to make a change Without Objection, a Player authorized to make a given change Without Objection must first post to the Public Forum eir intent to make such a change, unambiguously describing the change to be made. The change then takes place when a Player authorized to make that change Without Objection (who need not be the same player who posted eir intent to make the change) posts to the Public Forum that that change is made, and the following conditions are fulfilled: * The post announcing the change is made no fewer than four days after, nor more than fourteen days after, the post annoucing the intent to make the change. * Between the two posts, no Player has posted to the Public Forum eir objection to the change. This Rule defers to Rules which place further restrictions on the effectiveness of changes made Without Objection. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall be completely without effect. Two weeks after this paragraph is inserted into this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(2) Substantially by Rule 1728, 16 November 1997 text: Certain changes to Nomic Properties may be made Without Objection. Only those changes explicitly allowed by other Rules may be so made, and in order for such a change to take effect, the Rule allowing the change must explicitly state which Player or Players are authorized to make the change. In order to make a change Without Objection, a Player authorized to make a given change Without Objection must first post to the Public Forum eir intent to make such a change, unambiguously describing the change to be made. The change then takes place when a Player authorized to make that change Without Objection (who need not be the same player who posted eir intent to make the change) posts to the Public Forum that that change is made, and the following conditions are fulfilled: * The post announcing the change is made no fewer than four days after, nor more than fourteen days after, the post annoucing the intent to make the change. * Between the two posts, no Player has posted to the Public Forum eir objection to the change. This Rule defers to Rules which place further restrictions on the effectiveness of changes made Without Objection. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3812 (Steve), 21 December 1998 text: Certain changes to Nomic Properties may be made Without N Objections, where N is an integer between one and five inclusive, specifying how many objections are necessary to prevent the change from taking place. Only those changes explicitly allowed by other Rules may be so made, and in order for such a change to take effect, the Rule allowing the change must explicitly state which Player or Players are authorized to make the change. If such a Rule does not specify a value for N between one and five, the value of N is one. In order to make a change Without N Objections, a Player authorized to make a given change Without N Objections must first post to the Public Forum eir intent to make such a change, unambiguously describing the change to be made. The change then takes place when a Player authorized to make that change Without N Objections (who need not be the same player who posted eir intent to make the change) posts to the Public Forum that that change is made, and the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) the post announcing the change is made no fewer than four days after, nor more than fourteen days after, the post announcing the intent to make the change; (b) between the two posts, fewer than N Players posted to the Public Forum objecting to the change. This Rule defers to Rules which place further restrictions on the effectiveness of changes made Without Objection. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3836 (General Chaos), 2 March 1999 text: (a) When the Rules specify that an action may be performed "Without N Objections", where N is an integer between one and five inclusive, that action may be legally performed under the following conditions: (1) The Player who seeks to perform the action has announced eir intent to perform that action not fewer than four days before, nor more than fourteen days before, the performance of the action, and this announcement must unambiguously describe the action to be performed; (2) The action performed must match exactly the action described in the announcement made under subdivision (a)(1) of this Rule; (3) The Rule which authorizes the performance of that action Without N Objections must explicitly state which Player or Players are authorized to perform that action; and (4) During the time between the announcement made under subdivision (a)(1) of this Rule and the performance of the action itself, fewer than N Players have posted, in the Public Forum, Objections to the performance of that action. (b) If the action to be performed is the change of some property under that Player's control, the change may not take place until the Player announces that e is making that change. (This requirement is met by making any announcement normally required by the Rules in order to make such changes.) (c) The specification in the Rules that an action may be performed "Without Objection" is equivalent to specifying that it may be performed "Without 1 Objection". (d) The specification in the Rules that an action may be performed "Without N Objections" in no way prohibits performing that same action if doing so would be otherwise permissible. (e) A Rule may specify further restrictions upon the performance of an action Without N Objections, and this Rule defers to such Rules. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3950 (harvel), 8 December 1999 text: (a) When the Rules specify that an action may be performed "Without N Objections", where N is an integer between one and five inclusive, that action may be legally performed under the following conditions: (1) The Player who seeks to perform the action has announced eir intent to perform that action not fewer than four days before, nor more than fourteen days before, the performance of the action, and this announcement must unambiguously describe the action to be performed; (2) The action performed must match exactly the action described in the announcement made under subdivision (a)(1) of this Rule; (3) The Rule which authorizes the performance of that action Without N Objections must explicitly state which Player or Players are authorized to perform that action; and (4) During the time between the announcement made under subdivision (a)(1) of this Rule and the performance of the action itself, fewer than N Players have posted, in the Public Forum, Objections to the performance of that action. (b) If the action to be performed is the change of some property under that Player's control, the change may not take place until the Player announces that e is making that change. (This requirement is met by making any announcement normally required by the Rules in order to make such changes.) (c) The specification in the Rules that an action may be performed "Without Objection" is equivalent to specifying that it may be performed "Without 1 Objection". (d) The specification in the Rules that an action may be performed "Without N Objections" in no way prohibits performing that same action if doing so would be otherwise permissible. (e) Other Rules may place further restrictions on the performance of an action Without N Objections. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3973 (harvel), 14 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3991 (Steve), 30 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: An action is Dependent (or may be performed Dependently) if and only if it is an Action With N Objections or an Action With N Supporters, where N is a positive integer not greater than five. The phrase `Without Objection' is synonymous with `Without 1 Objection', and the phrase `With Support' is synonymous with `With 1 Supporter'. The Rules may authorise classes of Dependent Actions. A Player may, in a Public Forum, unambiguously describe a particular Dependent Action which e is authorised by the Rules to perform Dependently, and announce eir intent to perform it. That Player may perform that action if and only if: (a) e announced eir intent at most fourteen days before attempting to perform it, and, in the case of Actions Without N Objections, at least four days before attempting to perform it; (b) the authorising Rule explicitly indicates who may perform the action Dependently; (c) during the time between the announcement made under (a) of this Rule and the attempt to perform the action, (1) fewer than N Players have publicly posted Objections to the performance of the action, if the action is to be performed Without N Objections; or (2) at least N Players have publicly posted Support for the performance of the action, if the action is to be performed With N Supporters; and (d) e publicly announces that e performs the described action. Properties which would be changed by a Dependent Action do not occur until announced as in (d). The specification in the Rules that an action may be performed Dependently in no way prohibits performing that same action if doing so would otherwise be permissible. Other Rules may specify further restrictions upon the performance of Dependent Actions. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4121 (Ziggy), 16 March 2001 history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4121 (Ziggy), 16 March 2001 text: An action is Dependent (or may be performed Dependently) if and only if it is an Action With N Objections or an Action With N Supporters, where N is a positive integer not greater than five. The phrase `Without Objection' is synonymous with `Without 1 Objection', and the phrase `With Support' is synonymous with `With 1 Supporter'. The Rules may name specific actions as Dependent Actions. A Player may, in a Public Forum, unambiguously describe a particular Dependent Action which e is authorised by the Rules to perform Dependently, and announce eir intent to perform it. That Player may perform that action if and only if: (a) e announced eir intent at most fourteen days before attempting to perform it, and, in the case of Actions Without N Objections, at least four days before attempting to perform it; (b) the authorising Rule explicitly indicates who may perform the action Dependently; (c) during the time between the announcement made under (a) of this Rule and the attempt to perform the action, (1) fewer than N Players have publicly posted Objections to the performance of the action, if the action is to be performed Without N Objections; or (2) at least N Players other than the Player attempting to make the action have publicly posted Support for the performance of the action, if the action is to be performed With N Supporters; and (d) e publicly announces that e performs the described action. Properties which would be changed by a Dependent Action do not occur until announced as in (d). The specification in the Rules that an action may be performed Dependently in no way prohibits performing that same action if doing so would otherwise be permissible. Rules calling for Dependent Actions may restrict the eligibility of Players to Support or Object to that specific Action. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4279 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: An action is dependent, or may be performed dependently, if and only if it is an Action Without N Objections or an Action With N Supporters, where N is a positive integer. The phrase "Without Objection" is synonymous with "Without 1 Objection", and the phrase "With Support" is synonymous with "With 1 Supporter". A player may publicly announce eir intent to perform an unambiguously described dependent action. A player may perform a previously unambiguously described dependent action if and only if: (a) no more than fourteen days have passed since the announcement of intent to perform the action; (b) if the action to be performed is an Action Without N Objections, at least four days have passed since the announcement made under (a) of this rule; (c) either the player who attempts to perform the action is the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule, or (1) the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule did so by a privilege or duty granted em by virtue of holding a rules-defined position; and (2) the player who attempts to perform the action is the holder of that position when e attempts to perform the action; (d) the rules explicitly authorise the player to perform the action dependently; (e) during the time between the announcement made under (a) of this rule and the attempt to perform the action, (1) if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, fewer than N players have publicly posted objections to the performance of the action; or (2) if the action is to be performed With N Supporters, at least N players other than the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule have publicly posted support for the performance of the action; (f) the announcement made under (a) of this rule specifies whether the action is to be performed Without N Objections or With N Supporters, unless the rules either do not permit the action to be performed Without N Objections or do not permit the action to be performed With N Supporters; and (g) e announces that e performs the described action. A dependent action is not performed until announced as in (g). A player who posts an objection to the performance of an action may publicly retract eir objection. If e does so, e shall be deemed not have posted an objection to the performance of that action for the purposes of (e)(1) of this rule. The specification in the rules that an action may be performed dependently does not prohibit performing that action independently if doing so would otherwise be permissible. A rule authorising the performance of a dependent action may restrict the eligibility of players to support or object to that specific action. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4461 (Maud), 17 March 2003 text: An action is dependent, or may be performed dependently, if and only if it is an Action Without N Objections or an Action With N Supporters, where N is a nonnegative integer. The phrase "Without Objection" is synonymous with "Without 1 Objection", and the phrase "With Support" is synonymous with "With 1 Supporter". A player may publicly announce eir intent to perform an unambiguously described dependent action. A player may perform a previously unambiguously described dependent action if and only if: (a) no more than fourteen days have passed since the announcement of intent to perform the action; (b) if the action to be performed is an Action Without N Objections, at least four days have passed since the announcement made under (a) of this rule; (c) either the player who attempts to perform the action is the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule, or (1) the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule did so by a privilege or duty granted em by virtue of holding a rules-defined position; and (2) the player who attempts to perform the action is the holder of that position when e attempts to perform the action; (d) the rules explicitly authorise the player to perform the action dependently; (e) during the time between the announcement made under (a) of this rule and the attempt to perform the action, (1) if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, fewer than N players have publicly posted objections to the performance of the action; or (2) if the action is to be performed With N Supporters, at least N players other than the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule have publicly posted support for the performance of the action; (f) the announcement made under (a) of this rule specifies whether the action is to be performed Without N Objections or With N Supporters, unless the rules either do not permit the action to be performed Without N Objections or do not permit the action to be performed With N Supporters; and (g) e announces that e performs the described action. A dependent action is not performed until announced as in (g). A player who posts an objection to the performance of an action may publicly retract eir objection. If e does so, e shall be deemed not have posted an objection to the performance of that action for the purposes of (e)(1) of this rule. The specification in the rules that an action may be performed dependently does not prohibit performing that action independently if doing so would otherwise be permissible. A rule authorising the performance of a dependent action may restrict the eligibility of players to support or object to that specific action. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4915 (Murphy), 2 April 2007 text: An action is dependent, or may be performed dependently, if and only if it is an Action Without N Objections or an Action With N Supporters, where N is a nonnegative integer. The phrase "Without Objection" is synonymous with "Without 1 Objection", and the phrase "With Support" is synonymous with "With 1 Supporter". A player may publicly announce eir intent to perform an unambiguously described dependent action. A player may perform a previously unambiguously described dependent action if and only if: (a) no more than fourteen days have passed since the announcement of intent to perform the action; (b) if the action to be performed is an Action Without N Objections, at least four days have passed since the announcement made under (a) of this rule; (c) either the player who attempts to perform the action is the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule, or (1) the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule did so by a privilege or duty granted em by virtue of holding a rules-defined position; and (2) the player who attempts to perform the action is the holder of that position when e attempts to perform the action; (d) the rules explicitly authorise the player to perform the action dependently; (e) during the time between the announcement made under (a) of this rule and the attempt to perform the action, (1) if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, fewer than N players have publicly posted objections (and not publicly retracted eir objections) to the performance of the action; or (2) if the action is to be performed With N Supporters, at least N players other than the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule have publicly posted support for the performance of the action; (f) the announcement made under (a) of this rule specifies whether the action is to be performed Without N Objections or With N Supporters, unless the rules either do not permit the action to be performed Without N Objections or do not permit the action to be performed With N Supporters; and (g) e announces that e performs the described action. A dependent action is not performed until announced as in (g). The specification in the rules that an action may be performed dependently does not prohibit performing that action independently if doing so would otherwise be permissible. A rule authorising the performance of a dependent action may restrict the eligibility of players to support or object to that specific action. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4981 (Zefram), 31 May 2007 text: An action is dependent, or may be performed dependently, if and only if it is an Action Without N Objections or an Action With N Supporters, where N is a nonnegative integer. The phrase "Without Objection" is synonymous with "Without 1 Objection", and the phrase "With Support" is synonymous with "With 1 Supporter". A player may publicly announce eir intent to perform an unambiguously described dependent action. A player may perform a previously unambiguously described dependent action if and only if: (a) no more than fourteen days have passed since the announcement of intent to perform the action; (b) if the action to be performed is an Action Without N Objections, at least four days have passed since the announcement made under (a) of this rule; (c) either the player who attempts to perform the action is the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule, or (1) the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule did so by a privilege or duty granted em by virtue of holding a rules-defined position; and (2) the player who attempts to perform the action is the holder of that position when e attempts to perform the action; (d) the rules explicitly authorise the player to perform the action dependently; (e) during the time between the announcement made under (a) of this rule and the attempt to perform the action, (1) if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, fewer than N players who are natural persons have publicly posted objections (and not publicly retracted eir objections) to the performance of the action; or (2) if the action is to be performed With N Supporters, at least N players who are natural persons other than the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule have publicly posted support for the performance of the action; (f) the announcement made under (a) of this rule specifies whether the action is to be performed Without N Objections or With N Supporters, unless the rules either do not permit the action to be performed Without N Objections or do not permit the action to be performed With N Supporters; and (g) e announces that e performs the described action. A dependent action is not performed until announced as in (g). The specification in the rules that an action may be performed dependently does not prohibit performing that action independently if doing so would otherwise be permissible. A rule authorising the performance of a dependent action may restrict the eligibility of players to support or object to that specific action. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4999 (Zefram), 12 June 2007 text: An action is dependent, or may be performed dependently, if and only if it is an Action Without N Objections or an Action With N Supporters, where N is a nonnegative integer. The phrase "Without Objection" is synonymous with "Without 1 Objection", and the phrase "With Support" is synonymous with "With 1 Supporter". A player may publicly announce eir intent to perform an unambiguously described dependent action. A player may perform a previously unambiguously described dependent action if and only if: (a) no more than fourteen days have passed since the announcement of intent to perform the action; (b) if the action to be performed is an Action Without N Objections, at least four days have passed since the announcement made under (a) of this rule; (c) either the player who attempts to perform the action is the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule, or (1) the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule did so by a privilege or duty granted em by virtue of holding a rules-defined position; and (2) the player who attempts to perform the action is the holder of that position when e attempts to perform the action; (d) the rules explicitly authorise the player to perform the action dependently; (e) during the time between the announcement made under (a) of this rule and the attempt to perform the action, (1) if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, fewer than N players who are natural persons have publicly posted objections (and not publicly retracted eir objections) to the performance of the action; and (2) if the action is to be performed With N Supporters, at least N players who are natural persons other than the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule have publicly posted support for the performance of the action; (f) the announcement made under (a) of this rule specifies whether the action is to be performed Without N Objections or With N Supporters, unless the rules either do not permit the action to be performed Without N Objections or do not permit the action to be performed With N Supporters; and (g) e announces that e performs the described action. A dependent action is not performed until announced as in (g). The specification in the rules that an action may be performed dependently does not prohibit performing that action independently if doing so would otherwise be permissible. A rule authorising the performance of a dependent action may restrict the eligibility of players to support or object to that specific action. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5007 (Zefram), 18 June 2007 text: An action is dependent, or may be performed dependently, if and only if it is an Action Without N Objections or an Action With N Supporters, where N is a nonnegative integer. The phrase "Without Objection" is synonymous with "Without 1 Objection", and the phrase "With Support" is synonymous with "With 1 Supporter". A player may publicly announce eir intent to perform an unambiguously described dependent action. A player may perform a previously unambiguously described dependent action if and only if: (a) no more than fourteen days have passed since the announcement of intent to perform the action; (b) if the action to be performed is an Action Without N Objections, at least four days have passed since the announcement made under (a) of this rule; (c) either the player who attempts to perform the action is the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule, or (1) the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule did so by a privilege or duty granted em by virtue of holding a rules-defined position; and (2) the player who attempts to perform the action is the holder of that position when e attempts to perform the action; (d) the rules explicitly authorise the player to perform the action dependently; (e) during the time between the announcement made under (a) of this rule and the attempt to perform the action, (1) if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, fewer than N first-class players have publicly posted objections (and not publicly retracted eir objections) to the performance of the action; and (2) if the action is to be performed With N Supporters, at least N first-class players other than the player who made the announcement under (a) of this rule have publicly posted support for the performance of the action; (f) the announcement made under (a) of this rule specifies whether the action is to be performed Without N Objections or With N Supporters, unless the rules either do not permit the action to be performed Without N Objections or do not permit the action to be performed With N Supporters; and (g) e announces that e performs the described action. A dependent action is not performed until announced as in (g). The specification in the rules that an action may be performed dependently does not prohibit performing that action independently if doing so would otherwise be permissible. A rule authorising the performance of a dependent action may restrict the eligibility of players to support or object to that specific action. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 5113 (Murphy, Maud), 2 August 2007 text: An announcement of intent to perform a dependent action, unambiguously describing the action and method of dependent action, initiates the Agoran decision of whether to approve the action. For this decision: (a) The vote collector is the announcer. (b) The available options are SUPPORT and OBJECT. (c) The voting period ends after fourteen days or immediately before it is resolved, whichever comes first. (d) The eligible voters are those entities that were active first-class players at the start of the voting period, except for the vote collector, and any entities disqualified by the rule specifying that the action can be performed dependently. (e) The voting limit of each eligible voter is one. (f) The vote collector of such a decision CANNOT resolve it if it was initiated more than fourteen days ago, or (if it has an objection and/or majority index) less than four days ago. (g) If the outcome is APPROVED, then the vote collector performs the action upon resolving the decision. The specification in the rules that an action can be performed dependently does not prohibit performing that action independently if doing so would otherwise be permissible. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5370 (Zefram), 20 December 2007 text: An announcement of intent to perform a dependent action, unambiguously describing the action and method of dependent action, initiates the Agoran decision of whether to approve the action. For this decision: (a) The vote collector is the announcer. (b) The available options are SUPPORT and OBJECT. (c) The voting period ends after fourteen days or immediately before it is resolved, whichever comes first. (d) The eligible voters are those entities that were active first-class players at the start of the voting period, except for any entities disqualified by the rule specifying that the action can be performed dependently. (e) The voting limit of each eligible voter is one. (f) The vote collector of such a decision CANNOT resolve it if it was initiated more than fourteen days ago, or (if it has an objection and/or majority index) less than four days ago. (g) If the outcome is APPROVED, then the vote collector performs the action upon resolving the decision. (h) The announcer, by virtue of the announcement of intent, implicitly submits a ballot of SUPPORT on the Agoran decision, if e is an eligible voter and does not explicitly repudiate this implication in the announcement. The specification in the rules that an action can be performed dependently does not prohibit performing that action independently if doing so would otherwise be permissible. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5445 (Goethe, Murphy), 21 February 2008 text: A player CAN perform an action dependently (a dependent action) if and only if the Rules explicitly authorize the player to perform the action by one of the following methods: - Without N Objections, where N is a nonnegative integer; - With N Supporters, where N is a nonnegative integer; or - With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1, with a minimum of 1.0. The phrase "Without Objection" is synonymous with "Without 1 Objection"; the phrase "With Support" is synonymous with "With 1 Supporter"; the phrase "With Agoran Consent" is synonymous with "With 1.0 Agoran Consent". A player authorized to perform a dependent action (the initiator) CAN publicly announce eir intent to do so, unambiguously describing both the action and the method, including the required value for N. A player (the performer) CAN perform a previously unambiguously described dependent action by announcement, if and only if all of the following are true: (a) the time elapsed since the announcement of intent is no more than fourteen days, and (if the action is to be performed Without N Objections or With N Agoran Consent) at least four days; (b) either the performer was the initiator, or the initiator was authorized to perform the action by virtue of holding a rules-defined position and the performer is the holder of that position when e attempts to perform the action; and (c) At the time the action is attempted, Agora is Satisfied with the announced intent, as described elsewhere. The specification in the rules that an action may be performed dependently does not prohibit performing that action independently if doing so would otherwise be permissible. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5543 (Murphy, Pavitra, root), 16 June 2008 text: A player CAN perform an action dependently (a dependent action) if and only if the Rules explicitly authorize the player to perform the action by one of the following methods: - Without N Objections, where N is a nonnegative integer; - With N Supporters, where N is a nonnegative integer; or - With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1, with a minimum of 1.0. The phrase "Without Objection" is synonymous with "Without 1 Objection"; the phrase "With Support" is synonymous with "With 1 Supporter"; the phrase "With Agoran Consent" is synonymous with "With 1.0 Agoran Consent". A player authorized to perform a dependent action (the initiator) CAN publicly announce eir intent to do so, unambiguously describing both the action and the method, including the required value for N. A player (the performer) CAN perform a previously unambiguously described dependent action by announcement, if and only if all of the following are true: (a) the time elapsed since the announcement of intent is no more than fourteen days, and (if the action is to be performed Without N Objections or With N Agoran Consent) at least four days; (b) either the performer was the initiator, or the action depends on support and the performer has supported the action and the rule allowing the action to be performed dependently does not explicitly prohibit supporters from performing it, or the initiator was authorized to perform the action by virtue of holding a rules-defined position and the performer is the holder of that position when e attempts to perform the action; and (c) At the time the action is attempted, Agora is Satisfied with the announced intent, as described elsewhere. The specification in the rules that an action may be performed dependently does not prohibit performing that action independently if doing so would otherwise be permissible. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1729 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1729 by Proposal 3527 (Oerjan; disi.), 8 July 1997 text: An Interested Proposal is Insane, if it contains no minuscule letter. (That is the opposite of CAPITAL, for those who know not better.) For such a Proposal, until the Voting Period has ended: there shall be no discussing Votes, or this Rule has been bended. Nor shall a Player Vote in public, only to Assessor. The Votes shall be unknown to others, even employer and professor. And should it occur (due to greed or sin) that no one Votes FOR it, the Proposer shall Win. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 text: An Interested Proposal is Insane, if it contains no minuscule letter. (That is the opposite of CAPITAL, for those who know not better.) For such a Proposal, until the Voting Period has ended: there shall be no discussing Votes, or this Rule has been bended. Nor shall a Player Vote in public, only to Assessor. The Votes shall be unknown to others, even employer and professor. And should it occur (oh, need I say more?) that no one Votes FOR it, the Proposer shall Score. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3880 (harvel), 21 July 1999 text: An Interested Proposal is Insane, if it contains no minuscule letter. (That is the opposite of CAPITAL, for those who know not better.) For such a Proposal, until the Voting Period has ended: there shall be no discussing Votes, or this Rule has been bended. Nor shall a Player Vote in public, only to Assessor. The Votes shall be unknown to others, even employer and professor. And should at the end, Votes FOR plainly lack, The wicked Proposer shall be Maniac. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4138 (Murphy), 15 April 2001 text: An Interested Proposal is Insane, if it contains no minuscule letter. (That is the opposite of CAPITAL, for those who know not better.) For such a Proposal, until the Voting Period has ended: there shall be no discussing Votes, or this Rule has been bended. Nor shall a Player Vote in public, only to Assessor. The Votes shall be unknown to others, even employer and professor. And should such a Proposal's Voting Period begin, but no one Votes FOR it, the Proposer shall Win. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4277 (OscarMeyr), 3 April 2002 text: An Interested Proposal is Insane, if it contains no minuscule letter. (That is the opposite of CAPITAL, for those who know not better.) For such a Proposal, until the Voting Period has ended: there shall be no discussing Votes, or this Rule has been bended. Nor shall a Player Vote in public, only to Assessor. The Votes shall be unknown to others, even employer and professor. And should a Player split eir votes 'tween FOR and AGAINST like crazy, E will annoy Assessors (who are known for being lazy) So should eir votes cast differ from each other, this Rule's broke, With the breaker being the voting Player, as sure as if e'd spoke. And should such a Proposal's Voting Period begin, but no one Votes FOR it, the Proposer shall Win. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1729 by Proposal 4320 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1730 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1730 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: If the Executor of the source entity specifies a later time (possibly implicitly) at which the Order is to be executed, then the Order is executed at that time, unless cancelled prior to that time. An order of this latter type is called a "delayed Transfer Order." A delayed Transfer Order is cancelled when the Executor of its source entity transmits a message to the Recordkeepor cancelling that order. A Recordkeepor may reject a delayed Transfer Order by informing the Executor of the source entity of the Order that e is rejecting the Order because it is delayed (and for no other reason); if e does so, that Transfer Order is discarded and shall not be executed. However, a Recordkeepor may not reject a delayed Transfer Order when e is specifically prohibited from rejecting such an Order. In no case may a Recordkeepor reject a Transfer Order which is not delayed. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules pertaining to the execution of Transfer Orders, and the timing thereof. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The Recordkeepor of a Currency may, at eir discretion, elect to refuse any Transfer Order which requires em to note a transfer at any time other than as soon as possible after the Order itself became effective. The Recordkeepor's election to refuse an Transfer Order in this fashion renders invalid that Order provided that the Recordkeepor sends a message to the Player who executed the Order informing him of eir election, within seven days of the receipt of that Order. This Rule does not apply to Transfer Orders which are required by the Rules to be executed with a specification that the transfer be noted at a time other than as soon as possible after they become effective. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1731 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1731 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The Rules, and only the Rules, may specify that certain actions, such as Voting, are also implicitly the submission of one or more Transfer Orders, as long as the action which is implicitly the submission of a Transfer Order is the sending of a message from the Executor of the source entity of the Transfer Order to the Recordkeepor of the Currency involved, or to the Public Forum. Such implicitly submitted Transfer Orders may be delayed Transfer Orders, if the Rules which specify them as implicit Transfers Orders also specify them to be delayed. A Recordkeepor may not reject a implicitly submitted delayed Transfer Order. Similarly, the Rules may specify that certain actions are also implicitly cancellations of certain types of delayed Transfer Orders, subject to the same restrictions specified above for implicitly submitted Transfer Orders. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1731 by Proposal 3693 (Steve), 26 February 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1732 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1732 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: A Payment Order is satisfied when a Transfer Order from the payor named in that Payment Order to the payee of that Payment Order for the currency and amount named in that Payment Order is successfully executed, provided that, when that Transfer Order was submitted, its submitter clearly indicated that that Transfer Order was being submitted for the purpose of satisfying the Payment Order in question. A given Payment Order can be satisfied at most once. A vacated Payment Order cannot be satisfied. history: Amended(1) Substantially by Proposal 3605 (General Chaos), 9 December 1997 text: A Payment Order is satisfied when a Transfer Order from the payor named in that Payment Order to the payee of that Payment Order for the currency and amount named in that Payment Order is successfully executed, provided that, when that Transfer Order was submitted, its submitter clearly indicated that that Transfer Order was being submitted for the purpose of satisfying the Payment Order in question. A given Payment Order can be satisfied at most once. A vacated Payment Order cannot be satisfied. A given Transfer Order may be used for the purpose of satisfying at most one Payment Order. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3745 (Blob), 15 May 1998 text: A Payment Order is satisfied when a Transfer Order to the payee of that Payment Order for the currency and amount named in that Payment Order is successfully executed, provided that, when that Transfer Order was submitted, its submitter clearly indicated that that Transfer Order was being submitted for the purpose of satisfying the Payment Order in question. A given Payment Order can be satisfied at most once. A vacated Payment Order cannot be satisfied. A given Transfer Order may be used for the purpose of satisfying at most one Payment Order. history: ... history: Amended(3) text: A Payment Order is satisfied when a Transfer Order to the payee of that Payment Order for the currency and amount named in that Payment Order is successfully executed, provided that (i) when that Transfer Order was submitted, its submitter clearly indicated that that Transfer Order was being submitted for the purpose of satisfying the Payment Order in question; (ii) the Transfer Order has not satisfied any other Payment Order; (iii) the Payment Order has not already been satisfied or vacated; (iv) the Transfer Order would not have resulted in an entity possessing a negative quantity of Currency. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1733 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1733 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: A Payment Order is disputed if there is a COE regarding it which has not been denied, or a CFJ challenging the legality of its execution which is either presently assigned to a Judge or to a Board of Appeals for consideration. When a a COE regarding a Payment Order is accepted, the order shall be vacated (and an new order issued, if appropriate). The Judge of a CFJ which finds that a Payment Order was illegally or improperly executed shall make an Injunction requiring the Clerk of the Courts to vacate the illegal Payment Order. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1733 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1734 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1734 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: A Payment Order is vacated when a Player with the authority to do so (as defined by the Rules) posts to the Public Forum a notice to the effect that a given Payment Order is being vacated. This notice must clearly identify the Payment Order being vacated. When a satisfied Payment Order is vacated, the Recordkeepor of the Currency in that Payment Order shall execute a new Payment Order identical to the vacated Payment Order, but with the payor and payee interchanged. A Player only has the authority to vacate a Payment Order if e is the Player who originally executed that Order, if e is required to vacate that Order by the Rules or by an Injunction, or if the Rules otherwise grant em the authority to vacate that Order. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: When a satisfied Payment Order is vacated, the Recordkeepor of the Currency named in that Payment Order shall execute a new Payment Order identical to the vacated Payment Order, but with the payor and payee interchanged. If the Order vacating the original Payment Order is subsequently stayed or vacated, then the Recordkeepor shall stay or vacate, respectively, the reversing Order required by this Rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1735 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1735 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The Chancellor is the Executor of the Bank. As soon as possible after a Payment Order is executed for which the Bank is the payor, the Chancellor shall either (as the Bank's Executor) satisfy the Payment Order, or dispute it by making a COE or CFJ. However, the Chancellor need not do so if another Player makes such a COE or CFJ first. If the Chancellor submits a Transfer Order from the Bank for any reason other than to satisfy a Payment Order (except when specifically required by the Rules to submit a Transfer Order), e commits the Class A Crime of Misappropriation, and upon conviction of this Crime shall be removed from Office. history: ... history: Amended(1) text: (a) The Chancellor is the Executor of the Bank. (b) As soon as possible after a Payment Order is executed for which the Bank is the payor, the Chancellor shall either (as the Bank's Executor) satisfy the Payment Order, or dispute it by making a COE or CFJ. However, the Chancellor need not do so if another Player makes such a COE or CFJ first. (c) If the Chancellor submits a Transfer Order from the Bank for any reason other than to satisfy a Payment Order (except when specifically required by the Rules to submit a Transfer Order), e commits the Class A Crime of Misappropriation, and upon conviction of this Crime shall be removed from Office. (d) The Chancellor may (as the Bank's Executor) Mint new units of Currency of which the Bank is the Mintor, Without Objection. The Bank may not otherwise Mint units of Currency. (e) For each Currency minted by the Bank, at most once in each month, the Chancellor may levy a tax on that Currency. The amount of this tax shall not exceed fifty percent. The Chancellor may exempt units of Currency from this taxation, provided that the exemptions are: (1) the same among all Players; (2) the same among all non-Players; and (3) at least as great with respect to Players as with non-Players. history: ... history: Amended(4) text: (a) The Recordkeepor of a Bank Currency is the Executor of the Mintor of that Currency. E may be referred to as that Currency's Executor. (b) As soon as possible after a Payment Order is executed for which the Mintor of a Bank Currency is the payor, the Executor of that Currency shall either satisfy the Payment Order, or dispute it by making a COE or CFJ. However, e need not do so if another Player makes such a COE or CFJ first. (c) If the Executor of a Bank Currency submits a Transfer Order from the Bank for any reason other than to satisfy a Payment Order (except when specifically required by the Rules to submit a Transfer Order), e commits the Class 20 Crime of Misappropriation, and upon conviction of this Crime shall be removed from Office. history: ... history: Amended(5) text: (a) The Recordkeepor of a Bank Currency is the Executor of the Mintor of that Currency. E may be referred to as that Currency's Executor. (b) As soon as possible after a Payment Order is executed for which the Mintor of a Bank Currency is the payor, the Executor of that Currency shall either satisfy the Payment Order, or dispute it by making a COE or CFJ. However, e need not do so if another Player makes such a COE or CFJ first. (c) If the Executor of a Bank Currency executes a Transfer Order from the Bank for any reason other than to satisfy a Payment Order (except when specifically required by the Rules to submit a Transfer Order), e commits the Class 15 Crime of Misappropriation, and upon conviction of this Crime shall be removed from Office. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1736 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1736 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The Rules may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering the execution of a Payment Order. If the Payment Order required by such an Injunction is executed, and the Injunction itself later set aside, the Player who executed the required Payment Order shall, as soon as possible after the Injunction was set aside, vacate that Payment Order. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1736 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1737 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1737 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: The Rules may require, in certain cases, that a Judge issue an Injunction ordering that a Payment Order be vacated. If the Payment Order named by such an Injunction is vacated, and the Injunction itself later set aside, the Player who vacated that Payment Order shall, as soon as possible after the Injunction was set aside, execute a new Payment Order identical to the vacated Payment Order. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1737 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1738 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1738 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Whenever there is an entity in Probate which does not have an Executor in Probate, the Notary shall nominate a Player to be that entity's Executor in Probate. E shall announce this appointment in the Public Forum. The Executor in Probate of an entity is the Executor of that entity, and empowered only to submit Transfers Orders for that entity. An Executor in Probate also has the power to execute and vacate certain Payment Orders, as specified by the Probate Code. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which would specify a different Executor for an entity in Probate. The Executor in Probate of an entity shall, upon eir nomination, arrange for the disposal of that entity's assets and debts, according to the procedures specified in the Probate Code, and shall do so in a timely manner. The Executor in Probate of an entity ceases to be its Executor in Probate when e announces, in accordance with the Probate Code, that the entity is no longer in Probate, or when e announces that e resigns as that entity's Executor in Probate. The Notary shall keep a record of each entity in Probate, and the Executor in Probate of each entity in Probate. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3581 (Oerjan), 14 November 1997 text: Whenever there is an entity in Probate which does not have an Executor in Probate, the Notary shall nominate a Player to be that entity's Executor in Probate. E shall announce this appointment in the Public Forum. The Executor in Probate of an entity is not its Executor, but is empowered to submit for that entity any Transfers Orders required by the Probate Code, with the same effect as if e were its Executor. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which would prohibit Transfer Orders, if submitted in accordance with the Probate Code, from being effective. An Executor in Probate also has the power to execute and vacate certain Payment Orders, as specified by the Probate Code. The Executor in Probate of an entity shall, upon eir nomination, arrange for the disposal of that entity's assets and debts, according to the procedures specified in the Probate Code, and shall do so in a timely manner. The Executor in Probate of an entity ceases to be its Executor in Probate when e announces, in accordance with the Probate Code, that the entity is no longer in Probate, or when e announces that e resigns as that entity's Executor in Probate. The Notary shall keep a record of each entity in Probate, and the Executor in Probate of each entity in Probate. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3611 (Andre), 9 December 1997 text: Whenever there is an entity in Probate which does not have an Executor in Probate, the Notary shall nominate a Player to be that entity's Executor in Probate. E shall announce this appointment in the Public Forum. The Executor in Probate of an entity is not its Executor, but is empowered to submit for that entity any Transfers Orders required by the Probate Code, with the same effect as if e were its Executor. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which would prohibit Transfer Orders, if submitted in accordance with the Probate Code, from being effective. An Executor in Probate also has the power to execute and vacate certain Payment Orders, as specified by the Probate Code. The Executor in Probate of an entity shall, upon eir nomination, arrange for the disposal of that entity's assets and debts, according to the procedures specified in the Probate Code, and shall do so in a timely manner. The Executor in Probate of an entity ceases to be its Executor in Probate when e announces, in accordance with the Probate Code, that the entity is no longer in Probate, or when e announces that e resigns as that entity's Executor in Probate. The Notary shall keep a record of each entity in Probate, and the Executor in Probate of each entity in Probate. A Player ends being an entity's Executor in Probate if one of the following happens: - That entity is not anymore in Probate - The Player deregisters or is deregistered - A CFJ, alleging that the Player was that entity's Executor in Probate for a period of at least one month in which there were no disputed Payment Orders having that entity either as their payor as their payee, has been found true. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3636 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: Whenever there is an entity in Probate which does not have an Trustee, the Notary shall nominate a Player to be that entity's Trustee. E shall announce this appointment in the Public Forum. As soon as possible after the Notary announces the appointment of a Trustee for an entity in Probate, each Recordkeepor, with respect to the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor, shall provide to that Trustee an accounting of the number of units of that Currency held by the entity in Probate, and a list of all Payment Orders naming the entity in Probate as either Payor or Payee. As soon as possible after the Trustee has received all of the reports required by the previous paragraph, e shall formulate and announce in the Public Forum a Plan for the disposition of the estate of the entity in Probate according to the provisions of the Probate Code. However, if the Trustee determines, during the course of constructing the Plan, that any of the credits or debts of the entity in Probate is disputed, e shall announce this fact in the Public Forum, and shall neither formulate nor announce a Plan until after the dispute has been settled, and shall do so as soon as possible after the dispute has been settled. If no legally-made objection to the Plan is posted in the Public Forum during a waiting period of seven days following its announcement, the Trustee shall, as soon as possible after the expiration of thia waiting period, perform whatever steps are necessary to implement the Plan for disposition. If there is a legally-made objection, the Trustee shall, as soon as possible after the objection is announced, formulate and announce a new Plan as above, repeating the process until there is no objection. However, if a CFJ is made alleging that an objection to a Trustee's Plan lacks foundation, then the Trustee shall neither formulate a new Plan nor implement the existing Plan until the CFJ is resolved. If a CFJ finds that an objection lacks foundation, then the Trustee may proceed as if that objection had never been made, and any attempt to announce that same objection again is not legally made. An objection to a Plan for disposition has foundation if it properly alleges that: a) the Plan constructed is not in accord with the provisions of the Probate Code; b) the Plan disregards the Will (if any) of the entity in Probate; c) the implementation of the Plan as constructed would be substantially unfair to a creditor or heir of the entity in Probate; or d) the Plan would not fully dispose of the estate of the entity in Probate. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Whenever there is an entity in Probate which does not have a Trustee, the Notary shall nominate a Player to be that entity's Trustee. E shall announce this appointment in the Public Forum. As soon as possible after the Notary announces the appointment of a Trustee for an entity in Probate, each Recordkeepor, with respect to the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor, shall provide to that Trustee an accounting of the number of units of that Currency held by the entity in Probate, and a list of all Payment Orders naming the entity in Probate as either Payor or Payee. As soon as possible after the Trustee has received all of the reports required by the previous paragraph, e shall formulate and announce in the Public Forum a Plan for the disposition of the estate of the entity in Probate according to the provisions of the Probate Code. However, if the Trustee determines, during the course of constructing the Plan, that any of the credits or debts of the entity in Probate is disputed, e shall announce this fact in the Public Forum, and shall neither formulate nor announce a Plan until after the dispute has been settled, and shall do so as soon as possible after the dispute has been settled. If no legally-made objection to the Plan is posted in the Public Forum during a waiting period of seven days following its announcement, the Trustee shall, as soon as possible after the expiration of this waiting period, perform whatever steps are necessary to implement the Plan for disposition. If there is a legally-made objection, the Trustee shall, as soon as possible after the objection is announced, formulate and announce a new Plan as above, repeating the process until there is no objection. However, if a CFJ is made alleging that an objection to a Trustee's Plan lacks foundation, then the Trustee shall neither formulate a new Plan nor implement the existing Plan until the CFJ is resolved. If a CFJ finds that an objection lacks foundation, then the Trustee may proceed as if that objection had never been made, and any attempt to announce that same objection again is not legally made. An objection to a Plan for disposition has foundation if it properly alleges that: a) the Plan constructed is not in accord with the provisions of the Probate Code; b) the Plan disregards the Will (if any) of the entity in Probate; c) the implementation of the Plan as constructed would be substantially unfair to a creditor or heir of the entity in Probate; or d) the Plan would not fully dispose of the estate of the entity in Probate. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1739 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1739 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: Section 1. General The steps described herein shall be executed by an Executor in Probate, in order by increasing section number. If, in order to perform the duties required herein, the Executor in Probate would have to consider, in any way, a Payment Order which is presently disputed, e shall not proceed, but shall wait until the dispute regarding that Payment Order is resolved. Section 2. Procedure for Fair Division When an amount of Currency (either as units in possession of the estate, or units due the estate as credits) is to be divided, the following procedure shall be used: 1. The Executor in Probate shall first divide the amount of Currency amongst the creditors of the estate proportionally to the residual debts of each creditor, rounding each share down to the appropriate MUQ. The surplus is the amount remaining after this initial division is completed. 2. The surplus, if any, shall then be added to the share of the creditor with the greatest remaining residual debt whose share does not already equal eir remaining residual debt. In the event of a tie, the Executor in Probate shall select a creditor at random. If there is no such creditor, the surplus is retained. This step shall be repeated until there is no more surplus, or no more creditors with residual debt unequal to their share. 3. If at any time in the above process, any portion of any creditor's share exceeds eir residual debt, this excess portion shall be removed from eir share and added to the surplus. Section 3. Distribution of Assets to Creditors For each Currency of which the estate possesses units, the Executor in Probate shall divide those units according to the procedure in Section 2, and shall submit Transfer Orders from the estate to each creditor for the amount of that creditor's share. Section 4. Reassignment of Credits to Creditors For each debtor of the estate, in an order to be determined by the Executor in Probate, the Executor in Probate shall determine the sum of the credits due the estate from that debtor (separately for each Currency), and shall divide that sum amongst the creditors according to the procedure in Section 2, and shall execute Payment Orders from that debtor to each creditor for the amount of that creditor's share. If there is a surplus amount, the Executor in Probate shall execute a Payment Order from the creditor to the estate for the amount of the surplus. The Executor in Probate shall then vacate the credits thus reassigned. Section 5. Discharge of Residual Debts The Executor in Probate shall vacate all remaining debts of the estate. Section 6. Distribution of Residual Assets to Heirs This step is skipped if the estate is not terminal. The Executor in Probate shall execute the provisions of the Will of the estate, if a Will exists. If residual assets exist after the execution of the Will, the Executor in Probate shall distribute them to the heirs of the estate in the manner described in Sections 3 and 4, except that heirs replace creditors, and each heir is considered to have residual debt computed according to the provisions for division as specified in the Will (or equal to the residual assets divided equally, if there is no provision). Section 7. Remission of Unclaimed Assets This step is skipped if the estate is not terminal. For each Currency, the Executor in Probate shall submit a Transfer Order from the estate to the Mintor of that Currency for all the units of that Currency remaining in the estate, excepting any units which cannot be transferred for any reason. The Executor in Probate shall also vacate any remaining credits of the estate at this time. Section 8. Destruction of Immobile Assets This step is skipped if the estate is not terminal. The Executor in Probate shall destroy any units of Currency which remain in the estate. Section 9. Termination of Probate The Executor in Probate shall announce that Probate of the estate is complete. Section 10. Definitions The following definitions are used throughout this Rule. 1. Estate: the entity in Probate. 2. Debt: A Payment Order which names the estate as payor. 3. Credit: A Payment Order which names the estate as payee. 4. Creditor: an entity which is the payee of a debt. 5. Debtor: an entity which is the payor of a credit. 6. Residual debt of a creditor: the total of the amounts of the debts for which that creditor is the payee, less the sum of all amounts transferred from the estate to that creditor according to Section 3, and the amounts of all credits reassigned to that creditor according to Section 4. 7. Residual assets: the total of the units of Currency held by the estate and the credits of the estate, after the steps in Sections 3, 4, 5 have been completed. Note: Residual debt and residual assets are computed independently for each Currency involved. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3636 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: The Plan for the disposition of the estate of an entity in Probate shall be constructed by its Trustee as detailed below. First, the Plan shall divide the assets of the estate amongst its creditors, assigning to each creditor assets equal to the amount due that creditor if possible, or a pro-rata portion if not. All debts, whether satisfied in full or not, shall be cancelled. Next, if the entity in Probate is terminal, the Plan shall apply the Will, if any, of the entity in Probate to the extent possible. Any assets remaining after the application of the Will shall be divided amongst the heirs named in the Will, assigning to each heir a portion computed in a manner consistent with the Will; if the Will is silent or unclear on the division of remaining assets, the division shall be equal. Next, if the entity in Probate is terminal, and there is no Will or the Will fails to fully dispose of all assets of the entity in Probate, the Plan shall then cancel all remaining credits and assign all remaining units of Currency to the Bank. Units of Currency are assigned to an entity by requiring a Transfer Order for those Units of Currency from the entity in Probate to that Entity. A credit is assigned to an entity by requiring a Payment Order from the payor of the credit to the entity to whom it has been assigned; however, if the payor of the credit is the same as the entity to whom it is to be assigned, no Payment Order shall be required. A debt is cancelled by requiring the vacation of the Payment Order which established it. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1740 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1740 by Proposal 3533 (General Chaos), 15 July 1997 text: For each entity other than the Bank which possesses a negative quantity of any Currency at the time this Rule is enacted, the Chancellor shall, as soon as possible after the enactment of this Rule, execute Transfer Order(s) from the Bank to that entity for an amount of each such Currency equal to the absolute value of the negative amount possessed of that Currency, and shall also execute a Payment Order from that entity to the Bank for the same amount of that Currency. After all such Transfer and Payment Orders have been successfully executed, this Rule repeals itself. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1740 by Rule 1740, 16 July 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1741 history: Created as Power=1 Rule 1741 text: Upon the creation of this Rule, the following changes to Nomic Properties take place: (1) the number of Voting Tokens in the Bank is increased by the total number of Voting Tokens possessed by all Contests, and the number of Voting Tokens held by each Contest is adjusted to zero; (2) the number of Voting Tokens possessed by each Player who possesses more than 200 Voting Tokens is adjusted to be 200, and to each decrease in the Voting Tokens possessed by these Players caused by this adjustment there corresponds an equivalent increase in the number of Voting Tokens held by the Bank; (3) the number of Voting Tokens possessed by each Entity other than the Bank is adjusted to be one tenth of its previous value, and to each such decrease caused by this adjustment there corresponds an equivalent increase in the number of Voting Tokens held by the Bank. (4) if the number of Voting Tokens possessed by any Player after the adjustment performed above in (3) is less than 5, then the number of Voting Tokens possessed by that Player is adjusted to be 5, and to each such increase caused by this adjustment there corresponds an equivalent decrease in the number of Voting Tokens held by the Bank. All adjustments required by this Rule are detected and reported by the Assessor. This Rule shall repeal itself when the adjustments required by it are reported by the Assessor in the Public Forum. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3651 (General Chaos), 1 January 1998 text: Upon the creation of this Rule, the following changes to Nomic Properties take place: (1) the number of Voting Tokens in the Bank is increased by the total number of Voting Tokens possessed by all Contests, and the number of Voting Tokens held by each Contest is adjusted to zero; (2) the number of Voting Tokens possessed by each Player who possesses more than 200 Voting Tokens is adjusted to be 200, and to each decrease in the Voting Tokens possessed by these Players caused by this adjustment there corresponds an equivalent increase in the number of Voting Tokens held by the Bank; (3) the number of Voting Tokens possessed by each Entity other than the Bank is adjusted to be one tenth of its previous value, and to each such decrease caused by this adjustment there corresponds an equivalent increase in the number of Voting Tokens held by the Bank. (4) if the number of Voting Tokens possessed by any Player after the adjustment performed above in (3) is less than 5, then the number of Voting Tokens possessed by that Player is adjusted to be 5, and to each such increase caused by this adjustment there corresponds an equivalent decrease in the number of Voting Tokens held by the Bank. All adjustments required by this Rule are detected and reported by the Assessor. This Rule shall repeal itself when the adjustments required by it are reported by the Assessor in the Public Forum. However, this Rule shall not apply to a Proposal if it would have the effect of prohibiting all Voting upon that Proposal. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1741 by Proposal 3657 (Repeal-O-Matic), 8 January 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1742 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1742 by Proposal 3558 (General Chaos), 24 October 1997 text: If two (or more) Players enter into an agreement, but one (or more) of these Players then fails to comply with that agreement, any other Player party to that agreement may make a CFJ alleging that that agreement has been broken. If the Judge of such a CFJ finds that the agreement has in fact been broken, e is permitted to issue Injunctions binding upon any or all of the parties of the broken agreement so as to effect fair and appropriate restitution for its breach. When restitution would involve the transfer of Currencies, the Judge is authorized to execute whatever Payment Orders are necessary to effect fair and appropriate restitution. The above notwithstanding, no restitution shall be available with respect to the breach of the agreement which would have required a Player to break the Rules, nor shall restitution include the execution of Payment Orders, the payor of which is any entity not party to the agreement. Nothing in this Rule shall be construed so as to impair the enforcement of an agreement which requires a Player to violate another agreement. A CFJ alleging that an agreement has been broken called by anyone who is not party to that agreement lacks standing and shall be dismissed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: If two (or more) Players enter into an agreement, but one (or more) of these Players then fails to comply with that agreement, any other Player party to that agreement may make a CFJ alleging that that agreement has been broken. If the Judge of such a CFJ finds that the agreement has in fact been broken, e is permitted to issue Orders binding upon any or all of the parties of the broken agreement so as to effect fair and appropriate restitution for its breach. When restitution would involve the transfer of Currencies, the Judge is authorized to execute whatever Payment Orders are necessary to effect fair and appropriate restitution. The above notwithstanding, no restitution shall be available with respect to the breach of the agreement which would have required a Player to break the Rules, nor shall restitution include the execution of Payment Orders, the payor of which is any entity not party to the agreement. Nothing in this Rule shall be construed so as to impair the enforcement of an agreement which requires a Player to violate another agreement. A CFJ alleging that an agreement has been broken called by anyone who is not party to that agreement lacks standing and shall be dismissed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: Players may make agreements among themselves with the intention that such agreements will be binding under the Rules. If such an agreement is subsequently broken, any Player party to that agreement may then call a CFJ alleging that the agreement has been broken. If the Judge of such a CFJ finds that the agreement was entered into with the intention that the agreement be binding under the Rules and that the agreement has in fact been broken, e may Order the breaching party to: (1) transfer Property to the other party or parties to remedy the damages from the breach, (2) perform according to the agreement, or (3) perform such other substitute acts as would fairly serve the interests of the agreement. E may further Order the other parties of the agreement to perform such acts as may be necessary to preserve fairness and justice. Nothing in this Rule shall be construed so as to impair the enforcement of an agreement which requires a Player to violate another agreement. A CFJ alleging that an agreement has been broken called by anyone who is not party to that agreement lacks standing and shall be dismissed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 text: Players may make agreements among themselves with the intention that such agreements will be binding under the rules. If such an agreement is subsequently broken, any player party to that agreement may then call a CFJ alleging that the agreement has been broken. If the judge of such a CFJ finds that the agreement was entered into with the intention that the agreement be binding under the rules, and that the agreement has in fact been broken, then e may order the breaching party to perform according to the agreement, or perform substitute acts that would fairly serve the interests of the agreement; e may further order the other parties of the agreement to perform such acts as may be necessary to preserve fairness and justice. Nothing in this rule shall be construed so as to impair the enforcement of an agreement which requires a Player to violate another agreement. If a CFJ alleging that an agreement has been broken is called by anyone who is not party to that agreement, then it lacks standing and shall be dismissed. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Players may make agreements among themselves with the intention that such agreements will be binding; i.e. that they become parties to the agreement and agree to be bound by the agreement. A CFJ that alleges that a specific person (the Defendant) has broken an agreement is a Civil CFJ, for which the Caller is the Plaintiff. A CFJ that is not a Civil CFJ is a General CFJ. If the judge of a Civil CFJ finds that the agreement was entered into with the intention that the agreement be binding, and that the agreement has in fact been broken, then e may do any or all of the following: (i) order the defendant to perform according to the agreement or perform substitute acts that would fairly serve the interests of the agreement; (ii) order the other parties of the agreement to perform such acts as may be necessary to preserve fairness and justice; (iii) order that additional ("punitive") penalties or actions be applied to the defendant, if and only if the agreement in question explicitly specifies punitive penalties for the type of breach. If a Civil CFJ is called by anyone who is not party to that agreement, then it lacks standing and shall be dismissed. A Civil CFJ that specifies multiple defendants, or multiple independent breaches of contract, is improperly made and shall be dismissed. Nothing in this rule shall be construed so as to impair the enforcement of an agreement which requires a Player to violate another agreement. history: Retitled by Proposal 4987 (BobTHJ), 6 June 2007 history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4987 (BobTHJ), 6 June 2007 text: Persons may make agreements among themselves with the intention that such agreements will be binding; i.e. that they become parties to the agreement and agree to be bound by the agreement. A CFJ that alleges that a specific person (the Defendant) has broken an agreement is a Civil CFJ, for which the Caller is the Plaintiff. A CFJ that is not a Civil CFJ is a General CFJ. If the judge of a Civil CFJ finds that the agreement was entered into with the intention that the agreement be binding, and that the agreement has in fact been broken, then e may do any or all of the following: (i) order the defendant to perform according to the agreement or perform substitute acts that would fairly serve the interests of the agreement; (ii) order the other parties of the agreement to perform such acts as may be necessary to preserve fairness and justice; (iii) order that additional ("punitive") penalties or actions be applied to the defendant, if and only if the agreement in question explicitly specifies punitive penalties for the type of breach. If a Civil CFJ is called by anyone who is not party to that agreement, then it lacks standing and shall be dismissed. A Civil CFJ that specifies multiple defendants, or multiple independent breaches of contract, is improperly made and shall be dismissed. Nothing in this rule shall be construed so as to impair the enforcement of an agreement which requires a Player to violate another agreement. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5009 (Zefram), 18 June 2007 text: Persons may make agreements among themselves with the intention that such agreements will be binding; i.e. that they become parties to the agreement and agree to be bound by the agreement. A CFJ that alleges that a specific person (the Defendant) has broken an agreement is a Civil CFJ, for which the Caller is the Plaintiff. A CFJ that is not a Civil CFJ is a General CFJ. If the judge of a Civil CFJ finds that the agreement was entered into with the intention that the agreement be binding, and that the agreement has in fact been broken, then e may do any or all of the following: (i) order the defendant to perform according to the agreement or perform substitute acts that would fairly serve the interests of the agreement; (ii) order the other parties of the agreement to perform such acts as may be necessary to preserve fairness and justice; (iii) order that additional ("punitive") penalties or actions be applied to the defendant, if and only if the agreement in question explicitly specifies punitive penalties for the type of breach. A Civil CFJ that specifies multiple defendants, or multiple independent breaches of contract, is improperly made and shall be dismissed. Nothing in this rule shall be construed so as to impair the enforcement of an agreement which requires a Player to violate another agreement. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5028 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: Persons may make agreements among themselves with the intention that such agreements will be binding; i.e. that they become parties to the agreement and agree to be bound by the agreement. A CFJ that alleges that a specific person (the Defendant) has broken an agreement is a Civil CFJ, for which the Caller is the Plaintiff. A CFJ that is not a Civil CFJ is a General CFJ. If the judge of a Civil CFJ finds that the agreement was entered into with the intention that the agreement be binding, and that the agreement has in fact been broken, then e may do any or all of the following: (i) order the defendant to perform according to the agreement or perform substitute acts that would fairly serve the interests of the agreement; (ii) order the other parties of the agreement to perform such acts as may be necessary to preserve fairness and justice; (iii) order that additional ("punitive") penalties or actions be applied to the defendant, if and only if the agreement in question explicitly specifies punitive penalties for the type of breach. A Civil CFJ that specifies multiple defendants, or multiple independent breaches of contract, is improperly made and shall be dismissed. Nothing in this rule shall be construed so as to impair the enforcement of an agreement which requires a person to violate another agreement. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5040 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: Persons may make agreements among themselves with the intention that such agreements will be binding; i.e. that they become parties to the agreement and agree to be bound by the agreement. A CFJ that alleges that a specific person (the defendant) has broken an agreement is a Civil CFJ, for which the caller is the plaintiff. The defendant of a Civil CFJ is automatically barred from judging it. The plaintiff may bar one other player when e submits the CFJ, but is not otherwise at that time permitted or able to bar any players from judging the CFJ, any rule to the contrary notwithstanding. The defendant may bar one other player from judging, any time before the CFJ is assigned to a judge. Any evidence or arguments, published or submitted to the CotC by the defendant of a Civil CFJ with the clear intent of being part of a defense, any time before the CFJ is assigned to a judge, will become part of the material of that CFJ. When a Civil CFJ is submitted, the Clerk of the Courts shall as soon as possible send a copy of the CFJ to the defendant and inform the defendant that e has one week to publish a defense and/or bar a Player from judging. The CotC is prohibited from assigning a Trial Judge to a Civil CFJ until one week has passed since e notified the defendant of this, and is not obliged to assign a Trial Judge during this time, any rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Starting from one week after the CotC has notified the defendant, the CotC is obliged to assign a Trial Judge as soon as possible, and this assignment shall in all other respects be governed by the usual rules for assignment of judges. If the judge of a Civil CFJ finds that the agreement was entered into with the intention that the agreement be binding, and that the agreement has in fact been broken, then e may do any or all of the following: (i) order the defendant to perform according to the agreement or perform substitute acts that would fairly serve the interests of the agreement; (ii) order the other parties of the agreement to perform such acts as may be necessary to preserve fairness and justice; (iii) order that additional ("punitive") penalties or actions be applied to the defendant, if and only if the agreement in question explicitly specifies punitive penalties for the type of breach. A Civil CFJ that specifies multiple defendants, or multiple independent breaches of contract, is improperly made and shall be dismissed. Nothing in this rule shall be construed so as to impair the enforcement of an agreement which requires a person to violate another agreement. history: Retitled by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Power changed from 1 to 1.5 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: Any group of two or more persons may make an agreement among themselves with the intention that it be binding upon them and be governed by the rules. Such an agreement is known as a contract. A contract may be modified, including changing the set of parties, by agreement between all parties. A contract may also terminate by agreement between all parties. A contract automatically terminates if the number of parties to it falls below two. Parties to a contract governed by the rules SHALL act in accordance with that contract. This obligation is not impaired by contradiction between the contract and any other contract, or between the contract and the rules. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5254 (AFO), 18 October 2007 text: Any group of two or more persons may make an agreement among themselves with the intention that it be binding upon them and be governed by the rules. Such an agreement is known as a contract. A contract may be modified, including changing the set of parties, by agreement between all parties. A contract may also terminate by agreement between all parties. A contract automatically terminates if the number of parties to it falls below two. Parties to a contract governed by the rules SHALL act in accordance with that contract. This obligation is not impaired by contradiction between the contract and any other contract, or between the contract and the rules. A public contract is a contract that identifies itself as such. Any other contract is private. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5362 (root), 20 December 2007 text: Any group of two or more persons may make an agreement among themselves with the intention that it be binding upon them and be governed by the rules. Such an agreement is known as a contract. A contract may be modified, including changing the set of parties, by agreement between all parties. A contract may also terminate by agreement between all parties. A contract automatically terminates if the number of parties to it falls below the minimum number of parties defined by the rules for that contract. If not otherwise specified, the minimum number of parties for any contract is two. Parties to a contract governed by the rules SHALL act in accordance with that contract. This obligation is not impaired by contradiction between the contract and any other contract, or between the contract and the rules. A public contract is a contract that identifies itself as such. Any other contract is private. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 5403 (Murphy, Goethe), 16 January 2008 text: Any group of two or more persons may make an agreement among themselves with the intention that it be binding upon them and be governed by the rules. Such an agreement is known as a contract. A contract may be modified, including changing the set of parties, by agreement between all parties. A contract may also terminate by agreement between all parties. A contract automatically terminates if the number of parties to it falls below the minimum number of parties defined by the rules for that contract. If not otherwise specified, the minimum number of parties for any contract is two. Parties to a contract governed by the rules SHALL act in accordance with that contract. This obligation is not impaired by contradiction between the contract and any other contract, or between the contract and the rules. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 5420 (Wooble), 2 February 2008 text: Any person or group of persons may create an agreement with the intention that it be binding upon them and be governed by the rules. Such an agreement is known as a contract. A contract may be modified, including changing the set of parties, by agreement between all parties. A contract may also terminate by agreement between all parties. A contract automatically terminates if the number of parties to it falls below the minimum number of parties defined by the rules for that contract. If not otherwise specified, the minimum number of parties for any contract is two. Parties to a contract governed by the rules SHALL act in accordance with that contract. This obligation is not impaired by contradiction between the contract and any other contract, or between the contract and the rules. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 5423 (woggle; disi.), 6 February 2008 text: Contracts are binding agreements governed by the rules. Any agreement made by one or more persons with the intention that it be binding on them and governed by the rules is a contract (unless it would automatically terminate as a contract). A contract automatically terminates if the number of parties to it falls below the number of parties the rules require for the contract. If other rules do not specify such a number for a contract, then a contract requires at least two parties. Parties to a contract SHALL act in accordance with that contract. This obligation is not impaired by contradiction between the contract and any other contract, or between the contract and the rules. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1743 history: Enacted by Proposal 3569 (Zefram), 30 October 1997 text: Upon the creation of this Rule, the Herald shall report, as soon as possible, all Infractions of Persistent Indebtedness that have been committed and not previously reported. When e has done so, e is then authorised and obliged to, as soon as possible, vacate all unsatisifed Payment Orders for Indulgences. Immediately after e has done so, this Rule repeals itself. history: Repealed by Rule 1743, 6 November 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1744 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1744 by Proposal 3571 (Murphy), 30 October 1997 text: October 16, 1997, shall be known as Lost In Space Day. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1744 by Proposal 3792 (Steve), 6 October 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1745 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1745 by Proposal 3579 (General Chaos), 14 November 1997 text: The Chancellor is empowered to submit Transfer Orders for any entity which lacks an Executor, as if e were the Executor of that entity, but may do so only as specified by this Rule. Whenever there exist units of any Currency in the possession of any entity which neither has an Executor nor is in Probate, the Chancellor shall (as soon as possible after being made aware of this condition) execute Transfer Orders transferring all such Currencies to the Bank. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1745 by Proposal 3636 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1746 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1746 by Proposal 3580 (General Chaos), 14 November 1997 text: If it is determined by CFJ that the execution of a specific Transfer Order was in violation of the Rules or in violation of any other legal instrument granted binding force by these Rules, then: a) if the Transfer Order was executed to satisfy a Payment Order, the Judge of the CFJ shall vacate that Payment Order; b) otherwise, the Judge of the CFJ shall issue a Payment Order for an amount equal to the amount transferred illegally, naming as payor the recipient of the improper transfer and as payee the source of that transfer. However, the Judge shall not vacate a Payment Order under (a) if that Order has already been vacated, nor shall e issue a Payment Order under (b) if the improperly transferred Currencies have already been voluntarily refunded by the recipient of the improper transfer. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1746 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1747 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1747 by Proposal 3586 (Vlad), 14 November 1997 text: The Clerk of the Courts has the power to Pardon Lawless Players. The Clerk may not exercise this power more than once per Nomic month, and may not Pardon the same Player twice in a given term of office (although, if re-elected later, he may again Pardon that Player). The Clerk of the Courts Pardons a Player by announcing he is doing so in the Public Forum. At that time, the following events may occur: 1) The Clerk of the Courts shall request the Herald to eliminate all Fugitive Blots owned by the Pardoned Player, and the Herald shall do so as soon as possible. 2) The Clerk of the Courts may, if necessary, vacate any Payment Orders for Indulgences possessed by the Pardoned Player's estate in order to reduce the number of Blots possessed by the Player's estate to below the threshhold for Lawlessness. The CotC may not Vacate Payment Orders for X number of Indulgences if Vacating PO's for a lesser number of Indulgences would suffice to render the Player no longer Lawless. 3) After the above two actions have been completed, the Player may immediately reregister. 4) The Pardoned Player shall then post a Formal Apology to the Public Forum for his Lawlessness. The CotC may include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words in his Pardon. 5) A Pardoned Player is not subject to Persistent Indebtedness penalties for three months after being Pardoned, but during this period he must apply all Indulgences received (from any source) to his debt and may not transfer them to another Entity. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule governing Lawlessness, Fugitive Blots, when a deregistered Player may reregister, or Persistent Indebtedness. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The Clerk of the Courts has the power to Pardon Lawless Players. The Clerk may not exercise this power more than once per Nomic month, and may not Pardon the same Player twice in a given term of office (although, if re-elected later, e may again Pardon that Player). The Clerk of the Courts Pardons a Player by announcing e is doing so in the Public Forum. Then the following events shall occur: 1) The Clerk of the Courts shall request the Herald to eliminate all Fugitive Blots owned by the Pardoned Player, and the Herald shall do so as soon as possible. 2) The Clerk of the Courts may, if necessary, vacate any Payment Orders for Indulgences possessed by the Pardoned Player's estate in order to reduce the number of Blots possessed by the Player's estate to below the threshhold for Lawlessness. The CotC may not Vacate Payment Orders for X number of Indulgences if Vacating PO's for a lesser number of Indulgences would suffice to render the Player no longer Lawless. 3) After the above two actions have been completed, the Player may reregister. 4) The Pardoned Player shall then post a Formal Apology to the Public Forum for eir Lawlessness. The CotC may include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words in eir Pardon. 5) A Pardoned Player is not subject to Persistent Indebtedness penalties for three months after being Pardoned, but during this period e must apply all Indulgences received (from any source) to eir debt and may not transfer them to another Entity. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule governing Lawlessness, Fugitive Blots, when a deregistered Player may reregister, or Persistent Indebtedness. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3931 (Crito), 17 October 1999 text: Pardoning Lawlessness The Clerk of the Courts has the power to Pardon Lawless Players. The Clerk may not exercise this power more than once per Nomic month, and may not Pardon the same Player twice in a given term of office (although, if re-elected later, e may again Pardon that Player). The Clerk of the Courts Pardons a Player by announcing e is doing so in the Public Forum. Then the following events shall occur: 1) The Clerk of the Courts shall expunge as many of the Blots staining the Pardoned Player's record as required to reduce the number of Blots to one less than the threshold for Lawlessness and notify the Herald of this action. 2) After the above step has been completed, the Player may reregister. 3) The Pardoned Player shall then post a Formal Apology to the Public Forum for eir Lawlessness. The CotC may include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words in eir Pardon. 4) A Pardoned Player is not subject to Persistent Indebtedness penalties as a result of Indulgences for three months after being Pardoned, but during this period e may only use Indulgences to expunge Blots from eir record and may not transfer any Indulgences to another Entity. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule governing Lawlessness, when a deregistered Player may reregister, or Persistent Indebtedness. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4038 (Oerjan), 7 August 2000 text: The Clerk of the Courts has the power to Pardon Fugitives from Justice that have been deregistered for Lawlessness. The Clerk may not exercise this power more than once per Nomic month, and may not Pardon the same person twice in a given term of Office (although, if re-elected later, e may again Pardon that person). The Clerk of the Courts Pardons a Fugitive from Justice by announcing e is doing so in the Public Forum. Then the following events shall occur: i) The Clerk of the Courts shall expunge as many of the Blots staining the Fugitive's record as required to reduce the number of Blots to one less than the threshold for Lawlessness and notify the Herald of this action. ii) After the above step has been completed, the Fugitive may reregister as a Player. iii) The Pardoned Player shall then post a Formal Apology to the Public Forum for eir Lawlessness. The CotC may include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words in eir Pardon. iv) For three months after being Pardoned, the Pardoned Player may only use Indulgences to expunge Blots from eir record and may not transfer any Indulgences for any other purpose. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule governing Lawlessness, or when a deregistered Player may reregister. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: The Clerk of the Courts has the power to Pardon Fugitives from Justice that have been deregistered for Lawlessness. The Clerk may not exercise this power more than once per Nomic month, and may not Pardon the same person twice in a given term of Office (although, if re-elected later, e may again Pardon that person). The Clerk of the Courts Pardons a Fugitive from Justice by publicly announcing e is doing so. Then the following events shall occur: i) The Clerk of the Courts shall expunge as many of the Blots staining the Fugitive's record as required to reduce the number of Blots to one less than the threshold for Lawlessness and notify the Herald of this action. ii) After the above step has been completed, the Fugitive may reregister as a Player. iii) The Pardoned Player shall then publish a Formal Apology for eir Lawlessness. The CotC may include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words in eir Pardon. iv) For three months after being Pardoned, the Pardoned Player may only use Indulgences to expunge Blots from eir record and may not transfer any Indulgences for any other purpose. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule governing Lawlessness, or when a deregistered Player may reregister. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4272 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: The Clerk of the Courts has the power to Pardon Fugitives from Justice that have been deregistered for Lawlessness. The Clerk may not exercise this power more than once per Nomic month, and may not Pardon the same person twice in a given term of Office (although, if re-elected later, e may again Pardon that person). The Clerk of the Courts Pardons a Fugitive from Justice by publicly announcing e is doing so. Then the following events shall occur: i) The Clerk of the Courts shall expunge as many of the Fugitive's Blots as required to reduce eir Stain to one less than the threshold for Lawlessness, and notify the Herald of this action. ii) After the above step has been completed, the Fugitive may reregister as a Player. iii) The Pardoned Player shall then publish a Formal Apology for eir Lawlessness. The CotC may include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words in eir Pardon. iv) For three months after being Pardoned, the Pardoned Player may only use Indulgences to expunge Blots from eir record and may not transfer any Indulgences for any other purpose. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule governing Lawlessness, or when a deregistered Player may reregister. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: The Clerk of the Courts has the power to Pardon Fugitives from Justice that have been deregistered for Lawlessness. The Clerk may not exercise this power more than once per Agoran month, and may not Pardon the same person twice in a given term of Office (although, if re-elected later, e may again Pardon that person). The Clerk of the Courts Pardons a Fugitive from Justice by publicly announcing e is doing so. Then the following events shall occur: i) The Clerk of the Courts shall expunge as many of the Fugitive's Blots as required to reduce eir Stain to one less than the threshold for Lawlessness, and notify the Herald of this action. ii) After the above step has been completed, the Fugitive may reregister as a Player. iii) The Pardoned Player shall then publish a Formal Apology for eir Lawlessness. The CotC may include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words in eir Pardon. iv) For three months after being Pardoned, the Pardoned Player may only use Indulgences to expunge Blots from eir record and may not transfer any Indulgences for any other purpose. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule governing Lawlessness, or when a deregistered Player may reregister. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: The Clerk of the Courts has the power to Pardon Fugitives from Justice that have been deregistered for Lawlessness. The Clerk may not exercise this power more than once per Agoran month, and may not Pardon the same person twice in a given term of Office (although, if re-elected later, e may again Pardon that person). The Clerk of the Courts Pardons a Fugitive from Justice by publicly announcing e is doing so. Then the following events shall occur: i) The Clerk of the Courts shall expunge as many of the Fugitive's Blots as required to reduce eir Stain to one less than the threshold for Lawlessness, and notify the Herald of this action. ii) After the above step has been completed, the Fugitive may reregister as a Player. iii) The Pardoned Player shall then publish a Formal Apology for eir Lawlessness. The CotC may include a list of up to ten Prescribed Words in eir Pardon. iv) For three months after being Pardoned, the Pardoned Player may not perform any Progressive Actions except expunging Blots from eir record, unless e is Immaculate. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule governing Lawlessness, or when a deregistered Player may reregister. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1747 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1748 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1748 by Proposal 3590 (Swann), 14 November 1997 text: A Player who submits an InterNomic Proposal shall receive the following awards based upon the results of that InterNomic Proposal. The Ambassador shall pay out these awards as soon as possible after e announces the results of the InterNomic Proposal. i) In the case where the InterNomic Proposal fails, and Agora did not vote FOR it, there is no award. ii) In the case where the InterNomic Proposal fails, but Agora did vote FOR it, the award shall be one Voting Token. iii) In the case where the InterNomic Proposal passes, the award shall be five Voting Tokens and two Proposal Notes. In addition, if the adoption of the InterNomic Proposal directly results in Agora receiving enough InterNomic points to win a game of InterNomic, the Player who submitted that InterNomic Proposal shall Win the Game (of Agora). history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3794 (Kolja A.), 19 October 1998 text: A Player who submits an InterNomic Proposal shall receive the following awards based upon the results of that InterNomic Proposal. The Ambassador shall pay out these awards as soon as possible after e announces the results of the InterNomic Proposal. i) In the case where the InterNomic Proposal fails, and Agora did not vote FOR it, there is no award. ii) In the case where the InterNomic Proposal fails, but Agora did vote FOR it, the award shall be 0.5 Voting Tokens. iii) In the case where the InterNomic Proposal passes, the award shall be one Voting Token and one Proposal Note. In addition, if the adoption of the InterNomic Proposal directly results in Agora receiving enough InterNomic points to win a game of InterNomic, the Player who submitted that InterNomic Proposal shall Win the Game (of Agora). history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1748 by Proposal 3805 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1749 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1749 by Proposal 3555 (Steve; disi.), 24 October 1997 text: Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. This Rule shall repeal itself 60 days after it is created. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1749 by Rule 1749, 23 December 1997 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1750 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1750 by Proposal 3601 (Chuck), 9 December 1997 text: In each year, the first Nomic Week falling entirely in February shall be designated "Read the Ruleset Week". history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: The first Agoran week each year which falls entirely in February is Read the Ruleset Week. Agorans are encouraged to read the ruleset during Read the Ruleset Week. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1751 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1751 by Proposal 3602 (Chuck), 9 December 1997 text: When Rule 1776 is created, the Rulekeepor shall pay out, to the Entity which proposed the Proposal which created Rule 1776, 13 VTs. Once that has taken place, this Rule repeals itself. If Rule 1776 is not created by a Proposal, this Rule repeals itself upon creation of Rule 1776. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1751 by Rule 1751, 12 February 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1752 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1752 by Proposal 3608 (General Chaos), 9 December 1997 text: If a given Group is a Voting Entity, then it shall be entitled to cast Vote(s) only as specified by its Ordinances. If the Ordinances of the Group do not specify how the Group shall cast its Vote(s), it may not do so. A Group is not entitled to cast Votes on a Proposal if it did not exist at the beginning of the Voting Period of that Proposal. A Group with fewer than three Members is not entitled to cast Votes. The Vizier of a Group is responsible to communicate the Group's Votes to the Assessor. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: If a given Group is a Voting Entity, then it shall be entitled to cast Vote(s) only as specified by its Ordinances. If the Ordinances of the Group do not specify how the Group shall cast its Vote(s), it may not do so. A Group is not entitled to cast Votes on a Proposal if it did not exist at the beginning of the Voting Period of that Proposal. A Group with fewer than three Members is not entitled to cast Votes. The Vizier of a Group is responsible for communicating the Group's Votes to the Assessor. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: If a Group possesses at least three Members, it has a Legislative Status of Voter. Otherwise, it has a Legislative Status of Barred. A Group may only cast Votes as explicitly specified in its Ordinances. If the Ordinances are silent on this matter, the Group may not cast Votes. A Group may not cast Votes on any Proposal whose Voting Period began before the creation of that Group. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1753 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1753 by Proposal 3612 (Swann), 9 December 1997 text: This Rule shall be known as the Repeal-O-Matic Rule and may be referred to unambiguously in that manner. The Repeal-O-Matic Rule is a Proposing Entity, and its Executor is the Promotor. The Repeal-O-Matic Rule shall make from one to three proposals every week. The contents of these Proposals are determined as follows. The Promotor shall select five different Rules, at random, from the current Ruleset. E shall then pick a number of these selected Rules (at least one, and not more than three, and no Rule picked more than once) to be used for the Repeal-O-Matic Rule's Proposals. The Promotor shall make these selections as soon as possible after the beginning of the Nomic Week. For each Rule picked by the Promotor, the Repeal-O-Matic Rule shall submit a Proposal that consists of the following quoted text, with substitutions mandated by this Rule: "PROPOSAL: Repeal Rule [Number] This Proposal shall have an AI = [Power] Rule [Number] is hereby Repealed." Where [Number] in the quoted text is replaced by the Rule Number of the Rule picked by the Promotor, and [Power] is replaced by the Power of that same Rule. For the purpose of the Rules governing Proposals, it shall be deemed that The Repeal-O-Matic Rule has submitted its Proposal concerning a given Rule immediately after the Promotor makes the selection of that Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3641 (Kolja A.), 29 December 1997 text: This Rule shall be known as the Repeal-O-Matic Rule and may be referred to unambiguously in that manner. The Repeal-O-Matic Rule is a Proposing Entity, and its Executor is the Promotor. The Repeal-O-Matic Rule shall make from one to three proposals every week. The contents of these Proposals are determined as follows. The Promotor shall select five different Rules, at random, from the current Ruleset. E shall then pick a number of these selected Rules (at least one, and not more than three, and no Rule picked more than once) to be used for the Repeal-O-Matic Rule's Proposals. The Promotor shall make these selections as soon as possible after the beginning of the Nomic Week. For each Rule picked by the Promotor, the Repeal-O-Matic Rule shall submit a Proposal that consists of the following quoted text, with substitutions mandated by this Rule: "PROPOSAL: Repeal Rule [Number] This Proposal shall have an AI = [Power] Rule [Number] is hereby Repealed." Where [Number] in the quoted text is replaced by the Rule Number of the Rule picked by the Promotor, and [Power] is replaced by the Power of that same Rule. If a rule picked by the promotor explicitly refers to other rules or to concepts or entities that also appear in other rules, the promotor is authorized, but not obliged, to add provisions to the Proposal that leave the ruleset in a more consistent and functional state after the repeal of the rule picked by the promotor. For the purpose of the Rules governing Proposals, it shall be deemed that The Repeal-O-Matic Rule has submitted its Proposal concerning a given Rule immediately after the Promotor makes the selection of that Rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3668 (Kolja A.), 22 January 1998 text: This Rule shall be known as the Repeal-O-Matic Rule and may be referred to unambiguously in that manner. The Repeal-O-Matic Rule is a Proposing Entity, and its Executor is the Promotor. The Repeal-O-Matic Rule shall make from one to three proposals every week. The contents of these Proposals are determined as follows. The Promotor shall select five different Rules, at random, from the current Ruleset. E shall then pick a number of these selected Rules (at least one, and not more than three, and no Rule picked more than once) to be used for the Repeal-O-Matic Rule's Proposals. The Promotor shall make these selections as soon as possible after the beginning of the Nomic Week. For each Rule picked by the Promotor, the Repeal-O-Matic Rule shall submit a Proposal that consists of the following quoted text, with substitutions mandated by this Rule: "PROPOSAL: Repeal Rule [Number] ([Title]) This Proposal shall have an AI = [Power] Rule [Number] is hereby Repealed." Where [Number] in the quoted text is replaced by the Rule Number of the Rule picked by the Promotor, [Power] is replaced by the Power of that same Rule, and [Title] is replaced by the Title of that same Rule. At eir discretion, the promotor may also append the text of that same rule to the proposal, marked as an informational attachment. If a rule picked by the promotor explicitly refers to other rules or to concepts or entities that also appear in other rules, the promotor is authorized, but not obliged, to add provisions to the Proposal that leave the ruleset in a more consistent and functional state after the repeal of the rule picked by the promotor. For the purpose of the Rules governing Proposals, it shall be deemed that The Repeal-O-Matic Rule has submitted its Proposal concerning a given Rule immediately after the Promotor makes the selection of that Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3706 (Harlequin), 9 March 1998 text: This Rule shall be known as the Repeal-O-Matic Rule and may be referred to unambiguously in that manner. The Repeal-O-Matic Rule is a Proposing Entity, and its Executor is the Promotor. The Repeal-O-Matic Rule shall make from one to three proposals every week. The contents of these Proposals are determined as follows. The Promotor shall select five different Rules, at random, from the current Ruleset. E shall then pick a number of these selected Rules (at least one, and not more than three, and no Rule picked more than once) to be used for the Repeal-O-Matic Rule's Proposals. The Promotor shall make these selections as soon as possible after the beginning of the Nomic Week. For each Rule picked by the Promotor, e shall send a message to the Public Forum, acting as the Repeal-O-Matic's Executor, submitting a Proposal that consists of the following quoted text, with substitutions mandated by this Rule: "PROPOSAL: Repeal Rule [Number] ([Title]) This Proposal shall have an AI = [Power] Rule [Number] is hereby Repealed." Where [Number] in the quoted text is replaced by the Rule Number of the Rule picked by the Promotor, [Power] is replaced by the Power of that same Rule, and [Title] is replaced by the Title of that same Rule. At eir discretion, the promotor may also append the text of that same rule to the proposal, marked as an informational attachment. If a rule picked by the promotor explicitly refers to other rules or to concepts or entities that also appear in other rules, the promotor is authorized, but not obliged, to add provisions to the Proposal that leave the ruleset in a more consistent and functional state after the repeal of the rule picked by the promotor. For the purpose of the Rules governing Proposals, it shall be deemed that The Repeal-O-Matic Rule has submitted its Proposal concerning a given Rule immediately after the Promotor makes the selection of that Rule. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3817 (Blob), 21 December 1998 text: This Rule shall be known as the Repeal-O-Matic Rule and may be referred to unambiguously in that manner. The Repeal-O-Matic Rule is a Proposing Entity, and its Executor is the Promotor. The Repeal-O-Matic Rule shall make from one to three proposals every week. The contents of these Proposals are determined as follows. Each week, the Promotor shall select five different Rules, at random, from the current Ruleset. E shall then pick a number of these selected Rules (at least one, and not more than three, and no Rule picked more than once) to be used for the Repeal-O-Matic Rule's Proposals. For each Rule picked by the Promotor, e shall send a message to the Public Forum, acting as the Repeal-O-Matic's Executor, submitting a Proposal that consists of the following quoted text, with substitutions mandated by this Rule: "PROPOSAL: Repeal Rule [Number] ([Title]) This Proposal shall have an AI = [Power] Rule [Number] is hereby Repealed." Where [Number] in the quoted text is replaced by the Rule Number of the Rule picked by the Promotor, [Power] is replaced by the Power of that same Rule, and [Title] is replaced by the Title of that same Rule. At eir discretion, the promotor may also append the text of that same rule to the proposal, marked as an informational attachment. If a rule picked by the promotor explicitly refers to other rules or to concepts or entities that also appear in other rules, the promotor is authorized, but not obliged, to add provisions to the Proposal that leave the ruleset in a more consistent and functional state after the repeal of the rule picked by the promotor. For the purpose of the Rules governing Proposals, it shall be deemed that The Repeal-O-Matic Rule has submitted its Proposal concerning a given Rule immediately after the Promotor makes the selection of that Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1753 by Proposal 3824 (Repeal-O-Matic), 21 January 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1754 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1754 by Proposal 3619 (General Chaos), 9 December 1997 text: If an entity transfers Currency to the Bank without specifying a purpose for doing so, or if e specifies a purpose for doing so, but the transfer fails to accomplish that purpose, the Bank shall, as soon as possible, transfer that Currency back to that entity. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1754 by Proposal 3725 (Steve), 16 April 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1755 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1755 by Proposal 3622 (elJefe), 9 December 1997 text: When a player becomes deregistered, e ceases to be a candidate, officer, judge, or executor in probate, or in general to occupy any role or position to which a Rule assigns any duties or powers. Noone who is not registered may occupy such a role or position. This rule takes precedence over rules which would prevent em from ceasing to occupy such a role or position. The foregoing paragraph shall not apply to the holding of Patent Titles, or any position which a Rule specifically says may be held by a non-Player, nor shall it act to prevent a nonPlayer from registering, calling CFJs, or doing things that nonPlayers generally are able to do. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3853 (Blob), 19 April 1999 text: When a player becomes deregistered or a Zombie, e ceases to be a candidate, officer, judge, or executor in probate, or in general to occupy any role or position to which a Rule assigns any duties or powers. Noone who is not registered, or who is a Zombie, may occupy such a role or position. This rule takes precedence over rules which would prevent em from ceasing to occupy such a role or position. The foregoing paragraph shall not apply to the holding of Patent Titles, or any position which a Rule specifically says may be held by a non-Player or Zombie, nor shall it act to prevent a non-Player or Zombie from registering, calling CFJs, or doing things that non-Players and Zombies are generally able to do. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3896 (Elysion), 27 August 1999 text: When a player becomes deregistered or a Zombie, e ceases to be a candidate, officer, judge, or Executor of an entity in probate, or in general to occupy any role or position to which a Rule assigns any duties or powers. Noone who is not registered, or who is a Zombie, may occupy such a role or position. This rule takes precedence over rules which would prevent em from ceasing to occupy such a role or position. The foregoing paragraph shall not apply to the holding of Patent Titles, or any position which a Rule specifically says may be held by a non-Player or Zombie, nor shall it act to prevent a non-Player or Zombie from registering, calling CFJs, or doing things that non-Players and Zombies are generally able to do. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4048 (Peekee), 15 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: When a player becomes deregistered or a Zombie, e ceases to be a candidate, officer, judge, or in general to occupy any role or position to which a Rule assigns any duties or powers. No one who is not registered, or who is a Zombie, may occupy such a role or position. This rule takes precedence over rules which would prevent em from ceasing to occupy such a role or position. The foregoing paragraph shall not apply to the holding of Patent Titles, or any position which a Rule specifically says may be held by a non-Player or Zombie, nor shall it act to prevent a non-Player or Zombie from registering, calling CFJs, or doing things that non-Players and Zombies are generally able to do. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 text: When a player becomes deregistered or a Zombie, e ceases to be a candidate, officer, judge, or in general to occupy any role or position to which a Rule assigns any duties or powers. No one who is not registered, or who is a Zombie, may occupy such a role or position. This rule takes precedence over rules which would prevent em from ceasing to occupy such a role or position. The foregoing paragraph shall not apply to the Bearing of Patent Titles, or any position which a Rule specifically says may be held by a non-Player or Zombie, nor shall it act to prevent a non-Player or Zombie from registering, calling CFJs, or doing things that non-Players and Zombies are generally able to do. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 text: Whenever a player is deregistered, e ceases to be a candidate, officer, judge, or in general to occupy any role or position to which the rules assign any duties or powers. No one who is not registered may occupy such a role or position, unless at least one of the rules defining the role or position explicitly indicate it may be occupied by a nonplayer. Bearing a Patent Title shall not be deemed to be occupying a role or position. This rule shall not act to prevent a nonplayer from registering, calling for judgement, or otherwise doing things that nonplayers are generally able to do. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1755 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1756 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1756 by Proposal 3629 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall recuse from a CFJ any Judge who is delinquent upon the demand of any two Players. A Player demands the recusal of a delinquent Judge by posting eir demand in the Public Forum. A Judge recused for delinquency commits the Infraction of Judicial Delinquency, which bears a penalty of 2 Blots to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall recuse from a CFJ any Judge who is delinquent upon the demand of any two Players. A Player demands the recusal of a delinquent Judge by posting eir demand in the Public Forum. A Judge recused for delinquency commits the Infraction of Judicial Delinquency, to be reported by the Clerk of the Courts and bearing a penalty of 2 Blots. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall recuse from a CFJ any Judge who is delinquent upon the demand of any two Players. A Player demands the recusal of a delinquent Judge by posting eir demand in the Public Forum. A Judge recused for delinquency commits the Class 2 Infraction of Judicial Delinquency, to be reported by the CotC. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: The Clerk of the Courts shall recuse from a CFJ any Judge who is delinquent upon the public demand of any two Players. A Judge recused for delinquency commits the Class 2 Infraction of Judicial Delinquency, to be reported by the CotC. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1756 by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1757 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1757 by Proposal 3636 (General Chaos), 29 December 1997 text: The Trustee of an entity in Probate is empowered to submit on behalf of that entity whatever Transfer Orders are necessary to implement eir Plan for the disposition of that entity's Estate, as if e were that entity's Executor. The Trustee may also execute and vacate Payment Orders when necessary to implement the Plan for the disposition of the Estate. The Trustee may exercise the above powers only when implementing a Plan for the disposition of the Estate of the entity in Probate of which e is the Trustee. The Trustee of an entity in Probate ceases to be Trustee when: a) e announces in the Public Forum that e resigns as Trustee; b) e ceases to be a Player; c) the entity of which e is Trustee ceases to be in Probate; or d) the Notary announces that e has been removed as Trustee. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3662 (General Chaos), 17 January 1998 text: The Trustee of an entity in Probate is empowered to submit on behalf of that entity whatever Transfer Orders are necessary to implement eir Plan for the disposition of that entity's Estate, as if e were that entity's Executor. The Trustee may also execute and vacate Payment Orders when necessary to implement the Plan for the disposition of the Estate. The Trustee may exercise the above powers only when implementing a Plan for the disposition of the Estate of the entity in Probate of which e is the Trustee. The Trustee of an entity in Probate ceases to be Trustee when: a) e announces in the Public Forum that e resigns as Trustee; b) e ceases to be a Player; c) the entity of which e is Trustee ceases to be in Probate; or d) the Notary announces that e has been removed as Trustee. An entity in Probate ceases to be in Probate when its Trustee announces the completion the implementation of a Plan for the disposition of the Estate of that entity. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The Trustee of an entity in Probate is empowered to submit on behalf of that entity whatever Transfer Orders are necessary to implement eir Plan for the disposition of that entity's Estate, as if e were that entity's Executor. The Trustee may also execute and vacate Payment Orders when necessary to implement the Plan for the disposition of the Estate. The Trustee may exercise the above powers only when implementing a Plan for the disposition of the Estate of the entity in Probate of which e is the Trustee. The Trustee of an entity in Probate ceases to be Trustee when: a) e announces in the Public Forum that e resigns as Trustee; b) e ceases to be a Player; c) the entity of which e is Trustee ceases to be in Probate; or d) the Notary announces that e has been removed as Trustee. An entity in Probate ceases to be in Probate when its Trustee announces the completion of the implementation of a Plan for the disposition of the Estate of that entity. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1758 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1758 by Proposal 3637 (Blob), 29 December 1997 text: If a certain Office is held in the normal fashion by a Player, then the Registrar may declare Without Objection that the Office is held in perpetuity, until such time as the Player holding the Office changes. The Term of Service of an Office held in perpetuity shall never expire. This Rule takes precedence over other rules defining the expiry of an Office's Term of Service. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3707 (Steve), 9 March 1998 text: If a certain Office is held in the normal fashion by a Player, then the Registrar may declare Without Objection that that Player holds the Office in perpetuity. The Term of Service of an Office held in perpetuity shall never expire, and a Player holding an Office in perpetuity continues to hold the Office in perpetuity while e holds the Office. If a Player holding an Office in perpetuity delegates the Office to another Player, then, if e resumes holding the Office in the normal fashion at the end of the Period of Delegation, e also resumes holding the Office in perpetuity. This Rule takes precedence over other rules defining the expiry of an Office's Term of Service. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3742 (Harlequin), 8 May 1998 text: If a Player is the Electee to an Office which e currently holds, then the Registrar may declare Without Objection that that Player holds the Office in perpetuity. The Term of Service of an Office held in perpetuity shall never expire, and a Player holding an Office in perpetuity continues to hold the Office in perpetuity while e holds the Office. If a Player holding an Office in perpetuity delegates the Office to another Player, then, if e resumes holding the Office in the normal fashion at the end of the Period of Delegation, e also resumes holding the Office in perpetuity. This Rule takes precedence over other rules defining the expiry of an Office's Term of Service. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 text: If a Player is the Electee to an Office which e currently holds, then the Payroll Clerk may declare Without Objection that that Player holds the Office in perpetuity. The Term of Service of an Office held in perpetuity shall never expire, and a Player holding an Office in perpetuity continues to hold the Office in perpetuity while e holds the Office. If a Player holding an Office in perpetuity delegates the Office to another Player, then, if e resumes holding the Office in the normal fashion at the end of the Period of Delegation, e also resumes holding the Office in perpetuity. This Rule takes precedence over other rules defining the expiry of an Office's Term of Service. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4053 (harvel), 21 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4071 (Steve), 14 September 2000 text: If a Player is the Electee to an Office which e currently holds, then the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy may declare, Without Objection, that that Player holds that Office in perpetuity. The Player then holds the Office in perpetuity. The Term of Service of an Office held in perpetuity shall never expire, and a Player holding an Office in perpetuity continues to hold the Office in perpetuity while e holds the Office. If a Player holding an Office in perpetuity delegates the Office to another Player, and e is still the Electee to the Office at the end of the Period of Delegation, then e resumes holding the Office in perpetuity. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules defining the expiry of an Office's Term of Service. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4142 (Murphy), 15 April 2001 text: If a Player is the Electee to an Office which e currently holds, then the Assistant Director of Personnel may declare, Without Objection, that that Player holds that Office in perpetuity. The Player then holds the Office in perpetuity. The Term of Service of an Office held in perpetuity shall never expire, and a Player holding an Office in perpetuity continues to hold the Office in perpetuity while e holds the Office. If a Player holding an Office in perpetuity delegates the Office to another Player, and e is still the Electee to the Office at the end of the Period of Delegation, then e resumes holding the Office in perpetuity. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules defining the expiry of an Office's Term of Service. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4768 (root), 25 May 2005 text: If a Player is the Electee to an Office which e currently holds, then the Associate Director of Personnel may declare, Without Objection, that that Player holds that Office in perpetuity. The Player then holds the Office in perpetuity. The Term of Service of an Office held in perpetuity shall never expire, and a Player holding an Office in perpetuity continues to hold the Office in perpetuity while e holds the Office. If a Player holding an Office in perpetuity delegates the Office to another Player, and e is still the Electee to the Office at the end of the Period of Delegation, then e resumes holding the Office in perpetuity. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules defining the expiry of an Office's Term of Service. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1758 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1759 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1759 by Proposal 3646 (elJefe), 29 December 1997 text: The Executor of Organization's SLC is empowered to execute Payment Orders from the Organization or from any Player within its Jurisdiction, but only such Payment Orders as are authorized by the SLC. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: The Executor of an Organization's SLC is empowered to execute Payment Orders from the Organization or from any Player within its Jurisdiction, but only such Payment Orders as are authorized by the SLC. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1760 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1760 by Proposal 3647 (Swann), 29 December 1997 text: Any Player other than the Assessor is permitted to buyback Quorum on a particular Proposal. A Player is only permitted to do this once for any single Proposal. A Player does this by informing the Assessor that e wishes to buyback Quorum on a specified Proposal. That Player can rescind eir buyback before the end of the voting period by sending a message stating so to the Assessor. The effect of a Player's buyback on Quorum (if it is not rescinded) is to reduce the Quorum on the specified Proposal by one. If multiple Players buyback Quorum on a single Proposal, the effect is cumulative. At the end of the voting period for that Proposal, the Assessor shall adjust the Quorum for that Proposal by subtracting one for each buyback that was not rescinded. The Assessor shall then bill each Player whose buyback was not rescinded one P-Note. The Assessor is required to maintain the same secrecy about a Player's buyback as e is a Player's Vote. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1760 by Proposal 3796 (Repeal-O-Matic), 26 October 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1761 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1761 by Proposal 3648 (Swann), 1 January 1998 text: The Speaker has the power to, Without Objection, designate any Proposal whose voting period is underway to have achieved Quorum. That Proposal shall then have its Quorum adjusted to equal zero. This Rule takes precedence over the Rules defining Quorum for Proposals. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1762 history: Enacted as Power=1.5 Rule 1762 by Proposal 3652 (General Chaos), 1 January 1998 text: Upon the creation of this Rule, Rules 1671, 1672, 1673, and 1674 shall be repealed. Once this has occured, this Rule shall repeal itself. history: Repealed as Power=1.5 Rule 1762 by Rule 1762, 1 January 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1763 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1763 by Proposal 3654 (General Chaos), 1 January 1998 text: If an entity transfers Currency to the Bank without specifying a purpose for doing so, or if e specifies a purpose for doing so, but the transfer fails to accomplish that purpose, the Bank shall, as soon as possible, transfer that Currency back to that entity. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1763 by Proposal 3683 (Repeal-O-Matic), 12 February 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1764 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1764 by Proposal 3658 (Steve), 8 January 1998 text: Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. However, this Rule shall have no effect on the voting for a Proposal if it would prevent all legal voting on that Proposal. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3757 (Steve), 12 June 1998 text: Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. However, this Rule shall have no effect on the voting for a Proposal if it would prevent all legal voting on that Proposal. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, shall have no effect. Two months after this paragraph is added to this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(2) by Rule 1764, 12 August 1998 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3780 (Steve), 12 August 1998 text: Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. However, this Rule shall have no effect on the voting for a Proposal if it would prevent all legal voting on that Proposal. This Rule, apart from this paragraph, has no effect. Two months after this paragraph is added to this Rule, this paragraph shall be deleted from this Rule. history: Amended(4) by Rule 1764, 12 October 1998 text: Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. However, this Rule shall have no effect on the voting for a Proposal if it would prevent all legal voting on that Proposal. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3834 (Blob), 2 March 1999 text: (a) There are three possible modes of voting on Proposals, Elections and Referenda: Public, Private and Unrestricted. The prevailing mode for each of each of Proposals, Elections and Referenda is initially Public. (b) (1) The Assessor may change the prevailing mode of voting for Proposals, with Support. (2) The Registrar may change the prevailing mode of voting for Elections, with Support. (3) The prevailing mode of Referenda is always Public. (c) When the Voting Period on a Proposal, Election or Referendum begins, the mode of voting for that Proposal, Election or Referendum is set to the prevailing mode for that kind of vote. Once set in this manner, the mode of voting cannot be changed. (d) (1) If the mode of voting is Public, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on that Proposal, Election or Referendum, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. (2) If the mode of voting is Private, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on that Proposal, Election or Referendum, may only be achieved by sending a message privately to the Vote Collector. (3) If the mode of voting is Unrestricted, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on that Proposal, Election or Referendum, may be achieved by sending a message either publically or privately. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3952 (Blob), 13 December 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3956 (harvel), 28 December 1999 text: There are three classes of Issues: Proposals, Elections, and Referenda. (a) There are three possible modes of voting on Issues: Public, Private and Unrestricted. If not otherwise defined, the prevailing mode for each class of Issue is Public. (b) (1) The Assessor may change the prevailing mode of voting for Proposals, with Support. (2) The Payroll Clerk may change the prevailing mode of voting for Elections, with Support. (3) The prevailing mode of Referenda is always Public. (c) When the Voting Period on an Issue begins, the mode of voting for that particular Issue is permanently set to the prevailing mode for that class of Issue. (d) (1) If the mode of voting is Public, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. (2) If the mode of voting is Private, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message privately to the Vote Collector. (3) If the mode of voting is Unrestricted, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on that Issue, may be achieved by sending a message either publically or privately. (e) If the mode of voting is Private or Unrestricted, then the status of any votes cast privately is secret until the end of the voting period. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3972 (Peekee), 14 February 2000 text: There are three classes of Issues: Proposals, Elections, and Referenda. (a) There are three possible modes of voting on Issues: Public, Private and Unrestricted. If not otherwise defined, the prevailing mode for each class of Issue is Public. (b) (1) The Assessor may change the prevailing mode of voting for Proposals, with Support. (2) The Payroll Clerk may change the prevailing mode of voting for Elections, with Support. (3) The prevailing mode of Referenda is always Public. (c) When the Voting Period on an Issue begins, the mode of voting for that particular Issue is permanently set to the prevailing mode for that class of Issue. (d) (1) If the mode of voting is Public, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. (2) If the mode of voting is Private, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message privately to the Vote Collector. (3) If the mode of voting is Unrestricted, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may be achieved by sending a message either publically or privately. (e) If the mode of voting is Private or Unrestricted, then the status of any votes cast privately is secret until the end of the voting period. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4053 (harvel), 21 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: There are three classes of Issues: Proposals, Elections, and Referenda. (a) There are three possible modes of voting on Issues: Public, Private and Unrestricted. If not otherwise defined, the prevailing mode for each class of Issue is Public. (b) (1) The Assessor may change the prevailing mode of voting for Proposals, with Support. (2) The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy may change the prevailing mode of voting for Elections, with Support. (3) The prevailing mode of Referenda is always Public. (c) When the Voting Period on an Issue begins, the mode of voting for that particular Issue is permanently set to the prevailing mode for that class of Issue. (d) (1) If the mode of voting is Public, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. (2) If the mode of voting is Private, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message privately to the Vote Collector. (3) If the mode of voting is Unrestricted, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may be achieved by sending a message either publicly or privately. (e) If the mode of voting is Private or Unrestricted, then the status of any votes cast privately is secret until the end of the voting period. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4142 (Murphy), 15 April 2001 text: There are three classes of Issues: Proposals, Elections, and Referenda. (a) There are three possible modes of voting on Issues: Public, Private and Unrestricted. If not otherwise defined, the prevailing mode for each class of Issue is Public. (b) (1) The Assessor may change the prevailing mode of voting for Proposals, with Support. (2) The Assistant Director of Personnel may change the prevailing mode of voting for Elections, with Support. (3) The prevailing mode of Referenda is always Public. (c) When the Voting Period on an Issue begins, the mode of voting for that particular Issue is permanently set to the prevailing mode for that class of Issue. (d) (1) If the mode of voting is Public, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. (2) If the mode of voting is Private, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message privately to the Vote Collector. (3) If the mode of voting is Unrestricted, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may be achieved by sending a message either publicly or privately. (e) If the mode of voting is Private or Unrestricted, then the status of any votes cast privately is secret until the end of the voting period. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4759 (Manu, Sherlock), 15 May 2005 text: There are three classes of Issues: Proposals, Elections, and Referenda. (a) There are three possible modes of voting on Issues: Public, Private and Unrestricted. If not otherwise defined, the prevailing mode for each class of Issue is Public. (b) (1) The Assessor may change the prevailing mode of voting for Proposals, with Support. (2) The Assistant Director of Personnel may change the prevailing mode of voting for Elections, with Support. (3) The prevailing mode of Referenda is always Public. (c) When the Voting Period on an Issue begins, the mode of voting for that particular Issue is permanently set to the prevailing mode for that class of Issue. (d) (1) If the mode of voting is Public, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. (2) If the mode of voting is Private, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message privately to the Vote Collector. (3) If the mode of voting is Unrestricted, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may be achieved by sending a message either publicly or privately. (e) If the mode of voting is Private or Unrestricted, then the status of any votes cast privately is secret until the end of the voting period. Any player who knowingly reveals the status of any vote to any player besides the Assessor commits the Crime of Unlawful Vote Disclosure, a Class 5 Crime. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4768 (root), 25 May 2005 text: There are three classes of Issues: Proposals, Elections, and Referenda. (a) There are three possible modes of voting on Issues: Public, Private and Unrestricted. If not otherwise defined, the prevailing mode for each class of Issue is Public. (b) (1) The Assessor may change the prevailing mode of voting for Proposals, with Support. (2) The Associate Director of Personnel may change the prevailing mode of voting for Elections, with Support. (3) The prevailing mode of Referenda is always Public. (c) When the Voting Period on an Issue begins, the mode of voting for that particular Issue is permanently set to the prevailing mode for that class of Issue. (d) (1) If the mode of voting is Public, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Public Forum. (2) If the mode of voting is Private, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may only be achieved by sending a message privately to the Vote Collector. (3) If the mode of voting is Unrestricted, then any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voters on that Issue, may be achieved by sending a message either publicly or privately. (e) If the mode of voting is Private or Unrestricted, then the status of any votes cast privately is secret until the end of the voting period. Any player who knowingly reveals the status of any vote to any player besides the Assessor commits the Crime of Unlawful Vote Disclosure, a Class 5 Crime. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: There are three modes of nomination for elections: selfless, selfish, and open. If the player who initiated the election does not specify the mode of nomination for an election, it is selfish. (1) In a selfless election, any nominator may nominate any prospective besides emself. (2) In a selfish election, any nominator who is a prospective may nominate emself. (3) In an open election, any nominator may nominate any prospective. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1764 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1765 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1765 by Proposal 3670 (Swann), 30 January 1998 text: For each vote beyond the first two an entity casts on a particular Proposal, that entity must provide to the Assessor the Rule Numbers of the Rules that permit the casting of that additional vote. If these Rule Numbers are not provided to the Assessor before the end of the voting period for that Proposal, the Assessor has the option to not count more than two votes on that Proposal from that entity. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1766 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1766 by Proposal 3671 (Swann), 30 January 1998 text: If a particular Proposal amends the duties or description of a particular Office, and a Player holds that Office in normal fashion, and that Player is not the same Player who Proposed the Proposal, then that Player may cast two additional votes on that Proposal beyond what e is otherwise entitled to cast. This shall not increase the maximum number of votes that are permitted to be cast by that Player. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1766 by Proposal 3765 (Repeal-O-Matic), 6 July 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1767 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1767 by Proposal 3674 (Steve), 30 January 1998 text: Upon the creation of this Rule, all Voting Tokens are destroyed. Furthermore, as soon as possible after the creation of this Rule, the Chancellor shall, for each Player, execute a Transfer Order for five Voting Tokens, naming the Bank as payor, and that Player as the payee. This Rule shall repeal itself as soon as the Chancellor has executed the Transfer Orders required by it. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent VTs from being destroyed. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1767 by Rule 1767, 4 February 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1768 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1768 by Proposal 3676 (General Chaos), 30 January 1998 text: The published Report of an Officer constitutes prima facie evidence of the truth of those matters reported therein which that Officer is required by law to report. This presumption may be set aside only by clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1768 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1769 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1769 by Proposal 3679 (General Chaos), 30 January 1998 text: A Holiday is a period of time, not to exceed 7 days in length, designated as such by the Rules. If one Holiday begins within 24 hours of the end of another Holiday, the two Holidays and the time between them are taken as a single Holiday, unless this would cause the combined Holiday to exceed 7 days in length, in which case the first Holiday is extended to 7 days and the second Holiday does not occur. During a Holiday, no Proposal may be distributed by the Promotor, nor may any Call for Judgement, Judgement, notice of Appeal, Decision of Appeals Boards, or Opinion be published by the Clerk of the Courts; however, if any of the above do take place during the Holiday in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. If some Rule requires that an action be done prior to a given time, and that given time falls during a Holiday, or within the twenty-four-hour period immediately following that Holiday, then that action need not be done until twenty-four hours after that Holiday ends. If some Rule bases the time of a future event upon the time of another event, or requires that a Player perform some action within some time of another event, and that event occurs during a Holiday, the time at which the Holiday ends shall be used instead for the purpose of determining the time of the future event or of the time by which the Player must perform the specified action. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the timing of events, and over all Rules which require Players to perform events before a specified time. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4036 (Oerjan), 7 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 01-003 (Steve), 2 February 2001 text: A Holiday is a period of time, not to exceed 17 days in length, designated as such by the Rules. If one Holiday begins within 72 hours of the end of another Holiday, the two Holidays and the time between them are taken as a single Holiday, unless this would cause the combined Holiday to exceed 17 days in length, in which case the first Holiday is extended to 17 days and the second Holiday does not occur. During a Holiday, no Proposal may be distributed by the Promotor, nor may any Call for Judgement, Judgement, notice of Appeal, Decision of Appeals Boards, or Opinion be published by the Clerk of the Courts; however, if any of the above do take place during the Holiday in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. If some Rule requires that an action be done prior to a given time, and that given time falls during a Holiday, or within the 72-hour period immediately following that Holiday, then that action need not be done until 72 hours after that Holiday ends. If some Rule bases the time of a future event upon the time of another event, or requires that a Player perform some action within some time of another event, and that other event occurs during a Holiday, the time at which the Holiday ends shall be used instead for the purpose of determining the time of the future event or of the time by which the Player must perform the specified action. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the timing of events, and over all Rules which require Players to perform events before a specified time. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: A Holiday is a period of time designated as such by the Rules. During a Holiday, no Proposal may be distributed by the Promotor, nor may any Call for Judgement, Judgement, notice of Appeal, Decision of Appeals Boards, or Opinion be published by the Clerk of the Courts; however, if any of the above do take place during the Holiday in violation of this Rule, this Rule does not deprive them of their usual effects. If some Rule requires that an action be done prior to a given time, and that given time falls during a Holiday, or within the 72-hour period immediately following that Holiday, then that action need not be done until 72 hours after that Holiday ends. If some Rule bases the time of a future event upon the time of another event, or requires that a Player perform some action within some time of another event, and that other event occurs during a Holiday, the time at which the Holiday ends shall be used instead for the purpose of determining the time of the future event or of the time by which the Player must perform the specified action. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the timing of events, and over all Rules which require Players to perform events before a specified time. The period each year from midnight GMT on the morning of 24 December to the beginning of the first Agoran week to begin after 2 January is a Holiday. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5077 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 text: A Holiday is a period of time designated as such by the Rules. During a Holiday, the Promotor SHALL NOT distribute any proposals, and the Clerk of the Courts SHALL NOT publish any Call for Judgement, Judgement, notice of Appeal, Decision of Appeals Boards, or Opinion. If some Rule requires that an action be done prior to a given time, and that given time falls during a Holiday, or within the 72-hour period immediately following that Holiday, then that action need not be done until 72 hours after that Holiday ends. If some Rule bases the time of a future event upon the time of another event, or requires that a Player perform some action within some time of another event, and that other event occurs during a Holiday, the time at which the Holiday ends shall be used instead for the purpose of determining the time of the future event or of the time by which the Player must perform the specified action. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the timing of events, and over all Rules which require Players to perform events before a specified time. The period each year from midnight GMT on the morning of 24 December to the beginning of the first Agoran week to begin after 2 January is a Holiday. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: A Holiday is a period of time designated as such by the Rules. During a Holiday, the Promotor SHALL NOT distribute any proposals, and judges SHALL NOT be assigned to any judicial case, and judges SHALL NOT assign judgement to any judicial question. If some Rule requires that an action be done prior to a given time, and that given time falls during a Holiday, or within the 72-hour period immediately following that Holiday, then that action need not be done until 72 hours after that Holiday ends. If some Rule bases the time of a future event upon the time of another event, or requires that a Player perform some action within some time of another event, and that other event occurs during a Holiday, the time at which the Holiday ends shall be used instead for the purpose of determining the time of the future event or of the time by which the Player must perform the specified action. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the timing of events, and over all Rules which require Players to perform events before a specified time. The period each year from midnight GMT on the morning of 24 December to the beginning of the first Agoran week to begin after 2 January is a Holiday. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5484 (Murphy; disi.), 2 April 2008 text: A Holiday is a period of time designated as such by the Rules. During a Holiday, the Promotor SHALL NOT distribute any proposals, and judges SHALL NOT be assigned to any judicial case, and judges SHALL NOT assign judgement to any judicial question. If some Rule requires that an action be done prior to a given time, and that given time falls during a Holiday, or within the 72-hour period immediately following that Holiday, then that action need not be done until 72 hours after that Holiday ends. If some Rule bases the time of a future event (including the time limit for a player to perform an action) upon the time of another event, and a) that other event occurs during a Holiday, then the time at which that Holiday ends shall be used instead for the purpose of determining the time of the future event. b) the future event would occur during a Holiday, then the future event occurs 72 hours after the end of that Holiday instead. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the timing of events, and over all Rules which require Players to perform events before a specified time. The period each year from midnight GMT on the morning of 24 December to the beginning of the first Agoran week to begin after 2 January is a Holiday. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5535 (Murphy), 7 June 2008 text: A Holiday is a period of time designated as such by the Rules. During a Holiday, the Promotor SHALL NOT distribute any proposals, and judges SHALL NOT be assigned to any judicial case, and judges SHALL NOT assign judgement to any judicial question. If some Rule requires that an action be done prior to a given time, and that given time falls during a Holiday, or within the 72-hour period immediately following that Holiday, then that action need not be done until 72 hours after that Holiday ends. If some Rule bases the time of a future event (including the time limit to perform an action) upon the time of another event, and a) that other event occurs during a Holiday, then the time at which that Holiday ends shall be used instead for the purpose of determining the time of the future event. b) the future event would occur during a Holiday, then the future event occurs 72 hours after the end of that Holiday instead. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the timing of events, and over all Rules which require events to be performed before a specified time. The period each year from midnight GMT on the morning of 24 December to the beginning of the first Agoran week to begin after 2 January is a Holiday. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1770 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1770 by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 text: Each week, the Promotor shall distribute a batch of Proposals. These are the only Proposals e is allowed to distribute that week. If there are five or fewer Proposals in the Proposal Queue having a Priority greater than zero, then the batch shall consist of all such Proposals. If there are more than five such proposals, then the batch shall consist of the first five such Proposals, in the order given by the Queue. Once a Proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Queue. Promotor shall distribute each proposal in the batch to the Public Forum, accompanied by its Number and the identity of its Proposing Entity. The failure of the Promotor to distribute any of the above accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. A Proposal is only considered to be legally distributed if it is explicitly marked as such. The Promotor is permitted to publish the text of undistributed Proposals without necessarily distributing them. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3731 (Steve), 24 April 1998 text: Each week, the Promotor shall distribute a batch of Proposals. These are the only Proposals e is allowed to distribute that week. If the number of Proposals in the Proposal Queue with a Priority greater than zero is less than or equal to the Batch Size, then the batch shall consist of all such Proposals. If the number of Proposals in the Proposal Queue is greater than the Batch Size, then the batch shall consist of those Proposals in the Queue with the highest Priority such that the number of Proposals distributed is equal to the Batch Size. Once a Proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Queue. Promotor shall distribute each proposal in the batch to the Public Forum, accompanied by its Number and the identity of its Proposing Entity. The failure of the Promotor to distribute any of the above accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. A Proposal is only considered to be legally distributed if it is explicitly marked as such. The Promotor is permitted to publish the text of undistributed Proposals without necessarily distributing them. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Each week, the Promotor shall distribute a batch of Proposals. These are the only Proposals e is allowed to distribute that week. If the number of Proposals in the Proposal Queue with a Priority greater than zero is less than or equal to the Batch Size, then the batch shall consist of all such Proposals. If the number of Proposals in the Proposal Queue is greater than the Batch Size, then the batch shall consist of those Proposals in the Queue with the highest Priority such that the number of Proposals distributed is equal to the Batch Size. Once a Proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Queue. The Promotor shall distribute each proposal in the batch to the Public Forum, accompanied by its Number and the identity of its Proposing Entity. The failure of the Promotor to distribute any of the above accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. A Proposal is only considered to be legally distributed if it is explicitly marked as such. The Promotor is permitted to publish the text of undistributed Proposals without necessarily distributing them. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3841 (Blob), 15 March 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3842 (Blob), 15 March 1999 text: Each week, the Promotor shall distribute a batch of Proposals. These are the only Proposals e is allowed to distribute that week. If the number of Proposals in the Proposal Queue with a Priority greater than or equal to the Priority Bar is less than or equal to the Batch Size, then the batch shall consist of all such Proposals. Otherwise, the batch shall consist of those Proposals in the Queue with the highest Priority such that the number of Proposals distributed is equal to the Batch Size. Once a Proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Queue. The Promotor shall distribute each proposal in the batch to the Public Forum, accompanied by the identity of its Proposing Entity. The failure of the Promotor to distribute any of the above accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. A Proposal is only considered to be legally distributed if it is explicitly marked as such. The Promotor is permitted to publish the text of undistributed Proposals without necessarily distributing them. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3867 (Blob), 24 May 1999 text: Each week, the Promotor shall distribute a batch of Proposals. These are the only Proposals e is allowed to distribute that week. If the number of Interested Proposals in the Proposal Queue with a Priority greater than or equal to the Priority Bar is less than or equal to the Batch Size, then the batch shall consist of all such Proposals. Otherwise, the batch shall consist of those Interested Proposals in the Queue with the highest Priority such that the number of Proposals distributed is equal to the Batch Size. The batch shall also include any Disinterested Proposals currently in the Proposal Queue. Once a Proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Queue. The Promotor shall distribute each proposal in the batch to the Public Forum, accompanied by the identity of its Proposing Entity. The failure of the Promotor to distribute any of the above accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. A Proposal is only considered to be legally distributed if it is explicitly marked as such. The Promotor is permitted to publish the text of undistributed Proposals without necessarily distributing them. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3922 (Wes), 3 October 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 3933 (harvel), 24 October 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(9) by Proposal 3933 (harvel), 24 October 1999 text: The Current Batch for a given Week is a subset of the Proposal Queue. Its contents shall be calculated at the beginning of that Week. It shall contain every Disinterested Proposal then in the Proposal Queue, as well as: * all Interested Proposals in the Proposal Queue with Priority greater than zero, if their number is not greater than the Batch Size; or * a set of Interested Proposals in the Proposal Queue with the highest positive Priority the cardinality of which is equal to the Batch Size. Ties for highest Priority shall be broken in favor of those Proposals which have been in the Queue the longest. During a Week, the Promotor must distribute all and only Proposals in that Week's Current Batch. Failure to Distribute all Proposals in that Current Batch during that Week is the Class 0.5 Infraction of Promotor Tardiness. All Players are authorized to detect and report this Infraction. Distribution of a Proposal (or text purporting to be a Proposal) not in the Current Batch is the Class 1 Crime of Promotor Misrepresentation. All Players are authorized to detect and report this Crime. A Player may make a Claim of Error stating that a distributed Proposal was not in the Current Batch at the time it was distributed. If this is admitted, then: * the Voting Period for that Proposal shall immediately end; * all Votes cast on that Proposal shall be cancelled; and * the Promotor shall add the Proposal to the Proposal Queue. Once a Proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Queue. The Promotor shall distribute each proposal in the batch to the Public Forum, accompanied by the identity of its Proposing Entity. The failure of the Promotor to distribute any of the above accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. A Proposal is only considered to be legally distributed if it is explicitly marked as such. The Promotor is permitted to publish the text of undistributed Proposals without necessarily distributing them. Immediately after all Proposals in the Current Batch have been distributed the Promotor shall reduce the Priority of all Proposals remaining in the Queue to half of their previous values, rounding fractions down. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4005 (Taral), 8 May 2000 text: The Current Batch for a given Week is a subset of the Proposal Queue. Its contents shall be calculated at the beginning of that Week. It shall contain every Disinterested Proposal then in the Proposal Queue, as well as: * all Interested Proposals in the Proposal Queue with Priority greater than zero, if their number is not greater than the Batch Size; or * a set of Interested Proposals in the Proposal Queue with the highest positive Priority the cardinality of which is equal to the Batch Size. Ties for highest Priority shall be broken in favor of those Proposals which have been in the Queue the longest. During a Week, the Promotor must distribute all and only Proposals in that Week's Current Batch. Failure to Distribute all Proposals in that Current Batch during that Week is the Class 0.5 Infraction of Promotor Tardiness. All Players are authorized to detect and report this Infraction. Knowingly and willfully distributing a Proposal (or text purporting to be a Proposal) not in the Current Batch is the Class 2 Crime of Promotor Misrepresentation. All Players are authorized to detect and report this Crime. A Player may make a Claim of Error stating that a distributed Proposal was not in the Current Batch at the time it was distributed. If this is admitted, then: * the Voting Period for that Proposal shall immediately end; * all Votes cast on that Proposal shall be cancelled; and * the Promotor shall add the Proposal to the Proposal Queue. Once a Proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Queue. The Promotor shall distribute each proposal in the batch to the Public Forum, accompanied by its number, the identity of its Proposing Entity, and an indication of whether the Proposal is Ordinary or Democratic. The failure of the Promotor to distribute any of the above accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. A Proposal is only considered to be legally distributed if it is explicitly marked as such. The Promotor is permitted to publish the text of undistributed Proposals without necessarily distributing them. Immediately after all Proposals in the Current Batch have been distributed the Promotor shall reduce the Priority of all Proposals remaining in the Queue to half of their previous values, rounding fractions down. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4034 (Chuck), 2 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4072 (Steve), 20 September 2000 text: During each Week, the Promotor must either distribute every Proposal that was Distributable at the beginning of that Week, or announce that there were no such Proposals. Failure to do so is the Class 1 Infraction of Promotor Tardiness, which any Player may detect and report. The distribution of each Proposal shall be accompanied by the identity of its Proposing Entity, and an indication of whether the Proposal is Ordinary or Democratic. However, the failure of the Promotor to distribute any of these accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. A Proposal is legally distributed only if it is explicitly marked as such. When a Proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. The Promotor shall not distribute any Proposal which is not Distributable, and must abort any Proposal so distributed. If the Promotor aborts a Proposal which e knows was Distributable at the time it was distributed, e commits the Class 2 Crime of Illegal Abortion. The Promotor aborts a Proposal by publishing an announcement to that effect, clearly identifying the Proposal which has been aborted. When a Proposal is aborted: (a) the Voting Period for that Proposal immediately ends, if it has not ended already; (b) all Votes cast on that Proposal are cancelled, and the Proposal fails; (c) the Assessor is relieved of any duty to report on Votes cast on that Proposal; and (d) the Proposal is added to the Proposal Pool. The distribution of an Undistributable Proposal, when the Promotor knows that the Proposal is Undistributable, is the Class 2 Crime of Promotor Misrepresentation. The distribution of a text purporting to be a Proposal, when the Promotor knows that the text is not a Proposal, is the Class 5 Crime of Promotor Fraud. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4282 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: During each Week, the Promotor must either distribute every Proposal that was Distributable at the beginning of that Week, or announce that there were no such Proposals. Failure to do so is the Class 1 Infraction of Promotor Tardiness, which any Player may detect and report. The distribution of each Proposal shall be accompanied by the identity of its Proposing Entity, and an indication of the Proposal's Chamber. However, the failure of the Promotor to distribute any of these accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. A Proposal is legally distributed only if it is explicitly marked as such. When a Proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. The Promotor shall not distribute any Proposal which is not Distributable, and must abort any Proposal so distributed. If the Promotor aborts a Proposal which e knows was Distributable at the time it was distributed, e commits the Class 2 Crime of Illegal Abortion. The Promotor aborts a Proposal by publishing an announcement to that effect, clearly identifying the Proposal which has been aborted. When a Proposal is aborted: (a) the Voting Period for that Proposal immediately ends, if it has not ended already; (b) all Votes cast on that Proposal are cancelled, and the Proposal fails; (c) the Assessor is relieved of any duty to report on Votes cast on that Proposal; and (d) the Proposal is added to the Proposal Pool. The distribution of an Undistributable Proposal, when the Promotor knows that the Proposal is Undistributable, is the Class 2 Crime of Promotor Misrepresentation. The distribution of a text purporting to be a Proposal, when the Promotor knows that the text is not a Proposal, is the Class 5 Crime of Promotor Fraud. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4355 (Steve), 7 August 2002 text: (a) The Promotor is permitted to distribute a Distributable Proposal at any time. (b) During each Week, the Promotor is required to distribute every Proposal that was Distributable at the beginning of that Week, unless the Proposal has since ceased to be Distributable. (c) If there were no Distributable Proposals at the beginning of the Week, then the Promotor is required publically to note this fact at some time during the Week. (d) Failure by the Promotor to either distribute Proposals as required in (b), or to make an announcement as required in (c), is the Class 1 Infraction of Promotor Tardiness, which any Player may report. (e) The Promotor shall include with the distribution of each Proposal the identity of its Proposing Entity, its Adoption Index, and an indication of the Proposal's Chamber. However, the failure of the Promotor to include any of these accompaniments with a Proposal does not deprive the distribution of the Proposal of any legal effect. (f) A Proposal is legally distributed only if it is accompanied by an explicit indication that it is being distributed. When a Proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. (g) The Promotor shall not distribute any Proposal which is not Distributable, and must abort any Proposal so distributed. If the Promotor aborts a Proposal which e knows was Distributable at the time it was distributed, e commits the Class 2 Crime of Illegal Abortion. (h) The Promotor aborts a Proposal by publishing an announcement to that effect, clearly identifying the Proposal which has been aborted. (i) The distribution of an Undistributable Proposal, when the Promotor knows that the Proposal is Undistributable, is the Class 2 Crime of Promotor Misrepresentation. The distribution of a text purporting to be a Proposal, when the Promotor knows that the text is not a Proposal, is the Class 5 Crime of Promotor Fraud. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: (a) The Promotor is permitted to distribute a distributable proposal in the Proposal Pool at any time. (b) During each week, the Promotor must distribute each proposal which was distributable at the beginning of the week and which remains distributable. (c) If there were no proposals in the Proposal Pool at the beginning of a week, then the Promotor must announce this fact at some time during that week. (d) The Promotor legally distributes a proposal by publishing it accompanied by an explicit indication that it is being distributed. When a proposal is distributed, it is removed from the Proposal Pool. The distribution of a proposal initiates the Agoran decision of whether to adopt the proposal, as described elsewhere. (e) The Promotor shall include with the distribution of each proposal the identity of its proposer, the proposal's coauthors, if any, its chamber, and its adoption index. However, the failure of the Promotor to include any of these with a proposal does not deprive the distribution of the proposal of any legal effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1770 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1771 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1771 by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 text: An Entity may increase the Priority of a proposal by notifying the Promotor that e does so, and paying a number of P-Notes to the Bank. For each P-Note e pays to the Bank, the Priority of the Proposal is increased by one, provided that this transfer is not executed for any other purpose. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3749 (Steve), 9 June 1998 text: An Player may increase or decrease the Priority of a Proposal in the Queue by notifying the Promotor that e does so, and paying a number of P-Notes to the Bank. For each P-Note e pays to the Bank, the Priority of the Proposal is increased or decreased by one as specified by the Player making the payment, provided that this transfer is not executed for any other purpose. The Priority of a Proposal may not be reduced below zero in this manner. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3799 (Blob), 29 October 1998 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: An Player may increase or decrease the Priority of a Proposal in the Queue by announcing to the Public Forum that e does so, and paying a number of P-Notes to the Bank. For each P-Note e pays to the Bank, the Priority of the Proposal is increased or decreased by one as specified by the Player making the payment, provided that this transfer is not executed for any other purpose. The Priority of a Proposal may not be reduced below zero in this manner. text: An Player may increase or decrease the Priority of a Proposal in the Queue by announcing to the Public Forum that e does so, and paying a number of P-Notes to the Bank. For each P-Note e pays to the Bank, the Priority of the Proposal is increased or decreased by one as specified by the Player making the payment, provided that this transfer is not executed for any other purpose. The Priority of a Proposal may not be reduced below zero in this manner. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3806 (Kolja A.), 30 November 1998 text: An Player may increase or decrease the Priority of a Proposal in the Queue by announcing to the Public Forum that e does so, and paying a number of P-Notes to the Bank. For each P-Note e pays to the Bank, the Priority of the Proposal is increased or decreased by one as specified by the Player making the payment, provided that this transfer is not executed for any other purpose. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3841 (Blob), 15 March 1999 text: A Player may increase or decrease the Priority of a Proposal in the Queue by announcing to the Public Forum that e does so, and paying a number of P-Notes to the Bank. The Priority of the Proposal is increased or decreased, as specified by the Player making the payment, by an amount equal to the number of P-Notes transferred to the Bank, provided that this transfer is not executed for any other purpose. history: ... history: Amended(5) text: A Player may increase or decrease the Priority of a Proposal in the Queue by announcing to the Public Forum that e does so, and paying a number of P-Notes to the Bank. The Priority of the Proposal is increased or decreased, as specified by the Player making the payment, by: (a) an amount equal to one-half the number of P-Notes transferred to the Bank, if the transferor was the Proposer of that Proposal, or (b) an amount equal to the number of P-Notes transferred to the Bank, otherwise; provided that this transfer is not executed for any other purpose. history: ... history: Amended(6) text: A Player may increase the Priority of a Proposal in the Queue, by indicating in the Public Forum that e does so, naming the integer amount by which the Priority is to be increased, and transferring to the Bank a number of P-Notes equal to the amount of the increase times the Priority Cost of that Proposal, provided that the transfer is not executed for any other purpose. history: ... history: Amended(7) text: A Player may increase the Priority of a Proposal in the Queue by stating publicly the integer amount by which the Priority is to be increased and Paying a Fee equal to the number of P-Notes equal to the amount of the increase multiplied by the Priority Cost of the Proposal (rounded up to the nearest multiple of the MUQ of P-Notes). history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1772 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1772 by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 text: At most once a week, the Promotor may increase the Priority of a single Proposal in the Proposal Queue by one, so long as e is not the Proposer of the Proposal. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1773 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1773 by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 text: Every month, as soon as possible after the beginning of the month, the Promotor shall decrement by one the priority of all Proposals in the Proposal Queue which were proposed over a month previously. If the Priority of any Proposal falls below zero, then it shall be set to zero. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3806 (Kolja A.), 30 November 1998 text: Every month, as soon as possible after the beginning of the month, the Promotor shall decrement by one the priority of all Proposals in the Proposal Queue which were proposed over a month previously. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1774 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1774 by Proposal 3684 (Blob), 12 February 1998 text: If, at any time, there is a Proposal in the Proposal Queue which has zero Priority and has been in the Queue for more than a month, then the Promotor may, at eir discretion, remove this Proposal from the Queue, and discard it. Also, the Proposer of a Proposal in the Queue may remove that Proposal from the Queue, by notifying the Promotor that e does so. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3806 (Kolja A.), 30 November 1998 text: If, at any time, there is a Proposal in the Proposal Queue which has zero or negative Priority and has been in the Queue for more than a month, then the Promotor may, at eir discretion, remove this Proposal from the Queue, and discard it. Also, the Proposer of a Proposal in the Queue may remove that Proposal from the Queue, by notifying the Promotor that e does so. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3943 (Wes), 20 November 1999 text: If, at any time, there is a Proposal in the Proposal Queue which has zero or negative Priority and has been in the Queue for more than two weeks, then the Promotor may, at eir discretion, remove this Proposal from the Queue, and discard it. Also, the Proposer of a Proposal in the Queue may remove that Proposal from the Queue, by notifying the Promotor that e does so. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 text: If, at any time, there is an Undistributable Proposal in the Proposal Pool which has been in the Pool for more than two weeks, the Promotor may, at eir discretion, remove this Proposal from the Pool, and discard it. Also, the Proposer of a Proposal in the Pool may remove that Proposal from the Pool, by notifying the Promotor that e does so. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: If a proposal in the Proposal Pool has been undistributable and in the Pool for more than two weeks continuously, then the Promotor may remove that proposal from the Pool by announcement. The proposer of a proposal may remove it from the Pool by announcement. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1774 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1775 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1775 by Proposal 3686 (Swann), 12 February 1998 text: Every Player has associated with em specific numerical value known as their Score. A Player's Score shall always be an integer. If the rules specify a non-integral change in a Player's Score, that change shall be rounded to the nearest integer before being applied. Only a Player can have a Score. Changes in a Player's Score can be referred to as a gain or loss of Points. A gain of some number of Points means that number is to be added to a Player's Score, a loss of some number of Points means that number is to be subtracted from a Player's Score. This rule takes precedence over all other Rules dealing with Points and Scoring. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1775 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1776 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1776 by Proposal 3686 (Swann), 12 February 1998 text: There is an Office of Scorekeepor whose salary is twice the Basic Officer Salary. The Scorekeepor shall keep and maintain a record of the current Scores of each Player. The Scorekeepor's Official Report shall include the Scores of every player, the changes in those Scores since the last report, and the reasons for those changes. E shall publish this report in the Public Forum at least once a week. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1776 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1777 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1777 by Proposal 3686 (Swann), 12 February 1998 text: If any Player reaches a Score of 100 or more, then the Player who has the highest Score and no win-preventing conditions is Eligible to Win the game. In the case of a tie for the highest such Score, all such Players are Eligible to Win. Whenever a Player becomes Eligible to Win the Scorekeepor must announce this event in the Public Forum as soon as possible. If no Endgame Procedure is underway at the time of this announcement, this announcement initiates an Endgame Procedure. If an Endgame Procedure is underway, and a Player becomes Eligible to Win (because of a loss of a win-preventing condition) this does not imply that any other Player loses an Eligibility to Win already granted by the Scorekeepor. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1777 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1778 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1778 by Proposal 3686 (Swann), 12 February 1998 text: When the Scorekeepor announces that there is a Player Eligible to win, and there is no Endgame Procedure underway, then that announcement shall initiate an Endgame Procedure. During an Endgame Procedure no Score changes shall be applied to any Player. All orders to change a Player's Score shall be deferred until the termination of the Endgame Procedure. This rule takes precedence over Rules that would allow these changes to be applied during the Endgame Procedure. An Endgame Procedure shall persist until it is terminated by the Scorekeepor. An unchallenged Endgame Procedure shall be terminated one week from the date of its initiation, unless the Rules require an earlier termination. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3696 (Kolja A.), 3 March 1998 text: When the Scorekeepor announces that there is a Player Eligible to win, and there is no Endgame Procedure underway, then that announcement shall initiate an Endgame Procedure. During an Endgame Procedure no Score changes shall be applied to any Player. All orders to change a Player's Score shall be deferred until the termination of the Endgame Procedure. This rule takes precedence over Rules that would allow these changes to be applied during the Endgame Procedure. An Endgame Procedure shall persist until it is terminated by the Scorekeepor. An unchallenged Endgame Procedure shall be terminated as soon as it has been unchallenged for seven consecutive days, unless the Rules require an earlier termination. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1778 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1779 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1779 by Proposal 3686 (Swann), 12 February 1998 text: When the Scorekeepor initiates an Endgame Procedure it is initially unchallenged. An Endgame Procedure is challenged if any of the following occurs while it persists; i) A COE alleges an error in the Scorekeepor's announcement that affects a Player's Eligibility to Win. ii) A CFJ is being decided which alleges an error in the Scorekeepor's announcement that affects a Player's Eligibility to Win. iii) An Appeal of a CFJ is being decided where the matter at issue is an allegation of an error in the Scorekeepor's announcement that affects a Player's Eligibility to Win. If a challenge is resolved finding that no error existed, the Scorekeepor shall make an announcement stating that the Endgame Procedure is now unchallenged, the Endgame Procedure shall be terminated four days from this announcement, unless it is challenged again. If a challenge is resolved finding an error did exist, then all Players Eligible to Win cease to be Eligible to Win and the Endgame Procedure shall be immediately terminated without a winner. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1779 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1780 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1780 by Proposal 3686 (Swann), 12 February 1998 text: During an Endgame Procedure, if Player who is Eligible to Win acquires a win-preventing condition, or ceases to be a Player, e ceases to be Eligible to Win. If at any time during an Endgame Procedure there is no Player Eligible to Win, the Procedure shall immediately terminate without a winner. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1780 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1781 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1781 by Proposal 3686 (Swann), 12 February 1998 text: Whenever the Rules call for the termination of an Endgame Procedure, the Scorekeepor shall announce this fact in the Public Forum as soon as possible after it occurs. Upon the Scorekeepor's announcement, the Endgame Procedure shall conclude with the following effects, in order; i) If there was no successful challenge to the Endgame Procedure, and there are still Players Eligible to Win, then all Players' Scores shall be set to zero. The Scorekeepor must order this change. ii) If there was no successful challenge to the Endgame Procedure, and there are still Players Eligible to Win, then those Players Win. All such Players then cease to be Eligible to Win. iii) All score changes that were suspended during the Endgame Procedure shall be applied. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1781 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1782 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1782 by Proposal 3686 (Swann), 12 February 1998 text: A Player's Score is the Score reported by the Scorekeepor. A Player's Score changes only when the Scorekeepor records the change. The Scorekeepor shall only record changes when a Player empowered by the Rules to order such a change so orders eim. When the Scorekeepor is so ordered to make a change e must do so as soon as possible. A Player's score is correct when it reflects all changes mandated by the Rules and ordered by the appropriate Players. A Player's score is incorrect when it is in error, reflects changes that were not ordered as mandated by the Rules, or fails to reflect a change that was ordered as mandated by the Rules. A COE or CFJ can be issued alleging that a Player's score is incorrect. If such a CFJ or COE finds that the Score was incorrect, then the Scorekeepor must order that Score to be changed to the correct Score. (If an erroneous order resulted in the incorrect score, this order counts as its reversal. If an unapplied order resulted in the incorrect Score, this order counts as its application. Such corrections shall not be applied twice.) If the Rules mandate a change in a Player's score, and do not both require and empower a Player to order that change, that change shall not be included in any determination of a correct Score. The effect of ratifying the Scorekeepor's report is to render all Scores listed in it as correct. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule that attempts to specify a Player's Score. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3696 (Kolja A.), 3 March 1998 text: A Player's Score is the Score reported by the Scorekeepor. A Player's Score changes only when the Scorekeepor records the change. The Scorekeepor shall only record changes when a Player empowered by the Rules to order such a change so orders em. When the Scorekeepor is so ordered to make a change e must do so as soon as possible. A Player's score is correct when it reflects all changes mandated by the Rules and ordered by the appropriate Players. A Player's score is incorrect when it is in error, reflects changes that were not ordered as mandated by the Rules, or fails to reflect a change that was ordered as mandated by the Rules. A COE or CFJ can be issued alleging that a Player's score is incorrect. If such a CFJ or COE finds that the Score was incorrect, then the Scorekeepor must order that Score to be changed to the correct Score. (If an erroneous order resulted in the incorrect score, this order counts as its reversal. If an unapplied order resulted in the incorrect Score, this order counts as its application. Such corrections shall not be applied twice.) If the Rules mandate a change in a Player's score, and do not both require and empower a Player to order that change, that change shall not be included in any determination of a correct Score. The effect of ratifying the Scorekeepor's report is to render all Scores listed in it as correct. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule that attempts to specify a Player's Score. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1782 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1783 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1783 by Proposal 3686 (Swann), 12 February 1998 text: When a Rule states that a Player's Score must change, and specifies a Player who is required to order this change, that Player then must order the Scorekeepor to make this change as soon as possible after the Rules mandate the change. This order shall be a message to the Scorekeepor naming the Player subject to the Score change, the reason for the change, and specifying the magnitude of that change. If a Player is required to order a change to the Score, then e is empowered to order it, but not necessarily vice versa. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3719 (Swann), 3 April 1998 text: When a Rule states that a Player's Score must change, and specifies a Player who is required to order this change, that Player then must order the Scorekeepor to make this change as soon as possible after the Rules mandate the change. This order shall be a message to the Scorekeepor naming the Player subject to the Score change, the reason for the change, the magnitude of the change, and whether that change is a gain or a loss. If a Player is required to order a change to the Score, then e is empowered to order it, but not necessarily vice versa. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1783 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1784 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1784 by Proposal 3686 (Swann), 12 February 1998 text: In any week that at least one Rule Change Proposed by a Player is adopted, that Player shall gain three Points. The Rulekeepor must order this Score change. In any week where a Player Voted on more than three Proposals, e gains three Points. The Assessor must order this Score change. Whenever a Player wins an Election, e shall gain five Points. The Vote Collector for the Election must order this Score change. Whenever a Player becomes Speaker, e shall gain three Points. The Registrar must order this Score change. Whenever a Player gains three style points for a Proposal, e shall gain two Points. The Wizard must order this Score change. Whenever a Player Judges a CFJ, e gains three Points. The Clerk of the Courts must order this Score change. Whenever a Player gains a Blot, e shall lose two Points. The Herald must order this Score change. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3697 (Kolja A.), 3 March 1998 text: In any week that at least one Rule Change Proposed by a Player is adopted, that Player shall gain three Points. The Rulekeepor must order this Score change. In any week where a Player Voted on more than three Proposals, e gains three Points. The Assessor must order this Score change. Whenever a Player wins an Election, e shall gain five Points. The Vote Collector for the Election must order this Score change. Whenever a Player becomes Speaker, e shall gain three Points. The Registrar must order this Score change. Whenever a Player gains three style points for a Proposal, e shall gain two Points. The Wizard must order this Score change. Whenever a Player Judges a CFJ, e gains three Points. The Clerk of the Courts must order this Score change. Whenever a Player gains a Blot, e shall lose two Points. The Herald must order this Score change. In any week where a Player Voted in at least one referendum on an Internomic proposal, e gains one Point. The Ambassador must order this Score change. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3733 (Kolja A.), 24 April 1998 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: In any week that at least one Rule Change Proposed by a Player is adopted, that Player shall gain three Points. The Rulekeepor must order this Score change. In any week where a Player Voted on more than three Proposals, e gains three Points. The Assessor must order this Score change. Whenever a Player wins an Election, e shall gain five Points. The Vote Collector for the Election must order this Score change. Whenever a Player becomes Speaker, e shall gain three Points. The Registrar must order this Score change. Whenever a Player gains three style points for a Proposal, e shall gain two Points. The Wizard must order this Score change. Whenever a Player Judges a CFJ, e gains three Points. The Clerk of the Courts must order this Score change. Whenever a Player gains a Blot, e shall lose two Points. Whenever a Payment order for a certain number of indulgences naming a player as payor is vacated, this player shall gain a number of Points equal to twice the number of indulgences in the PO. The Herald must order this Score change. In any week where a Player Voted in at least one referendum on an Internomic proposal, e gains one Point. The Ambassador must order this Score change. text: In any week that at least one Rule Change Proposed by a Player is adopted, that Player shall gain three Points. The Rulekeepor must order this Score change. In any week where a Player Voted on more than three Proposals, e gains three Points. The Assessor must order this Score change. Whenever a Player wins an Election, e shall gain five Points. The Vote Collector for the Election must order this Score change. Whenever a Player becomes Speaker, e shall gain three Points. The Registrar must order this Score change. Whenever a Player gains three style points for a Proposal, e shall gain two Points. The Wizard must order this Score change. Whenever a Player Judges a CFJ, e gains three Points. The Clerk of the Courts must order this Score change. Whenever a Player gains a Blot, e shall lose two Points. Whenever a Payment order for a certain number of indulgences naming a player as payor is vacated, this player shall gain a number of Points equal to twice the number of indulgences in the PO. The Herald must order this Score change. In any week where a Player Voted in at least one referendum on an Internomic proposal, e gains one Point. The Ambassador must order this Score change. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3766 (Steve), 13 July 1998 text: In any week that at least one Rule Change Proposed by a Player is adopted, that Player shall gain three Points. The Rulekeepor must order this Score change. In any week where a Player Voted on more than three Proposals in a single message, e gains three Points. The Assessor must order this Score change. Whenever a Player wins an Election, e shall gain five Points. The Vote Collector for the Election must order this Score change. Whenever a Player becomes Speaker, e shall gain three Points. The Registrar must order this Score change. Whenever a Player gains three style points for a Proposal, e shall gain two Points. The Wizard must order this Score change. Whenever a Player Judges a CFJ, e gains three Points. The Clerk of the Courts must order this Score change. Whenever a Player gains a Blot, e shall lose two Points. Whenever a Payment order for a certain number of indulgences naming a player as payor is vacated, this player shall gain a number of Points equal to twice the number of indulgences in the PO. The Herald must order this Score change. In any week where a Player Voted in at least one referendum on an Internomic proposal, e gains one Point. The Ambassador must order this Score change. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1784 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1785 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1785 by Proposal 3693 (Steve), 26 February 1998 text: There is an Office of Accountor, whose Salary is 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary, and whose responsibility it is to be the Recordkeepor for Voting Tokens. The Accountor's Report includes the number of Voting Tokens possessed by each entity which possesses them, and any changes thereto since the last posting of the Accountor's Report. history: ... history: Amended(1) text: The Accountor There is an Office of Accountor, whose responsibility it is to be the Recordkeepor for Voting Tokens. The Accountor's Report includes the number of Voting Tokens possessed by each entity which possesses them, and any changes thereto since the last posting of the Accountor's Report. The Accountor shall receive a Salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: There exists the Office of Accountor, whose responsibility it is to be the Recordkeepor for Voting Tokens. The Accountor's Report includes the number of Voting Tokens possessed by each entity which possesses them, and any changes thereto since the last posting of the Accountor's Report. history: ... history: Amended(3) text: There exists the Office of Accountor, whose responsibility it is to be the Recordkeepor for Voting Tokens. The Accountor's Report shall include for each Voter that Voter's Maximum Votes. This value is determined as follows: a) if the Expected VTs of the Voter is non-negative, the Maximum Votes shall be equal to the floor of the square root of the Expected VTs plus 3; b) otherwise, the Maximum Votes shall be 2. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1786 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1786 by Proposal 3694 (Time Agent), 26 February 1998 text: A Proposal is considered to have passed by the narrowest of margins when all of the following conditions are true: 1) The Proposal has met the requirements established by other Rules to be considered passed. 2) If there had been 1 (one) less FOR vote (out of the total number of FOR votes in the final tally) on this proposal, it would not have passed or not met Quorum -- or both. 3) There must have been at least 1 (one) AGAINST vote in the final tally. As soon as possible after a Proposal has been determined to have passed by the narrowest of margins, the Assessor shall pay out to that Proposal's Proposer an award of 3 (three) Voting Tokens in addition to any other award that Player might also receive for the passing of that Proposal. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1787 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1787 by Proposal 3695 (Steve), 3 March 1998 text: A break from all the stress and strife and matters of much gravity, is what this Nomic sorely needs: a dithyramb to levity! In order that, just once a year, our hearts be light and gay, Let April Fool's Day, every year become a Holiday! history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4677 (root), 18 April 2005 text: A break from all the stress and strife and matters of much gravity, is what this Nomic sorely needs: a dithyramb to levity! In order that, just once a year, our hearts be light and gay, Let April Fool's Day, every year become a Holiday! And should it one day be observed by any wag who breaks a Rule, the Speaker will one Boon award to em who was the biggest Fool. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1787 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1788 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1788 by Proposal 3699 (Kolja A.), 3 March 1998 text: At the beginning of each Nomic Week, the Registrar shall pay out to every player who does not receive any Officer's Salary for the previous week an unemployment benefit of half a Basic Officer Salary. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1788 by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1789 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1789 by Proposal 3705 (Crito), 9 March 1998 text: Whenever a Player feels that e has been treated so egregiously by the Agoran community that e can no longer abide to be a part of it, e may submit a document to the Clerk of the Courts, clearly labeled a Cantus Cygneus, detailing eir grievances and expressing eir reproach for those who ey feel have treated em so badly. As soon as possible after receiving a Cantus Cygneus, the Clerk of the Courts shall post this document to the Public Forum along with a Writ of Fugere Agorae Grandissima Exprobratione, commanding the Player to be deregistered and instructing the Registrar to note the method of deregistration for that Player in subsequent Registrar Reports, as long as the Player remains deregistered. The Player is deregistered as of the posting of the Writ, and the notation in the Registrar's Report will ensure that, henceforth, all may know said Player deregistered in a Writ of FAGE. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: Whenever a Player feels that e has been treated so egregiously by the Agoran community that e can no longer abide to be a part of it, e may submit a document to the Clerk of the Courts, clearly labeled a Cantus Cygneus, detailing eir grievances and expressing eir reproach for those who e feels have treated em so badly. As soon as possible after receiving a Cantus Cygneus, the Clerk of the Courts shall post this document to the Public Forum along with a Writ of Fugere Agorae Grandissima Exprobratione, commanding the Player to be deregistered and instructing the Registrar to note the method of deregistration for that Player in subsequent Registrar Reports, as long as the Player remains deregistered. The Player is deregistered as of the posting of the Writ, and the notation in the Registrar's Report will ensure that, henceforth, all may know said Player deregistered in a Writ of FAGE. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: Whenever a Player feels that e has been treated so egregiously by the Agoran community that e can no longer abide to be a part of it, e may submit a document to the Clerk of the Courts, clearly labeled a Cantus Cygneus, detailing eir grievances and expressing eir reproach for those who e feels have treated em so badly. As soon as possible after receiving a Cantus Cygneus, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish this document along with a Write of Fugere Agorae Grandissima Exprobratione, commanding the Player to be deregistered and instructing the Registrar to note the method of deregistration for that Player in subsequent Registrar Reports, as long as the Player remains deregistered. The Player is deregistered as of the posting of the Writ, and the notation in the Registrar's Report will ensure that, henceforth, all may know said Player deregistered in a Writ of FAGE. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 text: Whenever a Player feels that e has been treated so egregiously by the Agoran community that e can no longer abide to be a part of it, e may submit a document to the Clerk of the Courts, clearly labeled a Cantus Cygneus, detailing eir grievances and expressing eir reproach for those who e feels have treated em so badly. As soon as possible after receiving a Cantus Cygneus, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish this document along with a Writ of Fugere Agorae Grandissima Exprobratione, commanding the Player to be deregistered and instructing the Registrar to note the method of deregistration for that Player in subsequent Registrar Reports, as long as the Player remains deregistered. The Player is deregistered as of the posting of the Writ, and the notation in the Registrar's Report will ensure that, henceforth, all may know said Player deregistered in a Writ of FAGE. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1790 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1790 by Proposal 3698 (Kolja A.), 19 March 1998 text: Player may pay currencies to gain points. To do this, a player must transfer the price for these points to the bank. This transfer may not have any other purpose. The price for any one point may only be paid using one single currency. As soon as possible after the transfer of the price, the Recordkeepor of the currency with which the price was paid must order the corresponding Points gain for the player who paid the price. The price for one Point can be one of the following: one indulgence, three P-notes or three VTs. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1790 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1791 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1791 by Proposal 3700 (Swann), 19 March 1998 text: Any Officer who holds an Office in Normal Fashion can Ratify an Official Report Without Objection, provided the following conditions hold; i) The Report to be Ratified is one that is legally permissible to Ratify. ii) The Report to be Ratified was produced by the Player holding the Office. iii) The Report to be Ratified is one that is required to be produced and maintained by the Officer. A Speaker who is not Tainted is permitted to Ratify any Official Report Without Objection provided that the Report is one legally permissible to Ratify. A COE on any Report undergoing this process shall be deemed by the Rules to constitute an Objection. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1791 by Proposal 4832 (Maud), 6 August 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1792 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1792 by Proposal 3701 (Swann), 19 March 1998 text: There is a type of Application known as an Proposal Application. Such an Application is executed by submitting it to the Promotor. This application takes effect when executed. For a Proposal Application to take effect it must; i) Indicate it is a Proposal Application ii) Include the text of a single Proposal, clearly indicated as such. iii) Specify the non-player entity which the Rules shall deem to have submitted the included Proposal. This entity cannot be an entity defined elsewhere in the Rules as a Proposing Entity. iv) Include the signature of the Executor of the non-player entity specified in iii) above. (A Proposal Application may never be executed on behalf of an entity with no Executor.) v) Include the signature of at least one other Player. If all the above conditions are met, the Application will be executed upon its receipt by the Promotor. The effect of the Application is to temporarily designate the non-Player entity specified in the Application as a Proposing Entity, and to submit the included Proposal on behalf of that entity. For the purpose of the Rules governing Proposals, the included Proposal shall be deemed to have been submitted when the Application was executed. Immediately after this submission, the entity will cease being a Proposing Entity. (Losing this designation will not change the identity of the Proposer, it will remain the non-Player entity specified in the Application.) history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1792 by Proposal 3807 (Repeal-O-Matic), 30 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1793 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1793 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: An Order is a command, executed by a Player and directed to some entity requiring that entity to perform exactly one action, or to refrain from performing one or more actions. An Order may be directed to the holder of an Office or other official position in eir capacity as that Office or other official position, and in this case if the Office or position changes hands before the Order is satisfied, the duty to abide by the Order automatically attaches to the new holder of that Office or position. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an Order, the purpose of which is to affect the operation of a prior Order, is as valid as any other Order, and is said to be directed at the prior Order it affects. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: An Order is a command, executed by a player and directed to some entity requiring that entity to perform exactly one action, or to refrain from performing one or more actions. An Order may be directed to the holder of an official position in eir capacity in that official position, and if the position changes hands before the Order is satisfied, the duty to abide by the Order automatically attaches to the new holder of that position. An Order may also be directed at a prior order so as to affect the prior order's operation, as the Rules permit. All Orders executed in the manner prescribed by the Rules for their class are presumed valid and enforceable until proven otherwise by CFJ. No Order may act to prevent or hinder its own appeal in any way. Knowingly and willfully executing invalid Orders constitutes the Class 10 Crime of Abuse of Authority. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: An Order is a command, executed by a player and directed to some entity requiring that entity to perform exactly one action, or to refrain from performing one or more actions. An Order may be directed to the holder of an official position in eir capacity in that official position, and if the position changes hands before the Order is satisfied, the duty to abide by the Order automatically attaches to the new holder of that position. An Order may also be directed at a prior order so as to affect the prior order's operation, as the Rules permit. All Orders executed in the manner prescribed by the Rules for their class are presumed valid and enforceable until proven otherwise by CFJ. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5029 (Murphy), 28 June 2007 text: An Order is a command, executed by an entity and directed to some entity requiring that entity to perform exactly one action, or to refrain from performing one or more actions. An Order may be directed to the holder of an official position in eir capacity in that official position, and if the position changes hands before the Order is satisfied, the duty to abide by the Order automatically attaches to the new holder of that position. An Order may also be directed at a prior order so as to affect the prior order's operation, as the Rules permit. All Orders executed in the manner prescribed by the Rules for their class are presumed valid and enforceable until proven otherwise by CFJ. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1793 by Proposal 5103 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1794 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1794 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: There are four classes of Order: Administrative, Judicial, Appellate, and Private. A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Player while acting as a Judge. An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. An Administrative Order is an Order executed by the holder of an Office or other official position (such as the Speaker or the Recordkeepor of a Currency) other than that of a Judge or Justice, in the course of performing the duties of that Office or position. A Private Order is any other sort of Order. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3869 (General Chaos), 24 May 1999 text: (a) Each Order is of one of the following classes: (1) Judicial: A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Player while acting as a Judge. (2) Appellate: An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. (3) Administrative: An Administrative Order is an Order executed by an Officer in the course of performing the duties of that Office, except when those duties involve acting as a member of a Board of Appeals. (4) Legislative: A Legislative Order is an Order executed as part of the effect of the adoption of a Proposal. (5) Private: A Private Order is any Order not described above. (b) For the purpose of this Rule, the holder of any of the following positions shall be considered an Officer when performing a duty required by or a privilege permitted only by virtue of holding that position: (1) the Speaker; (2) the Recordkeepor of a Currency; or (3) the Trustee of an entity in Probate. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3896 (Elysion), 27 August 1999 text: (a) Each Order is of one of the following classes: (1) Judicial: A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Player while acting as a Judge. (2) Appellate: An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. (3) Administrative: An Administrative Order is an Order executed by an Officer in the course of performing the duties of that Office, except when those duties involve acting as a member of a Board of Appeals. (4) Legislative: A Legislative Order is an Order executed as part of the effect of the adoption of a Proposal. (5) Private: A Private Order is any Order not described above. (b) For the purpose of this Rule, the holder of any of the following positions shall be considered an Officer when performing a duty required by or a privilege permitted only by virtue of holding that position: (1) the Speaker; (2) the Recordkeepor of a Currency; or (3) the Executor of an entity in Probate. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4048 (Peekee), 15 August 2000 text: (a) Each Order is of one of the following classes: (1) Judicial: A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Player while acting as a Judge. (2) Appellate: An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. (3) Administrative: An Administrative Order is an Order executed by an Officer in the course of performing the duties of that Office, except when those duties involve acting as a member of a Board of Appeals. (4) Legislative: A Legislative Order is an Order executed as part of the effect of the adoption of a Proposal. (5) Private: A Private Order is any Order not described above. (b) For the purpose of this Rule, the holder of any of the following positions shall be considered an Officer when performing a duty required by or a privilege permitted only by virtue of holding that position: (1) the Speaker; (2) the Recordkeepor of a Currency; or history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4137 (harvel), 5 April 2001 text: (a) Each Order is of one of the following classes: (1) Judicial: A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Player while acting as a Judge. (2) Appellate: An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. (3) Administrative: An Administrative Order is an Order executed by an Officer in the course of performing the duties of that Office, except when those duties involve acting as a member of a Board of Appeals. (4) Legislative: A Legislative Order is an Order executed as part of the effect of the adoption of a Proposal. (5) Private: A Private Order is any Order not described above. (b) For the purpose of this Rule, the holder of any of the following positions shall be considered an Officer when performing a duty required by or a privilege permitted only by virtue of holding that position: (1) the Speaker; or (2) the Recordkeepor of a Currency. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: Each Order is of exactly one of the following classes. If an Order could be of more than one of these classes, then it is of the first class that matches. (a) A Legislative Order is an Order executed as part of the effect of the adoption of a Proposal. (b) A Sentencing Order is an Order executed to impose the penalty for a Crime. (c) A Ticketing Order is an Order executed to impose the penalty for an Infraction. (d) An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. (e) A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Judge in the course of performing eir duties or privileges as Judge. (f) An Administrative Order is an Order executed by an Officer in the course of performing the duties or privileges of that Office. For the purpose of this Rule, the following positions are deemed to be Offices: (i) The Speaker. (ii) The Recordkeepor of a Currency. (g) Any other Order is a Private Order. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 text: Each Order is of exactly one of the following classes. If an Order could be of more than one of these classes, then it is of the first class that matches. (a) A Legislative Order is an Order executed as part of the effect of the adoption of a Proposal. (b) A Sentencing Order is an Order executed to impose the penalty for a Crime. (c) A Ticketing Order is an Order executed to impose the penalty for an Infraction. (d) An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. (e) A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Judge in the course of performing eir duties or privileges as Judge. (f) An Administrative Order is an Order executed by an Officer in the course of performing the duties or privileges of that Office. For the purpose of this Rule, the Speaker is deemed to be an Office. (g) Any other Order is a Private Order. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: Each Order is of exactly one of the following classes. If an Order could be of more than one of these classes, then it is of the first class that matches. (a) A Legislative Order is an Order executed as part of the effect of the adoption of a Proposal. (b) A Sentencing Order is an Order executed to impose the penalty for a Crime. (c) A Ticketing Order is an Order executed to impose the penalty for an Infraction. (d) An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. (e) A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Judge in the course of performing eir duties or privileges as Judge. (f) A Timing Order is an Order which may be executed by any person and directed at any entity. A timing order is valid if and only if it orders the entity to perform, as soon as possible, a duty specifically required of em by the Rules that does not otherwise have a specified timing requirement, or for which the otherwise specified timing requirement will have been exceeded as soon as possible after the Order is executed. No other types of Orders are valid. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Each Order is of exactly one of the following classes. If an Order could be of more than one of these classes, then it is of the first class that matches. (a) A Legislative Order is an Order executed as part of the effect of the adoption of a Proposal. (b) An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. (c) A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Judge in the course of performing eir duties or privileges as Judge. (d) A Timing Order is an Order which may be executed by any person and directed at any entity. A timing order is valid if and only if it orders the entity to perform, as soon as possible, a duty specifically required of em by the Rules that does not otherwise have a specified timing requirement, or for which the otherwise specified timing requirement will have been exceeded as soon as possible after the Order is executed. No other types of Orders are valid. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5012 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 text: Each Order is of exactly one of the following classes. If an Order could be of more than one of these classes, then it is of the first class that matches. (a) A Legislative Order is an Order executed as part of the effect of the adoption of a Proposal. (b) An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. (c) A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Judge in the course of performing eir duties or privileges as Judge. (d) A Timing Order is an Order which may be executed by any person by announcement and directed at any entity. A timing order is valid if and only if it orders the entity to perform, as soon as possible, a duty specifically required of em by the Rules that does not otherwise have a specified timing requirement, or for which the otherwise specified timing requirement will have been exceeded as soon as possible after the Order is executed. No other types of Orders are valid. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5017 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 text: Each Order is of exactly one of the following classes. If an Order could be of more than one of these classes, then it is of the first class that matches. (a) A Legislative Order is an Order executed as part of the effect of the adoption of a Proposal. (b) An Appellate Order is an Order executed by a Board of Appeals. (c) A Judicial Order is an Order executed by a Judge in the course of performing eir duties or privileges as Judge. A Judicial Oredr is executed by announcement. (d) A Timing Order is an Order which may be executed by any person by announcement and directed at any entity. A timing order is valid if and only if it orders the entity to perform, as soon as possible, a duty specifically required of em by the Rules that does not otherwise have a specified timing requirement, or for which the otherwise specified timing requirement will have been exceeded as soon as possible after the Order is executed. No other types of Orders are valid. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1794 by Proposal 5103 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1795 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1795 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: An Order which commands the performance of an action may specify when that action is to be performed; if no specification is given, or if the specification given would require the performance of the action at a time when the Order is without effect, the Order shall be taken to require the performance of the action as soon as possible after the Order takes effect. This Rule defers to any Rule which establishes regulations relating to the performance of duties required by various sorts of Orders, and only establishes the time by which an Order must be performed. The noncompliance of an Order with this Rule does not deprive that Order of all effect, but instead modifies the effect of that Order with respect to the time at which or by which the actions it requires must be performed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3768 (Chuck), 22 July 1998 text: An Order which commands the performance of an action may specify when that action is to be performed; if no specification is given, or the the specification given would require the performance of the action at a time when the Order is without effect, or if the specification given would allow less than 72 hours from the time when the Order takes effect to perform the action, then the Order shall be taken to require the performance of the action as soon as possible after the Order takes effect. If an Order which commands the performance of an action is directed to an Office or other position of authority, and the holder of that position of authority changes after the Order takes effect, but before the Order is satisfied, and the specification would require the performance of the action at a time before the current holder of the position came to hold that position, or would allow less than 72 hours from the time the current holder of the position came to hold that position, then the Order shall be taken to require the performance of the action as soon as possible after the current holder of the position came to hold that position. However, this shall not be taken to absolve the previous holder of the position of any penalties e might otherwise incur. This Rule defers to any Rule which establishes regulations relating to the performance of duties required by various sorts of Orders, and only establishes the time by which an Order must be performed. The noncompliance of an Order with this Rule does not deprive that Order of all effect, but instead modifies the effect of that Order with respect to the time at which or by which the actions it requires must be performed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: An Order which commands the performance of an action may specify when that action is to be performed; if no specification is given, or the specification given would require the performance of the action at a time when the Order is without effect, or if the specification given would allow less than 72 hours from the time when the Order takes effect to perform the action, then the Order shall be taken to require the performance of the action as soon as possible after the Order takes effect. If an Order which commands the performance of an action is directed to an Office or other position of authority, and the holder of that position of authority changes after the Order takes effect, but before the Order is satisfied, and the specification would require the performance of the action at a time before the current holder of the position came to hold that position, or would allow less than 72 hours from the time the current holder of the position came to hold that position, then the Order shall be taken to require the performance of the action as soon as possible after the current holder of the position came to hold that position. However, this shall not be taken to absolve the previous holder of the position of any penalties e might otherwise incur. This Rule defers to any Rule which establishes regulations relating to the performance of duties required by various sorts of Orders, and only establishes the time by which an Order must be performed. The noncompliance of an Order with this Rule does not deprive that Order of all effect, but instead modifies the effect of that Order with respect to the time at which or by which the actions it requires must be performed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3950 (harvel), 8 December 1999 text: An Order which commands the performance of an action may specify when that action is to be performed; if no specification is given, or the specification given would require the performance of the action at a time when the Order is without effect, or if the specification given would allow less than 72 hours from the time when the Order takes effect to perform the action, then the Order shall be taken to require the performance of the action as soon as possible after the Order takes effect. If an Order which commands the performance of an action is directed to an Office or other position of authority, and the holder of that position of authority changes after the Order takes effect, but before the Order is satisfied, and the specification would require the performance of the action at a time before the current holder of the position came to hold that position, or would allow less than 72 hours from the time the current holder of the position came to hold that position, then the Order shall be taken to require the performance of the action as soon as possible after the current holder of the position came to hold that position. However, this shall not be taken to absolve the previous holder of the position of any penalties e might otherwise incur. Other Rules may establish other times by which Orders must be performed. The noncompliance of an Order with this Rule does not deprive that Order of all effect, but instead modifies the effect of that Order with respect to the time at which or by which the actions it requires must be performed. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: An Order may specify the time limit for the performance of an ordered action. If a time limit is less than 72 hours after the Order takes effect, the time limit shall be 72 hours. If no time limit is specified, time limit shall be as soon as possible after the Order takes effect. If an Order which commands the performance of an action is directed to an Office or other position of authority, and the holder of that position of authority changes after the Order takes effect, but before the Order is satisfied, and the time limit is before, or less than 72 hours after, the current holder of the position came to hold that position, then the current holder shall have as soon as possible to satisfy that order. Other Rules may establish other times by which orders must be performed. The noncompliance of an order with this Rule does not deprive that order of all effect, but instead modifies the timing requirements of the order. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: An Order may specify the time limit for the performance of an ordered action. If a time limit is less than 72 hours after the Order takes effect, the time limit shall be 72 hours. If no time limit is specified, time limit shall be as soon as possible after the Order takes effect. If an Order which commands the performance of an action is directed to an Office or other position of authority, and the holder of that position of authority changes after the Order takes effect, but before the Order is satisfied, then the current holder shall have as soon as possible to satisfy that order. The noncompliance of an order with this Rule does not deprive that order of all effect, but instead modifies the timing requirements of the order. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4889 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: Orders to perform an action shall be satisfied as soon as possible, unless the Order specifies a different time limit. The minimum time limit is 72 hours after the Order takes effect; any time limit that would be shorter is extended to the minimum. If an Order to perform an action is directed to an Office or other position of authority, and the holder of that position changes after the Order takes effect, but before the Order is satisfied, then the time limit is extended (if needed) to one week after the change. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1795 by Proposal 5103 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1796 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1796 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: All Orders executed in the manner prescribed by the Rules for their class and type are presumed valid and enforceable until proven otherwise by CFJ. In order to be proven valid by CFJ, the Rules must permit the Player who executed the Order in question to execute such an Order, that the execution of the Order must have been required by or permitted in the circumstances which existed at the time it was executed, and that the Order has not been rendered invalid by the operation of any other Rule. Furthermore, no Order may act to prevent or hinder its own appeal in any way, and any portion of an Order which has this effect is void and without force. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1796 by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1797 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1797 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Knowingly and willfully executing invalid Orders constitutes the Class B Crime of Abuse of Authority. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: Knowingly and willfully executing invalid Orders constitutes the Class 10 Crime of Abuse of Authority. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1797 by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1798 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1798 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: A Player who performs as required by an Order which is later found to be invalid is not liable for eir actions; but other Rules may establish procedures for correcting or remedying such circumstances when they occur. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3768 (Chuck), 22 July 1998 text: A Player who performs as required by an Order which is later found to be invalid shall not be convicted of a Crime, nor penalized by being billed, being removed from or retired from Office, becoming Tainted, or being deregistered, solely as a result of performing as required by the Order. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would cause the Player to be convicted of a Crime or penalized, as described, for said action. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1798 by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1799 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1799 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Any Order may always be amended, stayed, or vacated by the Player (or, in the case of Appellate Orders, Board of Appeal) who executed it. Certain classes of Orders may be amended, stayed, or vacated in other circumstances as well, when the Rules so allow. In all cases, this is done by an Order to Amend, Stay, or Vacate, respectively, the original Order. Otherwise, an Order shall not be amended, stayed, vacated, or otherwise changed once executed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3755 (Crito), 12 June 1998 text: Any Order, except a Transfer Order, may always be amended, stayed, or vacated by the Player (or, in the case of Appellate Orders, Board of Appeal) who executed it. A Delayed Transfer Order may be amended, stayed or vacated by the Player who executed it only during the time in which it is delayed. Certain classes of Orders may be amended, stayed, or vacated in other circumstances as well, when the Rules so allow. In all cases, this is done by an Order to Amend, Stay, or Vacate, respectively, the original Order. Otherwise, an Order shall not be amended, stayed, vacated, or otherwise changed once executed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: Any Order may always be amended, stayed, or vacated by the Player (or, in the case of Appellate Orders, Board of Appeal) who executed it. Certain classes of Orders may be amended, stayed, or vacated in other circumstances as well, when the Rules so allow. In all cases, this is done by an Order to Amend, Stay, or Vacate, respectively, the original Order. Otherwise, an Order shall not be amended, stayed, vacated, or otherwise changed once executed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: The effect of staying an Order is to temporarily prevent the stayed Order from having any effect. A stay may be ordered for a fixed time, in which case the stay expires at the time specified; or for an indefinite time, in which case the stay will not expire. If no specification is made in the Order to Stay, the stay shall be indefinite. When the stay expires or is vacated, the previously stayed order again has effect as if it had been originally executed at the moment the stay ceases to be effective. However, if at the time the staying Order expires or otherwise ceases to have effect, the stayed Order has been vacated or is subject to another staying Order, it does not regain effect. The effect of vacating an Order is to permanently deny the vacated Order from having any effect. Vacating an Order to Vacate reinstates the ability of the vacated Order to have effect, as of the moment the Order to Vacate is itself vacated. Any Order may always be stayed or vacated by the Player (or, in the case of Appellate Orders, Board of Appeal) who executed it. Certain classes of Orders may be stayed or vacated in other circumstances as well, but only as the Rules allow. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The effect of staying an Order is to temporarily prevent the stayed Order from having any effect. A stay may be specified to expire after a fixed time. If no specification is made in the Order to Stay, the stay shall not expire. When the stay expires or is vacated, the previously stayed order again has effect as if it had been originally executed at the moment the stay ceases to be effective. However, if at the time the staying Order expires or otherwise ceases to have effect, the stayed Order has been vacated or is subject to another staying Order, it does not regain effect. The effect of vacating an Order is to permanently deny the vacated Order from having any effect. Vacating an Order to Vacate reinstates the ability of the vacated Order to have effect, as of the moment the Order to Vacate is itself vacated. Any Order may always be stayed or vacated by the Player (or, in the case of Appellate Orders, Board of Appeal) who executed it. Certain classes of Orders may be stayed or vacated in other circumstances as well, but only as the Rules allow. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1799 by Proposal 5103 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1800 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1800 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The effect of amending an Order is to cause it to be effective in its amended form. The prior form of the Order ceases to have effect upon the amendment, and the new form has effect as if it had been originally executed in that form at the moment the amendment becomes effective. Vacating an Order to Amend has the same effect as would an Order to Amend reinstating the previous form of the Order. Amending a stayed or vacated Order does not grant the stayed or vacated Order effect it would otherwise not have. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1800 by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1801 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1801 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The effect of staying an Order is to temporarily deny the stayed Order from having any effect. A stay may be ordered for a fixed time, in which case the stay expires at the time specified; or for an indefinite time, in which case the stay will not expire. If no specification is made in the Order to Stay, the stay shall be indefinite. When the stay expires or is vacated, the previously stayed order again has effect as if it had been originally executed at the moment the stay ceases to be effective. However, if at the time the staying Order expires or otherwise ceases to have effect, the stayed Order has been vacated or is subject to another staying Order, it does not regain effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1801 by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1802 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1802 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The effect of vacating an Order is to permanently deny the vacated Order from having any effect. Vacating an Order to Vacate reinstates the ability of the vacated Order to have effect, as of the moment the Order to Vacate is itself vacated. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1802 by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1803 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1803 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Judicial Orders are executed by being sent to the Clerk of the Courts, but do not take effect until their publication by the Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk of the Courts shall publish each Judicial Order as soon as possible after receiving it from the Judge who executed it. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: Judicial Orders and Sentencing Orders are executed by being sent to the Clerk of the Courts, but do not take effect until their publication by the Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk of the Courts shall publish each Judicial Order and Sentencing Order as soon as possible after receiving it from the Judge who executed it. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: Judicial Orders and Sentencing Orders are executed by being sent to the Clerk of the Courts, but do not take effect until their publication by the Clerk of the Courts. The Clerk of the Courts shall publish each Judicial Order and Sentencing Order as soon as possible after receiving it from the Judge who executed it. Any Player may formally request a Judge issue any Judicial Order by filing a motion requesting that Order. If granted, the Judge shall issue the Order requested. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1803 by Proposal 5017 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1804 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1804 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Judicial Orders are subject to appeal to a Board of Appeal by a Call for Appeal. The Board of Appeal shall, upon finding that a Judicial Order is improperly or invalidly executed, order that that Order be amended or vacated, as it deems appropriate. When the Clerk of the Courts receives a properly executed Call for Appeal of a Judicial Order, the Clerk of the Courts shall stay the Order under appeal. If the Board of Appeals affirms the validity of the original Order, it shall then vacate this stay. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: As soon as possible after a Judicial Order is Appealed, the Clerk of the Courts shall stay it. If the Appeal is sustained, then the Board of Appeals shall vacate this stay as soon as possible. In the Appeal of a Judicial Order, the Board of Appeals shall consider whether the Order was properly and validly executed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: As soon as possible after a Judicial Order or Sentencing Order is Appealed, the Clerk of the Courts shall stay it. If the Appeal is sustained, then the Board of Appeals shall vacate this stay as soon as possible. If the Appeal is sustained, then the Board of Appeals shall vacate the stayed Order as soon as possible. In the Appeal of a Judicial Order or Sentencing Order, the Board of Appeals shall consider whether the Order was properly and validly executed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: As soon as possible after a Judicial Order or Sentencing Order is Appealed, the Clerk of the Courts shall stay it. If the Appeal is sustained, then the Board of Appeals shall vacate this stay as soon as possible. If the Appeal is overturned, then the Board of Appeals shall vacate the stayed Order as soon as possible. In the Appeal of a Judicial Order or Sentencing Order, the Board of Appeals shall consider whether the Order was properly and validly executed. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5017 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 text: As soon as possible after a Judicial Order is Appealed, the Clerk of the Courts shall stay it. If the Appeal is sustained, then the Board of Appeals shall vacate this stay as soon as possible. If the Appeal is overturned, then the Board of Appeals shall vacate the stayed Order as soon as possible. In the Appeal of a Judicial Order, the Board of Appeals shall consider whether the Order was properly and validly executed. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1804 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1805 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1805 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Appellate Orders are executed by being sent to the Clerk of the Courts by the Lead Justice of a Board of Appeals, but do not take effect until their publication by the Clerk of the Courts. The Lead Justice shall certify in eir submission to the Clerk of the Courts that the Order is executed by the concurrence of the majority of the Justices comprising that Board of Appeals; failure to do so deprives the Order of effect. The Clerk of the Courts shall publish each Appellate Order as soon as possible after receiving it from the Board of Appeal which executed it. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: Appellate Orders are executed by being sent to the Clerk of the Courts by the Lead Judge of a Board of Appeals, but do not take effect until their publication by the Clerk of the Courts. The Lead Judge shall certify in eir submission to the Clerk of the Courts that the Order is executed by the concurrence of the majority of the Justices comprising that Board of Appeals; failure to do so deprives the Order of effect. The Clerk of the Courts shall publish each Appellate Order as soon as possible after receiving it from the Board of Appeal which executed it. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Appellate Orders are executed by being sent to the Clerk of the Courts by the Lead Judge of a Board of Appeals, but do not take effect until their publication by the Clerk of the Courts. The Lead Judge must certify in the execution that the order is executed by the concurrence of the majority of the Justices comprising that Board of Appeals; failure to do so deprives the Order of effect. Appellate Orders are not subject to appeal. However, upon a judicial finding that the required certification was falsely provided, the Clerk of the Courts shall vacate the Order which was accompanied by that false certification. Appellate Orders are valid only if addressed to: a) The Clerk of the Courts in eir Official capacity; b) an Order issued by the Clerk of the Courts in eir Official Capacity; c) The Judge of the CFJ which that Board of Appeals was convened to consider, or any Order issued by that Judge in that particular CFJ; or d) any combination of the above. All other Appellate Orders are presumptively invalid. The Clerk of the Courts shall publish each Appellate Order as soon as possible after receiving it from the Board of Appeal which executed it. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the validity of Appellate Orders. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5068 (Zefram), 11 July 2007 text: Appellate Orders are executed by being published by the Lead Judge of a Board of Appeals. The Lead Judge must certify in the execution that the order is executed by the concurrence of the majority of the Justices comprising that Board of Appeals; failure to do so deprives the Order of effect. Appellate Orders are not subject to appeal. However, upon a judicial finding that the required certification was falsely provided, the Clerk of the Courts shall vacate the Order which was accompanied by that false certification. Appellate Orders are valid only if addressed to: a) The Clerk of the Courts in eir Official capacity; b) an Order issued by the Clerk of the Courts in eir Official Capacity; c) The Judge of the CFJ which that Board of Appeals was convened to consider, or any Order issued by that Judge in that particular CFJ; or d) any combination of the above. All other Appellate Orders are presumptively invalid. The Clerk of the Courts shall publish each Appellate Order as soon as possible after receiving it from the Board of Appeal which executed it. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the validity of Appellate Orders. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1805 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1806 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1806 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Appellate Orders are not subject to appeal. However, upon a judicial finding that the required certification was falsely provided, the Justiciar shall vacate the Order which was accompanied by that false certification. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1806 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1807 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1807 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Since Appellate Orders cannot be appealed, Appellate Orders are valid only if addressed to: a) The Clerk of the Courts in eir Official capacity; b) an Order issued by the Clerk of the Courts in eir Official Capacity; c) The Judge of the CFJ which that Board of Appeals was convened to consider, or any Order issued by that Judge in that particular CFJ; or d) any combination of the above. All other Appellate Orders are presumptively invalid. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules pertaining to the validity of Appellate Orders. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1807 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1808 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1808 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Administrative Orders are executed by being published in the Public Forum, and take effect upon publication. Private Orders are executed by submitting them directly to the Player to be commanded, and take effect upon submission. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3793 (Steve), 6 October 1998 text: Administrative Orders are executed by being published in the Public Forum, and take effect upon publication. Private Orders are executed by submitting them to the Player to be commanded, and take effect upon submission. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: Administrative Orders are executed by being published and take effect upon publication. Private Orders are executed by submitting them to the Player to be commanded, and take effect upon submission. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1808 by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1809 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1809 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Both Administrative and Private Orders are subject to appeal by a CFJ, the statement of which Statement alleges that the Order is improperly or invalidly executed. Upon a judicial finding that an Administrative or Private Order was improperly or invalidly executed, the Judge so finding shall vacate that Order. When the Clerk of the Courts receives a properly executed Call for Judgement, the statement of which alleges that an Administrative or Private Order was improperly or invalidly executed, the Clerk of the Courts shall stay the Order in dispute. If the Judge affirms the validity of the original Order, e shall then vacate this stay. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1809 by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1810 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1810 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: An Order is satisfied when the action which it requires to be performed is performed by the entity it requires to perform it. (Only Orders which require an entity to perform an action can be satisfied.) Any entity who is required by an Order to perform an act who fails to perform the required action prior to the time specified in the Order commits the Crime of Contempt by Inaction, a Class C Crime. Except when otherwise specified, a single action can result in the satisifaction of at most one Order. If an action would satisfy more than one Order, and no other specification is made, the Action satisfies the oldest Order which it would satisfy. This Rule shall have no application with respect to any Order which has been adjudicated to be invalid, and the invalidity of the Order is a complete defense to a Criminal accusation made under this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3954 (Elysion), 13 December 1999 text: An Order requiring an entity to perform an action is satisfied when that entity performs that action. Other Rules may define other ways for Orders to be satisfied. If an Order requires an entity to perform an action prior to a specified time, and the Order is not satisfied prior to that time specified in the Order commits the Class 4 Crime of Contempt by Inaction. Except when otherwise specified, a single action can result in the satisifaction of at most one Order. If an action would satisfy more than one Order, and no other specification is made, the Action satisfies the oldest Order which it would satisfy. This Rule shall have no application with respect to any Order which has been adjudicated to be invalid, and the invalidity of the Order is a complete defense to a Criminal accusation made under this Rule. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: An Order requiring an entity to perform an action is satisfied when that entity performs that action. Other Rules may define other ways for Orders to be satisfied. If an Order requires an entity to perform an action prior to a specified time, and the Order is not satisfied prior to that time specified in the Order commits the Class 4 Crime of Contempt by Inaction. Except when otherwise specified, a single action can result in the satisfaction of at most one Order. If an action would satisfy more than one Order, and no other specification is made, the Action satisfies the oldest Order which it would satisfy. This Rule shall have no application with respect to any Order which has been adjudicated to be invalid, and the invalidity of the Order is a complete defense to a Criminal accusation made under this Rule. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: An Order requiring an entity to perform an action is satisfied when that entity performs that action. Other Rules may define other ways for Orders to be satisfied. Except when otherwise specified, a single action can result in the satisfaction of at most one Order. If an action would satisfy more than one Order, and no other specification is made, the Action satisfies the oldest Order which it would satisfy. If an Order requires an entity to perform an action prior to a specified time, and the Order is not satisfied prior to that time specified in the Order commits the Class 4 Crime of Contempt by Inaction. Any entity who, while required by an Order to refrain from performing an action, performs the proscribed action while the Order is in effect commits the Class 4 Crime of Contempt by Action. This Rule shall have no application with respect to any Order which has been adjudicated to be invalid. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: An Order requiring an entity to perform an action is satisfied when that entity performs that action. Other Rules may define other ways for Orders to be satisfied. Except when otherwise specified, a single action can result in the satisfaction of at most one Order. If an action would satisfy more than one Order, and no other specification is made, the Action satisfies the oldest Order which it would satisfy. Willfully performing contrary to valid orders, either through action or inaction, is a violation of this Rule. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5077 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 text: An Order requiring an entity to perform an action is satisfied when that entity performs that action. Other Rules may define other ways for Orders to be satisfied. Except when otherwise specified, a single action can result in the satisfaction of at most one Order. If an action would satisfy more than one Order, and no other specification is made, the Action satisfies the oldest Order which it would satisfy. A player SHALL NOT willfully perform contrary to a valid unsatisfied order, either through action or inaction. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1810 by Proposal 5103 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1811 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1811 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Any entity who, while required by an Order to refrain from performing an action, performs the proscribed action while the Order is in effect commits the Crime of Contempt by Action, a Class C Crime. This Rule shall have no application with respect to any Order which has been adjudicated to be invalid, and the invalidity of the Order is a complete defense to a Criminal accusation made under this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: Any entity who, while required by an Order to refrain from performing an action, performs the proscribed action while the Order is in effect commits the Class 4 Crime of Contempt by Action. This Rule shall have no application with respect to any Order which has been adjudicated to be invalid, and the invalidity of the Order is a complete defense to a Criminal accusation made under this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1811 by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1812 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1812 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Any entity who performs an action defined by the Rules to be an Infraction, or fails to perform an action where such failure is defined by the Rules to be an Infraction, shall be subject to whatever penalty the Rules prescribe for that Infraction upon a Notice of Infraction stating that e committed that Infraction. A Notice of Infraction stating that an entity has committed a specific Infraction consists of a report by a Player authorized to report instances of that specific Infraction that it is eir informed belief that the specified entity has committed the specified Infraction. A Notice of Infraction shall also specify the penalty to be imposed for that Infraction. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3934 (Wes), 24 October 1999 text: If an entity engages in any action or non-action which is defined by the Rules as an Infraction, then the Player authorized to report said Infraction may execute a Notice of Infraction by posting to the Public Forum that is is eir informed belief that the entity has committed an Infraction. A Notice of Infraction shall include the specific Infraction which has been committed, the entity which has committed it, the Rule(s) defining said Infraction, and sufficient details regarding the circumstances surrounding the offensing action (or inaction) to identify the offense. A Notice of Infraction shall also include any and all necessary Orders or other actions to impose the mandated penalty for the Infraction which has been committed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: If an entity engages in any action or non-action which is defined by the Rules as an Infraction, then the Player authorized to report said Infraction may execute a Notice of Infraction by posting to the Public Forum that it is eir informed belief that the entity has committed an Infraction. A Notice of Infraction shall include the specific Infraction which has been committed, the entity which has committed it, the Rule(s) defining said Infraction, and sufficient details regarding the circumstances surrounding the offending action (or inaction) to identify the offense. A Notice of Infraction shall also include any and all necessary Orders or other actions to impose the mandated penalty for the Infraction which has been committed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: If an entity engages in any action or non-action which is defined by the Rules as an Infraction, then the Player authorized to report said Infraction may execute a Notice of Infraction by publicly stating that it is eir informed belief that the entity has committed an Infraction. A Notice of Infraction shall include the specific Infraction which has been committed, the entity which has committed it, the Rule(s) defining said Infraction, and sufficient details regarding the circumstances surrounding the offending action (or inaction) to identify the offense. A Notice of Infraction shall also include any and all necessary Orders or other actions to impose the mandated penalty for the Infraction which has been committed. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4152 (Murphy), 13 May 2001 text: If an entity (hereafter the Defendant) commits an Infraction, then any Player authorized by the Rules to report the commission of that Infraction may announce a Notice of Infraction. This Notice shall explicitly specify the following: a) The Infraction that has been committed. b) The identity of the Defendant. c) The Rule(s) defining that action or inaction as an Infraction. d) The action of inaction by which the Defendant committed the Infraction. e) Whatever Orders are sufficient to impose the penalty for the Infraction. If a Claim of Error alleging that the Defendant did not commit the Infraction is admitted, then the Player who announced the Notice of Infraction shall vacate all Orders that e executed to impose the penalty for the Infraction. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4369 (RedKnight), 29 August 2002 text: If an entity (hereafter the Defendant) commits an Infraction, then any Player authorized by the Rules to report the commission of that Infraction may announce a Notice of Infraction. This Notice shall explicitly specify the following: a) The Infraction that has been committed. b) The identity of the Defendant. c) The Rule(s) defining that action or inaction as an Infraction. d) The action or inaction by which the Defendant committed the Infraction. e) Whatever Orders are sufficient to impose the penalty for the Infraction. If a Claim of Error alleging that the Defendant did not commit the Infraction is admitted, then the Player who announced the Notice of Infraction shall vacate all Orders that e executed to impose the penalty for the Infraction. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: If an entity (hereafter the Jaywalker) commits an Infraction, then any Player authorized by the Rules to report the commission of that Infraction (hereafter the Traffic Cop) may publish a Notice of Infraction. This Notice shall explicitly specify the following: a) The Infraction that has been committed. b) The identity of the Jaywalker. c) The Rule(s) defining that action or inaction as an Infraction. d) The action or inaction by which the Jaywalker committed the Infraction. e) All and only those Ticketing Orders necessary and sufficient to impose the penalty for that Infraction. The Orders are executed and take effect upon publication. When a Player publishes a Claim of Error alleging that the Jaywalker did not commit the Infraction, e may (in the same message as the COE) stay one or more of the Ticketing Orders. If the COE is denied, then the Traffic Cop shall vacate the Order to Stay as soon as possible. If the COE is admitted, then the Traffic Cop shall vacate all the stayed Ticketing Orders as soon as possible. Players are encouraged to CFJ on the commission of Infractions only when a question of interpretation, rather than of fact, arises. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1812 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1813 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1813 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The imposition of penalties for the commission of an Infraction shall be by the execution of a Notice of Infraction. The Player executing the Notice of Infraction shall, at the time e does so, also execute Orders sufficient to implement the penalty required by the Rules for that Infraction. history: ... history: Amended(7) text: An Overdue Payment Order is a Payment Order which is presently effective, has been effective for more than seven days, and has not been satisfied, unless the Payment Order was issued while the Payor was On Hold, in which case the Payment Order becomes overdue if it has been effective and unsatisfied for more than seven days after the Payor first comes Off Hold. If the Executor of an entity for which, at the beginning of a given Nomic week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order naming it as Payor is not on hold, e commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness at the beginning of that Week. If the Executor of such an entity comes off hold, e commits the Infraction of Persistent Indebtedness. If an entity has more than one Overdue Payment Order naming it as payor, its Executor commits as many such Infractions as there are different Currencies named in all these Overdue Payment Orders, save that only one such Infraction is committed for Overdue Payment Orders in +VTs, -VTs, and unspecified VTs. The Recordkeepor of each Currency is authorized to report this Infraction with respect to the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor. Persistent Indebtedness is a Class 1 Infraction. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1814 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1814 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The punishment for a Crime or Infraction shall be whatever was specified by the Rules at the time the action so designated as a Crime or an Infraction was committed, even if the Rule or Rules which specified the punishment, or which designated the action as a Crime or Infraction, have since been amended or repealed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3768 (Chuck), 22 July 1998 text: The punishment for a Crime or Infraction shall be whatever was specified by the Rules at the time the action so designated as a Crime or an Infraction was committed, even if the Rule or Rules which specified the punishment, or which designated the action as a Crime or Infraction, have since been amended or repealed. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which specifies a different penalty for a Crime or Infraction. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1814 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1815 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1815 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: No action is a Crime or an Infraction unless defined as such by the Rules. If the Rules define an act to be a Crime or an Infraction, but fail to prescribe a penalty for that act, then there is no penalty for that act. If the Rules define an act to be an Infraction, but fail to authorize any Player or Players to report instances of that Infraction, then that Infraction cannot be reported. history: ... history: Repealed by Proposal 4152 (Murphy), 13 May 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1816 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1816 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Any CFJ whose Statement alleges that an entity has, through action or inaction, committed a Crime shall be dismissed if there is a prior CFJ, the statement of which alleges that the same entity has, through the same action or inaction, committed the same Crime, and which was itself not dismissed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4341 (Steve), 8 July 2002 text: (a) No Player may be penalized more than once for any single act, or failure to act, that is in violation of one or more Rules. (b) Where a CFJ exists whose Statement alleges that a Player has through action or inaction violated a Rule, and that CFJ has not been dismissed, any further CFJ alleging that the same Player has through the same action or inaction violated the same Rule, lacks standing and shall be dismissed. history: Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4341 (Steve), 8 July 2002 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: No Player may be penalized more than once for any single action or inaction. If a non-dismissed CFJ alleges that a Player has committed a Crime through a given action or inaction, then any further CFJ alleging that the same Player has committed the same Crime through the same action or inaction lacks standing and shall be dismissed. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 1816 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1817 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1817 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: A Recordkeepor is required to abide by all valid Transfer Orders submitted by the Executor of the owner of the units of Currency to be transferred (or, with respect to any entity which lacks an Executor, by any other person empowered by the Rules to execute Transfer Orders on the behalf of such entities), except for those transfers which would result in an entity possessing a negative quantity of Currency. Transfers shall be noted on the Recordkeepor's records in the order in which they are received by the Recordkeepor. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1818 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1818 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: If a Recordkeepor notes a transfer pursuant to a Transfer Order which is subsequently vacated, e shall correct eir records as soon as possible after the Transfer Order is vacated by noting a transfer which is the reverse of the transfer originally noted. However, if such a reversing transfer would result in an entity possessing a negative quantity of units of Currency, e shall instead execute a Payment Order requiring a Transfer Order that would have the same effect as the reversing transfer. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1819 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1819 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The effect of noting a transfer on the records of the Recordkeepor is to remove the specified number of units of Currency from the holdings of the source entity and to add the specified number of units of Currency to the holdings of the destination entity. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1820 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1820 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Each Recordkeepor shall maintain a record of all Transfer Orders submitted which specify the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor, for at least four weeks after their submission, and a complete record of all transfers noted upon eir records for at least four weeks. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1821 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1821 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: A Payment Order is only valid if a copy has been filed with the Recordkeepor of the Currency specified in it, and takes effect no sooner than the time of such filing. (Publishing the Payment Order in the Public Forum is sufficient to meet this requirement.) history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1822 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1822 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Each Recordkeepor shall maintain a record of all Payment Orders filed with em which specify the Currency of which e is the Recordkeepor. This record shall also indicate, for each Order, if that Order has been satisfied, vacated, or both. However, the Recordkeepor need only maintain records of satisfied or vacated Orders for four weeks after they have been satisfied or vacated. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1823 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1823 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: If a Player is required to execute two or more Payment Orders, all of which name the same Payor, Payee, and Currency, that Player may elect to instead execute one Payment Order naming that Payor, Payee and Currency, and for an amount equal to the sum of all such Payment Orders required. Doing so satisfies by substitution the requirement to execute all such Payment Orders. This Rule may not be applied with respect to any Payment Order required consequent to the vacation or stay of another Payment Order or of a Transfer Order. Payment Orders to be executed for the purpose of paying for Voting upon Proposals may not be combined by this Rule with Payment Orders executed for any other purpose. history: ... history: Amended(1) text: If a Player is required to execute two or more Payment Orders, all of which name the same Payor, Payee, and Currency, that Player may elect to instead execute one Payment Order naming that Payor, Payee and Currency, and for an amount equal to the sum of all such Payment Orders required. Doing so satisfies by substitution the requirement to execute all such Payment Orders. This Rule may not be applied with respect to any Payment Order required consequent to the vacation or stay of another Payment Order or of a Transfer Order. Payment Orders executed for the purpose of billing the Payor for Voting upon Proposals may not be combined by this Rule with Payment Orders executed for any other purpose. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1824 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1824 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: An entity for which, at the beginning of a given Nomic week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order naming it as Payor which was executed originally for the purpose of paying for Voting upon Proposals commits the Infraction of Debt Voting. This Infraction shall be reported by the Recordkeepor for Voting Tokens, and shall bear the penalty of the denial of Voting Privileges for a period of two weeks. history: ... history: Amended(1) text: If, at the beginning of the week, there is at least one Overdue Payment Order billing the Payor for Voting upon Proposals, then the Payor commits the Infraction of Debt Voting. This Infraction shall be reported by the Recordkeepor for Voting Tokens, and shall bear the penalty of the denial of Voting Privileges for a period of two weeks. history: ... history: Amended(3) text: At the beginning of each week, all entities that are the Payors of at least one Overdue Payment Order originally executed for the purpose of billing that entity for Votes on Proposals, commit the Infraction of Debt Voting. This Infraction shall be reported by the Accountor, and shall bear the penalty of the being Denied for all Proposals for a period of two weeks. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1825 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1825 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: A penalty denying Voting Privileges to an entity for a period of time shall be imposed by ordering the Assessor to deny Voting Privilege to the named Voting Entity for that period of time. The denial of Voting Privilege begins with the beginning of the first full Nomic Week after the Order takes effect, and continues for the period specified. While the Assessor is ordered to deny Voting Privilege to a Voting Entity, that Voting Entity shall be entitled to cast no Votes on any Proposal, any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Any period of time during which an Order denying Voting Privilege is without effect does not count toward the period of denial. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: Any Rule which specifies that an entity shall be denied Voting Privileges for a period of time shall result in the Legislative Status of that entity being given the value Barred in addition to any other values it may already have. After the specified period of time has ended, the value of Barred shall be removed from the Legislative Status of that entity. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1826 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1826 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: A Motion is a formal request made by a Player to the Judge of a CFJ. A Motion is made by submitting it to the Clerk of the Courts, clearly identifying the CFJ to which the Motion applies. The Clerk of the Courts shall forward each properly-filed Motion to the Judge of the CFJ to which the Motion applies as soon as possible after receiving it. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: A Motion is a formal request made by a Player to the Judge of a CFJ. A Motion is made by submitting it to the Clerk of the Courts, clearly identifying the CFJ to which the Motion applies. The Clerk of the Courts shall forward each properly-filed Motion to the Judge of the CFJ to which the Motion applies as soon as possible after receiving it. A Judge must either grant or deny each Motion so forwarded within five days of receiving it. A Judge grants or denies a Motion by sending eir determination on that Motion to the Clerk of the Courts, along with any reasons e chooses to provide. The effect of granting a Motion depends on its nature, but generally amounts to requiring the Judge to perform as requested by the Motion. Upon receipt of a Judge's determination on a Motion, the Clerk shall note the determination made and the reasons, if any, on the record of the CFJ, and shall notify the Player who made the Motion of that determination. If a Judge fails to Grant or Deny a Motion within five days of when it was forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, the Clerk of the Courts shall Recuse the Judge and assign a new one as usual. If a Motion is made after a case is closed, and the original Judge of that case is not active or is not a player, then a new Judge shall be assigned to the case as usual. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5068 (Zefram), 11 July 2007 text: A motion is a formal request made by a player to the judge of a CFJ. A motion is made by announcement, which must clearly identify the CFJ to which the motion applies. The judge of a CFJ must either grant or deny each motion that applies to that CFJ within five days of it being made. If a judge fails to grant or deny an applicable motion within five days of it being made, the Clerk of the Courts shall recuse the judge and assign a new one. If a motion is made after a case has been judged, and the original judge of that case is not active or is not a player, then the Clerk of the Courts shall assign a new judge. A judge grants or denies a motion by publishing eir determination, along with any arguments, evidence, or other material that e considers relevant. The effect of granting a motion depends on its nature, but generally amounts to requiring the judge to perform as requested by the motion. A denied motion has no further effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1826 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1827 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1827 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: A Judge must either grant or deny each Motion forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, within five days of when the Motion was received by the Judge. E may, but need not, state the reasons for eir grant or denial. A Judge grants or denies a Motion by sending eir determination on that Motion to the Clerk of the Courts, along with any reasons e chooses to provide. The effect of granting a Motion depends on the nature of the Motion granted, but generally amounts to requiring the Judge to perform as requested by the Motion. Upon receipt of a Judge's determination on a Motion, the Clerk the determination made and the reasons, if any, on the record of the CFJ, and shall notify the Player who made the Motion of that determination. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: A Judge must either grant or deny each Motion forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, within five days of when the Motion was received by the Judge. E may, but need not, state the reasons for eir grant or denial. A Judge grants or denies a Motion by sending eir determination on that Motion to the Clerk of the Courts, along with any reasons e chooses to provide. The effect of granting a Motion depends on the nature of the Motion granted, but generally amounts to requiring the Judge to perform as requested by the Motion. Upon receipt of a Judge's determination on a Motion, the Clerk shall note the determination made and the reasons, if any, on the record of the CFJ, and shall notify the Player who made the Motion of that determination. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3962 (Wes), 20 January 2000 text: A Judge must either grant or deny each Motion forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, within five days of when the Motion was received by the Judge. E may, but need not, state the reasons for eir grant or denial. A Judge grants or denies a Motion by sending eir determination on that Motion to the Clerk of the Courts, along with any reasons e chooses to provide. The effect of granting a Motion depends on the nature of the Motion granted, but generally amounts to requiring the Judge to perform as requested by the Motion. Upon receipt of a Judge's determination on a Motion, the Clerk shall note the determination made and the reasons, if any, on the record of the CFJ, and shall notify the Player who made the Motion of that determination. If a Judge fails to Grant or Deny a Motion within seven days of when it was forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, e commits the Class 0.5 Infraction of Slow Motion, detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. If this occurs, the Clerk of the Courts shall Recuse the Judge and assign a new one as usual. If a Motion is made after a case is closed, and the original Judge of that case is no longer a Player or is On Hold, then a new Judge shall be assigned to the case as usual. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4160 (root), 5 June 2001 text: A Judge must either grant or deny each Motion forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, within five days of when the Motion was received by the Judge. E may, but need not, state the reasons for eir grant or denial. A Judge grants or denies a Motion by sending eir determination on that Motion to the Clerk of the Courts, along with any reasons e chooses to provide. The effect of granting a Motion depends on the nature of the Motion granted, but generally amounts to requiring the Judge to perform as requested by the Motion. Upon receipt of a Judge's determination on a Motion, the Clerk shall note the determination made and the reasons, if any, on the record of the CFJ, and shall notify the Player who made the Motion of that determination. If a Judge fails to Grant or Deny a Motion within five days of when it was forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, e commits the Class 0.5 Infraction of Slow Motion, detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. If this occurs, the Clerk of the Courts shall Recuse the Judge and assign a new one as usual. If a Motion is made after a case is closed, and the original Judge of that case is no longer a Player or is On Hold, then a new Judge shall be assigned to the case as usual. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: A Judge must either grant or deny each Motion forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, within five days of when the Motion was received by the Judge. E may, but need not, state the reasons for eir grant or denial. A Judge grants or denies a Motion by sending eir determination on that Motion to the Clerk of the Courts, along with any reasons e chooses to provide. The effect of granting a Motion depends on the nature of the Motion granted, but generally amounts to requiring the Judge to perform as requested by the Motion. Upon receipt of a Judge's determination on a Motion, the Clerk shall note the determination made and the reasons, if any, on the record of the CFJ, and shall notify the Player who made the Motion of that determination. If a Judge fails to Grant or Deny a Motion within five days of when it was forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, e commits the Class 0.5 Infraction of Slow Motion, detected and reported by the Clerk of the Courts. If this occurs, the Clerk of the Courts shall Recuse the Judge and assign a new one as usual. If a Motion is made after a case is closed, and the original Judge of that case is not active or is not a player, then a new Judge shall be assigned to the case as usual. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4406 (Murphy), 30 October 2002 text: A Judge must either grant or deny each Motion forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, within five days of when the Motion was received by the Judge. E may, but need not, state the reasons for eir grant or denial. A Judge grants or denies a Motion by sending eir determination on that Motion to the Clerk of the Courts, along with any reasons e chooses to provide. The effect of granting a Motion depends on the nature of the Motion granted, but generally amounts to requiring the Judge to perform as requested by the Motion. Upon receipt of a Judge's determination on a Motion, the Clerk shall note the determination made and the reasons, if any, on the record of the CFJ, and shall notify the Player who made the Motion of that determination. If a Judge fails to Grant or Deny a Motion within five days of when it was forwarded to em by the Clerk of the Courts, e commits the Class 0.5 Infraction of Slow Motion, which may be reported by the Clerk of the Courts. If this occurs, the Clerk of the Courts shall Recuse the Judge and assign a new one as usual. If a Motion is made after a case is closed, and the original Judge of that case is not active or is not a player, then a new Judge shall be assigned to the case as usual. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1827 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1828 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1828 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: Any Plauer may formally request a Judge issue any Judicial Order by filing a motion requesting that Order. If granted, the Judge shall issue the Order requested. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3823 (Oerjan), 21 January 1999 text: Any Player may formally request a Judge issue any Judicial Order by filing a motion requesting that Order. If granted, the Judge shall issue the Order requested. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1828 by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1829 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1829 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The refusal of the Speaker to perform a duty when ordered to do so by an validly issued Order to Compel constitutes being an Impossible Speaker, as defined elsewhere. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3768 (Chuck), 22 July 1998 text: If the Speaker is convicted of the Crime of Contempt by Inaction, relating to a validly issued Order to Compel which was directed at the position of Speaker, the Speaker becomes Tainted. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1829 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1830 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1830 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: No valid Order to Compel may be directed to a Judge, or may require the performance of any duty required of Player by the virtue of that Player being a Judge. Any such Order is invalid. Any CFJ alleging that a Judge has failed to perform a duty of a judicial nature shall be dismissed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: Any Order to Compel directed to a Judge, or requiring the performance of a duty required of a Player because that Player is a Judge, is invalid. Any CFJ alleging that a Judgement is incorrect, or that a Judge has failed to perform a judicial duty, lacks standing. Such a claim should instead be pursued via Appeal. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4810 (Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: Any Order to Compel directed to a Judge, or requiring the performance of a duty required of a Player because that Player is a Judge, is invalid, unless that Order is a valid Appellate Order. Any CFJ alleging that a Judgement is incorrect, or that a Judge has failed to perform a judicial duty, lacks standing. Such a claim should instead be pursued via Appeal. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1830 by Proposal 5013 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1831 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1831 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: A CFJ alleging that the Clerk of the Courts has failed to perform a duty of eir Office may, at the Caller's option, be filed with the Justiciar, who shall then perform all the duties of the Clerk of the Courts with respect to that CFJ. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1831 by Proposal 4170 (Elysion), 26 June 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1832 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1832 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The failure to abide by an Order to Submit a Formal Apology is an Infraction carrying a penalty of 3 Blots, to be reported by the Judge who issued the original Order. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: The failure to abide by an Order to Submit a Formal Apology is the Class 3 Infraction of Failure to Apologize, to be reported by the Judge who issued the original Order. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1832 by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1833 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1833 by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), 19 March 1998 text: The Lead Justice of a Board of Appeals is the Justiciar, if e is serving on that Board, or the Player who serves in the place of the Justiciar otherwise. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1833 by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1834 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1834 by Proposal 3713 (Blob), 19 March 1998 text: There shall exist a Patent Title of "Robespierre". When a Revolt succeeds, the Player who Called for the Revolt is awarded this Title, and any previous holder of the Title loses it. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1835 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1835 by Proposal 3715 (Blob), 19 March 1998 text: During the Voting Period of an Election, any Candidate for that Election may stand down, by posting a message to the Public Forum to that effect. The player is then no longer to be considered a Candidate for that Election. Any further votes cast in eir favour are invalid, and e cannot win the Election. When a player stands down, e has the option of transferring all votes so far cast for em to another Candidate in the Election, if one exists. To do so, e must explicitly state which Candidate e is transferring eir votes to, in the same message as the announcement that e is standing down. Any votes transferred in this fashion will be considered to be cast for the receiving Candidate. This rule takes precedence over other rules for determining the Winner of an Election. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4035 (Chuck), 2 August 2000 text: During the Voting Period of an Election, any Candidate for that Election may stand down, by posting a message to the Public Forum to that effect. The player is then no longer to be considered a Candidate for that Election. Any further votes cast in eir favour are invalid, and e cannot win the Election. Any votes cast for a Player who stands down are cancelled, and any Player who cast such a vote is considered to have declared eir Presence in that Election. Additionally, any Player who cast such a vote may vote again, unless e has already cast another vote which remains uncancelled, and this Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent such a vote. If, at any time during the Voting Period of an Election, there remains only a single Candidate, the Voting Period ends immediately, with the sole remaining Candidate as the winner of that Election. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: During the Voting Period of an Election, any Candidate for that Election may stand down, by posting a public message to that effect. The player is then no longer to be considered a Candidate for that Election. Any further votes cast in eir favour are invalid, and e cannot win the Election. Any votes cast for a Player who stands down are cancelled, and any Player who cast such a vote is considered to have declared eir Presence in that Election. Additionally, any Player who cast such a vote may vote again, unless e has already cast another vote which remains uncancelled, and this Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent such a vote. If, at any time during the Voting Period of an Election, there remains only a single Candidate, the Voting Period ends immediately, with the sole remaining Candidate as the winner of that Election. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4363 (OscarMeyr), 16 August 2002 text: During the Voting Period of an Election, any Candidate for that Election may stand down, by posting a public message to that effect. The player is then no longer to be considered a Candidate for that Election. Any further votes cast in eir favour are invalid, and e cannot win the Election. Any votes cast for a Player who stands down are cancelled, and any Player who cast such a vote is considered to have declared eir Presence in that Election. Additionally, any Player who cast such a vote may vote again, unless e has already cast another vote which remains uncancelled, and this Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent such a vote. If, at any time during the Voting Period of an Election, there remains only a single Candidate, the Voting Period ends immediately, with the sole remaining Candidate as the winner of that Election. For the purposes of Rules on awarding Points, that Election shall not be considered a contested Election. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: During the Voting Period of an Election, any Candidate for that Election may stand down, by posting a public message to that effect. The player is then no longer to be considered a Candidate for that Election. Any further votes cast in eir favour are invalid, and e cannot win the Election. Any votes cast for a Player who stands down are cancelled, and any Player who cast such a vote is considered to have declared eir Presence in that Election. Additionally, any Player who cast such a vote may vote again, unless e has already cast another vote which remains uncancelled, and this Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent such a vote. If, at any time during the Voting Period of an Election, there remains only a single Candidate, the Voting Period ends immediately, with the sole remaining Candidate as the winner of that Election. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1835 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1836 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1836 by Proposal 3716 (Chuck), 27 March 1998 text: Upon creation of this Rule, the Voting Index of the Proposal entitled "CounterScam the Veto Scam, Part II" shall be set to 6. Immediately following that, the Proposal entitled "CounterScam the Veto Scam, Part II" shall take effect; that is, the provisions contained in the text of that Proposal shall be implemented to the maximal extent permitted by the Rules. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent "CounterScam the Veto Scam, Part II" from having effect at the time required by this Rule, or from having effect at all. All references to "CounterScam the Veto Scam, Part II" in this Rule shall be taken to refer to the Proposal of that Title which was Proposed by the same Player as the Proposal which created this Rule. If there is more than one such Proposal, then the first and second paragraphs of this Rule are without effect. This Rule shall repeal itself at 12:00 GMT on 15 April 1998. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1836 by Rule 1836, 15 April 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1837 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1837 by Proposal 3723 (Sherlock), 16 April 1998 text: Let there exist the Patent Title of "Miscreant". If any Player has more than ten Blots, the Player with the most Blots earns the Title of Miscreant. If no Player has the most number of Blots, there is no Miscrean t. The Miscreant loses eir Title of Miscreant if eir number of Blots drops below ten, if another Player gains as many Blots as em, or if another Player gains more Blots than em. A Player with the Title Miscreant counts as two Players towards the tally needed for Rebellion. If a Rebellion occurs in which the Miscreant was a Rebel, the Title of Miscreant is revoked from the Miscreant. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3777 (Blob), 3 August 1998 text: Let there exist the Patent Title of "Miscreant". If any Player has more than ten Blots, the Player with the most Blots earns the Title of Miscreant. If no Player has the most number of Blots, there is no Miscreant. The Miscreant loses eir Title of Miscreant if eir number of Blots drops below ten, if another Player gains as many Blots as em, or if another Player gains more Blots than em. The Herald shall announce in the Public Forum whenever a Player receives or loses this Title, as soon as possible after such award or revocation occurs. A Player with the Title Miscreant counts as two Rebellious Players when determining the outcome of a Revolt. This rule takes precedence over any other rule determining the outcome of a Revolt. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1838 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1838 by Proposal 3725 (Steve), 21 April 1998 text: Upon the creation of this Rule, all Voting Tokens, Proposal Notes and Indulgences are destroyed. Further, all obligations on the Chancellor to transfer Currency incurred under the authority of Rule 1754 (Inadvertent Transfers to the Bank) are cancelled. Further, all unsatisfied Payment Orders naming any Player as Payor are vacated. Within three days after the creation of this Rule, the Chancellor shall pay out to each Player seven Voting Tokens and 1 Proposal Note. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1838 by Proposal 3792 (Steve), 6 October 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1839 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1839 by Proposal 3731 (Steve), 24 April 1998 text: The Batch Size is an integer with a value between two and six inclusive, indicating the number of Proposals which will be distributed by the Promotor in the following Nomic Week, provided that there are that many Proposals in the Queue. Unless the Rules give it another value, the Batch Size is five. The Promotor may change the value of the Batch Size by announcing the new value in the Public Forum, provided that e announces a value between two and six inclusive, that e makes the announcement prior to midnight GMT Thursday, and that e has not already made such an announcement earlier in the Week. As indicated above, this change in the Batch Size has the effect of changing the number of Proposals which will be distributed by the Promotor in the Nomic Week *following* that in which the change is made; once the Week has begun, the Promotor cannot change the number of Proposals which will be distributed in that Week by changing the Batch Size. history: ... history: Amended(1) text: The Batch Size is an integer with a value between two and six inclusive, indicating the number of Interested Proposals which will be distributed by the Promotor in the following Nomic Week, provided that there are that many Intereseted Proposals in the Queue. Unless the Rules give it another value, the Batch Size is five. The Promotor may change the value of the Batch Size by announcing the new value in the Public Forum, provided that e announces a value between two and six inclusive, that e makes the announcement prior to midnight GMT Thursday, and that e has not already made such an announcement earlier in the Week. As indicated above, this change in the Batch Size has the effect of changing the number of Proposals which will be distributed by the Promotor in the Nomic Week *following* that in which the change is made; once the Week has begun, the Promotor cannot change the number of Proposals which will be distributed in that Week by changing the Batch Size. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: The Batch Size is an integer with a value between two and six inclusive, indicating the number of Interested Proposals which will be distributed by the Promotor in the following Nomic Week, provided that there are that many Intereseted Proposals in the Queue. Unless the Rules give it another value, the Batch Size is five. The Promotor may change the value of the Batch Size by announcing the new value in the Public Forum, provided that e announces a value between one and three inclusive, that e makes the announcement prior to midnight GMT Thursday, and that e has not already made such an announcement earlier in the Week. As indicated above, this change in the Batch Size has the effect of changing the number of Proposals which will be distributed by the Promotor in the Nomic Week *following* that in which the change is made; once the Week has begun, the Promotor cannot change the number of Proposals which will be distributed in that Week by changing the Batch Size. history: ... history: Amended(4) text: The Batch Size is an integer with a value between one and four inclusive, indicating the number of Interested Proposals which will be distributed by the Promotor in the following Nomic Week, provided that there are that many Intereseted Proposals in the Queue. Unless the Rules give it another value, the Batch Size is five. The Promotor may change the value of the Batch Size by publicly announcing the new value, provided that e announces a value between one and four inclusive, that e makes the announcement prior to midnight GMT Thursday, and that e has not already made such an announcement earlier in the Week. As indicated above, this change in the Batch Size has the effect of changing the number of Proposals which will be distributed by the Promotor in the Nomic Week *following* that in which the change is made; once the Week has begun, the Promotor cannot change the number of Proposals which will be distributed in that Week by changing the Batch Size. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1840 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1841 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1841 by Proposal 3739 (Swann), 3 May 1998 text: Any Player who has been continuously registered for two or more months is empowered to give another willing Player eir Power of Attorney for a specified period of time. The giving Player shall be known, for this Rule, as the Grantor. The receiving Player shall be known, for this Rule, as the Holder. Power of Attorney is given by the Grantor posting in the Public Forum, naming the Holder e is giving the Power of Attorney to, and the time period for which the Power of Attorney shall given. To be effective, this post must name a time that begins within the week following the posting. The Power of Attorney shall not be granted unless the Holder is an active Player and consents in the Public Forum before the beginning of the specified period of time. If the grant is effective, the Holder shall then have the Power of Attorney beginning at the specified time. This grant shall end when one of the following occurs; i) The period specified expires. ii) The Grantor posts in the Public Forum that e is withdrawing eir Power of Attorney. iii) The Grantor is deregistered, or goes On Hold. iv) The Holder is deregistered, or goes On Hold v) It has been over three months since the Grantor gave eir Power of Attorney to the Holder. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: Any Player who has been continuously registered for two or more months is empowered to give another willing Player eir Power of Attorney for a specified period of time. The giving Player shall be known, for this Rule, as the Grantor. The receiving Player shall be known, for this Rule, as the Holder. Power of Attorney is given by the Grantor posting in the Public Forum, naming the Holder e is giving the Power of Attorney to, and the time period for which the Power of Attorney shall given. To be effective, this post must name a time that begins within the week following the posting. The Power of Attorney shall not be granted unless the Holder is an active Player and consents publicly before the beginning of the specified period of time. If the grant is effective, the Holder shall then have the Power of Attorney beginning at the specified time. This grant shall end when one of the following occurs; i) The period specified expires. ii) The Grantor posts publicly that e is withdrawing eir Power of Attorney. iii) The Grantor is deregistered, or goes On Hold. iv) The Holder is deregistered, or goes On Hold v) It has been over three months since the Grantor gave eir Power of Attorney to the Holder. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: Any Player who has been continuously registered for two or more months is empowered to give another willing Player eir Power of Attorney for a specified period of time. The giving Player shall be known, for this Rule, as the Grantor. The receiving Player shall be known, for this Rule, as the Holder. Power of Attorney is given by the Grantor publicly announcing such, naming the Holder e is giving the Power of Attorney to and the time period for which the Power of Attorney is given. To be effective, this post must name a time that begins within the week following the posting. The Power of Attorney shall not be granted unless the Holder is an active Player and consents publicly before the beginning of the specified period of time. If the grant is effective, the Holder shall then have the Power of Attorney beginning at the specified time. This grant shall end when one of the following occurs; i) The period specified expires. ii) The Grantor posts publicly that e is withdrawing eir Power of Attorney. iii) The Grantor is deregistered, or goes On Hold. iv) The Holder is deregistered, or goes On Hold v) It has been over three months since the Grantor gave eir Power of Attorney to the Holder. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4190 (Steve), 18 July 2001 text: (a) A Player (the Grantor) who has been continuously registered for more than two months is empowered to give eir Power of Attorney (PoA) to another Player (the Holder), as specified in this Rule. (b) The Holder holds the Grantor's PoA if all of the following conditions are met: (1) the Grantor has announced that e grants eir PoA to the Holder; (2) the Holder has, in the week immediately preceding or immediately following the Grantor's announcement, publically consented to hold the Grantor's PoA; (3) the Holder is Active; and (4) the grant of PoA has not been withdrawn for any of the reasons listed in (d). (c) The grant of PoA commences at the time the Grantor grants eir PoA to the Holder, or at the time the Holder consents to the grant, or at the time specified by the Grantor, whichever is latest. If the Grantor specifies a time at which the grant of PoA is to commence, it must be a time no more than seven says from the Grantor's announcement. Later specifications are without effect for the purposes of this Rule. (d) The grant of PoA is withdrawn if: (1) the period of the grant specified by the Grantor expires; (2) the Grantor publically withdraws the grant; (3) the Grantor is deregistered; (4) the Holder is deregistered or goes On Hold; or (5) the Holder has held the PoA continuously for three months. (e) Nothing in this Rule shall be construed as preventing other Rules from granting and withdrawing PoA by other means. (f) Other Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no Player who has granted PoA to another Player as described in this Rule shall become a Zombie while the grant of PoA is in effect. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 text: (a) A Player (the Grantor) who has been continuously registered for more than two months is empowered to give eir Power of Attorney (PoA) to another Player (the Holder), as specified in this Rule. (b) The Holder holds the Grantor's PoA if all of the following conditions are met: (1) the Grantor has announced that e grants eir PoA to the Holder; (2) the Holder has, in the week immediately preceding or immediately following the Grantor's announcement, publically consented to hold the Grantor's PoA; (3) the Holder is Active; and (4) the grant of PoA has not been withdrawn for any of the reasons listed in (d). (c) The grant of PoA commences at the time the Grantor grants eir PoA to the Holder, or at the time the Holder consents to the grant, or at the time specified by the Grantor, whichever is latest. If the Grantor specifies a time at which the grant of PoA is to commence, it must be a time no more than seven says from the Grantor's announcement. Later specifications are without effect for the purposes of this Rule. (d) The grant of PoA is withdrawn if: (1) the period of the grant specified by the Grantor expires; (2) the Grantor publically withdraws the grant; (3) the Grantor is deregistered; (4) the Holder is deregistered or goes On Hold; or (5) the Holder has held the PoA continuously for three months. (e) Nothing in this Rule shall be construed as preventing other Rules from granting and withdrawing PoA by other means. (f) Other Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no Player who has granted PoA to another Player as described in this rule shall be deregistered while the grant of PoA is in effect. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: (a) A Player (the Grantor) who has been continuously registered for more than two months is empowered to give eir Power of Attorney (PoA) to another Player (the Holder), as specified in this Rule. (b) The Holder holds the Grantor's PoA if all of the following conditions are met: (1) the Grantor has announced that e grants eir PoA to the Holder; (2) the Holder has, in the week immediately preceding or immediately following the Grantor's announcement, publically consented to hold the Grantor's PoA; (3) the Holder is Active; and (4) the grant of PoA has not been withdrawn for any of the reasons listed in (d). (c) The grant of PoA commences at the time the Grantor grants eir PoA to the Holder, or at the time the Holder consents to the grant, or at the time specified by the Grantor, whichever is latest. If the Grantor specifies a time at which the grant of PoA is to commence, it must be a time no more than seven says from the Grantor's announcement. Later specifications are without effect for the purposes of this Rule. (d) The grant of PoA is withdrawn if: (1) the period of the grant specified by the Grantor expires; (2) the Grantor publically withdraws the grant; (3) the Grantor is deregistered; (4) the Holder ceases to be active or is deregistered; or (5) the Holder has held the PoA continuously for three months. (e) Nothing in this Rule shall be construed as preventing other Rules from granting and withdrawing PoA by other means. (f) Other Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no Player who has granted PoA to another Player as described in this rule shall be deregistered while the grant of PoA is in effect. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4656 (Quazie), 29 March 2005 text: (a) A Player (the Grantor) who has been continuously registered for more than two months is empowered to give eir Power of Attorney (PoA) to another Player (the Holder), as specified in this Rule. (b) The Holder holds the Grantor's PoA if all of the following conditions are met: (1) the Grantor has announced that e grants eir PoA to the Holder; (2) the Holder has, in the week immediately preceding or immediately following the Grantor's announcement, publically consented to hold the Grantor's PoA; (3) the Holder is Active; and (4) the grant of PoA has not been withdrawn for any of the reasons listed in (d). (c) The grant of PoA commences at the time the Grantor grants eir PoA to the Holder, or at the time the Holder consents to the grant, or at the time specified by the Grantor, whichever is latest. If the Grantor specifies a time at which the grant of PoA is to commence, it must be a time no more than seven days from the Grantor's announcement. Later specifications are without effect for the purposes of this Rule. (d) The grant of PoA is withdrawn if: (1) the period of the grant specified by the Grantor expires; (2) the Grantor publically withdraws the grant; (3) the Grantor is deregistered; (4) the Holder ceases to be active or is deregistered; or (5) the Holder has held the PoA continuously for three months. (e) Nothing in this Rule shall be construed as preventing other Rules from granting and withdrawing PoA by other means. (f) Other Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no Player who has granted PoA to another Player as described in this rule shall be deregistered while the grant of PoA is in effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1841 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1842 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1842 by Proposal 3739 (Swann), 3 May 1998 text: In certain specified circumstances the Rules may grant one Player, hereafter called the Holder, Power of Attorney for another Player, hereafter called the Grantor. Such a grant shall only occur when specified by the Rules, and shall last only as long as the Rules permit. When the Holder is granted Power of Attorney for the Grantor, that means that the Holder becomes the sole Executor for the Grantor for as long as e has that Power of Attorney. No Player is permitted to have Power of Attorney for more than two other Players. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4190 (Steve), 18 July 2001 text: (a) The Rules may grant a Player, called the Holder, Power of Attorney for another Player, called the Grantor. Power of Attorney is granted only as specified by the Rules, and shall last only as long as the Rules specify. (b) While the Holder is granted Power of Attorney for the Grantor, the Holder is an Executor of the Grantor, and the Prime Executor of the Grantor. (c) No Player is permitted to have Power of Attorney for more than two other Players. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1842 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1843 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1843 by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: The Market Value of a Plot is 5 VTs, unless the Rules state otherwise. In particular, the Market Value of the first three Bank-owned Plots purchased by a given Player is 0 VTs. A Player may become the owner of a Bank-owned Plot by transferring the Market Value of that Plot to the Bank for the sole purpose of buying that Plot. A Plot's owner may transfer ownership of it to any other consenting entity, by informing the Cartographor that e wishes to do so. For the purposes of this Rule, the Bank is always deemed to consent to such wishes. Furthermore, as soon as possible after a Plot is transferred to the Bank in this way, the Cartographor shall pay out half the Plot's Market Value to the transferring entity. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1843 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1844 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1844 by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: If at least one-third of all Plots are not owned by the Bank, and all Plots not owned by the Bank are owned by a single entity, then that entity's Executor satisfies a Win Condition known as a Win by Monopoly. Upon the correct report of such a Win, all Plots become Owned by the Bank. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1844 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1845 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1845 by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: There exists a class of entities known as Structures. Each Structure is assigned to a Plot and owned by that Plot's owner. No entity may own more than five Structures, unless another Rule specifies otherwise. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1845 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1846 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1846 by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: Ergs are a Currency. Their MUQ is 1. Their Recordkeepor is the Cartographor. Their Mintor is the Bank. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1846 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1847 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1847 by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: Upon the creation of this Rule: * All Voting Tokens and P-Notes are destroyed. * All obligations to transfer Currency due to Rule 1754 ("Inadvertent Transfers to the Bank") are cancelled. * For each Player, 5 VTs, 1 P-Note, and 30 Ergs are created in that Player's possession. One second after this Rule is created, it repeals itself. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1847 by Rule 1847, 8 May 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1848 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1848 by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: All Structures have a Type. Only Types of Structure defined by the Rules exist. A Player may create a Structure by informing the Cartographor. E must specify the Structure's Type, and to which Plot the Structure is assigned. As soon as possible after this happens, the Cartographor shall bill that Player the price of that Type of Structure. A Player may destroy a Structure by informing the Cartographor. E must specify to which Plot the Structure is assigned. As soon as possible after this happens, the Cartographor shall pay out to that Player half the price of that Type of Structure. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1848 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1849 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1849 by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: A Player's Maintenance Fee equals the total of the Maintenance Fees of all the Structures e owns, plus 1 Erg per Type of Structure e owns, at the end of the Nomic Week. As soon as possible after the end of the Nomic Week, the Cartographor shall bill each Player's Maintenance Fee to that Player. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1849 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1850 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1850 by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: As soon as possible after the end of the Nomic Week, the Cartographor shall pay out each Structure's Production to its owner, excluding Structures whose Type changed during that Week, and excluding Players with a Maintenance Fee that is neither satisfied, disputed, nor vacated. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1850 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1851 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1851 by Proposal 3741 (Murphy), 8 May 1998 text: The following Types of Structure exist, with the specified prices, Productions, and Maintenance Fees, unless otherwise specified: Type Price Production Maintenance Fee ---------------------------------------------------- Farm 4 Ergs 1 VT 1 Erg House 4 Ergs 1 P-Note 1 Erg Mine 4 Ergs 3 Ergs 1 Erg Church 4 Ergs special 1 Erg Churches have no Production. However, when an Indulgence is to be given to a random Player, each Church is deemed to be two Players, and any Indulgence that would otherwise be given to a Church is instead given to its owner. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule attempting to prevent Churches from having this effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1851 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1852 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1852 by Proposal 3747 (Steve), 22 May 1998 text: An amount of Currency is in circulation if it exists and is not possessed by the Bank. The Voting Token Circulation Level is a number which indicates an approximate upper limit on how many Voting Tokens per Player are in circulation. The Accountor can set the Voting Token Circulation Level by announcing in the Public Forum that e is doing so, provided that e announces a value between 0 and 15 inclusive, and that the Voting Token Circulation Level has not already been set by a similar such announcement earlier in the Week. The Accountor is responsible for ensuring that the number of Voting Tokens per Player in circulation does not exceed the Voting Token Circulation Level. To this end, at any time at which the number of Voting Tokens per Player in circulation does exceed the Voting Token Circulation Level, but only at such a time, the Accountor is empowered and required to levy a tax on Voting Tokens, as described in other Rules. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3790 (Steve), 6 October 1998 text: The amount of a Currency in circulation is the amount of that Currency possessed by entities other than the Bank, minus the total of the undisputed Payment Orders for that Currency naming entities other than Bank as payor, and the Bank as payee. The Voting Token Circulation Level is a number which indicates an approximate upper limit on how many Voting Tokens per Player are in circulation. The Accountor can set the Voting Token Circulation Level by announcing in the Public Forum that e is doing so, provided that e announces a value between 0 and 15 inclusive, and that the Voting Token Circulation Level has not already been set by a similar such announcement earlier in the Week. The Accountor is responsible for ensuring that the number of Voting Tokens per Player in circulation does not exceed the Voting Token Circulation Level. To this end, at any time at which the number of Voting Tokens per Player in circulation does exceed the Voting Token Circulation Level, but only at such a time, the Accountor is empowered and required to levy a tax on Voting Tokens, as described in other Rules. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1852 by Proposal 3857 (General Chaos), 27 April 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1853 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1853 by Proposal 3747 (Steve), 22 May 1998 text: When (and only when) a Player is empowered to levy a tax on a Currency, e may do so by announcing the levy in the Public Forum. The announcement must specify which Currency the tax in being levied on (and this must be a Currency on which the Player making the announcement is empowered to levy a tax), and the amount of the levy, expressed as a percentage of holdings of that Currency, not in excess of fifty percent, which each entity in possession of that Currency will be required to pay to the Bank (the levy must be the same for all entities). Finally, the announcement must contain Payment Orders naming each entity in possession of the named Currency as payor, and with the Bank as payee, for an amount of the named Currency equal to the amount of the levy. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3790 (Steve), 6 October 1998 text: When (and only when) a Player is empowered to levy a tax on a Currency, e may do so by announcing the levy in the Public Forum. The announcement must specify which Currency the tax in being levied on (and this must be a Currency on which the Player making the announcement is empowered to levy a tax), and the amount of the levy, expressed as a percentage of holdings of that Currency, not in excess of fifty percent, which each entity in possession of that Currency will be required to pay to the Bank (the levy must be the same for all entities). As soon as possible after making the announcement, the Accountor is required to execute Payment Orders naming each entity other than the Bank in possession of the named Currency as payor, and with the Bank as payee, for an amount of the named Currency equal to the amount of the levy. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3794 (Kolja A.), 19 October 1998 text: When (and only when) a Player is empowered to levy a tax on a Currency, e may do so by announcing the levy in the Public Forum. The announcement must specify which Currency the tax in being levied on (and this must be a Currency on which the Player making the announcement is empowered to levy a tax), and the amount of the levy, expressed as a percentage of holdings of that Currency, which each entity in possession of that Currency will be required to pay to the Bank (the levy must be the same for all entities). Unless the rule(s) authorizing a particular tax explicitly say so, the amount of the levy of that tax may never be larger than 50%. As soon as possible after making the announcement, the Accountor is required to execute Payment Orders naming each entity other than the Bank in possession of the named Currency as payor, and with the Bank as payee, for an amount of the named Currency equal to the amount of the levy. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3857 (General Chaos), 27 April 1999 text: (a) When (and only when) an Officer is empowered to levy a tax on a Currency, e may do so by announcing the levy in the Public Forum. (b) Taxes may be levied only when the Rules explicitly permit it, and then only by the Officer authorized to impose that levy. (c) An Officer levies a tax by announcing it in a Public Forum. An announcement of levy must specify: (1) The Currency being taxed; (2) the amount of the levy, expressed as a percentage; (3) any exemptions from the levy; and (4) the legal authorization for the levy. (d) As soon as possible after the announcement of a tax levy conforming with subdivision (c) of this Rule, the Recordkeepor of the Currency in which the tax is levied shall compute the amount of tax owed by each taxable entity, and issue Payment Orders requiring each such entity to pay eir tax to the Bank. (e) The amount of tax levied on a taxable entity is the announced percentage of that entity's holdings of the Currency being taxed, using the amount of that Currency owned by that entity at the time the announcement was made, and shall exclude any amount which the legal authorization of that specific tax levy allows to be excluded from taxation. (f) Subdivision (e) of this Rule notwithstanding, the amount of tax levied on a particular entity may not exceed fifty percent of that entity's holdings unless the legal authorization of the specific tax levy explicitly permits it. (g) The Bank is not a taxable entity. All other entities are. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3951 (Elysion), 8 December 1999 text: (a) When (and only when) an Officer is empowered to levy a tax on a Currency, e may do so by announcing the levy in the Public Forum. (b) Taxes may be levied only when the Rules explicitly permit it, and then only by the Officer authorized to impose that levy. (c) An Officer levies a tax by announcing it in a Public Forum. An announcement of levy must specify: (1) The Currency being taxed; (2) the amount of the levy, expressed as a percentage (but not to exceed fifty percent unless permitted by the Rule specifically authorizing the levy); (3) any exemptions from the levy (but only as permitted by the Rules authorizing specific levies); (4) the Effective Time of the levy, which may not be earlier than the time of the announcement, nor more than four weeks later than the time of the announcment; and (5) the legal authorization for the levy. (d) As soon as possible after the Effective Time of a tax levy conforming with subdivision (c) of this Rule, the Recordkeepor of the Currency in which the tax is levied shall compute the amount of tax owed by each taxable entity, and issue Payment Orders requiring each such entity to pay eir tax to the Bank. (e) The amount of tax levied on a taxable entity is the announced percentage of that entity's Expected holdings of the Currency being taxed, at the Effective Time of the levy, less any amount which the legal authorization of that specific tax levy allows to be excluded from taxation. (f) The Bank and any Rebellious Players are not taxable entities. All other entities are. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: Taxes may be levied only when the Rules explicitly permit it, and then only by the Officer authorized by the Rule permitting the levy. An Officer levies a tax by announcing it in a Public Forum. An announcement of levy must specify: (1) The Currency being taxed; (2) the amount of the levy, expressed as a percentage; and (3) the legal authorization for the levy. Upon the announcement of a tax levy conforming with the above requirements, each taxable entity becomes liable to the Bank for a debt equal to the percentage stated in the announcement of that entity's holdings in the taxed Currency at the time of the announcement of the levy. The Recordkeepor of the Currency named in a tax levy shall, as soon as possible after the announcement, provide a report setting out the holdings in that Currency of each taxable entity, as of the time the announcement was made. Each entity which is not exempt from taxation is a taxable entity. The following are exempt from taxation: (a) Each Rebellious Player; (b) the Bank. The amount of tax levied may not exceed 50% of an entity's holdings unless the Rule which authorizes the tax explicitly permits it. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4127 (Murphy), 28 March 2001 text: Taxes may be levied only by an Officer explicitly permitted by the Rules to do so. An Officer levies a tax by announcing that e does so, and specifying: (1) The Currency being taxed. (2) The percentage of the tax. (3) Any exemptions applying to the tax. (4) The Rule authorizing em to levy the tax. Upon such an announcement, each taxable entity becomes liable to the Bank for a debt equal to the specified percentage of eir taxable holdings of that Currency at the time of the announcement. As soon as possible after this happens, the Recordkeepor of that Currency shall publish a report listing each entity's holdings of that Currency as of the time of the announcement. All entities are taxable, except for: (a) the Bank (b) all Rebellious Players (c) entities explicitly specified by the Rule authorizing the levy as tax-exempt for that levy All Currency holdings are taxable, except for holdings explicitly specified by the Rule authorizing the levy as tax-exempt for that levy. The percentage of the tax may not exceed 50%, unless the Rule authorizing the levy explicitly permits it to do so. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4193 (Taral), 18 July 2001 text: Taxes may be levied only by an Officer explicitly permitted by the Rules to do so. An Officer levies a tax by announcing that e does so, and specifying: (1) The Currency being taxed. (2) The percentage of the tax. (3) Any exemptions applying to the tax. (4) The Rule authorizing em to levy the tax. Upon such an announcement, each taxable entity becomes liable to the Bank for a debt equal to the specified percentage of eir taxable holdings of that Currency at the time of the announcement. As soon as possible after this happens, the Recordkeepor of that Currency shall publish a report listing each entity's holdings of that Currency as of the time of the announcement. All entities are taxable, except for: (a) the Bank (b) all Rebellious Players who were Rebellious at the time the intent to levy was published (c) entities explicitly specified by the Rule authorizing the levy as tax-exempt for that levy All Currency holdings are taxable, except for holdings explicitly specified by the Rule authorizing the levy as tax-exempt for that levy. The percentage of the tax may not exceed 50%, unless the Rule authorizing the levy explicitly permits it to do so. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4470 (Steve), 26 March 2003 text: (a) Taxes may be levied only by a person explicitly empowered by the rules to do so; each currency Recordkeepor is empowered to levy a tax on that currency, and is herein referred to as "the taxing authority". (b) The procedure for levying a tax may be summarized as follows: first, the taxing authority publically issues an announcement of intent to levy a tax; second, at a later point, the taxing authority publically issues a tax notice. (c) To be valid, both the notice of intent to levy a tax, and the tax notice itself, must specify the elements of the tax, viz., the currency being taxed, the tax rate expressed as a percentage of holdings (which may not exceed 50% unless the Rule authorizing the tax explicitly permits it), and any exemptions. (d) An exemption is specified as a percentage of the holdings of a taxable entity. It may be set at the discretion of the taxing authority, provided that: (1) all players are exempt identical amounts, (2) all non-players are exempt identical amounts, and (3) the non-players' exemption is less than or equal to the players' exemption. (e) A notice of intent to levy a tax may not validly be issued while another attempt to levy a tax in that currency is proceeding in accordance with this rule. (f) A tax notice may only validly be issued between seven and fourteen days after the publication of a valid notice of intent to levy a tax, and at least 30 days after the publication of the last valid tax notice (if there has been one). (g) A tax notice must also indicate the currency holdings of each taxable entity at the time of the publication of the notice of intent to levy a tax, and the tax debt incurred by each such entity. (h) The tax debt for each taxable entity is calculated on the basis of the entity's holdings at the time of the publication of the notice of intent to levy a tax. Any holdings exempt from the tax are exempted, and the tax is applied to the remainder at the specified tax rate. (i) Any error in the calculation of holdings or tax debts for a taxable entity does not invalidate the tax notice with respect to the other taxable entities mentioned in it. (j) Upon the publication of a valid tax notice, each taxable entity incurs a debt to the Bank equal to the tax debt for that entity. (k) All entities are taxable, except for: (1) the Bank, (2) rebellious players who were rebellious at the time the intent to levy was published, and (3) entities explicitly specified by the rule authorizing the levy as non-taxable for that levy. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: The Recordkeepor of a Currency ("the taxing authority") may levy a tax on that Currency only as follows: (A) First, the taxing authority publically issues an announcement of intent to levy a tax; second, at a later point, the taxing authority publically issues a tax notice (the levy). (B) To be valid, both the notice of intent to levy a tax, and the tax notice itself, must specify the elements of the tax, viz., the currency being taxed, the tax rate expressed as a percentage of holdings (which may not exceed 50%), and any exemptions. (C) The tax notice must be published between seven and fourteen days after the time of the announcement of the intent to issue the levy, and must be at least 30 days after the last valid tax notice published for that Currency. The announcement of intent to issue the levy may not take place while another attempt to levy a tax on that Currency is pending under the authority of this Rule. (D) The tax may include exemptions on a fixed amount of the holdings of every taxable entity, provided that: (i) All Players are exempt identical amounts, (ii) All Non-players are exempt identical amounts, (iii) The Non-players' exemption is less than or equal to the Players' exemption. (E) The tax debt for each taxable entity is calculated on the basis of the entity's holdings at the time of the publication of the notice of intent. Any holdings exempt from the tax are exempted, and the tax is applied to the remainder at the specified tax rate. (F) A tax notice must also indicate the currency holdings of each taxable entity at the time of the publication of the notice of intent to levy a tax, and the tax debt incurred by each such entity. Any error in the calculation of holdings or tax debts does not invalidate the tax notice with respect to the other taxable entities mentioned in it. (G) Upon the publication of a valid tax notice, each taxable entity incurs a debt to the Mintor of the Currency equal to eir tax debt. (H) All entities are taxable, except for: (i) rebellious players who were rebellious at the time the intent to levy was published, and (ii) entities explicitly specified by the rule authorizing the levy as non-taxable for that levy. Other Rules may specify conditions under which an entity other than the recordkeepor of a currency may be a taxing authority for the purposes of this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1853 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1854 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1854 by Proposal 3747 (Steve), 22 May 1998 text: The Chancellor can set the level of the Basic Officer Salary by announcing in the Public Forum that e is doing so, provided that e announces a value between 0 VTs and 2 VTs inclusive, that e makes the announcement before midnight GMT Thursday, and that the Basic Officer Salary has not already been set by a similar such announcement earlier in the Week. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3802 (Kolja A.), 15 November 1998 text: The Chancellor can set the level of the Basic Officer Salary by announcing in the Public Forum that e is doing so, provided that e announces a value between 0 VTs and 8 VTs inclusive, that e makes the announcement before the 25th day of the month, and that the Basic Officer Salary has not already been set by a similar such announcement earlier in the month. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3835 (Michael), 2 March 1999 text: The Chancellor can set the Basic Officer Salary by first announcing that e is doing so in the Public Forum, provided that e announces a value between 0 VTs and 8 VTs inclusive. The change to the Basic Officer Salary then occurs at the beginning of the next week if the announcement was made on a Thursday or earlier in the week. If the announcement is made later in the week, then the change occurs at the start of the second week after the announcement. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1855 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1855 by Proposal 3753 (Murphy), 9 June 1998 text: There is a class of entities called Plots. All Plots are initially owned by the Bank. Each Plot has a unique name. A Plot's owner may change its name Without Objection. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1855 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1856 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1856 by Proposal 3753 (Murphy), 9 June 1998 text: Each Plot has a Longitude and Latitude, each of which is an integer. Two Plots are Adjacent if and only if one of the following applies: * They have the same Longitude, and their Latitudes differ by one. * They have the same Latitude, and their Longitudes differ by one. For each combination of Latitude (X) from 0 to 9 and Longitude (Y) from 0 to 9: * If a Plot named "Area XY" (substituting the Latitude for "X" and the Longitude for "Y") already exists, its Latitude and Longitude are set to X and Y, respectively. * If no such Plot exists, then a Plot with that name, Latitude and Longitude is created. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1856 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1857 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1857 by Proposal 3753 (Murphy), 9 June 1998 text: There is an Office of Cartographor. The Cartographor recieves a salary equal to 2 times the Basic Officer Salary. At least once each Nomic Week, the Cartographor shall post a Report to the Public Forum containing the following information: * the name, ownership, and Adjacency of all Plots * the ownership, assignment (if any) and Type of all Structures * the ownership of all Ergs * all changes in ownership of Plots since the last Report * all changes in ownership, assignment, or Type of all Structures since the last Report * all Transfer Orders and Payment Orders specifying Ergs since the last Report history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1857 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1858 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1858 by Proposal 3754 (Steve), 9 June 1998 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each Week, the Registrar shall pay out to every Player who did not receive any Officer's Salary for the previous week an unemployment benefit of half the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3802 (Kolja A.), 15 November 1998 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the Registrar shall pay out to every Player who does not receive any Officer's Salary for the previous month an unemployment benefit of half the Basic Officer Salary. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3844 (Blob), 22 March 1999 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the Registrar shall pay out to every Player who does not receive any Officer's Salary for the previous month an unemployment benefit. The value of the unemployment benefit is a proportion of the Basic Officer Salary, the same for all Players. It can be set by the Registrar by announcing in the Public Forum that e is doing so, provided that e announces a value between 0% and 100% inclusive in units of 10%, and that e makes the announcement before the 25th day of the month. history: ... history: Amended(3) text: Unemployment Benefits As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the Registrar shall pay out to every Player who does not receive any Officer's Salary for the previous month an unemployment benefit as set in the last Treasuror's budget. history: ... history: Amended(6) text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the Payroll Clerk shall pay out to every Player the Minimum Income as set in the last Treasuror's budget. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1859 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1859 by Proposal 3757 (Steve), 12 June 1998 text: Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Vote Collector of the Proposal, Election, or Referendum only. (Players are, however, permitted to send or copy such messages to themselves.) A Player who sends a message containing votes on a Proposal, Election or Referendum to the Public Forum, prior to the conclusion of the Voting Period of that Proposal, Election, or Referendum, commits the Infraction of Public Voting. The commission of this Infraction is to be detected and reported by the Vote Collector; the penalty is 1 Voting Token and 1 Blot. Two months after it is created, this Rule repeals itself. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3780 (Steve), 12 August 1998 text: Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the casting of any votes, or the declaration of Presence, by Voting Entities on Proposals, Elections or Referenda, may only be achieved by sending a message to the Vote Collector of the Proposal, Election, or Referendum only. (Players are, however, permitted to send or copy such messages to themselves.) A Player who sends a message containing votes on a Proposal, Election or Referendum to the Public Forum, prior to the conclusion of the Voting Period of that Proposal, Election, or Referendum, commits the Infraction of Public Voting. The commission of this Infraction is to be detected and reported by the Vote Collector; the penalty is 1 Voting Token and 1 Blot. Two months after this paragraph is added to this Rule, this Rule repeals itself. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1859 by Rule 1859, 12 October 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1860 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1860 by Proposal 3760 (Kolja A.), 19 June 1998 text: If at any time a Player has held an Office in the normal fashion without interruption for more than two weeks, ownership of any Plots this Player owned at that time is transferred to the bank. This transfer occurs even if other Rules do not allow it. As soon as possible after this transfer of ownership the Chancellor shall pay out to this Player Nationalization Damages of half the Market Value of all Plots transferred to the Bank, and 2 Ergs per Structure on these Plots. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1860 by Proposal 3804 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1861 history: Created text: As soon as possible after creation of this Rule, Chuck shall vacate all unsatisfied Payment Orders for Indulgences naming him as Payor. He is both authorized and empowered to do this. Once that has taken place, this Rule repeals itself. history: Repealed by Rule 1861, ca. Aug. 2 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1862 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1862 by Proposal 3783 (Blob), 24 August 1998 text: The Voting Tariff is a number of VTs, a multiple of the MUQ, between 0.5 and 2.0 inclusive. Unless the Rules give it another value, the Voting Tariff is 1 VT. The Assessor may change the value of the Voting Tariff by announcing the new value in the Public Forum, provided that e announces a value within the range proscribed above, that e makes the announcement prior to midnight GMT Thursday, and that e has not already made such an announcement earlier in the Week. The new value of the Voting Tariff does not take effect until the beginning of the Nomic Week after the change has been announced. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3795 (Blob), 19 October 1998 text: The Voting Tariff is a number of VTs, a multiple of the MUQ, between 0 and 2 inclusive. Unless the Rules give it another value, the Voting Tariff is 1 VT. The Assessor may change the value of the Voting Tariff by announcing the new value in the Public Forum, provided that e announces a value within the range proscribed above, that e makes the announcement prior to midnight GMT Thursday, and that e has not already made such an announcement earlier in the Week. The new value of the Voting Tariff does not take effect until the beginning of the Nomic Week after the change has been announced. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1863 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1863 by Proposal 3792 (Steve), 6 October 1998 text: An Active Player with effective control of more than three Voting Tokens at the time a batch of Proposals is distributed, who is not denied Voting Privileges at that time, who is Active at the end of the Voting Period of the Proposal in the batch whose Voting Period finishes latest, and who fails to cast a vote on any Proposal in the batch, commits the Infraction of Failing to Vote, to be detected and reported by the Assessor. The penalty for commission of this Infraction is 1 VT. Effective control of an asset (eg. a unit of Currency) is the ability to dispose of that asset as one wishes. The Assessor is empowered to make determinations as to whether a Player has effective control over a particular asset at a particular time. Such determinations are defeasible and may be overturned by the Courts. Three months after this Rule is created, this Rule shall repeal itself. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1863 by Rule 1863, 6 January 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1864 history: Created text: As soon as possible after the creation of this rule, the Herald shall levy a tax of 80% on indulgences. This rule is automatically repealed two weeks after it is created. history: Repealed by Rule 1864, 2 November 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1865 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1865 by Proposal 3798 (Macross), 29 October 1998 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: Every Player has a Public Service Status which takes exactly one of the values: Served, or Required to Serve. Initially, every Player's Status is Served. The Promotor shall maintain a list of all Players, including for each Player eir Public Service Status, and the date at which eir Status last changed to Served, or the date at which e last submitted a Proposal, whichever is later. The list shall be sorted on this date, from earliest to latest, with ties being broken alphabetically. The Promotor shall include this list in eir Promotor's Report. As soon as possible after the beginning of each Week, the Promotor shall select the two Active Players not in their Grace Periods highest on the list (at the time of selection) who are not already Required to Serve, and change their Statuses from Served to Required to Serve, by announcing this change in the Public Forum. Any Player who is Required to Serve continuously for 14 days has their Status changed to Served and commits the Infraction of Failure to Propose, incurring a penalty of 1 Blot and 1 P-Note, to be detected and reported by the Promotor. Whenever any Player submits a Proposal, eir Public Service Status changes to (or remains as) Served. text: Every Player has a Public Service Status which takes exactly one of the values: Served, or Required to Serve. Initially, every Player's Status is Served. The Promotor shall maintain a list of all Players, including for each Player eir Public Service Status, and the date at which eir Status last changed to Served, or the date at which e last submitted a Proposal, whichever is later. The list shall be sorted on this date, from earliest to latest, with ties being broken alphabetically. The Promotor shall include this list in eir Promotor's Report. As soon as possible after the beginning of each Week, the Promotor shall select the two Active Players not in their Grace Periods highest on the list (at the time of selection) who are not already Required to Serve, and change their Statuses from Served to Required to Serve, by announcing this change in the Public Forum. Any Player who is Required to Serve continuously for 14 days has their Status changed to Served and commits the Infraction of Failure to Propose, incurring a penalty of 1 Blot and 1 P-Note, to be detected and reported by the Promotor. Whenever any Player submits a Proposal, eir Public Service Status changes to (or remains as) Served. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3817 (Blob), 21 December 1998 text: Every Player has a Public Service Status which takes exactly one of the values: Served, or Required to Serve. Initially, every Player's Status is Served. The Promotor shall maintain a list of all Players, including for each Player eir Public Service Status, and the date at which eir Status last changed to Served, or the date at which e last submitted a Proposal, whichever is later. The list shall be sorted on this date, from earliest to latest, with ties being broken alphabetically. The Promotor shall publish this list each Week. Each Week, the Promotor shall select the two Active Players not in their Grace Periods highest on the list (at the time of selection) who are not already Required to Serve, and change their Statuses from Served to Required to Serve, by announcing this change in the Public Forum. Any Player who is Required to Serve continuously for 14 days has their Status changed to Served and commits the Infraction of Failure to Propose, incurring a penalty of 1 Blot and 1 P-Note, to be detected and reported by the Promotor. Whenever any Player submits a Proposal, eir Public Service Status changes to (or remains as) Served. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1865 by Proposal 3826 (Repeal-O-Matic), 29 January 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1866 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1866 by Proposal 3805 (General Chaos), 19 November 1998 text: The Ambassador is hereby directed to inform the InterNomic Moderator that Agora Nomic has elected, in accordance with its Rules and as permitted by the Rules of InterNomic, to withdraw from InterNomic. Within one week of doing so, the Ambassador shall propose that this Rule be repealed. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1866 by Proposal 3811 (Kolja A.), 21 December 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1867 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1867 by Proposal 3810 (Blob), 21 December 1998 text: There exists an Office called the Treasuror, with a salary equal to zero. The Treasuror is elected like any other Office, except that sometime during the Nominating period for the Office, Nominees must issue a Budget. Any Nominee who has not issued a Budget is not a Candidate for that Election. This rule takes precedence over any other rule which may identify Candidates. A Budget is a list of all Players' names, each with a corresponding number of VTs. The number of VTs must be an integral multiple of the MUQ of VTs, and cannot be less than zero. The sum of all these amounts must be less than or equal to 50 VTs. A Budget is issued by posting it to the Public Forum. A Nominee may issue as many Budgets as e wishes, but only the latest Budget issued during the Nominating Period of the Election is allowed to be implemented. As soon as possible after the Treasuror is elected, e must implement eir Budget. E does so by posting it to the Public Forum and announcing that e is implementing it. Only the last valid Budget e issued in the Nomination Period can be implemented in this way. At the time the Budget is thus implemented, all outstanding Payment Orders are vacated, and all Players' VT holdings are set to the values shown in the Budget. The VT holdings of all other entities are set to zero, except for the Bank, which shall contain 50VTs. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule which would prevent these changes from being made. One week after the Budget has been implemented, this Rule shall repeal itself. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1867 by Rule 1867, 21 January 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1868 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1868 by Proposal 3816 (Repeal-O-Matic), 21 December 1998 text: Whenever there is an open Call for Judgement to which no Player has been assigned as its Judge, the Clerk of the Court shall, as soon as possible after being made aware of this condition, select a Player to be assigned as its Judge. This selection shall be made from amongst all those Players eligible to serve as the Judge of that CFJ. Once assigned as the Judge of a CFJ, that Player remains the Judge of that CFJ until e is recused from that CFJ, or e ceases to be a Player. The Clerk shall announce the identity of the Player who is assigned to Judge a CFJ as soon as possible after the selection is made. A CFJ is "open" if it has neither been dismissed nor judged, or if there is an outstanding judicial motion pertaining to that CFJ which has been neither granted nor denied. A CFJ which is not open is closed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3962 (Wes), 20 January 2000 text: Whenever there is an open Call for Judgement to which no Player has been assigned as its Judge, the Clerk of the Court shall, as soon as possible after being made aware of this condition, select a Player to be assigned as its Judge. This selection shall be made from amongst all those Players eligible to serve as the Judge of that CFJ. Once selected as the Judge of a CFJ, that Player remains the Judge of that CFJ until e is Recused from that CFJ or becomes ineligible to Judge that particular CFJ. The Clerk shall announce the identity of the Player who is assigned to Judge a CFJ as soon as possible after the selection is made. A CFJ is "open" if it has neither been dismissed nor judged, or if there is an outstanding judicial motion pertaining to that CFJ which has been neither granted nor denied. A CFJ which is not open is closed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4166 (Elysion), 11 June 2001 text: Whenever there is an open Call for Judgement to which no Player has been assigned as its Judge, the Clerk of the Court shall, as soon as possible after being made aware of this condition, select a Player to be assigned as its Judge and announce eir selection. This selection shall be made from amongst all those Players eligible to serve as the Judge of that CFJ. Once selected as the Judge of a CFJ, that Player remains the Judge of that CFJ until e is Recused from that CFJ or becomes ineligible to Judge that particular CFJ. A CFJ is "open" if it has neither been dismissed nor judged, or if there is an outstanding judicial motion pertaining to that CFJ which has been neither granted nor denied. A CFJ which is not open is closed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: A CFJ is open if it has not been Judged, or if an outstanding judicial motion pertaining to it has been neither granted nor denied. A CFJ is closed if it is not open. As soon as possible after becoming aware that an open CFJ has no Judge assigned to it, the Clerk of the Courts shall choose a Player eligible to Judge it, and announce them as its Trial Judge. That Player remains the Trial Judge of that CFJ until e is recused from it or becomes ineligible to Judge it. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: A CFJ is open if it has not been Judged, or if an outstanding judicial motion pertaining to it has been neither granted nor denied. A CFJ is closed if it is not open. As soon as possible after becoming aware that an open CFJ has no Judge assigned to it, the Clerk of the Courts shall choose a Player eligible to Judge it, and announce them as its Trial Judge. That Player remains the Trial Judge of that CFJ until e is recused from it or becomes ineligible to Judge it. Other rules may explicitly delay the timing requirement of making assignments, for example with respect to providing the Defendant with response time in a Civil CFJ. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5040 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: A CFJ is open if it has not been Judged, or if an outstanding judicial motion pertaining to it has been neither granted nor denied. A CFJ is closed if it is not open. As soon as possible after becoming aware that an open CFJ has no Judge assigned to it, the Clerk of the Courts shall choose a Player eligible to Judge it, and announce them as its Trial Judge. That Player remains the Trial Judge of that CFJ until e is recused from it or becomes ineligible to Judge it. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5069 (Zefram), 11 July 2007 text: Whenever a CFJ that has not been judged has no trial judge assigned, the Clerk of the Courts shall as soon as possible assign an eligible judge to it by announcement. The assigned judge remains its trial judge until recused. Every active player is eligible to be assigned as a trial judge unless made ineligible by the rules. Entities other than active players are always ineligible. If the Clerk of the Courts errs in good faith by assigning an ineligible judge then the assignment stands. In this case, the Clerk of the Courts may recuse the judge by announcement accompanied by a description of eir error. history: Retitled by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: At any time, a judicial case either has no judge assigned to it (default) or has exactly one entity assigned to it as judge; this is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. To recuse a judge from a case means to deassign em as judge. To assign a judge to a case implicitly recuses any existing judge. At any time, a judicial case either does not require a judge (default) or requires a judge; this is not a persistent status, but is evaluated instantaneously. When a judicial case requires a judge and has no judge assigned, the CotC CAN assign a qualified entity to be its judge by announcement. Whenever this situation arises the CotC SHALL make such an assignment as soon as possible. Except where modified by other rules, the entities qualified to be assigned as judge of a judicial case are the active first-class players. Being unqualified to be assigned as a judge does not inherently prevent an entity from continuing to be judge if already assigned. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5151 (root), 29 August 2007 text: At any time, a judicial case either has no judge assigned to it (default) or has exactly one entity assigned to it as judge; this is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. To recuse a judge from a case means to deassign em as judge. To assign a judge to a case implicitly recuses any existing judge. A recusal is without cause unless stated otherwise in the rules. At any time, a judicial case either does not require a judge (default) or requires a judge; this is not a persistent status, but is evaluated instantaneously. When a judicial case requires a judge and has no judge assigned, the CotC CAN assign a qualified entity to be its judge by announcement. Whenever this situation arises the CotC SHALL make such an assignment as soon as possible. Except where modified by other rules, the entities qualified to be assigned as judge of a judicial case are the active first-class players. Being unqualified to be assigned as a judge does not inherently prevent an entity from continuing to be judge if already assigned. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5217 (Murphy; disi.), 13 September 2007 text: At any time, a judicial case either has no judge assigned to it (default) or has exactly one entity assigned to it as judge; this is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. To recuse a judge from a case means to deassign em as judge. To assign a judge to a case implicitly recuses any existing judge. A recusal is with cause if and only if stated as such by the rules. At any time, a judicial case either does not require a judge (default) or requires a judge; this is not a persistent status, but is evaluated instantaneously. When a judicial case requires a judge and has no judge assigned, the CotC CAN assign a qualified entity to be its judge by announcement. Whenever this situation arises the CotC SHALL make such an assignment as soon as possible. Except where modified by other rules, the entities qualified to be assigned as judge of a judicial case are the active first-class players. Being unqualified to be assigned as a judge does not inherently prevent an entity from continuing to be judge if already assigned. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5248 (AFO; disi.), 14 October 2007 text: At any time, a judicial case either has no judge assigned to it (default) or has exactly one entity assigned to it as judge; this is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. To recuse a judge from a case means to deassign em as judge. To assign a judge to a case implicitly recuses any existing judge. A recusal is with cause if and only if stated as such by the rules. At any time, a judicial case either does not require a judge (default) or requires a judge; this is not a persistent status, but is evaluated instantaneously. When a judicial case requires a judge and has no judge assigned, the CotC CAN assign a qualified entity to be its judge by announcement. Whenever this situation arises the CotC SHALL make such an assignment as soon as possible. Except where modified by other rules, the entities qualified to be assigned as judge of a judicial case are the active first-class players. Being unqualified to be assigned as a judge does not inherently prevent an entity from continuing to be judge if already assigned. When a player is poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of a judicial case, the Clerk of the Courts SHALL not assign em to be the judge of that case; if e has done so, and that player is still the judge of that case, then e CAN recuse that judge from that case by announcement. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5277 (Murphy, Zefram), 7 November 2007 text: At any time, a judicial case either has no judge assigned to it (default) or has exactly one entity assigned to it as judge; this is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. To recuse a judge from a case means to deassign em as judge. To assign a judge to a case implicitly recuses any existing judge. A recusal is with cause if and only if stated as such by the rules. At any time, a judicial case either does not require a judge (default) or requires a judge; this is not a persistent status, but is evaluated instantaneously. When a judicial case requires a judge and has no judge assigned, the CotC CAN assign a qualified entity to be its judge by announcement. Whenever this situation arises the CotC SHALL make such an assignment as soon as possible. Except where modified by other rules, the entities qualified to be assigned as judge of a judicial case are the active first-class players. Being unqualified to be assigned as a judge does not inherently prevent an entity from continuing to be judge if already assigned. When a player is poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of a judicial case, the Clerk of the Courts SHALL not assign em to be the judge of that case; if e has done so, and that player is still the judge of that case, then e CAN recuse that judge from that case by announcement. Making an entity unqualified or poorly qualified to judge is secured, with a power threshold of 1.5. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 5317 (Murphy), 28 November 2007 text: At any time, a judicial case either has no judge assigned to it (default) or has exactly one entity assigned to it as judge. This is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. At any time, a judicial case either does not require a judge (default) or requires a judge. This is not a persistent status, but is evaluated instantaneously. When a judicial case requires a judge and has no judge assigned, the CotC CAN assign a qualified entity to be its judge by announcement, and SHALL do so as soon as possible. The entities qualified to be assigned as judge of a judicial case are the active first-class players, subject to modification by other rules. Being unqualified to be assigned as a judge does not inherently prevent an entity from continuing to be judge of a case to which e is already assigned. When a player is poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of a judicial case, the Clerk of the Courts SHALL not assign em to be the judge of that case; if e has done so, and that player is still the judge of that case, then e CAN recuse that judge from that case by announcement. Making an entity unqualified or poorly qualified to judge is secured, with a power threshold of 1.5. To recuse a judge from a case is to deassign em as its judge. Assigning a judge to a case implicitly recuses its existing judge, if any. A recusal is "with cause" if and only if stated as such by the rules. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1869 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 1869 by Proposal 3818 (Chuck), 21 December 1998 text: Except as described in this Rule, no entity can set the Power of another entity to exceed the Power of the entity causing the Power to be so set. A Rule may set the Power of an adopted Proposal, even exceeding the Power of the Rule, so long as the Power of the adopted Proposal does not exceed the Voting Index of that Proposal. No entity may destroy or repeal an entity with Power greater than its own. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3915 (harvel), 27 September 1999 text: Except as described in this Rule, no entity can set the Power of another entity to exceed the Power of the entity causing the Power to be so set. A Rule may set the Power of an adopted Proposal, even exceeding the Power of the Rule, so long as the Power of the adopted Proposal does not exceed the Voting Index of that Proposal. No entity may destroy or repeal an entity with Power greater than its own. No Rule may have Power less than 1 or greater than 4. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4328 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 text: Except as described in this Rule, no entity can set the Power of another entity to exceed the Power of the entity causing the Power to be so set. A Rule may set the Power of an adopted Proposal even exceeding the Power of the Rule only as follows: (A) If the Proposer is a Member of The Cabal (as explicitly defined by the Rules) when the Proposal takes effect, the Proposal's Power is set equal to 4; (B) Otherwise, Rules to the Contrary nonwithstanding, the Proposal's Power is set to 1. No entity may destroy or repeal an entity with Power greater than its own. No Rule may have Power less than 1 or greater than 4. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 1869 by Proposal 4329 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1870 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1870 by Proposal 3819 (Steve), 28 December 1998 text: The period commencing every year at midnight GMT December 25, and concluding at midnight GMT January 1 is a Holiday. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 01-003 (Steve), 2 February 2001 text: The period commencing every year at midnight GMT on the morning of December 24, and concluding at the beginning of the first Nomic Week to commence after January 2, is a Holiday. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: The period each year from midnight GMT on the morning of 24 December to the beginning of the first Agoran week to begin after 2 January is a Holiday. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4548 (Magu), 13 January 2004 text: The period each year from midnight GMT on the morning of 24 December to the beginning of the first Agoran week to begin after 2 January is a Holiday. There exists a Boon known as Shiny New Toy, and an Albatross known as Lump of Coal. For the purposes of this rule, Players with a Stain of at least one Blot are known as Naughty, and Players with a Stain of less than one Blot are known as Nice. As soon as possible after the conclusion of the Holiday described above, the Herald shall award a Shiny New Toy to each Nice Player, and a Lump of Coal to each Naughty player. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1870 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1871 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1871 by Proposal 3821 (Blob), 12 January 1999 text: Whenever a Player is selected to judge a CFJ, e becomes ineligible to judge any future CFJs. If ever there are no Players eligible to Judge a CFJ, then all Players made ineligible by this rule become eligible again. Being made ineligible to judge a CFJ by this rule does not cause a Player to become ineligible to serve as a Justice on that CFJ. This rule takes precedence over any rule which claims otherwise. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: Whenever a Player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e becomes ineligible to be Trial Judge of any future CFJs. Whenever there are no Players eligible to be Trial Judge of a CFJ, all Players ineligible solely because of this Rule become eligible again. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4342 (root), 8 July 2002 text: Whenever a Player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e begins to Turn Around And Around. Players who are Turning Around And Around are ineligible to be Trial Judge of any future CFJs. Whenever there are no Players eligible to be Trial Judge of a CFJ, all Players who are Turning Around And Around cease Turning Around And Around. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4523 (Murphy), 28 August 2003 text: Orientation is a stuck player switch with values unturned and turned. The Clerk of the Courts shall maintain and report records for this switch. Whenever a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e becomes turned. Turned players are ineligible to be Trial Judge of any future CFJs. Whenever there are no players eligible to be Trial Judge of a CFJ, all turned players become unturned. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4563 (OscarMeyr), 6 April 2004 text: Orientation is a stuck player switch with values unturned and turned. Whenever a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e becomes turned. Turned players are ineligible to be Trial Judge of any future CFJs. Whenever there are no players eligible to be Trial Judge of a CFJ, all turned players become unturned. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4596 (Murphy), 4 July 2004 text: Orientation is a stuck player switch with values unturned and turned. Whenever a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e becomes turned. Turned players are ineligible to be Trial Judge of any future CFJs. Whenever an open CFJ has no Trial Judge assigned to it, and there are no players eligible to be assigned, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish a Notice of Rotation, specifying at least one such CFJ. Upon such an announcement, all turned players become unturned. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4648 (Kolja), 22 March 2005 text: Orientation is a stuck player switch with values unturned and turned. Whenever a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e becomes turned. Turned players are ineligible to be Trial Judge of any future CFJs. Whenever an open CFJ has no Trial Judge assigned to it, and there are no players eligible to be assigned, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish a Notice of Rotation, specifying at least one such CFJ. Upon such an announcement, all turned players become unturned. The CotC may switch the Orientation of players e expects to judge CFJs slowly or not at all to turned, without 2 objections. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4691 (root), 18 April 2005 text: Orientation is a stuck player switch with values unturned and turned. Whenever a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e becomes turned. Turned players are ineligible to be Trial Judge of any future CFJs. Whenever an open CFJ has no Trial Judge assigned to it, and there are no players eligible to be assigned, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish a Notice of Rotation, specifying at least one such CFJ. Upon such an announcement, all turned players become unturned. The CotC may flip the Orientation of players e expects to judge CFJs slowly or not at all to turned, without 2 objections. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Whenever a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e becomes turned. Turned players are ineligible to be Trial Judge of any future CFJs. When a player registers, e is considered turned. Whenever an open CFJ has no Trial Judge assigned to it, and there are no players eligible to be assigned, the Clerk of the Courts shall publish a Notice of Rotation, specifying at least one such CFJ. Upon such an announcement, all turned players become unturned. The CotC may turn a player e expects to judge CFJs slowly or not at all, without 2 objections. If the Clerk of the Courts errs in good faith by selecting a Player to Judge a CFJ or Appeal who is not eligible to judge that CFJ or Appeal solely because e is turned, then that selection shall stand, unless the Clerk of the Courts points out eir error and makes a new selection before the selected Player returns Judgement. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4912 (Murphy), 21 March 2007 text: When a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e becomes turned. A player is ineligible to be Trial Judge of a CFJ if e was turned when it was called. When a player registers, e becomes turned. The Clerk of the Courts may (without 2 objections) turn a player. E is encouraged to do this only if e expects the player to judge CFJs slowly or not at all. When the Clerk of the Courts publishes a Notice of Rotation, all players become unturned. The Clerk of the Courts shall only do so when all open CFJs without a Trial Judge have no players eligible to be assigned, and at least one of them has at least one player ineligible solely to being turned; e shall list all CFJs in the first set, and at least one in the second. However, failing to meet these requirements does not deprive the Notice of effect. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4958 (Murphy), 3 June 2007 text: When a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e becomes turned. A player is ineligible to be Trial Judge of a CFJ if e was turned when it was called. When a player registers, e becomes turned. The Clerk of the Courts may (without 2 objections) turn a player. E is encouraged to do this only if e expects the player to judge CFJs slowly or not at all. When the Clerk of the Courts publishes a Notice of Rotation, all players become unturned. The Clerk of the Courts shall only do so when all open CFJs without a Trial Judge have no players eligible to be assigned, and at least one of them has at least one player ineligible solely to being turned; e shall list all CFJs in the first set, and at least one (and at least one such player for it) in the second. However, failing to meet these requirements does not deprive the Notice of effect. history: Retitled by Proposal 4991 (Murphy), 6 June 2007 history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4991 (Murphy), 6 June 2007 text: Each player is either standing, sitting, or lying down. A player may change emself from sitting to lying down, or vice versa, by announcement. When a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e changes to sitting. A player is ineligible to become Trial Judge of a CFJ if e is not standing. When a player registers, e is lying down. The Clerk of the Courts may (without 2 objections) change a player to lying down. E is encouraged to do this only if e expects the player to judge CFJs slowly or not at all. When the Clerk of the Courts publishes a Notice of Rotation, all sitting players change to standing. The Clerk of the Courts shall only do so when all open CFJs without a Trial Judge have no players eligible to be assigned, and at least one of them has at least one player ineligible solely to not standing; e shall list all CFJs in the first set, and at least one in the second (noting at least one of the relevant players). However, failing to meet these requirements does not deprive the Notice of effect. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 5069 (Zefram), 11 July 2007 text: Each player is either standing, sitting, or lying down. A player may change emself from sitting to lying down, or vice versa, by announcement. When a player is selected as Trial Judge of a CFJ, e changes to sitting. A player is ineligible to become Trial Judge of a CFJ if e is not standing. When a player registers, e is lying down. The Clerk of the Courts may (without 2 objections) change a player to lying down. E is encouraged to do this only if e expects the player to judge CFJs slowly or not at all. When the Clerk of the Courts publishes a Notice of Rotation, all sitting players change to standing. The Clerk of the Courts shall only do so when all CFJs awaiting trial judge assignment have no players eligible to be assigned, and at least one of them has at least one player ineligible solely to not standing; e shall list all CFJs in the first set, and at least one in the second (noting at least one of the relevant players). However, failing to meet these requirements does not deprive the Notice of effect. history: Power changed from 1 to 1.5 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 history: Amended(13) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: Each player is either standing, sitting, or supine; this status is known as eir posture. The CotC's report includes each player's posture. When an entity becomes a player, e is initially supine. A player CAN change emself from sitting to supine, or from supine to sitting, by announcement. A supine player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. The CotC SHALL NOT assign a sitting player to be the judge of any judicial case. If the CotC has assigned a sitting player as judge, and that player is still the judge of that case, the CotC CAN recuse that judge from that case by announcement. When the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of a judicial case, the player becomes sitting, except in the situation discussed in the next sentence. If the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of more than one judicial case consecutively in the same announcement, and states in the announcement that these are linked assignments, the player becomes sitting upon the last of these assignments, but not any of the earlier ones. The CotC SHOULD NOT perform linked assignments unless the cases being linked are closely related in their subject matter. The CotC CAN change all sitting players to standing by announcement. The CotC SHALL NOT do this unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are sitting players, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 5111 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: Posture is a player switch with values Standing, Sitting, and Supine (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A player may flip eir posture from Sitting to Supine, or vice versa, by announcement. A supine player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. The CotC SHALL NOT assign a sitting player to be the judge of any judicial case. If the CotC has assigned a sitting player as judge, and that player is still the judge of that case, the CotC CAN recuse that judge from that case by announcement. When the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of a judicial case, the player becomes sitting, except in the situation discussed in the next sentence. If the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of more than one judicial case consecutively in the same announcement, and states in the announcement that these are linked assignments, the player becomes sitting upon the last of these assignments, but not any of the earlier ones. The CotC SHOULD NOT perform linked assignments unless the cases being linked are closely related in their subject matter. The CotC CAN change all sitting players to standing by announcement. The CotC SHALL NOT do this unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are sitting players, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5248 (AFO; disi.), 14 October 2007 text: Posture is a player switch with values Standing, Sitting, and Supine (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A player may flip eir posture from Sitting to Supine, or vice versa, by announcement. A supine player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. A sitting player is poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. When the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of a judicial case, the player becomes sitting, except in the situation discussed in the next sentence. If the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of more than one judicial case consecutively in the same announcement, and states in the announcement that these are linked assignments, the player becomes sitting upon the last of these assignments, but not any of the earlier ones. The CotC SHOULD NOT perform linked assignments unless the cases being linked are closely related in their subject matter. The CotC CAN change all sitting players to standing by announcement. The CotC SHALL NOT do this unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are sitting players, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 5249 (AFO), 14 October 2007 text: Posture is a player switch with values Standing, Sitting, Leaning, and Supine (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A non-standing player CAN flip eir posture to any non-standing value by announcement. A supine player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. A sitting or leaning player is poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. When the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of a judicial case, the player becomes sitting, except in the situation discussed in the next sentence. If the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of more than one judicial case consecutively in the same announcement, and states in the announcement that these are linked assignments, the player becomes sitting upon the last of these assignments, but not any of the earlier ones. The CotC SHOULD NOT perform linked assignments unless the cases being linked are closely related in their subject matter. The CotC CAN change all sitting players to standing by announcement. The CotC SHALL NOT do this unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are sitting players, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5250 (AFO), 14 October 2007 text: Posture is a player switch with values Standing, Sitting, Leaning, and Supine (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A non-standing player CAN flip eir posture to any non-standing value by announcement. A supine player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. A sitting or leaning player is poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. Hawkishness is a player switch with values Hanging, Hugging, and Hemming-and-Hawing (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A player CAN flip eir hawkishness by announcement. A hanging player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any inquiry case. A hugging player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any criminal case, and poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any equity case. When the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of a judicial case, the player becomes sitting, except in the situation discussed in the next sentence. If the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of more than one judicial case consecutively in the same announcement, and states in the announcement that these are linked assignments, the player becomes sitting upon the last of these assignments, but not any of the earlier ones. The CotC SHOULD NOT perform linked assignments unless the cases being linked are closely related in their subject matter. The CotC CAN change all sitting players to standing by announcement. The CotC SHALL NOT do this unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are sitting players, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5251 (Goddess Eris), 14 October 2007 text: Posture is a player switch with values Standing, Sitting, Leaning, and Supine (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A non-standing player CAN flip eir posture to any non-standing value by announcement. A supine player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. A sitting or leaning player is poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. Hawkishness is a player switch with values Hanging, Hugging, and Hemming-and-Hawing (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A player CAN flip eir hawkishness by announcement. A hanging player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any inquiry case. A hugging player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any criminal case, and poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any equity case. When the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of a judicial case, the player becomes sitting, except in the situation discussed in the next sentence. If the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of more than one judicial case consecutively in the same announcement, and states in the announcement that these are linked assignments, the player becomes sitting upon the last of these assignments, but not any of the earlier ones. The CotC SHOULD NOT perform linked assignments unless the cases being linked are closely related in their subject matter. The CotC CAN change all sitting players to standing by announcement. The CotC SHALL NOT do this unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are sitting players, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. When the CotC recuses a judge with cause, e SHALL flip that player's posture to supine by announcement within one week. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5259 (Zefram), 27 October 2007 text: Posture is a player switch with values Standing, Sitting, Leaning, and Supine (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A non-standing player CAN flip eir posture to any non-standing value by announcement. A supine player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. A sitting or leaning player is poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. Hawkishness is a player switch with values Hanging, Hugging, and Hemming-and-Hawing (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A player CAN flip eir hawkishness by announcement. A hanging player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any inquiry case. A hugging player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any criminal case, and poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any equity case. When the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of a judicial case, the player becomes sitting, except in the situation discussed in the next sentence. If the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of more than one judicial case consecutively in the same announcement, and states in the announcement that these are linked assignments, the player becomes sitting upon the last of these assignments, but not any of the earlier ones. The CotC SHOULD NOT perform linked assignments unless the cases being linked are closely related in their subject matter. The CotC CAN change all sitting players to standing by announcement. The CotC SHALL NOT do this unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are poorly qualified, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. When the CotC recuses a judge with cause, e SHALL flip that player's posture to supine by announcement within one week. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5261 (root; disi.), 31 October 2007 text: Posture is a player switch with values Standing, Sitting, Leaning, and Supine (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A player CAN flip eir posture to any non-standing value by announcement. A supine player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. A sitting or leaning player is poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. Hawkishness is a player switch with values Hanging, Hugging, and Hemming-and-Hawing (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A player CAN flip eir hawkishness by announcement. A hanging player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any inquiry case. A hugging player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any criminal case, and poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any equity case. When the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of a judicial case, the player becomes sitting, except in the situation discussed in the next sentence. If the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of more than one judicial case consecutively in the same announcement, and states in the announcement that these are linked assignments, the player becomes sitting upon the last of these assignments, but not any of the earlier ones. The CotC SHOULD NOT perform linked assignments unless the cases being linked are closely related in their subject matter. The CotC CAN change all sitting players to standing by announcement. The CotC SHALL NOT do this unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are poorly qualified, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. When the CotC recuses a judge with cause, e SHALL flip that player's posture to supine by announcement within one week. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5456 (Goddess Eris), 9 March 2008 text: Posture is a player switch with values Standing, Sitting, Leaning, and Supine (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A player CAN flip eir posture to any non-standing value by announcement. Changes to posture are secured. A supine player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. A sitting or leaning player is poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any judicial case. Hawkishness is a player switch with values Hanging, Hugging, and Hemming-and-Hawing (default), tracked by the Clerk of the Courts. A player CAN flip eir hawkishness by announcement. A hanging player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any inquiry case. A hugging player is unqualified to be assigned as judge of any criminal case, and poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any equity case. When the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of a judicial case, the player becomes sitting, except in the situation discussed in the next sentence. If the CotC assigns a standing player as judge of more than one judicial case consecutively in the same announcement, and states in the announcement that these are linked assignments, the player becomes sitting upon the last of these assignments, but not any of the earlier ones. The CotC SHOULD NOT perform linked assignments unless the cases being linked are closely related in their subject matter. The CotC CAN change all sitting players to standing by announcement. The CotC SHALL NOT do this unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are poorly qualified, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. When the CotC recuses a judge with cause, e SHALL flip that player's posture to supine by announcement within one week. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5468 (Murphy), 13 March 2008 text: Posture is a player switch, tracked by the Clerk of the Courts, with the following values: * Standing. Standing players are generally qualified to judge. * Sitting. Sitting players are poorly qualified to judge, but will generally become qualified when the CotC rotates the bench. * Leaning. Leaning players are poorly qualified to judge, but are generally qualified to serve on appeal panels. * Supine (default). Supine players are unqualified to judge. Changes to posture are secured. A player CAN flip eir posture to any non-standing value by announcement. When the CotC assigns a player as judge, that player becomes sitting. The CotC CAN rotate the bench (change all sitting players to standing) by announcement, but SHALL NOT do so unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are poorly qualified, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. When the CotC recuses a player with cause, e SHALL flip that player's posture to supine by announcement within one week. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5474 (Murphy), 24 March 2008 text: Posture is a player switch, tracked by the Clerk of the Courts, with the following values: * Standing. Standing players are generally qualified to judge. * Sitting. Sitting players are poorly qualified to judge, but will generally become qualified when the CotC rotates the bench. * Leaning. Leaning players are poorly qualified to judge, but are generally qualified to serve on appeal panels. * Supine (default). Supine players are unqualified to judge. Changes to posture are secured. A player CAN flip eir posture to any non-standing value by announcement. When the CotC assigns a player as judge, that player becomes sitting. The CotC CAN rotate the bench (change all sitting players to standing) by announcement, but SHALL NOT do so unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are poorly qualified, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. When the CotC recuses a player with cause, e SHALL flip that player's posture to supine by announcement in a timely fashion. history: Amended(24) by Proposal 5500 (Murphy; disi.), 26 April 2008 text: Posture is a player switch, tracked by the Clerk of the Courts, with the following values: * Standing. Standing players are generally qualified to judge. * Sitting. Sitting players are poorly qualified to judge, but will generally become qualified when the CotC rotates the bench. * Leaning. Leaning players are poorly qualified to judge, but are generally qualified to serve on appeal panels. * Supine (default). Supine players are unqualified to judge. Changes to posture are secured. A player CAN flip eir posture to any non-standing value by announcement. When the CotC assigns a player as judge, that player becomes sitting. The CotC CAN rotate the bench (change all sitting players to standing) by announcement, but SHALL NOT do so unless there is a judicial case to which e is obliged to assign a judge, all entities qualified to be so assigned are poorly qualified, and e immediately afterwards (in the same announcement) assigns a judge to that case. When the CotC recuses a non-supine player with cause, e SHALL flip that player's posture to supine by announcement in a timely fashion. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1872 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1872 by Proposal 3822 (Crito), 12 January 1999 text: No more than once a month, the Herald may increase the honour of a Player, other than emself, by announcing in the Public Forum the identity of that Player and the reason for the increase. At the same time as e makes this announcement, the Herald shall record an increase of one Kudo in the holdings of said Player. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4079 (Elysion), 30 October 2000 text: Once during each calendar month, the Herald may increase the Honor of any single Player by one Kudo by announcing publicly that e does so. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1873 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1873 by Proposal 3825 (Steve), 29 January 1999 text: An Active Player with effective control of more than three Voting Tokens at the time a batch of Proposals is distributed, who is not denied Voting Privileges at that time, who is Active at the end of the Voting Period of the Proposal in the batch whose Voting Period finishes latest, and who fails to cast a vote on any Proposal in the batch, commits the Infraction of Failure to Vote, to be detected and reported by the Assessor. The penalty for commission of this Infraction is one Blot and one Voting Token. Effective control of an asset (e.g., a unit of Currency) is the ability to dispose of that asset as one wishes. The Assessor is empowered to make determinations as to whether a Player has effective control over a particular asset at a particular time. Such determinations may be overturned by the Courts. Three months after this Rule is created, it repeals itself. history: ... history: Amended(1) text: An Active Voter with effective control of more than three Voting Tokens at the time a batch of Proposals is distributed, who is not denied Voting Privileges at that time, who is Active at the end of the Voting Period of the Proposal in the batch whose Voting Period finishes latest, and who fails to cast a vote on any Proposal in the batch, commits the Infraction of Failure to Vote, to be detected and reported by the Assessor. The penalty for commission of this Infraction is one Blot and one Voting Token. Effective control of an asset (e.g., a unit of Currency) is the ability to dispose of that asset as one wishes. The Assessor is empowered to make determinations as to whether a Player has effective control over a particular asset at a particular time. Such determinations may be overturned by the Courts. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1874 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1874 by Proposal 3830 (Blob), 8 February 1999 text: Certain changes to Nomic Properties may be made With N Supporters, where N is an integer between one and five inclusive, specifying how many supporters are necessary to allow the change to take place. Only those changes explicitly allowed by other Rules may be so made, and in order for such a change to take effect, the Rule allowing the change must explicitly state which Player or Players are authorized to make the change. If such a Rule does not specify a value for N between one and five, the value of N is one. For brevity's sake, the term "With Support" shall be taken as meaning "With one Supporter". In order to make a change With N Supporters, a Player authorized to make a given change With N Supporters must first post to the Public Forum eir intent to make such a change, unambiguously describing the change to be made. The change then takes place when a Player authorized to make that change With N Supporters (who need not be the same player who posted eir intent to make the change) posts to the Public Forum that that change is made, and the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) the post announcing the change is made no fewer than four days after, nor more than fourteen days after, the post announcing the intent to make the change; (b) between the two posts, N or more Players posted to the Public Forum supporting the change. This Rule defers to Rules which place further restrictions on the effectiveness of changes made With Supporters. history: ... history: Amended(1) text: Certain changes to Nomic Properties may be made With N Supporters, where N is an integer between one and five inclusive, specifying how many supporters are necessary to allow the change to take place. Only those changes explicitly allowed by other Rules may be so made, and in order for such a change to take effect, the Rule allowing the change must explicitly state which Player or Players are authorized to make the change. If such a Rule does not specify a value for N between one and five, the value of N is one. For brevity's sake, the term "With Support" shall be taken as meaning "With one Supporter". In order to make a change With N Supporters, a Player authorized to make a given change With N Supporters must first post to the Public Forum eir intent to make such a change, unambiguously describing the change to be made. The change then takes place when a Player authorized to make that change With N Supporters (who need not be the same player who posted eir intent to make the change) posts to the Public Forum that that change is made, and the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) the post announcing the change is made no fewer than four days after, nor more than fourteen days after, the post announcing the intent to make the change; (b) between the two posts, N or more Players other than the Player intending to make the change posted to the Public Forum supporting the change. This Rule defers to Rules which place further restrictions on the effectiveness of changes made With Supporters. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: Certain changes to Nomic Properties may be made With N Supporters, where N is an integer between one and five inclusive, specifying how many supporters are necessary to allow the change to take place. Only those changes explicitly allowed by other Rules may be so made, and in order for such a change to take effect, the Rule allowing the change must explicitly state which Player or Players are authorized to make the change. If such a Rule does not specify a value for N between one and five, the value of N is one. For brevity's sake, the term "With Support" shall be taken as meaning "With one Supporter". In order to make a change With N Supporters, a Player authorized to make a given change With N Supporters must first post to the Public Forum eir intent to make such a change, unambiguously describing the change to be made. The change then takes place when a Player authorized to make that change With N Supporters (who need not be the same player who posted eir intent to make the change) posts to the Public Forum that that change is made, and the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) the post announcing the change is made no fewer than four days after, nor more than fourteen days after, the post announcing the intent to make the change; (b) between the two posts, N or more Players other than the Player intending to make the change posted to the Public Forum supporting the change. Other Rules may place further restrictions on the effectiveness of changes made With Supporters. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1875 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1875 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 text: The Grand Agoran Tournament consists of a series of Rounds. These Rounds begin on the First of March, June, September, and October of each year, and last for three months. The first Round begins March 1, 1999. At the beginning of each Round, the Scorekeepor will draw up a list of all Active Players in descending order of their Scores from the preceding Round. For the first Round, this will be done instead in descending order of the Players' combined P-Note and VT holdings taken from the most recent Official Reports. Ties will be broken by random selection. The Scorekeepor will then define a number of Circles among which the Active Players will be partitioned. These must be as few as possible, but there is a minimum of three Circles and an initial maximum of six Players per Circle. They are designated the First Circle, Second Circle, etc.... Nth Circle. The First Circle is the highest ranking Circle, and the Nth Circle is the lowest ranking Circle. The initial number of spots in each Circle will be the number of Active Players divided by the number of Circles (FRD). If there are more Active Players than spots the Scorekeepor will add one spot to the Nth Circle, then one to the N-1th Circle, etc. until there are exactly as many spots as Active Players. The First Circle spots are filled with the highest ranked Players from the preceding Round (skipping Inactive Players), and so on down the remainder of the Circles in order. After the above procedure, if a Player is assigned a Circle below that of another Player with whom e was tied at the end the last Round, that Player shall be moved into the same Circle as the Player with whom e was tied (this last procedure is ignored for the first Round). The initial Score for each Player in each Round is zero. When a Player joins the game e is automatically assigned to the same Circle e held when e deregistered (if applicable and possible), or else the lowest Circle. A Player going On Hold is automatically withdrawn from the current Round of competition. A Player coming Off Hold is treated as a new Player for the purposes of this Rule, with an initial Score of zero. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1876 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1876 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 text: The Individual Competition At the end of each Round each Player with the highest Score in eir Circle wins that Round for that Circle and receives the corresponding Scoring Patent Title. Any Player winning eir Circle has the option of not participating in the Round immediately following. To exercise this option, the Player must post eir wishes to the Public Forum within two weeks after the beginning of the Round e is opting out of. The Player then receives no Score, and is ineligible for SPTs. The next Round the Scorekeepor shall seed the Player based on the score that Player received two Rounds previously. The Team Competition The Team Competition runs parallel to and concurrently with the Individual Competition. A Team consists of a group of Players who have signed an Application to Form a Team within two weeks of the beginning of the Round in which they wish to compete. If fewer then two Teams register for a round, there is no Team Competition that Round. A Team's Score is the combined Scores of its members. A Team wins the Team Competition if at the end of that Round its Score is greater than that of the other registered Teams. If a Team is formed and persists to the end of the Round without being dissolved, the Scorekeepor shall instruct the Accountor to pay out 2 VTs to each member of that Team. The Accountor shall then do so. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1877 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1877 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 text: There is a type of Application called an Application to Form a Team (AFT). A valid AFT, in order to have effect upon Execution, must contain the following: i) The name of the proposed Team. ii) The Players who will compose the Team, which must include the Sponsor. iii) The Signatures of the Players who will compose the Team. The Sponsor of an AFT will be known as the Team Captain for the duration of the Round. To be valid, an AFT must also fulfill the following conditions: i) The proposed Team must consist of at least three Players ii) No two proposed Team members may belong to the same Circle. iii) No proposed Team Member may belong to an already existing Team. If any of the above three conditions ceases to be true, a Team is immediately dissolved and removed from the current Team Competition. A valid AFT is Executed by sending it to the Scorekeepor or submitting it to the Public Forum. The effect of Execution of an AFT is the entrance of the proposed Team into the current Team Competition. A Team is automatically dissolved at the end of the current Round, but may register again in subsequent Rounds. An AFT shall only be valid if its contents are not in conflict with this or other Rules. An AFT that is not valid shall never be Executed. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1878 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1878 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 text: There is an Office of Scorekeepor, whose Salary is 1.5 times the Basic Officer Salary, and whose responsibility it is to keep accurate track of the current Score of all Players. The Scorekeepor's Report consists of the Circles of the current Round and the Players in each Circle, the current Scores of each Player, the changes in Scores since the last Report and the way those points were earned, the Teams entered in the current Team Competition, and the current Team Scores of each Team. The Scorekeepor is only obliged to keep track of scores and post reports if a Round is currently underway. The Scorekeepor is also responsible for posting the final Scores at the end of each Round, and announcing the SPTs awarded to the Players that have fulfilled the conditions for receiving them. Once per Round, no more than two weeks and no less than one week before the end of the Round, the Scorekeepor may act to change the Scoring Rule Without 3 Objections. The Scorekeepor may only propose changes to the basis of Scoring, otherwise the Action automatically fails. If the action takes effect, the Scoring Rule is changed appropriately at the beginning of the next Round. history: ... history: Amended(1) text: There is an Office of Scorekeepor. The Scorekeepor shall receive a Salary as set in the last Treasuror's budget. and whose responsibility it is to keep accurate track of the current Score of all Players. The Scorekeepor's Report consists of the Circles of the current Round and the Players in each Circle, the current Scores of each Player, the changes in Scores since the last Report and the way those points were earned, the Teams entered in the current Team Competition, and the current Team Scores of each Team. The Scorekeepor is only obliged to keep track of scores and post reports if a Round is currently underway. The Scorekeepor is also responsible for posting the final Scores at the end of each Round, and announcing the SPTs awarded to the Players that have fulfilled the conditions for receiving them. Once per Round, no more than two weeks and no less than one week before the end of the Round, the Scorekeepor may act to change the Scoring Rule Without 3 Objections. The Scorekeepor may only propose changes to the basis of Scoring, otherwise the Action automatically fails. If the action takes effect, the Scoring Rule is changed appropriately at the beginning of the next Round. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1879 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1879 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 text: Players receive Points when certain actions are performed by them or when certain events occur. This is the only Rule which may define the methods of Scoring. In general, a Player may receive points only for actions which occur during the current Round, although those actions may depend on others which occurred previously (thus, for example, a Player could gain points for one of eir Proposals passing, even if the Proposal was distributed before the beginning of the current Round.). Points are non-transferable. In general, a Player may receive points for a certain type of event any number of times, unless that event has a number (N) after it, in which case a given Player may be awarded points for that type of event only N times in a given Round. If not otherwise noted, Points awarded for events referring to "a Player" or "any Player", go to that Player. Bonuses are in addition to the basic award. Multipliers are in lieu of the basic award. Bonuses can be multiplied. Responsibility for detecting changes to a Player's Score from the following events is the responsibility of the Scorekeepor: If a Proposal proposed by a Player passes: 5 points for first passing Proposal by that Player in that Round, 3 for second, 1 for third, 0.5 for fourth and subsequent Proposals, +0.5 if Proposal is a Repeal, +1 if the Proposer does not Vote on the Proposal. Double points if Proposal passes unanimously. Triple Points if the Player making the Proposal is the only Entity who votes AGAINST. To any Player winning a contested Election: 8 points. Double points if Elected unanimously. To any Player holding the most of a given currency at the end of a Round: 8 Points per currency. Tripled if at any point during the Round a Player had no holdings in that Currency. To any Player tied for the most of a given currency at the end of a Round: 5 Points per currency. Tripled if at any point during the Round a Player had no holdings in that Currency. To any Player holding no Currency whatsoever at the end of a Round: 5 Points. To any Player earning no Blots during a Round: 4 Points. To any Player having no Blots at the end of a Round: 6 Points. To any Player voting on a Proposal: If the Player casts at least one vote which is the same as 80% or more of the Votes cast on a Proposal (including eir own): 1 Point, scored when the Proposal results are announced. To any Player voting on a Proposal: If the final tally of Votes shows the same number of FOR votes as AGAINST votes: 2 Points, scored when the Proposal results are announced. To the Player Voting or declaring Presence on all Proposals of a single distribution: 0.5 Points. Changes to a Player's score from the following events may be reported by any Player by notifying the Scorekeepor or posting to the Public Forum. No Player, however, not even the Scorekeepor, is legally required to do so. If a Rule is created containing a Player's name in the text: 15 Points. If a Player gains a Patent Title (other than SPTs or Degrees): 4 Points (1). To any Player receiving a Degree: 4 Points for am A.N., 6 points for a B.N., 8 Points for a M.N., and 12 Points for a D.N.Phil or a D.N.Hist. If a Proposal made by a Player successfully creates a Rule with a number that is a multiple of 23: 4 Points. If a Player submits a Proposal to the Queue that is subsequently discarded: 5 Points (1). To any Player Proposing an Insane Proposal for which no Entity votes FOR: 30 Points. To any Player who is chided for posting a single document that is not an Official Report to a forum other than the Public Forum by more than one Player (other than themselves): 2 Points (1). To the third Player other than the Poster making substantive comments to a protoproposal: 1 Point (3). To the Player making a COE that is Responded to and admitted by the relevant Officer (other than themselves): 1 Point (1). To the Player Holding an Office for at least one month during the Round, and issuing at least one Official Report: 2 Points (1) To the Player making a Sane Proposal for which a Non-Player Voting Entity successfully Votes: 15 points (1). To the Player making a Senate Proposal for which a non-Senator successfully Votes: 25 points (1). To any Player submitting a Judgment for a CFJ which is not Appealed before the end of the Round: 1 point. To the Player making a CFJ which is not Judged for one month from its original assignment: 8 Points (1 per Player per CFJ). When an Appeal successfully overturns a Judgment, to the Players calling for that Appeal: 2 Points When an Appeal fails to overturn a Judgment, to the Judge who made the original Judgment on that CFJ: 4 Points. If three consecutive CFJs are Judged TRUE, FALSE and UNDECIDED (in any order), to the Player making the third CFJ: 17 Points. When a Player is Deregistered due to Silence, to the Player last making em Silent: 5 Points. To the Player successfully Calling for a Revolt: 15 Points. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1880 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1880 by Proposal 3833 (Vlad), 15 February 1999 text: Scoring Patent Titles (SPTs) are a subclass of Patent Titles. They are identical to Patent Titles except that they are automatically revoked at the end of the Round subsequent to the one for which they were awarded. The valid SPTs, and the circumstances for which they are awarded, are as follows: For winning an Individual Competition in the Nth Circle, a Player receives the SPT of 'Victor of the Nth Circle' (where Nth is replaced by the ordinal corresponding to eir Circle number). If a Player wins the same Circle two Rounds in succession e receives instead the SPT of 'Double Victor of the Nth Circle', for three consecutive Rounds 'Triple Victor of the Nth Circle', etc. If two or more Players within a Circle are tied for the highest score in a Circle at the end of a Round, they receive the SPT of 'Pseudo-Victor of the Nth Circle' (where Nth is replaced by the ordinal corresponding to eir Circle number). For being a member of a Team winning the Team Competition, a Player receives the SPT of 'Team Victor', except for the Team Captain who receives the SPT of "Victorious Leader" If two or more Teams are tied for the highest Team Score at the end of a Round, their members receive the SPT of 'Team Pseudo-Victor' If a Player Scores enough in a Round that e would have won at least one of the Circles higher than that in which e competed, e receives the SPT of 'Overachiever'. If a Player Scores so low that e would have placed last in at least one of the Circles below eir own e receives the SPT of 'Slacker'. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1881 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1881 by Proposal 3841 (Blob), 15 March 1999 text: (a) The Priority Bar is the minimum Priority needed for a Proposal to be distributed. It is an integer multiple of the MUQ of P-Notes, lying between zero and two inclusive. (b) Upon the adoption of the proposal which created this rule, its value shall be set to one. (c) The Promotor may change the value of the Priority Bar by announcing its new value in the Public Forum, provided that the new value is within the range allowed by subdivision (a) of this Rule. (d) Whenever a new value is announced according to subdivision (c) of this Rule, the new value takes effect at the beginning of the next Nomic Week, unless the announcement is made within three days of the end of the current Nomic Week, in which case the new value takes effect at the beginning of the Nomic Week following the next Nomic Week. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1882 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1882 by Proposal 3841 (Blob), 15 March 1999 text: Each week, after distributing a batch of proposals, the Promotor may order the Bank to pay out a number of P-Notes equal to five percent of the total Priority of the proposals in the batch. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1883 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 1883 by Proposal 3845 (General Chaos), 22 March 1999 text: (a) The Proposer of any Proposal may cause it to be Adopted Without Objection, but only if the Proposal has not yet been distributed. (b) A Proposal Adopted Without Objection is Adopted at the time its Proposer changes its status to Adopted in accordance with the procedure for performing changes Without Objection, but only if at that time that Proposal has not yet been distributed. (c) When a Proposal is Adopted Without Objection, it is removed from the Queue. (d) A Proposal Adopted Without Objection is considered to be Disinterested. (e) This Rule takes precedence over: (1) any Rule which would prevent a Proposal from being Adopted Without Objection; (2) any Rule which would prevent a Proposal Adopted Without Objection from being removed from the Proposal Queue; and (3) any Rule which would prevent a Proposal Adopted Without Objection from being considered Disinterested. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1884 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1884 by Proposal 3853 (Blob), 19 April 1999 text: Each Player who is a Zombie has a Master, who owns em. When a Player first becomes a Zombie, eir Master is the Bank. Zombies may only be transferred from one Master to another as explicitly described by the rules. If a Player becomes a Zombie's Master, then e is granted Power of Attorney for the Zombie, for as long as e remains the Zombie's Master. Non-player Zombie Masters are not granted Power of Attorney in this way. If a Player who owns a Zombie deregisters, all eir Zombies become owned by the Bank. The Registrar is required to announce this transfer as soon as possible after the Player's deregistration, and the transfer takes effect at the time it is announced. The Registrar is required to keep track of which Players are Zombies, and who their Masters are, and publish this information in eir Report. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: Each Player who is a Zombie has a Master, who owns em. When a Player first becomes a Zombie, eir Master is the Bank. Zombies may only be transferred from one Master to another as explicitly described by the rules. If a Player becomes a Zombie's Master, then e is granted Power of Attorney for the Zombie, for as long as e remains the Zombie's Master. Non-player Zombie Masters are not granted Power of Attorney in this way. If a Player who owns a Zombie deregisters, all eir Zombies become owned by the Bank. The Registrar is required to announce this transfer as soon as possible after the Player's deregistration, and the transfer takes effect at the time it is announced. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: Zombies are Property. The owner of a Zombie is called eir Master. When a Player first becomes a Zombie, eir Master is the Bank. The Master of a Zombie has Power of Attorney for that Zombie for as long as e remains the Zombie's Master, but only if the Master is a Player. Non-Player Zombie Masters are not granted Power of Attorney in this way. The Registrar is the Recordkeepor of each Zombie. The Registrar must include in eir Report a schedule of all Zombies and their Masters. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4118 (Goethe), 6 March 2001 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4132 (harvel), 5 April 2001 text: Zombies are Property. The owner of a Zombie is called eir Master. Whenever a Player becomes a Zombie, eir Master is the Bank. Whenever the Master of a Zombie is a Player, e has Power of Attorney for that Zombie, unless the Rules withdraw it from em. The Registrar is the Recordkeepor of each Zombie. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1884 by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1885 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1885 by Proposal 3853 (Blob), 19 April 1999 text: Each week, if there are any Zombies owned by the Bank, for which Auctions are not already underway, the Registrar shall conduct an Auction for each of those Zombies. The Auctioneer for these Auctions shall be the Registrar. The Auction Currency is Indulgences, and the Starting Price for each Auction is equal to the number of Blots held by the Zombie being Auctioned, with a minimum value of one. When the Winner of the Auction is announced, e becomes the Zombie's new Master. If the Auction ends without a winner, then the Zombie is deregistered. As soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Registrar shall vacate any Blots the Zombie has. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3901 (Schneidster), 6 September 1999 text: Each week, if there are any Zombies owned by the Bank, for which Auctions are not already underway, the Registrar shall conduct an Auction for each of those Zombies. The Auctioneer for these Auctions shall be the Registrar. The Auction Currency is Indulgences, and the Starting Price for each Auction is equal to the number of Blots held by the Zombie being Auctioned, with a minimum value of one. When the Winner of the Auction is announced, e becomes the Zombie's new Master. If the Auction ends without a winner, then the Zombie is deregistered. As soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Registrar shall expunge any Blots the Zombie has, notifying the Herald of this action. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: Whenever the Bank possesses a Zombie which is neither currently being Auctioned nor for which an Auction has been completed but the debt arising therefore not yet paid, the Registrar shall initiate an Auction for the sale of that Zombie. All Auctions of Bank-owned Zombies shall be conducted as follows: (1) The Auctioneer shall be the Registrar. (2) The Auction Currency shall be Indulgences. (3) The Starting Price shall be number of Blots of the Zombie being Auctioned; or, if the Zombie has no Blots, one Indulgence. As soon as possible after the end of a Zombie Auction, the Registrar shall expunge any Blots the Zombie has, notifying the Herald of this action. If a Zombie Auction ends with no winning bids, the Zombie to be auctioned shall be deregistered. The Registrar is a Limited Executor of the Bank, with authority to execute transfers of any Zombie owned by the Bank. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4118 (Goethe), 6 March 2001 text: Whenever the Bank possesses a Zombie which is neither currently being Auctioned nor for which an Auction has been completed but the debt arising therefore not yet paid, the Registrar shall initiate an Auction for the sale of that Zombie. All Auctions of Bank-owned Zombies shall be conducted as follows: (1) The Auctioneer shall be the Registrar. (2) The Auction Currency shall be Indulgences. (3) The Starting Price shall be number of Blots of the Zombie being Auctioned; or, if the Zombie has no Blots, one Indulgence. As soon as possible after the end of a Zombie Auction, the Registrar shall expunge any Blots the Zombie has, notifying the Herald of this action. If there are no winning bids for a Zombie during a Zombie Auction, that Zombie is deregistered. The Registrar is a Limited Executor of the Bank, with the authority to satisfy debts of Zombies owed by the Bank to its creditors. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1885 by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1886 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1886 by Proposal 3853 (Blob), 19 April 1999 text: If a Zombie Player becomes Noisy, then e is no longer a Zombie, and eir Master ceases to own em. Unless the Zombie was owned by the Bank, the Registrar shall pay the Zombie's most recent Master a number of Indulgences equal to the starting price in that Zombie's most recent Auction, halved for each new calendar month since the end of the Auction. This payment shall be made as soon as possible after the Zombie becomes Noisy. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3958 (Murphy), 28 December 1999 text: If a Zombie Player becomes Noisy, then e is no longer a Zombie, and eir Master ceases to own em. Unless the Zombie was owned by the Bank, the Registrar shall pay out to the Zombie's most recent Master a number of Indulgences equal to the starting price in that Zombie's most recent Auction, halved for each new calendar month since the end of the Auction. This payment shall be made as soon as possible after the Zombie becomes Noisy. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4134 (harvel), 5 April 2001 text: If a Zombie becomes Noisy, eir Master ceases to own em, and e ceases to be a Zombie. Unless the Zombie was owned by the Bank when e became Noisy, then, as soon as possible, the Registrar shall pay out to the Zombie's most recent Master a number of Indulgences equal to the starting price in that Zombie's most recent Auction, halved for each new calendar month since the end of the Auction. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1886 by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1887 [Problematic source edition ignored: can't place 1887/9 anywhere in its rule history.] history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1887 by Proposal 3853 (Blob), 19 April 1999 text: When an Auction is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following standard Auction procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is the Entity responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. This Entity is the Speaker if not otherwise specified. (b) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. (c) Auction Currency: Each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. Unless otherwise specified, the Auction Currency is the Voting Token. (d) Start of Auction: The Auction begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that an Auction is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Auctioneer, the Auction Currency, and the value of the Starting Bid. (e) Starting Bid: The Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Stating Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (f) Making Bids: Each Bidder may make as many Bids as e desires during the Auction. Blob is way cool. A Bid is a message, sent to the Public Forum, announcing that the sender is bidding in that particular Auction, and the amount of eir Bid. A Bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) The Bid is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. (2) The amount Bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (3) The amount Bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (4) The Bid is larger than any other valid Bid made so far in the Auction. (g) End of Auction: If, one week after the Auction started, there have been no Bids made. The Auction ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Auction ends when 24 hours has passed without a valid Bid having been made. (h) The Winner: When the Auction ends, the Bidder who made the largest valid Bid in the Auction is the Winner. The Auctioneer shall announce the Winner of the Auction as soon as possible after the end of the Auction, and shall issue a Payment Order from the Winner to the Bank, for an amount equal to the size of the winning Bid. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3884 (harvel), 26 July 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 text: When an Auction is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following standard Auction procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Auctioneer. (b) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. (c) Auction Currency: Each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Auction must specify the currency to be used, or the Auction cannot take place. (d) Number of Items: Each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical items. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of items up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: The Auction begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that an Auction is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Auctioneer, the Auction Currency, the number of items, and the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Starting Bid: The Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (g) Making Bids: Each Bidder may make as many Bids as e desires during the Auction. A Bid is a message, sent to the Public Forum, announcing that the sender is bidding in that particular Auction, and the amount of eir Bid. A Bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) The Bid is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. (2) The amount Bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (3) The amount Bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (h) Cancelling Bids: A Bid may be cancelled by its Bidder by posting such to the Public Forum, clearly identifying the Bid to be cancelled, while the Auction is in progress. (i) End of Auction: If, one week after the Auction started, there have been no Bids made, the Auction ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Auction ends when 24 hours have passed without a valid Bid higher than the Nth-highest Bid (at the time the Bid is made) having been made. The Auction shall end 14 days after the Auction has started, if it has not ended earlier. (j) Winning Bids: When the Auction ends, the winning Bids are the N largest uncancelled valid Bids in that auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled Bids. Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier-submitted bids. The Auctioneer shall announce the winning Bids and their Bidders as soon as possible after the end of the Auction. For each winning Bid, the Auctioneer shall bill the associated Bidder: (1) The amount of the Nth highest Bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled Bids in the auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were fewer than N valid uncancelled Bids. Note that it is possible for a single Player to have more than one Winning Bid. If this happens, the Auctioneer shall issue separate POs for each Winning Bid and shall not combine them into a single PO, and this Rule takes precedence over Rules which would permit such a combination. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3979 (Elysion), 23 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4000 (Steve), 2 May 2000 text: When an Auction is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following standard Auction procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Auctioneer. (b) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. (c) Auction Currency: Each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. If the Rules do not specify a Currency to be used, then the Auction does not proceed. (d) Number of Items: Each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical items. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of items up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: The Auction begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that an Auction is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Auctioneer, the Auction Currency, the number of items, and the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Starting Bid: The Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (g) Making Bids: Each Bidder may make as many Bids as e desires during the Auction. A Bid is a message, sent to the Public Forum, announcing that the sender is bidding in that particular Auction, and the amount of eir Bid. A Bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) The Bid is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. (2) The amount Bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (3) The amount Bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (h) Cancelling Bids: A Bid may be cancelled by its Bidder by posting such to the Public Forum, clearly identifying the Bid to be cancelled, while the Auction is in progress. (i) End of Auction: If, one week after the Auction started, there have been no Bids made, the Auction ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Auction ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid Bid higher than the Nth-highest Bid (at the time the Bid is made) having been made. The Auction shall end 14 days after the Auction has started, if it has not ended earlier. (j) Winning Bids: When the Auction ends, the winning Bids are the N largest uncancelled valid Bids in that auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled Bids. Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier-submitted bids. The Auctioneer shall announce the winning Bids and their Bidders as soon as possible after the end of the Auction. For each winning Bid, the Auctioneer shall bill the associated Bidder: (1) The amount of the Nth highest winning Bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled winning Bids in the auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were fewer than N valid uncancelled winning Bids. Note that it is possible for a single Player to have more than one Winning Bid. If this happens, the Auctioneer shall issue separate POs for each Winning Bid and shall not combine them into a single PO, and this Rule takes precedence over Rules which would permit such a combination. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4026 (t), 14 July 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4094 (Steve), 15 January 2001 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(10) by Proposal 01-005 (Steve), 2 February 2001 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4122 (Goethe), 21 March 2001 text: When an Auction is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following standard Auction procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Auctioneer. (b) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. (c) Auction Currency: Each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Auction must specify the currency to be used, or the Auction cannot take place. (d) Number of Items: Each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical items. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of items up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: The Auction begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that an Auction is begun, as defined in other Rules, is sent to the Public Forum, together with the identity of the Auctioneer, the Auction Currency, the number of items, and the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Starting Bid: The Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (g) Making Bids: Each Bidder may make as many Bids as e desires during the Auction. A Bid is a message, sent to the Public Forum, announcing that the sender is bidding in that particular Auction, and the amount of eir Bid. A Bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) The Bid is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. (2) The amount Bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (3) The amount Bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (h) Canceling Bids: A Bid may be cancelled by its Bidder by posting such to the Public Forum, clearly identifying the Bid to be cancelled, while the Auction is in progress. (i) End of Auction: If, one week after the Auction started, there have been no Bids made, the Auction ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Auction ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid Bid higher than the Nth-highest Bid (at the time the Bid is made) having been made. The Auction shall end 14 days after the Auction has started, if it has not ended earlier. (j) Winning Bids: When the Auction ends, the winning Bids are the N largest uncancelled valid Bids in that auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled Bids). Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier- submitted bids. The Final Auction Price is: (1) The amount of the Nth highest Bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled Bids in the auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were fewer than N valid uncancelled Bids. As soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Auctioneer shall announce the winning Bids and issue to each winning Bidder a separate bill for each of eir winning Bids. Unless specified otherwise, the Auctioneer shall transfer an Auctioned item to the winning Bidder as soon as possible after the bill for that item is paid. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: When an Auction is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the following standard Auction procedure shall be used. Details specified herein are defaults which may be modified by other Rules for specific situations. (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Auctioneer. (b) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. (c) Auction Currency: Each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Auction must specify the currency to be used, or the Auction cannot take place. (d) Number of Items: Each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical items. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of items up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: The Auction begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that an Auction is begun, as defined in other Rules, is published, together with the identity of the Auctioneer, the Auction Currency, the number of items, and the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Starting Bid: The Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (g) Making Bids: Each Bidder may make as many Bids as e desires during the Auction. A Bid is a public message, announcing that the sender is bidding in that particular Auction, and the amount of eir Bid. A Bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) The Bid is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. (2) The amount Bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (3) The amount Bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (h) Canceling Bids: A Bid may be cancelled by its Bidder by publicly posting such, clearly identifying the Bid to be cancelled, while the Auction is in progress. (i) End of Auction: If, one week after the Auction started, there have been no Bids made, the Auction ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Auction ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid Bid higher than the Nth-highest Bid (at the time the Bid is made) having been made. The Auction shall end 14 days after the Auction has started, if it has not ended earlier. (j) Winning Bids: When the Auction ends, the winning Bids are the N largest uncancelled valid Bids in that auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled Bids). Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier- submitted bids. The Final Auction Price is: (1) The amount of the Nth highest Bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled Bids in the auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were fewer than N valid uncancelled Bids. As soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Auctioneer shall announce the winning Bids and issue to each winning Bidder a separate bill for each of eir winning Bids. Unless specified otherwise, the Auctioneer shall transfer an Auctioned item to the winning Bidder as soon as possible after the bill for that item is paid. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4167 (root), 11 June 2001 text: When an Auction is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the Auctioneer shall select a rules-defined Auction Procedure and publicly announce eir selection. If e does not specify which procedure is used, the Default Auction Procedure shall be used. The details specified herein are for the Default Auction Procedure. (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Auctioneer. (b) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. (c) Auction Currency: Each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Auction must specify the currency to be used, or the Auction cannot take place. (d) Number of Items: Each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical items. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of items up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: The Auction begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that an Auction is begun, as defined in other Rules, is published, together with the identity of the Auctioneer, the Auction Currency, the number of items, and the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Starting Bid: The Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (g) Making Bids: Each Bidder may make as many Bids as e desires during the Auction. A Bid is a public message, announcing that the sender is bidding in that particular Auction, and the amount of eir Bid. A Bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) The Bid is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. (2) The amount Bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (3) The amount Bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (h) Canceling Bids: A Bid may be cancelled by its Bidder by publicly posting such, clearly identifying the Bid to be cancelled, while the Auction is in progress. (i) End of Auction: If, one week after the Auction started, there have been no Bids made, the Auction ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Auction ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid Bid higher than the Nth-highest Bid (at the time the Bid is made) having been made. The Auction shall end 14 days after the Auction has started, if it has not ended earlier. (j) Winning Bids: When the Auction ends, the winning Bids are the N largest uncancelled valid Bids in that auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled Bids). Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier- submitted bids. The Final Auction Price is: (1) The amount of the Nth highest Bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled Bids in the auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were fewer than N valid uncancelled Bids. As soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Auctioneer shall announce the winning Bids and issue to each winning Bidder a separate bill for each of eir winning Bids. Unless specified otherwise, the Auctioneer shall pay out an Auctioned item to the winning Bidder as soon as possible after the bill for that item is paid. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4176 (root), 7 July 2001 text: When an Auction is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the Auctioneer shall select a rules-defined Auction Procedure and publicly announce eir selection. If e does not specify which procedure is used, the Default Auction Procedure shall be used. The details specified herein are for the Default Auction Procedure. (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Auctioneer. (b) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. (c) Auction Currency: Each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Auction must specify the currency to be used, or the Auction cannot take place. (d) Number of Lots: Each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical lots of identical items, which must all be owned by the same entity. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of lots up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: The Auction begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that an Auction is begun, as defined in other Rules, is published, together with the identity of the Auctioneer, the Auction Currency, the number of items, and the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Starting Bid: The Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (g) Making Bids: Each Bidder may make as many Bids as e desires during the Auction. A Bid is a public message, announcing that the sender is bidding in that particular Auction, and the amount of eir Bid. A Bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) The Bid is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. (2) The amount Bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (3) The amount Bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (h) Canceling Bids: A Bid may be cancelled by its Bidder by publicly posting such, clearly identifying the Bid to be cancelled, while the Auction is in progress. (i) End of Auction: If, one week after the Auction started, there have been no Bids made, the Auction ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Auction ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid Bid higher than the Nth-highest Bid (at the time the Bid is made) having been made. The Auction shall end 14 days after the Auction has started, if it has not ended earlier. (j) Winning Bids: When the Auction ends, the winning Bids are the N largest uncancelled valid Bids in that auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled Bids). Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier- submitted bids. The Final Auction Price is: (1) The amount of the Nth highest Bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled Bids in the auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were fewer than N valid uncancelled Bids. As soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Auctioneer shall announce the winning Bids and issue to each winning Bidder a separate bill for each of eir winning Bids. Unless specified otherwise, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to the winning Bidder when the bill for that lot is paid. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4249 (Murphy), 19 February 2002 text: When an Auction is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the Auctioneer shall select a rules-defined Auction Procedure and publicly announce eir selection. If e does not specify which procedure is used, the Default Auction Procedure shall be used. The details specified herein are for the Default Auction Procedure. (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. The Auctioneer is the Player who initiates the Auction. If the Rules require or allow an Auction to be initiated, but do not specify which Player shall initiate it, then the Speaker shall initiate it. (b) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. (c) Auction Currency: Each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Auction must specify the currency to be used, or the Auction cannot take place. (d) Number of Lots: Each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical lots of identical items, which must all be owned by the same entity. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of lots up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: The Auction begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that an Auction is begun, as defined in other Rules, is published, together with the identity of the Auctioneer, the Auction Currency, the number of items, and the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Starting Bid: The Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (g) Making Bids: Each Bidder may make as many Bids as e desires during the Auction. A Bid is a public message, announcing that the sender is bidding in that particular Auction, and the amount of eir Bid. A Bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) The Bid is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. (2) The amount Bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (3) The amount Bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (h) Canceling Bids: A Bid may be cancelled by its Bidder by publicly posting such, clearly identifying the Bid to be cancelled, while the Auction is in progress. (i) End of Auction: If, one week after the Auction started, there have been no Bids made, the Auction ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Auction ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid Bid higher than the Nth-highest Bid (at the time the Bid is made) having been made. The Auction shall end 14 days after the Auction has started, if it has not ended earlier. (j) Winning Bids: When the Auction ends, the winning Bids are the N largest uncancelled valid Bids in that auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled Bids). Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier- submitted bids. The Final Auction Price is: (1) The amount of the Nth highest Bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled Bids in the auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were fewer than N valid uncancelled Bids. As soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Auctioneer shall announce the winning Bids and issue to each winning Bidder a separate bill for each of eir winning Bids. Unless specified otherwise, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to the winning Bidder when the bill for that lot is paid. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: When an Auction is required and the procedure is not defined elsewhere, the Auctioneer shall select a rules-defined Auction Procedure and publicly announce eir selection. If e does not specify which procedure is used, the Default Auction Procedure shall be used. The details specified herein are for the Default Auction Procedure. (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. The Auctioneer is the Player who initiates the Auction. If the Rules require or allow an Auction to be initiated, but do not specify which Player shall initiate it, then the Speaker shall initiate it. (b) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. Activity is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. (c) Auction Currency: Each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Auction must specify the currency to be used, or the Auction cannot take place. (d) Number of Lots: Each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical lots of identical items, which must all be owned by the same entity. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of lots up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: The Auction begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that an Auction is begun, as defined in other Rules, is published, together with the identity of the Auctioneer, the Auction Currency, the number of items, and the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Starting Bid: The Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (g) Making Bids: Each Bidder may make as many Bids as e desires during the Auction. A Bid is a public message, announcing that the sender is bidding in that particular Auction, and the amount of eir Bid. A Bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) The Bid is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. (2) The amount Bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (3) The amount Bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (h) Canceling Bids: A Bid may be cancelled by its Bidder by publicly posting such, clearly identifying the Bid to be cancelled, while the Auction is in progress. (i) End of Auction: If, one week after the Auction started, there have been no Bids made, the Auction ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Auction ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid Bid higher than the Nth-highest Bid (at the time the Bid is made) having been made. The Auction shall end 14 days after the Auction has started, if it has not ended earlier. (j) Winning Bids: When the Auction ends, the winning Bids are the N largest uncancelled valid Bids in that auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled Bids). Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier- submitted bids. The Final Auction Price is: (1) The amount of the Nth highest Bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled Bids in the auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were fewer than N valid uncancelled Bids. As soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Auctioneer shall announce the winning Bids and issue to each winning Bidder a separate bill for each of eir winning Bids. Unless specified otherwise, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to the winning Bidder when the bill for that lot is paid. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 4356 (Steve), 7 August 2002 text: When an Auction is to be held and the procedure is not specified, the Auctioneer may select a rules-defined Auction Procedure. If e does not specify which procedure is to be used, the Default Auction Procedure shall be used. The Default Auction Procedure is as follows: (a) Auctioneer: the Auctioneer is the Player who initiates the Auction, and is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. If the Rules require (or permit) an Auction to be initiated, but do not specify which Player shall initiate it, then the Speaker shall (or may) initiate it. (b) Bidders: every Player not on Hold may bid in an Auction. Activity is measured at the time a Player sends eir bid. (c) Auction Currency: each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule providing for a particular Auction must specify the currency to be used, or the Auction cannot take place. (d) Number of lots: each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical lots of identical items, which must all be owned by the same entity. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of lots up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: the Auction begins when the first announcement that an Auction has begun is made by a Player authorized to initiate the Auction. The announcement must contain: (1) the identity of the Auctioneer; (2) the Auction Currency; (3) the number of items being Auctioned; and (4) the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Errors in initiating Auctions: if one of the required elements is missing from the announcement initiating the Auction, or is incorrect, then the Auctioneer may let the Auction stand Without 2 Objections. If the Auction stands, then the announcement initiating the Auction is deemed to have been legal and correct for the purposes of the Rules. If the Auction does not stand, it is deemed not to have occurred. (g) Starting Bid: the Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (h) Bidding: a bid is a public message from a bidder identifying the Auction e is bidding in, and specifying the amount of eir bid. Each bidder may make as many bids as e likes during the Auction. A bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) it is made after the start of the Auction, and before its end; (2) the amount of the bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency; and (3) the amount of the bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (i) Cancelling bids: a bidder may cancel eir bid while the Auction is in progress by publically identifying the bid to be cancelled. (j) End of Auction: the Auction ends if any of the following occur: (1) one week has passed from the start of the Auction, and no bids have been made; or (2) a bid has been made in the Auction, and 72 hours have passed without there being a change in the N highest bids in the Auction; or (3) 14 days have passed since the Auction began. (k) Winning bids: when the Auction ends, the winning bids are the N largest uncancelled valid bids in the Auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled bids). Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier- submitted bids. If there were no bids in the Auction, then the Auction has no winner. (l) Final Auction Price: the Final Auction Price is either: (1) the amount of the Nth highest bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled bids in the auction; or (2) the Starting Bid, if there were greater than zero but fewer than N valid uncancelled bids. (m) Billing for winning bids: as soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Auctioneer shall announce the winning bids and issue to each winning bidder a separate bill for each of eir winning bids. (n) Defaulting: a winning bidder has a week from the time e is billed by the Auctioneer for a winning bid e made to satisfy the debt arising from that bid. If e does not do so, e commits the Class 2 Infraction of Defaulting (reportable by the Auctioneer), and thereafter loses eir right to purchase the Auctioned item by paying the debt arising from that bid. As soon as possible after a winning bidder defaults on a bid, the Auctioneer shall Order the owner of the items being Auctioned (normally the Bank) to forgive the unsatisfied debt arising from the bid. (o) Unless specified otherwise, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to the winning bidder when the bill for that lot is paid. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 4385 (Steve), 17 September 2002 text: When an Auction is to be held and the procedure is not specified, the Auctioneer may select a rules-defined Auction Procedure. If e does not specify which procedure is to be used, the Default Auction Procedure shall be used. The Default Auction Procedure is as follows: (a) Auctioneer: the Auctioneer is the Player who initiates the Auction, and is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. If the Rules require (or permit) an Auction to be initiated, but do not specify which Player shall initiate it, then the Speaker shall (or may) initiate it. (b) Bidders: every active Player may bid in an Auction; non-active Players may not bid. Activity is measured at the time a Player sends eir bid. (c) Auction Currency: each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule providing for a particular Auction must specify the currency to be used, or the Auction cannot take place. (d) Number of lots: each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical lots of identical items, which must all be owned by the same entity. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of lots up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: the Auction begins when the first announcement that an Auction has begun is made by a Player authorized to initiate the Auction. The announcement must contain: (1) the identity of the Auctioneer; (2) the Auction Currency; (3) the number of items being Auctioned; and (4) the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Errors in initiating Auctions: if one of the required elements is missing from the announcement initiating the Auction, or is incorrect, then the Auctioneer may let the Auction stand Without 2 Objections. If the Auction stands, then the announcement initiating the Auction is deemed to have been legal and correct for the purposes of the Rules. If the Auction does not stand, it is deemed not to have occurred. (g) Starting Bid: the Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (h) Bidding: a bid is a public message from a bidder identifying the Auction e is bidding in, and specifying the amount of eir bid. Each bidder may make as many bids as e likes during the Auction. A bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) it is made after the start of the Auction, and before its end; (2) the amount of the bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency; and (3) the amount of the bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (i) Cancelling bids: a bidder may cancel eir bid while the Auction is in progress by publically identifying the bid to be cancelled. (j) End of Auction: the Auction ends if any of the following occur: (1) one week has passed from the start of the Auction, and no bids have been made; or (2) a bid has been made in the Auction, and 72 hours have passed without there being a change in the N highest bids in the Auction; or (3) 14 days have passed since the Auction began. (k) Winning bids: when the Auction ends, the winning bids are the N largest uncancelled valid bids in the Auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled bids). Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier- submitted bids. If there were no bids in the Auction, then the Auction has no winner. (l) Final Auction Price: the Final Auction Price is either: (1) the amount of the Nth highest bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled bids in the auction; or (2) the Starting Bid, if there were greater than zero but fewer than N valid uncancelled bids. (m) Billing for winning bids: as soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Auctioneer shall announce the winning bids and issue to each winning bidder a separate bill for each of eir winning bids. (n) Defaulting: a winning bidder has a week from the time e is billed by the Auctioneer for a winning bid e made to satisfy the debt arising from that bid. If e does not do so, e commits the Class 2 Infraction of Defaulting (reportable by the Auctioneer), and thereafter loses eir right to purchase the Auctioned item by paying the debt arising from that bid. As soon as possible after a winning bidder defaults on a bid, the Auctioneer shall Order the owner of the items being Auctioned (normally the Bank) to forgive the unsatisfied debt arising from the bid. (o) Unless specified otherwise, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to the winning bidder when the bill for that lot is paid. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: When an Auction is to be held and the procedure is not specified, the Auctioneer may select a rules-defined Auction Procedure. If e does not specify which procedure is to be used, the Default Auction Procedure shall be used. The Default Auction Procedure is as follows: (a) Auctioneer: the Auctioneer is the Player who initiates the Auction, and is responsible for collecting bids and announcing the result of the Auction. If the Rules require (or permit) an Auction to be initiated, but do not specify which Player shall initiate it, then the Speaker shall (or may) initiate it. (b) Bidders: every active Player may bid in an Auction; non-active Players may not bid. Activity is measured at the time a Player sends eir bid. (c) Auction Currency: each Auction is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule providing for a particular Auction must specify the currency to be used, or the Auction cannot take place. (d) Number of lots: each Auction is conducted for 1 or more identical lots of identical items, which must all be owned by the same entity. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of lots up for bid in the Auction. (e) Start of Auction: the Auction begins when the first announcement that an Auction has begun is made by a Player authorized to initiate the Auction. The announcement must contain: (1) the identity of the Auctioneer; (2) the Auction Currency; (3) the number of items being Auctioned; and (4) the value of the Starting Bid. (f) Errors in initiating Auctions: if one of the required elements is missing from the announcement initiating the Auction, or is incorrect, then the Auctioneer may let the Auction stand Without 2 Objections. If the Auction stands, then the announcement initiating the Auction is deemed to have been legal and correct for the purposes of the Rules. If the Auction does not stand, it is deemed not to have occurred. (g) Starting Bid: the Starting Bid is the minimum possible value of a bid. If not otherwise specified, the Starting Bid is equal to the MUQ of the Auction Currency. (h) Bidding: a bid is a public message from a bidder identifying the Auction e is bidding in, and specifying the amount of eir bid. Each bidder may make as many bids as e likes during the Auction. A bid is only valid if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) it is made after the start of the Auction, and before its end; (2) the amount of the bid is a multiple of the MUQ of the Auction Currency; and (3) the amount of the bid is no less than the Starting Bid. (i) Cancelling bids: a bidder may cancel eir bid while the Auction is in progress by publically identifying the bid to be cancelled. (j) End of Auction: the Auction ends if any of the following occur: (1) one week has passed from the start of the Auction, and no bids have been made; or (2) a bid has been made in the Auction, and 72 hours have passed without there being a change in the N highest bids in the Auction; or (3) 14 days have passed since the Auction began. (k) Winning bids: when the Auction ends, the winning bids are the N largest uncancelled valid bids in the Auction (or all valid uncancelled Bids, if there were less than N valid uncancelled bids). Ties shall be broken in favor of earlier- submitted bids. If there were no bids in the Auction, then the Auction has no winner. (l) Final Auction Price: the Final Auction Price is either: (1) the amount of the Nth highest bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled bids in the auction; or (2) the Starting Bid, if there were greater than zero but fewer than N valid uncancelled bids. (m) Billing for winning bids: as soon as possible after the end of the Auction, the Auctioneer shall announce the winning bids and issue to each winning bidder a separate bill for each of eir winning bids. (n) Defaulting: a winning bidder has a week from the time e is billed by the Auctioneer for a winning bid e made to satisfy the debt arising from that bid. If e does not do so, e commits the Class 2 Infraction of Defaulting (reportable by the Auctioneer), and thereafter loses eir right to purchase the Auctioned item by paying the debt arising from that bid. As soon as possible after a winning bidder defaults on a bid, the Auctioneer shall Order the owner of the items being Auctioned to forgive the unsatisfied debt arising from the bid. (o) Unless specified otherwise, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to the winning bidder when the bill for that lot is paid. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1887 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1888 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1888 by Proposal 3853 (Blob), 19 April 1999 text: If an Auction is designated by the rules as being Private, then Bids may only made by sending them privately to the Auctioneer. This rule takes precedence over the standard Auction procedure. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4167 (root), 11 June 2001 text: The Auction Procedure for a Private Auction is the same as the Default Auction Procedure except that Bids may only made by sending them privately to the Auctioneer. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4403 (OscarMeyr), 23 October 2002 text: The Auction Procedure for a Private Auction is the same as the Default Auction Procedure with the following modifications: (a) Bidders: any Player with the same Executor as the Auctioneer may bid only in the first 72 hours of the Auction. (b) Bidding: if a bidder has the same Executor as the Auctioneer, then eir bids must be made publicly. Otherwise, bidders must send eir bids privately to the Auctioneer. (c) Canceling Bids: if a Bidder has the same Executor as the Auctioneer, then eir Bids must be canceled publicly. Otherwise, bidders must cancel eir bids privately to the Auctioneer. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1888 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1889 history: Created text: Every Player is either a Legislator or a Voter. By default, every Player is a Voter. Newly registered Players are Voters. A Legislator has the right to submit Proposals, but may not cast votes on Proposals (i.e., e is a Proposing Entity but not a Voting Entity). A Voter has the right to cast votes on Proposals, but not to submit Proposals (i.e., e is a Voting Entity but not a Proposing Entity). A Voter may become a Legislator, or a Legislator a Voter, by announcing that e is doing so in the Public Forum, provided that e has not changed from being a Legislator to being a Voter, or vice versa, during the previous two months. The Registrar shall record whether each Player is a Legislator or a Voter, and the date and time at which e last became either a Legislator or a Voter, and include it in eir Registrar's Report. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1890 history: Created text: The Voting Factor is a real number between 0.1 and 10 inclusive. Unless the Rules give it another value, the Voting Factor is 1. The Assessor may change the value of the Voting Factor by announcing the new value in the Public Forum, provided that e announces a value within the range proscribed above, that e makes the announcement prior to midnight GMT Thursday, and that e has not already made such an announcement earlier in the Week. The new value of the Voting Factor does not take effect until the beginning of the Nomic Week after the change has been announced. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1891 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1891 by Proposal 3869 (General Chaos), 24 May 1999 text: (a) A Proposal may contain one or more Orders. (b) The effect of adopting a Proposal which contains Orders is to execute those Orders. Such Orders are known as Legislative Orders, are deemed to have been executed by that Proposal, and are deemed to have been executed as of the date of the proclamation of the Proposal's adoption. (c) Legislative Orders may not be stayed, vacated, or amended except: (1) by a subsequent Legislative Order; (2) by a Judicial Order issued only after a judicial finding that the Proposal containing the Legislative Order was not adopted, was barred from taking effect, or was invalid; or (3) by the Clerk of the Courts, but only for the purpose of staying such an Order during the pendency of a dispute which might reasonably lead to a judicial finding of the sort mentioned in subdivision (c)(2) of this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4915 (Murphy), 2 April 2007 text: (a) A Proposal may contain one or more Orders. (b) The effect of adopting a Proposal which contains Orders is to execute those Orders. Such Orders are known as Legislative Orders, and are executed by that Proposal as of the date of the proclamation of the Proposal's adoption. (c) Legislative Orders may not be stayed, vacated, or amended except: (1) by a subsequent Legislative Order; (2) by a Judicial Order issued only after a judicial finding that the Proposal containing the Legislative Order was not adopted, was barred from taking effect, or was invalid; or (3) by the Clerk of the Courts, but only for the purpose of staying such an Order during the pendency of a dispute which might reasonably lead to a judicial finding of the sort mentioned in subdivision (c)(2) of this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1891 by Proposal 5018 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1892 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1892 by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: There exists the office of Treasuror. As soon as possible after the beginning of the quarter, the Registrar shall initiate an Election for Treasuror. The Office of Treasuror shall only be elected at the time specified by this Rule, Rules to the contrary notwithstanding. Each Nominee for Treasuror shall submit a valid Protobudget by the end of the Nomination Period, else their Nomination is automatically withdrawn. A valid Protobudget must contain all information that the Treasuror's Budget is required to contain. If a Nominee submits multiple Protobudgets during the Nomination Period, only the last one is considered. When the Vote Collector announces the Candidates for the office of Treasuror to the Public forum at the start of the voting period, e shall also list the last valid Protobudget posted by each Candidate. As soon as possible after the election of a Nominee to the office of Treasuror the Nominee's Protobudget becomes the Treasuror's budget, and shall be posted to a public forum again by the Treasuror. If there are no candidates for the office of Treasuror or no one is elected to the office of Treasuror. The Treasuror's budget shall remain the same as in the previous quarter. The Treasuror does not receive a monthly salary but instead receives a payment of VTs as set in the Treasuror's budget as soon as possible after e is elected. If the Treasuror holds no other office e is unemployed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3888 (Blob), 30 July 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3935 (Murphy), 24 October 1999 text: There exists the office of Treasuror, whose responsibility it is to maintain the Budget. Each Nominee for Treasuror shall submit a valid Proto-Budget during the Nomination Period, or else eir Nomination is automatically withdrawn. A valid Proto-Budget must contain all information that the Budget is required to contain. When the Voting Period for Treasuror begins, the Vote Collector shall announce each Candidate's last valid Proto-Budget. When the Voting Period for Treasuror ends, the winning Nominee's last valid Proto-Budget becomes the Budget, and e shall announce it as soon as possible. If the Election ends without a winner, then the existing Budget remains in effect. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: There exists the Office of Treasuror, whose responsibility it is to maintain the Budget. The Treasuror's Monthly Report shall include, for each Currency: (i) its name; (ii) its Mintor; (iii) its Recordkeepor; (iv) its MUQ; and (v) whether it is (and if so, when it became) a Basic Currency. Each Nominee for Treasuror shall submit a valid Proto-Budget during the Nomination Period, or else eir Nomination shall automatically be withdrawn at the end of the Nomination Period. A Proto-Budget is valid if it would be valid as a Budget. When the Voting Period for Treasuror begins, the Vote Collector shall announce each Candidate's last valid Proto-Budget. When the Voting Period for Treasuror ends, the Winner's last valid Proto-Budget becomes the Budget, and e shall announce it as soon as possible. If the Election ends without a Winner, then the existing Budget remains in effect. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4054 (Oerjan), 21 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 text: There exists the Office of Treasuror, whose responsibility it is to record various information regarding Budgets, Currencies and Properties, and to maintain the Treasuror's Budget. The Treasuror's Monthly Report shall include, for each Currency: (i) its name; (ii) its Mintor; (iii) its Recordkeepor; and (iv) its MUQ. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Treasuror is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of generic information, excluding holdings, of currencies, and is responsible for setting the values of compensations. The Treasuror's Monthly Report shall include, for each currency, its name, mintor, recordkeepor, and Minimum Unit Quantity. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1892 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1893 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1893 by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), 2 June 1999 text: The Treasuror's Budget shall include the following: (1) The Salary of every officer that receives a monthly wage. (2) The unemployment benefit. (3) The payment of the Treasuror. (4) The Speaker's Gratuity. (5) Any other material that is required by the rules to be in the Treasuror's budget. The above shall be given in integer multiples of 0.1, of the Basic Officer Salary, between 0 and 4 times the BOS inclusive. (E.g. 3.2*The BOS). Also, the average (mean) of all of the above shall be below or equal to twice the BOS. If there is no valid version of the Treasuror's budget, there shall be a budget created as soon as possible by the chancellor. This budget shall contain all the information that is required to be in the Treasuror's budget and shall be set, as best as is possible to the values of the previous quarter. The resultant budget shall be considered to be the Treasuror's Budget. The Chancellor shall post this budget to the public forum. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3924 (Wes), 10 October 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3944 (harvel), 20 November 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 3955 (Blob), 13 December 1999 text: The Treasuror's Budget shall include the following: (1) The Basic Officer Salary, an amount between 0 and 200 Stems. (2) The Salary of every officer that receives a monthly wage. (3) The Minimum Income. (4) The Speaker's Gratuity. (5) Any other material that is required by the rules to be in the Treasuror's budget. (2) - (4) above shall be given in integer multiples of 0.1, of the Basic Officer Salary, between 0 and 4 times the BOS inclusive. (E.g. 3.2*The BOS). Also, the average (mean) of all of the above shall be less than or equal to twice the BOS. If there is no valid version of the Treasuror's budget, there shall be a budget created as soon as possible by the Treasuror. This budget shall contain all the information that is required to be in the Treasuror's budget and shall be set, as best as is possible to the values of the previous quarter. The resultant budget shall be considered to be the Treasuror's Budget. The Treasuror shall post this budget to the public forum. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 3982 (Sherlock), 1 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 3996 (lee), 25 April 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(7) by Proposal 3998 (harvel), 2 May 2000 text: The Treasuror's Budget (Budget) shall contain the Basic Officer Salary (BOS), an amount between 0 and 200 Stems inclusive. Additionally, the Budget shall contain the values of the following compensations: * the New Player Award; * the Minimum Income; * the Judicial Salary; * the Distributor's Gratuity; * the Speaker's Gratuity; and * for each wage-earning Office, the Salary of that Office. A compensation shall be not less than 0 nor more than 4, and must be an integral multiple of 0.1. The arithmetic mean of all compensations shall be no greater than 2. Whenever the Rules indicate that one of the above compensations shall be paid out, the amount to be paid out shall be the product of the value of the compensation and the value of the BOS (as set in the latest Budget). The Treasuror may, With Support, amend the Budget, so long as the amendment would not make the Budget invalid and the Treasuror does not hold the Office temporarily. If the current Budget is invalid, then the Treasuror shall create a valid one as soon as possible. This valid one should be as close as as possible to the most recent valid version of the Budget. The Treasuror shall then post this Budget to a Public Forum. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4054 (Oerjan), 21 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4081 (Elysion), 30 October 2000 text: The Treasuror's Budget shall contain the Basic Officer Salary (BOS), an amount between 0 and 200 Stems inclusive. Additionally, the Budget shall contain the values of the following compensations: * the New Player Award; * the Minimum Income; * the Judicial Salary; * the Winner's Stipend; * the Distributor's Gratuity; * the Speaker's Gratuity; and * for each wage-earning Office, the Salary of that Office. A compensation shall be not less than 0 nor more than 4, and must be an integral multiple of 0.1. The arithmetic mean of all compensations shall be no greater than 2. Whenever the Rules indicate that one of the above compensations shall be paid out, the amount to be paid out shall be the product of the value of the compensation and the value of the BOS (as set in the latest Budget). While holding the Office as Electee, the Treasuror may amend eir Budget, With Support. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4140 (Wes), 15 April 2001 text: The Treasuror's Budget shall contain the Basic Officer Salary (BOS), an amount between 0 and 200 Stems inclusive. Additionally, the Budget shall contain the values of the following compensations: * the New Player Award; * the Minimum Income; * the Judicial Salary; * the Winner's Stipend; * the Distributor's Gratuity; * the Speaker's Gratuity; and * for each Office, the Salary of that Office. A compensation shall be not less than 0 nor more than 4, and must be an integral multiple of 0.1. The arithmetic mean of all compensations shall be no greater than 2. Whenever the Rules indicate that one of the above compensations shall be paid out, the amount to be paid out shall be the product of the value of the compensation and the value of the BOS (as set in the latest Budget). While holding the Office as Electee, the Treasuror may amend eir Budget, With Support. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4155 (harvel), 18 May 2001 text: The Treasuror's Budget shall contain the Basic Officer Salary (BOS), an amount between 0 and 200 Stems inclusive. Additionally, the Budget shall contain the values all of the following compensations: (i) the Minimum Income; (ii) the Judicial Salary; (iii) the Winner's Stipend; (iv) the Distributor's Gratuity; (v) the Speaker's Gratuity; and (vi) for each wage-earning Office, the Salary of that Office. A compensation shall be not less than 0 nor more than 4, and must be an integral multiple of 0.1. The arithmetic mean of all compensations shall be no greater than 2. Whenever the Rules indicate that one of the above compensations is to be paid out, the amount to be paid out shall be the product of the value of the compensation and the value of the BOS (as set in the latest Budget). The Treasuror's Budget shall also contain a schedule that, for each Bank Currency, shall indicate the amount of the New Player Award for that Currency. The amount of the New Player Award for a Bank Currency shall not be less than the Minimum Unit Quantity of that Currency. While holding the Office as Electee, the Treasuror may amend eir Budget, With Support. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4367 (Steve), 23 August 2002 text: The Treasuror's Budget shall contain the Basic Officer Salary (BOS), an amount between 0 and 40 Stems inclusive. Additionally, the Budget shall contain the values all of the following compensations: (i) the Minimum Income; (ii) the Judicial Salary; (iii) the Winner's Stipend; (iv) the Distributor's Gratuity; (v) the Speaker's Gratuity; and (vi) for each wage-earning Office, the Salary of that Office. A compensation shall be not less than 0 nor more than 4, and must be an integral multiple of 0.1. The arithmetic mean of all compensations shall be no greater than 2. Whenever the Rules indicate that one of the above compensations is to be paid out, the amount to be paid out shall be the product of the value of the compensation and the value of the BOS (as set in the latest Budget). The Treasuror's Budget shall also contain a schedule that, for each Bank Currency, shall indicate the amount of the New Player Award for that Currency. The amount of the New Player Award for a Bank Currency shall not be less than the Minimum Unit Quantity of that Currency. While holding the Office as Electee, the Treasuror may amend eir Budget, With Support. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4383 (Sir Toby), 11 September 2002 text: The Treasuror's Budget shall contain the Basic Officer Salary (BOS), an amount between 0 and 40 Stems inclusive. Additionally, the Budget shall contain the values all of the following compensations: (i) the Minimum Income; (ii) the Judicial Salary; (iii) the Winner's Stipend; (iv) the Distributor's Gratuity; (v) the Speaker's Gratuity; and (vi) for each wage-earning Office, the Salary of that Office. A compensation shall be not less than 0 nor more than 4, and must be an integral multiple of 0.1. The arithmetic mean of all compensations shall be no greater than 2. Whenever the Rules indicate that one of the above compensations is to be paid out, the amount to be paid out shall be the product of the value of the compensation and the value of the BOS (as set in the latest Budget). The Treasuror's Budget shall also contain a schedule that, for each Bank Currency, shall indicate the amount of the New Player Award for that Currency. The amount of the New Player Award for a Bank Currency shall not be less than the Minimum Unit Quantity of that Currency. The Treasuror's Budget shall also contain the Foul Weather Factor and the Weather Intensity Factor. Both are numbers between 0 and 10 inclusive that are evenly divisible by 0.1. While holding the Office as Electee, the Treasuror may amend eir Budget, With Support. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: The Treasuror's Budget shall contain the Basic Officer Salary (BOS), an amount between 0 and 40 Stems inclusive. Additionally, the Budget shall contain the values all of the following compensations: (i) the Minimum Income; (ii) the Judicial Salary; (iii) the Distributor's Gratuity; (iv) the Speaker's Gratuity; and (v) for each wage-earning Office, the Salary of that Office. A compensation shall be not less than 0 nor more than 4, and must be an integral multiple of 0.1. The arithmetic mean of all compensations shall be no greater than 2. Whenever the Rules indicate that one of the above compensations is to be paid out, the amount to be paid out shall be the product of the value of the compensation and the value of the BOS (as set in the latest Budget). The Treasuror's Budget shall also contain a schedule that, for each Bank Currency, shall indicate the amount of the New Player Award for that Currency. The amount of the New Player Award for a Bank Currency shall not be less than the Minimum Unit Quantity of that Currency. The Treasuror's Budget shall also contain the Foul Weather Factor and the Weather Intensity Factor. Both are numbers between 0 and 10 inclusive that are evenly divisible by 0.1. While holding the Office as Electee, the Treasuror may amend eir Budget, With Support. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1893 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1894 history: Created text: There exists a class of Entities called Genera (singular: Genus). The collection of all Genera is the Animal Kingdom. Each Genus is a Currency, with MUQ 1. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1895 history: Created text: There exists the Office of Animalkeepor, who receives a salary equal to the Basic Officer Salary. The Animalkeepor is the Mintor and Recordkeepor for all Genera. The Animalkeepor shall also receive a Commission. As soon as possible at the beginning of each month, the Animalkeepor shall pay out to emself an amount in VTs equal in magnitude to 5% of the Genera paid to the Bank the previous month. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1896 history: Created text: There exists a Genus called Amoeba. In addition to any other properties of Genera, the following hold for the Amoeba: (a) At the beginning of each Week, for each unit of Amoeba in existence, a new unit of Amoeba is created with the same controller. (b) If at any time an Entity controls more than 8 units of Amoeba, then: (1) if the Entity is a Player, all units of Amoeba that Player controls are destroyed, and the Player gains a Blot; (2) otherwise, all but one units of Amoeba that Entity controls are destroyed. (c) Players may gain certain temporary privileges by paying Amoeba to the Bank in accordance with the following: (1) A Voter may cast an additional Vote, if e so chooses, on each Proposal in the next Proposal Distribution by paying 4 Amoeba to the Bank. (2) A Voter may make one Proposal with Adoption Index no greater than 1 by paying 8 Amoeba to the Bank. Such a Proposal shall have an automatic Priority of 0.5. (3) A Legislator may cast one Vote on one Proposal in the next Proposal Distribution without cost by paying 6 Amoeba to the Bank. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1897 history: Created text: All Players have a charge, which is either Positive or Negative. Initially all Players are Postively Charged. A Player may change eir charge by posting to the Public Forum announcing that e does so. This change is only effective if the Player has not changed eir charge already that month. The Accountor shall keep track of each Player's charge, and include it as part of eir Official Report. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1898 history: Created text: Voting Tokens have a charge which is one of Positive, Negative or Neutral. Unless otherwise specified a Voting token is Neutral. All Voting Tokens created in the Bank, or transferred to it immediately become Neutrally charged. All Voting Tokens possessed by Players must be either Positively or Negatively charged. If a Neutral VT is transferred to a Player then its charge is changed to match that Player's charge. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1899 history: Created text: A Transfer Order for Voting Tokens may specify what charge VTs are transferred. If no charge is specified, it is assumed that Neutrally charged VTs are transferred. Such a Transfer Order is not valid unless the Entity owning the VTs to be transferred has enough VTs of the specified charge. This rule takes precedence over other rules defining the validity of such Transfer Orders. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1900 history: Created text: A Payment Order for Voting Tokens may specify a charge that those VTs are to have. Such a Payment order may only be satisfied if the VTs transferred have the required charge. A Payment Order for Voting Tokens that does not specify a charge may be satisfied by transferring VTs of any charge. This rule takes precedence over other rules which might otherwise permit such Payment Orders to be satisfied, but it should not be construed as permitting a Payment Order to be satisfied in a way that is otherwise not permitted. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1901 history: Created, ca. Jun. or Jul. 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1902 history: Created, ca. Jun. or Jul. 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1903 history: Created, ca. Jun. or Jul. 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1904 history: Created text: The Registrar may cause any person to become an Honourary Player Without 2 Objections by posting such to the Public Forum identifying in some unambigous manner the person (or persons) being honoured in this way. No current Player may ever become an Honourary Player, and any Honourary Player who becomes a current Player shall immediately cease to be an Honourary Player. Honourary Players are not considered to be Players with respect to the Rules or any other Nomic Entity within Agora Nomic, but shall be considered Players of Agora Nomic to all persons, organizations, nomics and other entities which exist entirely outside of the Agora Nomic Rules history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1905 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1905 by Proposal 3887 (Blob), 30 July 1999 text: The set of Players consisting of the Speaker and all current Electees to Offices is called the Cabinet. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Cabinet, or Inner Cabinet, consists of the Speaker and all electees to office. The Outer Cabinet consists of all Oligarchs who are not members of the Inner Cabinet. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: The Cabinet, or Inner Cabinet, consists of the Speaker and all electees to office. The Outer Cabinet consists of all Shareholders who are not members of the Inner Cabinet. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1905 by Proposal 4713 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1906 history: Created text: The Treasuror make make changes to the Budget, With Support, provided that e does not hold the Office temporarily. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1907 history: Created, ca. Aug. 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1908 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1908 by Proposal 3896 (Elysion), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3930 (Murphy), 17 October 1999 text: If an entity is placed in Probate, the Notary shall become its Executor and shall perform the following actions as soon as possible in the following order: i) The Notary shall divide the assets of the estate amongst its creditors, assigning to each creditor assets equal to the amount due that creditor if possible, or a pro-rata portion if not. All debts, whether satisfied in full or not, shall be cancelled. If the entity in Probate is not terminal, the Notary shall stop here. ii) The Notary shall apply the Will, if any, of the entity in Probate to the extent possible. Any assets remaining after the application of the Will shall be divided amongst the heirs named in the Will, assigning to each heir a portion computed in a manner consistent with the Will; if the Will is silent or unclear on the division of remaining assets, the division shall be equal. iii) The Notary shall assign any remaining Indulgences to the Bank, and expunge an equal number of the entity in Probate's Blots. If the entity does not have that many Blots, then the Notary shall expunge all of the entity's Blots. iv) If the entity in Probate has Blots remaining, then the Notary shall assign all Indulgence credits to the Bank, and expunge a number of the entity's Blots equal to the total amount of the credits thus assigned. If the entity does not have that many Blots, then the Notary shall expunge all of the entity's Blots. v) The Notary shall cancel any remaining credits, and assign any remaining units of a Currency to the Mintor of that Currency. Units of Currency are assigned to an entity by issuing a Transfer Order for those units of Currency from the entity in Probate to that entity. A credit is assigned to an entity by issuing a Payment Order from the payor of the credit to the entity to whom it has been assigned, for the same amount of Currency as specified by the credit. However, if these are the same entity, then the credit is assigned by doing nothing. A debt is cancelled by vacating the Payment Order which established it. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4082 (Peekee), 30 October 2000 text: Property which is possessed by an entity which has no Executor, is deemed "abandoned". The Notary shall be a Limited Executor of any entity which possesses abandoned Property, and on behalf of that entity e may: (1) transfer Property owned by that entity to any entity to which the dissolute entity owes debts, for the purpose of making partial or complete payment on those debts; (2) forgive in part or in full any debts owed to it; (3) Without Objection, transfer Property owned by it to the Bank; or (4) transfer Property to satisfy the Will, provided that all debts for that type of Property that the entity had when it lost its Executor have been satisfied. If an entity which possesses property of any sort dies, dissolves, or otherwise ceases to exist, that entity is nonetheless considered to continue to exist for the purpose of those Rules pertaining to the possession and disposition of Property, for as long as it continues to possess Property. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 text: Property possessed by an entity (the Dissolute) without a Prime Executor is deemed to be abandoned as long as it is possessed by the Dissolute. The Notary is a Limited Executor of each Dissolute, on behalf of whom e may: (1) transfer property owned by em to any creditor of any of eir debts, for the purpose of making partial or complete payment on those debts; (2) forgive in part or in full any debts owed to em; (3) Without Objection, transfer property owned by em to the Bank, unless the Dissolute was a player before eir property was abandoned; or (4) transfer property to satisfy the Dissolute's Will, provided that the Dissolute was not Silent when e lost eir Prime Executor and all debts for that type of property that the Dissolute had when e lost eir Prime Executor have been satisfied. If any entity possessing property dies, dissolves, or otherwise ceases to exist, that entity shall be deemed to exist for as long as e possesses property. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4497 (Steve), 13 May 2003 text: Property possessed by an entity (the Dissolute) without a Prime Executor is deemed to be abandoned as long as it is possessed by the Dissolute. The Notary is a Limited Executor of each Dissolute, on behalf of whom e may: (1) transfer property owned by em to any creditor of any of eir debts, for the purpose of making partial or complete payment on those debts; (2) forgive in part or in full any debts owed to em; (3) Without Objection, transfer property owned by em to the Mintor or Recordkeepor of that Property, unless the Dissolute was a player before eir property was abandoned; or (4) transfer property to satisfy the Dissolute's Will, provided that the Dissolute was not Silent when e lost eir Prime Executor and all debts for that type of property that the Dissolute had when e lost eir Prime Executor have been satisfied. If any entity possessing property dies, dissolves, or otherwise ceases to exist, that entity shall be deemed to exist for as long as e possesses property. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1908 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1909 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1909 by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3935 (Murphy), 24 October 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 text: There exists the Office of Payroll Clerk. The Payroll Clerk shall receive a salary as set in the last Treasuror's Budget. In addition to information which may be required by other Rules, the Payroll Clerk's report shall include: (a) each Player's Associated Basic Currency (ABC), if any; and (b) the time at which each Player's ABC was last set or changed. (c) A list of all Offices, with the identity of the holder of each, the time of the last Election for that Office and ] whether the Office is held temporarily. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: There exists the Office of Payroll Clerk, whose responsibility it is to be Recordkeepor for Stesm, to maintain records of Players' Associated Basic Currencies and rotations in the Oligarchy, and to pay out Salaries. The Payroll Clerk's Report shall include: (i) each Player's Associated Basic Currency (ABC), if any; (ii) the time at which each Player's ABC was most recently set or changed, if any; (iii) a list of all Offices, and for each Office, the identity of the Officer, the time of the last Election, and whether the Office is held temporarily; (iv) a list of all positions in the Oligarchy with their ranks, and the Players who hold those positions; and (v) the date of the next monthly rotation in the Oligarchy. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4053 (harvel), 21 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 text: There exists the Office of Payroll Clerk, whose responsibility it is to be Recordkeepor for Stems and to pay out Salaries. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Payroll Clerk is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of Stems and is responsible for paying out salaries and other compensations. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1909 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1910 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1910 by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 text: Stems are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Stems is 1. The Recordkeepor for Stems is the Payroll Clerk. Any Transfer Order or Payment Order of Stems must involve either the Bank as Payor and a Player as Payee, or a Player as Payor and the Bank as Payee, at the time the Order is issued. Any Order not meeting these requirements is invalid, and this Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which states otherwise. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 535[2001] (Elysion), 2 February 2001 text: Stems are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Stems is 1. The Recordkeepor for Stems is the Payroll Clerk. Transfers of Stems are permitted only if either the transferor or the transferee is the Bank. All other transfers of Stems are prohibited. However, in the case that an Organization somehow obtains Stems, it shall nevertheless be allowed to transfer those to Players, as long as this is done within seven days of when the Stems are obtained. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 text: Stems are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Stems is 1. The Recordkeepor for Stems is the Payroll Clerk. Transfers of Stems are permitted only if at least one of the following is true: (1) either the transferor or the transferee is the Bank; (2) the Stems are to be transferred from a Dissolute to a player who has the privilege of Looting the Corpse of that Dissolute; or (3) the transferor is an Organization, and the Stems to be transferred had not been held continuously by the Organization for one week. All other transfers of Stems are prohibited. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4337 (Sir Toby), 30 June 2002 text: Stems are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Stems is 1. The Recordkeepor for Stems is the Payroll Clerk. Transfers of Stems are permitted only if at least one of the following is true: (1) either the transferor or the transferee is the Bank; (2) the Stems are to be transferred from a Dissolute to a player who has the privilege of Looting the Corpse of that Dissolute; or (3) the transferor is an Organization, and the Stems to be transferred had not been held continuously by the Organization for one week; (4) either the transferor or the transferee is a Money Grubbing Contest, and the regulations of the Contest(s) involved in the transfer specifically permit the transfer. All other transfers of Stems are prohibited. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4387 (Peekee), 25 September 2002 text: Stems are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Stems is 1. The Recordkeepor for Stems is the Payroll Clerk. Transfers of Stems are permitted only if at least one of the following is true: (1) either the transferor or the transferee is the Bank; (2) the Stems are to be transferred from a Dissolute to a player who has the privilege of Looting the Corpse of that Dissolute; or (3) the transferee is a Group; (4) either the transferor or the transferee is a Money Grubbing Contest, and the regulations of the Contest(s) involved in the transfer specifically permit the transfer. All other transfers of Stems are prohibited. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: Stems are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Stems is 1. The Recordkeepor for Stems is the Payroll Clerk. Transfers of Stems are permitted only if at least one of the following is true: (1) either the transferor or the transferee is the Bank; (2) the Stems are to be transferred from a Dissolute to a player who has the privilege of Looting the Corpse of that Dissolute; (3) either the transferor or the transferee is a Money Grubbing Contest, and the regulations of the Contest(s) involved in the transfer specifically permit the transfer. All other transfers of Stems are prohibited. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1910 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1911 history: Created text: A Currency is a Basic Currency only if defined as such by the Rules. Each Player has at most one Associated Basic Currency (ABC). Initially, Players have no ABC. A Player who has no ABC may associate a Basic Currency with emself by declaring that e does so, and stating which Basic Currency is so associated, in the Public Forum. A Player who has an ABC may change eir ABC by the same method, but only if: a) it has been at least 3 months since eir ABC was last set or changed, OR b) if the Currency which is to be eir new ABC became a Basic Currency more recently than eir ABC was last set or changed. A Player with an ABC may never cease to have any ABC at all, unless e ceases to be a Player, or eir ABC ceases to be a Basic Currency. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1912 history: Created [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) text: A Player who wishes to obtain a quantity of eir Associated Basic Currency (ABC) may state publicly the quantity of eir ABC e wishes to obtain and pay a Fee of an equal number of Stems. If e does so, then as soon as possible, the Payroll Clerk shall pay out to that Player that quantity of eir ABC at the time of the request. history: ... [orphaned text: A Player may convert Stems in eir possession to eir Associated Basic Currency (ABC) by transferring Stems to the Bank, and stating that they are to be converted to eir ABC. Such a transfer may not satisfy any other purpose. The Payroll Clerk shall then pay out to that Player an equal number of the Currency which was eir ABC at the time the initial Stem transfer took place. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1913 history: Created [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) text: An Outstanding Payment Order is one that has neither been satisfied nor vacated. For each entity able to own Currency, there is a value for each Currency, at any given time, known as the Expected value of that Currency. This value is equal to the number of units of that Currency owned by that entity, plus the number of units of that Currency named in Outstanding POs with that Entity as Payee, minus the number of units of that Currency named in Outstanding Payment Orders with that Entity as Payor. A Player for whom the Expected value of P-Notes is 5, for example, is said to have 5 Expected P-Notes. history: ... [orphaned text: An Outstanding Payment Order is one that has neither been satisfied nor vacated. For each entity able to own Currency, there is a value for each Currency, at any given time, known as the Expected value of that Currency. This value is equal to the number of units of that Currency owned by that entity, plus the number of units of that Currency named in Outstanding POs with that Entity as Payee, minus the number of units of that Currency named in Outstanding Payment Orders with that Entity as Payor. A Player for whom the Expected value of P-Notes is 5, for example, is said to have 5 Expected P-Notes. There is also an Expected number of VTs, which is equal to the sum of currently owned +VTs and -VTs, and taking into account all Outstanding POs for +VTs, -VTs, as well as for unspecified VTs, as above. ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1914 history: Created text: The Accountor's Report shall include the Maximum Votes for each Voting Entity. This value is determined as follows: a) if the Expected VTs of the Entity is non-negative, the Maximum Votes is equal to the square root of the Expected VTs plus 3, rounded down to the next integer if non-integral; b) if the Expected VTs of the Entity is negative, the Maximum Votes is 2. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1915 history: Created [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) text: There exists the Office of Priest, whose responsibility it is to conduct a monthly Indulgence Auction. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: There exists the Office of Priest, whose responsibility it is to conduct a monthly Indulgence Auction, and to be the Recordkeepor for Indulgence Auction Tokens. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1916 history: Created [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Amended(1) text: Indulgence Auction Tokens (IATs) are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of IATs is 0.01. The Recordkeepor for IATs is the Priest. IATs are a Basic Currency. history: ... history: Amended(2) text: Indulgence Auction Tokens (IATs) are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of IATs is 1. The Recordkeepor for IATs is the Priest. IATs are a Basic Currency. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1917 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1917 by Proposal 3897 (harvel), 27 August 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3940 (Blob), 15 November 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 3953 (Blob), 13 December 1999 text: The Recordkeepor of a Currency may levy a tax on that Currency, subject to the following restrictions: a) All elements required to be specified in the announcement of the levy must also be specified in the annoucement of intent to issue the levy. b) The Effective Time of the levy must be between seven and fourteen days after the time of the annoucement of the intent to issue the levy. c) The Effective Time of a levy is at least one month after the last Effective Time of a levy on that Currency issued under the authority of this Rule. d) The annoucement of intent to issue the levy may not take place while another attempt to levy a tax on that Currency is pending under the authority of this Rule. e) If the Currency is a Bank Currency, then either the Recordkeepor is a member of the Cabinet at the time e levies the tax, or eir action has the support of two current Cabinet members. The tax may include exemptions on a fixed amount of the holdings of every taxable entity, provided that: (i) All Players are exempt identical amounts, (ii) All Non-players are exempt identical amounts, (iii) The Non-players' exemption is less than or equal to the Players' exemption. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: The Recordkeepor of a Currency may levy a tax on that Currency, subject to the following restrictions: a) All elements required to be specified in the announcement of the levy must also be specified in the announcement of intent to issue the levy. b) The Effective Time of the levy must be between seven and fourteen days after the time of the announcement of the intent to issue the levy. c) The Effective Time of a levy is at least one month after the last Effective Time of a levy on that Currency issued under the authority of this Rule. d) The announcement of intent to issue the levy may not take place while another attempt to levy a tax on that Currency is pending under the authority of this Rule. e) If the Currency is a Bank Currency, then either the Recordkeepor is a member of the Cabinet at the time e levies the tax, or eir action has the support of two current Cabinet members. The tax may include exemptions on a fixed amount of the holdings of every taxable entity, provided that: (i) All Players are exempt identical amounts, (ii) All Non-players are exempt identical amounts, (iii) The Non-players' exemption is less than or equal to the Players' exemption. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1917 by Proposal 4470 (Steve), 26 March 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1918 history: Created, ca. Aug. 27 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1919 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1919 by Proposal 3898 (Wes), 27 August 1999 text: A Player may be Installed into an Office by the operation of a Proposal. If that Office is already held by a Player, that Player will be removed from Office. The Player named in the Proposal then becomes the Electee to that Office. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 text: A Player may be Installed into an Office by the adoption of a Democratic Proposal. If that Office is already held by a Player, that Player is removed from the Office. The Player named in the Proposal then becomes the Electee to that Office. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1919 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1920 history: Created, ca. Sep. 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1921 history: Created, ca. Sep. 1999 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1922 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1922 by Proposal 3916 (harvel), 27 September 1999 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) Quack, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the production, distribution, and marketing of panaceas and other patent medicines. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4129 (Goethe), 28 March 2001 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) Quack, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the production, distribution, and marketing of panaceas and other patent medicines. (c) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for one Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as 1, with 2 Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with 3 Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus 2 Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4204 (Syllepsis), 28 August 2001 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) Quack, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the production, distribution, and marketing of panaceas and other patent medicines. (c) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for one Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as 1, with 2 Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with 3 Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus 2 Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (d) Filthy Bureaucrat, to be awarded to any player who at some point simultaneously holds and is Electee to three or more Offices. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4288 (OscarMeyr), 5 May 2002 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) Quack, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the production, distribution, and marketing of panaceas and other patent medicines. (c) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for one Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as 1, with 2 Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with 3 Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus 2 Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (d) Filthy Bureaucrat, to be awarded to any player who at some point simultaneously holds and is Electee to three or more Offices. (e) Groovy, which may be awarded to any Player Winning the Game at least once since the introduction of this Patent Title and demonstrating eir total coolness by Winning the Game at least once by each of at least three distinct win conditions. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4404 (Steve), 23 October 2002 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) Quack, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the production, distribution, and marketing of panaceas and other patent medicines. (c) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for one Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as 1, with 2 Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with 3 Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus 2 Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (d) Filthy Bureaucrat, to be awarded to any player who at some point simultaneously holds and is Electee to three or more Offices. This Patent Title is revoked from a player who ceases to hold and be Electee to three or more Offices. (e) Groovy, which may be awarded to any Player Winning the Game at least once since the introduction of this Patent Title and demonstrating eir total coolness by Winning the Game at least once by each of at least three distinct win conditions. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) Quack, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the production, distribution, and marketing of panaceas and other patent medicines. (c) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for one Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as 1, with 2 Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with 3 Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus 2 Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (d) Filthy Bureaucrat, to be awarded to any player who at some point simultaneously holds and is Electee to three or more Offices. This Patent Title is revoked from a player who ceases to hold and be Electee to three or more Offices. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4556 (Goethe), 22 March 2004 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) Quack, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the production, distribution, and marketing of panaceas and other patent medicines. (c) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for one Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as 1, with 2 Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with 3 Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus 2 Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (d) Filthy Bureaucrat, to be awarded to any player who at some point simultaneously holds and is Electee to three or more Offices. This Patent Title is revoked from a player who ceases to hold and be Electee to three or more Offices. (e) Admiral, to be awarded to a Team Captain when eir Team achieves a Team Win. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) Quack, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the production, distribution, and marketing of panaceas and other patent medicines. (c) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for one Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as 1, with 2 Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with 3 Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus 2 Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (d) Filthy Bureaucrat, to be awarded to any player who at some point simultaneously holds and is Electee to three or more Offices. This Patent Title is revoked from a player who ceases to hold and be Electee to three or more Offices. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4642 (Murphy), 12 March 2005 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) Quack, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the production, distribution, and marketing of panaceas and other patent medicines. (c) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for one Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as 1, with 2 Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with 3 Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus 2 Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (d) Filthy Bureaucrat, to be awarded to any player who at some point simultaneously holds and is Electee to three or more Offices. This Patent Title is revoked from a player who ceases to hold and be Electee to three or more Offices. (e) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4708 (OscarMeyr), 18 April 2005 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for one Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as 1, with 2 Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with 3 Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus 2 Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Filthy Bureaucrat, to be awarded to any player who at some point simultaneously holds and is Electee to three or more Offices. This Patent Title is revoked from a player who ceases to hold and be Electee to three or more Offices. (d) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for one Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as 1, with 2 Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with 3 Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus 2 Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Filthy Bureaucrat, to be awarded to any player who at some point simultaneously holds and is Electee to three or more Offices. This Patent Title is revoked from a player who ceases to hold and be Electee to three or more Offices. (d) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4878 (Goethe), 22 January 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded to players who win the game. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4891 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded to players who win the game. (d) Champion, to be awarded to any player who wins the game. The Herald's report shall record how the player won. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4975 (OscarMeyr), 23 May 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded to any player who wins the game. The Herald's report shall record how the player won. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 5112 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded to any player who wins the game. The Herald's monthly report shall record how the player won. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5205 (Zefram), 8 September 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded to any person who wins the game. The Herald's monthly report shall record how the player won. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 5237 (AFO; disi.), 3 October 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded to any person who wins the game. The Herald's monthly report includes how the player won. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5239 (AFO), 3 October 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded to any person who wins the game. The Herald's report includes how the player won. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5257 (AFO), 27 October 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded to any person who wins the game. The Herald's report includes how the player won. (e) Minister Without Portfolio, to be awarded to any player who wins the game. If the number of players bearing this title is greater than the number of Prerogatives defined by the rules, then this title is revoked from the Speaker. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5290 (comex), 14 November 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded to any person who wins the game. The Herald's report includes how the player won. (e) Minister Without Portfolio, to be awarded to any player who wins the game. If the number of players bearing this title is greater than the number of Prerogatives defined by the rules, then this title is administratively revoked from the Speaker. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5300 (Murphy), 28 November 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded to any person who wins the game. The Herald's report includes how the player won. (e) Minister Without Portfolio, to be awarded to any player who wins the game and does not already bear the title. If the number of players bearing this title is greater than the number of Prerogatives defined by the rules, then this title is administratively revoked from the Speaker. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5341 (Goethe), 8 December 2007 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded by the IADoP to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded by the Herald to any person who wins the game. The Herald's report includes how the player won. (e) Minister Without Portfolio, to be awarded to any player who wins the game and does not already bear the title. If the number of players bearing this title is greater than the number of Prerogatives defined by the rules, then this title is administratively revoked from the Speaker. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5389 (Goethe), 1 January 2008 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded by the IADoP to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded by the Herald to any person who wins the game. The Herald's report includes how the player won. (e) Minister Without Portfolio, to be awarded by the Herald to any player who wins the game and does not already bear the title. If the number of players bearing this title is greater than the number of Prerogatives defined by the rules, then this title is administratively revoked from the Speaker. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5434 (Murphy), 13 February 2008 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded by the IADoP to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded by the Herald to any person who wins the game. The Herald's report includes how the player won. (e) Minister Without Portfolio, to be awarded by the Herald to any player who wins the game and does not already bear the title. If the number of players bearing this title is greater than the number of Prerogatives defined by the rules, then this title is administratively revoked from the Speaker. (f) Left in a Huff, to be awarded by the Clerk of the Courts or the Registrar (whichever one gets around to it first) to any player who publishes a Cantus Cygneus. history: Amended(24) by Proposal 5559 (Quazie, BobTHJ), 25 June 2008 text: The following are Patent Titles: (a) Scamster, which may be awarded to any Player who has shown great enthusiasm, persistence, or skill in the perpetrating of scams. This title may not be declined, retracted, or revoked. (b) A Patent Title (non-unique) now will Be known as "Bard", and granted those with wit. In order for the Title to be filled, A level of Support must call for it. Three players to a fourth may grant this name If these three write as one, with two Support. A current Bard may also grant the same, Provided that a second Bard's a sport. And so we don't the name of Bard debase, A Player with three Supporters can conspire To (from a Bard), this Title to erase: Or Bard (plus two Bards) make a Bard retire. But lest we ruin some poor minstrel's fun No bard will be dis-bard for eir bad pun. (c) Three Months Long Service, Six Months Long Service, Nine Months Long Service, Twelve Months Long Service, to be awarded by the IADoP to any player who has held a particular Office continuously for the specified duration. Each of these titles shall be awarded only once per player. (d) Champion, to be awarded by the Herald to any person who wins the game. The Herald's report includes how the player won. (e) Minister Without Portfolio, to be awarded by the Herald to any player who wins the game and does not already bear the title. If the number of players bearing this title is greater than the number of Prerogatives defined by the rules, then this title is administratively revoked from the Speaker. (f) Left in a Huff, to be awarded by the Clerk of the Courts or the Registrar (whichever one gets around to it first) to any player who publishes a Cantus Cygneus. (g) Elder Lurker, to be awarded to Persons who are true legends that were involved in Agora in its early days and now continue to grace us with their presence by lurking on the lists to occasionally add tid-bits of wisdom or insight to discussions. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1923 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1923 by Proposal 3916 (harvel), 27 September 1999 text: The following are Unique Patent Titles: (a) Distributor, which shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of one or more Public Fora. The Registrar may, at eir whim, award this title. (b) Robespierre, which shall automatically be awarded to the Player who called for a Revolt, it the Revolt succeeds. (c) Miscreant, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player who has at least ten Blots and has a greater number of Blots than any other Player, if there is such a Player. It shall automatically be revoked if either condition becomes false. (d) Maniac, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player submitting an Insane Proposal on which no one votes FOR. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4027 (Elysion), 19 July 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4079 (Elysion), 30 October 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4091 (Elysion), 18 December 2000 text: The following are Unique Patent Titles: (a) Distributor, which shall be possessed by that person most responsible for the maintenance of one or more Public Fora. The Registrar may, at eir whim, award this title. (b) Robespierre, which shall automatically be awarded to the Player who called for a Revolt, it the Revolt succeeds. (c) Miscreant, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player who has at least ten Blots and has a greater number of Blots than any other Player, if there is such a Player. It shall automatically be revoked if either condition becomes false. (d) Maniac, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player submitting an Insane Proposal on which no one votes FOR. (e) Honorless Worm, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player whose Honor is less than that of other Player, if there is such a Player. It shall automatically be revoked if this condition becomes false. (f) Shogun, which shall automatically be awarded to the player whose Honor is greater than any other player, if they are a Samurai. It shall automatically be revoked if the holder ceases to be a Samurai or another player's Honor is greater than the holder's. (g) Pugachev, which shall automatically be awarded to the player who called for a Revolt, if the Revolt fails. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4124 (Elysion), 28 March 2001 text: The following are Unique Patent Titles: (a) Distributor, which shall be awarded by the Registrar, at eir whim, to that person most responsible for the maintenance of one or more Public Fora. (b) Robespierre, which shall automatically be awarded to the Player who called for a Revolt, it the Revolt succeeds. (c) Miscreant, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player who has at least ten Blots and has a greater number of Blots than any other Player, if there is such a Player. It shall automatically be revoked if either condition becomes false. (d) Maniac, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player submitting an Insane Proposal on which no one votes FOR. (e) Pugachev, which shall automatically be awarded to the player who called for a Revolt, if the Revolt fails. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4141 (Wes), 15 April 2001 text: The following are Unique Patent Titles: (b) Robespierre, which shall automatically be awarded to the Player who called for a Revolt, it the Revolt succeeds. (c) Miscreant, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player who has at least ten Blots and has a greater number of Blots than any other Player, if there is such a Player. It shall automatically be revoked if either condition becomes false. (d) Maniac, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player submitting an Insane Proposal on which no one votes FOR. (e) Pugachev, which shall automatically be awarded to the player who called for a Revolt, if the Revolt fails. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4313 (Sir Toby), 28 May 2002 text: The following are Unique Patent Titles: (b) Robespierre, which shall automatically be awarded to the Player who called for a Revolt, if the Revolt succeeds. (c) Miscreant, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player who has at least ten Blots and has a greater number of Blots than any other Player, if there is such a Player. It shall automatically be revoked if either condition becomes false. (d) Maniac, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player submitting an Insane Proposal on which no one votes FOR. (e) Pugachev, which shall automatically be awarded to the player who called for a Revolt, if the Revolt fails. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4320 (t), 28 May 2002 text: The following are Unique Patent Titles: (a) Robespierre, which shall automatically be awarded to the Player who called for a Revolt, it the Revolt succeeds. (b) Miscreant, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player who has at least ten Blots and has a greater number of Blots than any other Player, if there is such a Player. It shall automatically be revoked if either condition becomes false. (c) Pugachev, which shall automatically be awarded to the player who called for a Revolt, if the Revolt fails. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4339 (Sir Toby), 8 July 2002 text: The following are Unique Patent Titles: (a) Robespierre, which shall automatically be awarded to the Player who called for a Revolt, if the Revolt succeeds. (b) Miscreant, which shall automatically be awarded to a Player who has at least ten Blots and has a greater number of Blots than any other Player, if there is such a Player. It shall automatically be revoked if either condition becomes false. (c) Pugachev, which shall automatically be awarded to the player who called for a Revolt, if the Revolt fails. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1923 by Proposal 4824 (Maud, Manu), 17 July 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1924 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1924 by Proposal 3936 (Elysion), 31 October 1999 text: Now the truth is that we see, How much better we'd all be, If immaculatity, Were rewarded, I and thee, Were we to acknowledge those, With the pur'ty of a rose, At the end of quarter each, Since the virtues we do teach, Herald with eir records true, Shall pay out but one, not two, 'ndulgences to each of y'all, 'mmaculate past quarter all, By what name this gift shall be, Called for all eternity, Like some old tradition knew, As my latest gift to you, Nonetheless there still are those, Everybody surely knows, We can find them anywhere, (But it's very rude to stare), Those with Zombies at their side, Mindless hordes they try to hide, Surely there should be some price, (It's unnatur'l to live twice), Since we want to boost morale, Once again the herald shall, Only for those three months past, Have been held b'eir master last, Bill the players who did own, Zombies (which will often moan), Only one and never two, Fair Indulgences (mon dieu!), Every zombie undead for, Perhaps one, but maybe more. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4039 (Elysion), 7 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: Friends of mine, there is a plague! A blight! A scourge! Let's not be vague, Ev'rybody's surely seen The creatures that exist between Life and death, which reign no more, So unlike in those days of yore. Now demand we some new rule! We marched out to Istanbul, (We'd lost our map, 'cause life is cruel), Argued, squabbled, fought did we, Now we all do hope you see This simple, plain necessity. Registrar, who keeps our lists, For every Zombie that exists, Every end of quarter passed, Shall bill the master of that ghast, One Indulgence, (aren't they nice?) So living twice shall have its price. Simple as this act may be, Since no longer care do we, About immaculatity, Lost have we that bonus old, "Wins now matter!" we've been told, So much for my reform so bold. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4118 (Goethe), 6 March 2001 text: O Agorans! Please hear my claim: A dark injustice mars our game. Though politics should not be easy For Zombie Masters life is breezy. The ordinary Player's stressed, The Zombie Master's triply bless'd With extra votes, and extra Roles And Stems enough to buy mink stoles. With all these perks, it seems they oughtta Pay more than one Indulgence per Quarter. And so, henceforth, for justices' sake, Let them this payment monthly make. The Registrar, who keeps our lists, For every Zombie that exists, Shall, at the end of each month passed, a Lone Indulgence bill the Master. And should this Upkeep be not paid Asap, the Master's disobeyed This Rule, and makes a wretched journey, Loses the Power of Attorney O'er that Zombie. More disaster! The Registrar shall bill the Master For the Zombie - but forgive The Upkeep debt, and thusly shrive The Master. That's the heavy price That must be paid for living twice. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1924 by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1925 history: Created text: Legislative Status is a Nomic Property which may consist of one or more of the values Legislator, Voter or Barred. Each Player has a Legislative Status. Other entities may possess a Legislative Status if and only if the Rules explicitly permit them to. If an entity has a Legislative Status without a value, then it shall be given the value Barred. The Registrar shall record the Legislative Status of each Player. Players have a Legislative Status of both Legislator and Voter. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1926 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1926 by Proposal 3952 (Blob), 13 December 1999 text: The Rules may desingate certain pieces of information to be secret. Any player who knowingly reveals secret information to another player, except as explicitly permitted or required by the rules, commits the Crime of Unlawful Disclosure, a Class 5 Crime. All secret information is deemed private, with respect to the Freedom of Information Act. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: The Rules may designate certain pieces of information to be secret. Any player who knowingly reveals secret information to another player, except as explicitly permitted or required by the rules, commits the Crime of Unlawful Disclosure, a Class 5 Crime. All secret information is deemed private, with respect to the Freedom of Information Act. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1926 by Proposal 4759 (Manu, Sherlock), 15 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1927 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1927 by Proposal 3953 (Blob), 13 December 1999 text: The Executor of a Bank Currency may Mint new units of that Currency, subject to the following restrictions: a) E announces eir intent between seven and fourteen days prior to the time of minting. b) Either e is a member of the Cabinet at the time e mints the currency, or eir action has the support of two Cabinet members. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1928 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1928 by Proposal 3977 (Wes), 23 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3993 (t), 20 April 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), 8 May 2000 text: There exists the Office of Scorekeepor, whose responsibility it is to keep track of Scores. The Scorekeepor's Report includes the Score of each current Player, as well as any changes thereto since the last posting of the Report. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Scorekeepor is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of scores. The Scorekeepor's Weekly Report shall include the score of each registered player, as well as any changes thereto since the last posting of the Report. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: The Scorekeepor is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of scores and Teams. The Scorekeepor's Weekly Report shall include the score of each registered Player and all Team Scores as well as any changes to either since the last posting of the Report. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1928 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1929 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1929 by Proposal 3977 (Wes), 23 February 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3993 (t), 20 April 2000 text: Points are a measure of a Player's unloserliness. The number of Points a Player has is called eir Score. The Score of each Player is at all times an integer. A new Player, or a Player with no Score starts with a Score of zero Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Player to be Awarded Points (causing eir Score to be increased) or Penalized Points (causing eir Score to be decreased). If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Player's Score. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is invalid: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first such notification for that specific event Having a Score of 200 Points or more is a Win Condition. If at any time a Player Wins the Game, all Player's Scores shall instantly be set to zero. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4141 (Wes), 15 April 2001 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4141 (Wes), 15 April 2001 text: A Player's Score is a measure of that Player's unloserliness, measured in Points. The Score of each Player is at all times an integer. A Player who has not been Awarded or Penalized since the last Win has a Score of zero Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Player to be Awarded Points (causing eir Score to be increased) or Penalized Points (causing eir Score to be decreased). If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Player's Score. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is ineffective: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first such notification for that specific event Having a Score of 200 Points or more is a Win Condition. If at any time a Player Wins the Game, all Player's Scores shall instantly be set to zero. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4180 (Elysion), 7 July 2001 text: A Player's Score is a measure of that Player's unloserliness, measured in Points. The Score of each Player is at all times an integer. A Player who has not been Awarded or Penalized since the last Win has a Score of zero Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Player to be Awarded Points (causing eir Score to be increased) or Penalized Points (causing eir Score to be decreased). If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Player's Score. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is ineffective: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first such notification for that specific event Having a Score of 100 Points or more is a Win Condition. If at any time a Player Wins the Game, all Player's Scores shall instantly be set to zero. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: A Player's Score is a measure of that Player's unloserliness, measured in Points. The Score of each Player is at all times an integer. A Player who has not been Awarded or Penalized since the last Team Win has a Score of zero Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Player to be Awarded Points (causing eir Score to be increased) or Penalized Points (causing eir Score to be decreased). If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Player's Score. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is ineffective: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first such notification for that specific event history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4467 (OscarMyer), 17 March 2003 text: A Player's Score is a measure of that Player's unloserliness, measured in Points. The Score of each Player is at all times an integer. A Player who has not been Awarded or Penalized since the last Team Win has a Score of zero Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Player to be Awarded Points (causing eir Score to be increased) or Penalized Points (causing eir Score to be decreased). If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Player's Score. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is ineffective: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first valid notification for that specific event history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4542 (Murphy), 23 November 2003 text: A Player's Score is a measure of that Player's unloserliness, measured in Points. The Score of each Player is at all times an integer. A Player who has not been Awarded or Penalized since the last Team Win has a Score of zero Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Player to be Awarded Points (causing eir Score to be increased) or Penalized Points (causing eir Score to be decreased). If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Player's Score. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is ineffective: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first valid notification for that specific event If the event did not actually occur, and the notification is challenged within 7 days for this reason, then the notification is invalid and points do not change. If the event did not actually occur, and the notification is not challenged within 7 days for this reason, then the notification is valid and points change. If the notification is challenged later, then the player may be penalized/awarded a number of points equal to the original award/penalty. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4612 (Murphy), 10 September 2004 text: A Player's Score is a measure of that Player's unloserliness, measured in Points. The Score of each Player is at all times an integer. A Player who has not been Awarded or Penalized since the last Score Reset has a Score of zero Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Player to be Awarded Points (causing eir Score to be increased) or Penalized Points (causing eir Score to be decreased). If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Player's Score. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is ineffective: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first valid notification for that specific event If the event did not actually occur, and the notification is challenged within 7 days for this reason, then the notification is invalid and points do not change. If the event did not actually occur, and the notification is not challenged within 7 days for this reason, then the notification is valid and points change. If the notification is challenged later, then the player may be penalized/awarded a number of points equal to the original award/penalty. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1929 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1930 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1930 by Proposal 3977 (Wes), 23 February 2000 text: If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime, e may be Penalized a number of Points equal to the Class of the Crime times 2. If a Player wins a contested Election, e may be Awarded 10 Points. If a Player Resigns from an Office, e may be Penalized 5 Points. If a Player is Impeached, e may be Penalized 15 Points. If a Revolt succeeds, each Rebellious Player may be Awarded 15 Points. If a Revolt fails, each Rebellious Player may be Penalized 10 Points. If a Player submits a Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded a number of Points equal to twice the number of AGAINST Votes cast on that Proposal. If a Player submits an Insane Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded 5 Points, in addition to any other Awards for that particular Proposal. If a Player is the only Player to Vote either FOR or AGAINST a particular Proposal that e did not write or Propose, e may be Awarded 10 Points. If a Judgement is Sustained on Appeal, the original Judge may be Awarded 5 Points If a Judgement is Overturned on Appeal, the original Judge may be Penalized 5 Points. If a Player gains a Patent Title, e may be Awarded 5 Points. If a Player is granted a Degree, e may be Awarded 10 Points. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4113 (Elysion), 2 March 2001 text: If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime, e may be Penalized a number of Points equal to the Class of the Crime times 2. If a Player wins a contested Election, e may be Awarded 10 Points. If a Player Resigns from an Office, e may be Penalized 5 Points. If a Player is Impeached, e may be Penalized 15 Points. If a Revolt succeeds, each Rebellious Player may be Awarded 15 Points. If a Revolt fails, each Rebellious Player may be Penalized 10 Points. If a Player submits a Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded a number of Points equal to twice the number of AGAINST Votes cast on that Proposal. If a Player submits an Insane Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded 5 Points, in addition to any other Awards for that particular Proposal. If a Player is the only Player to Vote either FOR or AGAINST a particular Proposal that e did not write or Propose, e may be Awarded 2 Points. If a Judgement is Sustained on Appeal, the original Judge may be Awarded 5 Points If a Judgement is Overturned on Appeal, the original Judge may be Penalized 5 Points. If a Player is granted a Degree, e may be Awarded 10 Points. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4141 (Wes), 15 April 2001 text: If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime, e may be Penalized a number of Points equal to the Class of the Crime times 2. If a Player wins a contested Election, e may be Awarded 10 Points. If a Player Resigns from an Office, e may be Penalized 5 Points. If a Player is Impeached, e may be Penalized 15 Points. If a Revolt succeeds, each Rebellious Player may be Awarded 15 Points. If a Revolt fails, each Rebellious Player may be Penalized 10 Points. If a Player submits a Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded a number of Points equal to twice the number of AGAINST Votes cast on that Proposal. If a Player submits an Insane Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded 5 Points, in addition to any other Awards for that particular Proposal. If a Player is the only Player to Vote either FOR or AGAINST a particular Proposal that e did not write or Propose, e may be Awarded 2 Points. If a Judgement is Sustained on Appeal, the original Judge may be Awarded 5 Points If a Judgement is Overturned on Appeal, the original Judge may be Penalized 5 Points. If a Player gains a Patent Title which e has not held during the 7 days prior to gaining it, e may be Awarded 5 Points. If a Player is granted a Degree e has not previously held, e may be Awarded 10 Points. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4320 (t), 28 May 2002 text: If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime, e may be Penalized a number of Points equal to the Class of the Crime times 2. If a Player wins a contested Election, e may be Awarded 10 Points. If a Player Resigns from an Office, e may be Penalized 5 Points. If a Player is Impeached, e may be Penalized 15 Points. If a Revolt succeeds, each Rebellious Player may be Awarded 15 Points. If a Revolt fails, each Rebellious Player may be Penalized 10 Points. If a Player submits a Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded a number of Points equal to twice the number of AGAINST Votes cast on that Proposal. If a Player is the only Player to Vote either FOR or AGAINST a particular Proposal that e did not write or Propose, e may be Awarded 2 Points. If a Judgement is Sustained on Appeal, the original Judge may be Awarded 5 Points If a Judgement is Overturned on Appeal, the original Judge may be Penalized 5 Points. If a Player gains a Patent Title which e has not held during the 7 days prior to gaining it, e may be Awarded 5 Points. If a Player is granted a Degree e has not previously held, e may be Awarded 10 Points. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4365 (Steve), 23 August 2002 text: (a) If a Player is found Guilty of a Crime, e may be Penalized a number of Points equal to the Class of the Crime times 2. (b) If a Player wins a contested Election, e may be Awarded 10 Points. (c) If a Player Resigns from an Office, e may be Penalized 5 Points. (d) If a Player is Impeached, e may be Penalized 15 Points. (e) If a Revolt succeeds, each Rebellious Player may be Awarded 15 Points. (f) If a Revolt fails, each Rebellious Player may be Penalized 10 Points. (g) If a Player submits a Disinterested Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded 1 Point, plus 1 Point for each vote that was cast AGAINST the Proposal. (h) If a Player submits an Interested Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded 4 Points, plus 1 Point for each vote that was cast AGAINST the Proposal. (i) If a Player is the only Player to Vote either FOR or AGAINST a particular Proposal that e did not write or Propose, e may be Awarded 2 Points. (j) If a Judgement is Sustained on Appeal, the original Judge may be Awarded 5 Points (k) If a Judgement is Overturned on Appeal, the original Judge may be Penalized 5 Points. (l) If a Player gains a Patent Title which e has not held during the 7 days prior to gaining it, e may be Awarded 5 Points. (m) If a Player is granted a Degree e has not previously held, e may be Awarded 10 Points. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4408 (OscarMeyr), 30 October 2002 text: (a) If a Player wins a contested Election, e may be Awarded 10 Points. (b) If a Player Resigns from an Office, e may be Penalized 5 Points. (c) If a Player is Impeached, e may be Penalized 15 Points. (d) If a Revolt succeeds, each Rebellious Player may be Awarded 15 Points. (e) If a Revolt fails, each Rebellious Player may be Penalized 10 Points. (f) If a Player submits a Disinterested Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded 1 Point, plus 1 Point for each vote that was cast AGAINST the Proposal. (g) If a Player submits an Interested Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded 4 Points, plus 1 Point for each vote that was cast AGAINST the Proposal. (h) If a Player is the only Player to Vote either FOR or AGAINST a particular Proposal that e did not write or Propose, e may be Awarded 2 Points. (i) If a Judgement is Sustained on Appeal, the original Judge may be Awarded 5 Points (j) If a Judgement is Overturned on Appeal, the original Judge may be Penalized 5 Points. (k) If a Player gains a Patent Title which e has not held during the 7 days prior to gaining it, e may be Awarded 5 Points. (l) If a Player is granted a Degree e has not previously held, e may be Awarded 10 Points. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4497 (Steve), 13 May 2003 text: (a) If a Player wins a contested Election, e may be Awarded 10 Points. (b) If a Player Resigns from an Office, e may be Penalized 5 Points. (c) If a Player is Impeached, e may be Penalized 15 Points. (d) If a Revolt succeeds, each Rebellious Player may be Awarded 15 Points. (e) If a Revolt fails, each Rebellious Player may be Penalized 10 Points. (f) If a Player submits a Disinterested Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded 1 Point, plus 1 Point for each vote that was cast AGAINST the Proposal. (g) If a Player submits an Interested Proposal which is Adopted, e may be Awarded 4 Points, plus 1 Point for each vote that was cast AGAINST the Proposal. (h) If a Player is the only Player to Vote either FOR or AGAINST a particular Proposal that e did not write or Propose, e may be Awarded 2 Points. (i) If a Judgement is Sustained on Appeal, the original Judge may be Awarded 5 Points (j) If a Judgement is Overturned on Appeal, the original Judge may be Penalized 5 Points. (k) If a Player gains a Historical Patent Title which e has not held during the 7 days prior to gaining it, e may be Awarded 5 Points. (l) If a Player is granted a Degree e has not previously held, e may be Awarded 10 Points. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1930 by Proposal 4502 (Peekee), 5 June 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1931 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1931 by Proposal 3977 (Wes), 23 February 2000 text: When a Win occurs, all persons possessing the Patent Title of Current Champion shall lose that Patent Title but shall gain the Patent Title of Champion instead. Immediately afterwards, whichever Player Won the Game (or Players, should multiple Players have Won the Game simultaneously) shall gain the Patent Title of Current Champion. At the beginning of each month, the Payroll Clerk shall pay out a number of Stems equal to one half the BOS to each Player that has held the Patent Title Current Champion for a total of at least 12 days in the preceding month. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4081 (Elysion), 30 October 2000 text: When a Win occurs, all persons possessing the Patent Title of Current Champion shall lose that Patent Title but shall gain the Patent Title of Champion instead. Immediately afterwards, whichever Player Won the Game (or Players, should multiple Players have Won the Game simultaneously) shall gain the Patent Title of Current Champion. At the beginning of each month, the Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Winner's Stipend to each Player that has held the Patent Title Current Champion for a total of at least 12 days in the preceding month. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 text: When a Win occurs, all persons Bearing the Patent Title of Current Champion shall have that Patent Title revoked but shall have the Patent Title of Champion awarded to them instead. Immediately afterwards, whichever Player Won the Game (or Players, should multiple Players have Won the Game simultaneously) shall be awarded the Patent Title of Current Champion. At the beginning of each month, the Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Winner's Stipend to each Player that has Borne the Patent Title Current Champion for a total of at least 12 days in the preceding month. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1931 by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1932 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1932 by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 text: The Oligarchy is a set of six positions which are filled by Players, who are called Oligarchs. No Player may ever occupy more than one position in the Oligarchy at any one time. The Oligarchy is divided into three ranks: High, Middle and Low. There is one High Oligarch, two Middle Oligarchs and three Low Oligarchs. The Speaker may never be an Oligarch. If an Oligarch becomes Speaker, e immediately ceases to be an Oligarch and eir position in the Oligarchy becomes vacant. If an Oligarch ceases to be a Player, is On Hold, is a Zombie, or has three or more Blots, e ceases to be an Oligarch and eir position in the Oligarchy becomes vacant. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4084 (Steve), 9 November 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 01-005 (Steve), 2 February 2001 text: The Oligarchy is a set of six positions which are filled by Players, who are called Oligarchs. No Player may ever occupy more than one position in the Oligarchy at any one time. A position is vacant if and only if it is not occupied; hence there is a vacancy in the Oligarchy only when there are fewer than six Oligarchs. There are three ranks within the Oligarchy, termed High, Middle, and Low. There are at most one High Oligarch and at most two Middle Oligarchs. There may be as many as six Low Oligarchs, but the normal number is three. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4111 (Elysion), 20 February 2001 text: The Oligarchy is a set of six positions which are filled by Players, who are called Oligarchs. No Player may ever occupy more than one position in the Oligarchy at any one time. A position is vacant if and only if it is not occupied; hence there is a vacancy in the Oligarchy only when there are fewer than six Oligarchs. There are three ranks within the Oligarchy, termed High, Middle, and Low. There are at most one High Oligarch and at most two Middle Oligarchs. There may be as many as six Low Oligarchs, but the normal number is three. An Oligarch may resign eir position in the Oligarchy by publicly announcing e does so. Upon such an announcement, e ceases to be an Oligarch and eir position becomes vacant. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 text: (a) The Oligarchy is the set of all Players who are Oligarchs. (b) An Oligarch may resign eir position in the Oligarchy by publicly announcing that e does so. Upon such an announcement, e ceases to be an Oligarch. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4555 (Elysion), 22 March 2004 text: Class is a stuck player switch with values Plebeian and Oligarch. A Plebeian may flip eir class if eir Potency is greater than or equal to the Potency Threshold. An Oligarch may flip eir class at any time. The Oligarchy is the set of all Players who are Oligarchs. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: The following Elements for Cards are defined: * Shares [X], where X is a positive integer. The Holder is considered to possess X shares (cumulative with any other Cards). The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: One Share Elements: Budgeted, Bleed [2], Shares [1] * Caption: Two Shares Elements: Budgeted, Bleed [4], Shares [2] * Caption: Three Shares Elements: Budgeted, Bleed [6], Shares [3] * Caption: Corporate Bankruptcy Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Shareholders] [3] Exploit: For a fee of 3 kudos, all Stock Cards are returned to the Deck. All cards with the Element "Shares [X]" are cumulatively known as the Stock Cards. An entity's Share Holdings is equal to the number of Shares possessed. The Number of Shares is the sum of the Share Holdings of all entities. A Shareholder is an Eligible Shareholder with positive Share Holdings. A Plebeian is a Player who is not a Shareholder. The Corporation is the set of all Shareholders. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: The following Elements for Cards are defined: * Shares [X], where X is a positive integer. The Holder is considered to possess X shares (cumulative with any other Cards). The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: One Share Elements: Budgeted, Shares [1] * Caption: Two Shares Elements: Budgeted, Shares [2] * Caption: Three Shares Elements: Budgeted, Shares [3] * Caption: Corporate Bankruptcy Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Shareholders] [3] Exploit: For a fee of 3 kudos, all Stock Cards are returned to the Deck. All cards with the Element "Shares [X]" are cumulatively known as the Stock Cards. An entity's Share Holdings is equal to the number of Shares possessed. The Number of Shares is the sum of the Share Holdings of all entities. A Shareholder is an Eligible Shareholder with positive Share Holdings. A Plebeian is a Player who is not a Shareholder. The Corporation is the set of all Shareholders. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4638 (root), 19 February 2005 text: The following Elements for Cards are defined: * Shares [X], where X is a positive integer. The Holder is considered to possess X shares (cumulative with any other Cards). The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: One Share Elements: Budgeted, Shares [1], Handed [2] * Caption: Two Shares Elements: Budgeted, Shares [2], Handed [3] * Caption: Three Shares Elements: Budgeted, Shares [3], Handed [4] * Caption: Corporate Bankruptcy Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Shareholders] [3] Exploit: For a fee of 3 kudos, all Stock Cards are returned to the Deck. All cards with the Element "Shares [X]" are cumulatively known as the Stock Cards. An entity's Share Holdings is equal to the number of Shares possessed. The Number of Shares is the sum of the Share Holdings of all entities. A Shareholder is an Eligible Shareholder with positive Share Holdings. A Plebeian is a Player who is not a Shareholder. The Corporation is the set of all Shareholders. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4668 (Quazie, Murphy), 9 April 2005 text: The following Elements for Cards are defined: * Shares [X], where X is a positive integer. The Holder is considered to possess X shares (cumulative with any other Cards). The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: One Share Elements: Budgeted, Shares [1], Handed [2] * Caption: Two Shares Elements: Budgeted, Shares [2], Handed [3] * Caption: Three Shares Elements: Budgeted, Shares [3], Handed [4] * Caption: Corporate Bankruptcy Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Shareholders] [3] Exploit: For a fee of 3 kudos, all Stock Cards are returned to the Deck. All cards with the Element "Shares [X]" are cumulatively known as the Stock Cards. An entity's Share Holdings is equal to the number of Shares possessed. The Number of Shares is the sum of the Share Holdings of all entities. A Shareholder is an Eligible Shareholder with positive Share Holdings. A Plebeian is a Player who is not a Shareholder. The Corporation is the set of all Shareholders. * Caption: Divide or Conquer Your Stock Quota: 8 Elements: Restricted [Shareholders] Exploit: Specify one or more Share cards in your hand, and one or more Share cards in the deck, such that both sets consist of the same total number of Shares. The specified cards in your hand are transferred to the deck, and the specified cards in the deck are transferred to your hand. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: All cards with the Element "Shares [X]" are cumulatively known as the Stock Cards. An entity's Share Holdings is equal to the number of Shares possessed. The Number of Shares is the sum of the Share Holdings of all entities. A Shareholder is an Eligible Shareholder with positive Share Holdings. A Plebeian is a Player who is not a Shareholder. The Corporation is the set of all Shareholders. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: All cards with the Element "Shares [X]" are cumulatively known as the Stock Cards. An entity's Share Holdings is equal to the number of Shares possessed by that entity. The Number of Shares is the sum of the Share Holdings of all entities. A Shareholder is an entity with positive Share Holdings. A Plebeian is a player who is not an eligible Shareholder. The Corporation is the set of all eligible Shareholders. To be valid, a ballot on an ordinary proposal must be submitted by an eligible Shareholder. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4829 (Maud), 30 July 2005 text: A Stock Card is a card with the Element "Shares [X]". The Share Holdings of an entity is the number of Shares possessed by that entity. The Number of Shares is the sum of the Share Holdings of all entities. A Shareholder is an entity with positive Share Holdings. A Plebeian is a player who is not a Shareholder. The Corporation is the collection of all Shareholders. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1932 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1933 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1933 by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3990, "Agora Abhors a Vacuum", (Murphy), 24 March 2000 text: An Ordinary Proposal is a Proposal on which only Oligarchs are permitted to vote. While a Proposal is an Ordinary Proposal, all non-Oligarchs are Denied for that Proposal. A Democratic Proposal is a Proposal on which all Voters are permitted to vote to the extent that other Rules permit them to do so. Unless another Rule with Power greater than or equal to 2 says otherwise, a Proposal with an Adoption Index of less than two is Ordinary, and a Proposal with an Adoption Index of two or greater is Democratic. However, any Proposal distributed while there are no Oligarchs is Democratic, even if its Adoption Index is less than two. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: Every Proposal is either Ordinary or Democratic. A Proposal is Ordinary unless (a) the Proposal has an Adoption Index of two (2) or greater; (b) the Proposal was distributed at a time when there were fewer than three Oligarchs; or (c) the Proposal is made Democratic by the operation of an instrument with Power greater than or equal to two (2). history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4111 (Elysion), 20 February 2001 text: Every Proposal is either Ordinary or Democratic. A Proposal is Ordinary unless (a) the Proposal has an Adoption Index of two (2) or greater; (b) the Proposal is made Democratic as specified by an instrument with Power greater than or equal to two (2). history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4282 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: Every Proposal shall be in (or have) exactly one defined Chamber out of the following possibile Chambers: (A) Ordinary; (B) Democratic; (C) Parliamentary. Rules to the nonwithstanding, a Proposal can never be Ordinary if its Adoption Index is two (2) or greater. Every Proposals is initially Ordinary unless the above limitation applies to it, in which case it is initially Democratic. The Chamber of a Proposal may only be changed as specified by an instrument with Power greater than or equal to two (2). history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4539 (Goethe), 16 November 2003 text: Chamber is a stuck switch for Proposals with values Ordinary and Democratic. Rules to the nonwithstanding, a Proposal can never be Ordinary if its Adoption Index is two (2) or greater. Every Proposals is initially Ordinary unless the above limitation applies to it, in which case it is initially Democratic. The Chamber of a Proposal may only be changed as specified by an instrument with Power greater than or equal to two (2). history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4570 (Elysion), 2 May 2004 text: Chamber is a stuck switch for Proposals with values Ordinary and Democratic. An Ordinary Proposal with Adoption Index of two (2) or greater is a Stalled Proposal. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a Stalled Proposal may not be distributed. If a proposal is distributed that was Stalled at the time of distribution, the Promotor shall abort it as soon as possible. Every Proposal is initially Democratic, unless its Adoption Index is less than two (2), in which case it is initially Ordinary. The Chamber of a Proposal may only be changed as specified by an instrument with Power greater than or equal to two (2). history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4590 (Elysion), 4 July 2004 text: Chamber is a stuck switch for Proposals with values Ordinary and Democratic. An Ordinary Proposal with Adoption Index of two (2) or greater is a Stalled Proposal. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a Proposal is Undistributable while it is Stalled. If a proposal is distributed that was Stalled at the time of distribution, the Promotor shall abort it as soon as possible. Every Proposal is initially Democratic, unless its Adoption Index is less than two (2), in which case it is initially Ordinary. The Chamber of a Proposal may only be changed as specified by an instrument with Power greater than or equal to two (2). history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4599 (root), 11 July 2004 text: Chamber is a stuck switch for Proposals with values Ordinary and Democratic. An Ordinary Proposal with Adoption Index of two (2) or greater is a Stalled Proposal. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a Proposal is Undistributable while it is Stalled. If a proposal is distributed that was Stalled at the time of distribution, the Promotor shall abort it as soon as possible. Every Proposal is initially Democratic, unless its Adoption Index is less than two (2), in which case it is initially Ordinary. The Chamber of a Proposal may only be changed as specified by an instrument with Power greater than or equal to two (2). Whenever a Proposal's Chamber is changed while the Proposal is in its Voting Period, it is Aborted as described elsewhere and returned to the Proposal Pool with its Distributability and other characteristics intact. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: Chamber is a stuck proposal switch with values democratic and ordinary. An ordinary proposal with adoption index of two or greater is stalled. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a proposal is undistributable while it is stalled. If a proposal is distributed that was stalled at the time of distribution, its chamber shall immediately and automatically be flipped to democratic. While a proposal is in the Proposal Pool, its proposer may flip its chamber by announcement. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would permit the chamber of a proposal to be changed. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4836 (Goethe, Maud), 2 October 2005 text: Chamber is a stuck proposal switch with values ordinary and democratic. The default chamber for a proposal with an adoption index of at least 2 is democratic. An ordinary proposal with an adoption index of two or greater is stalled. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a stalled proposal is undistributable, and if a proposal is distributed that was stalled at the time of distribution, its chamber shall immediately and automatically be set to democratic. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4863 (Goethe), 30 May 2006 text: Chamber is a stuck proposal switch with values ordinary and democratic. An ordinary proposal with an adoption index of two or greater is stalled. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a stalled proposal is undistributable, and if a proposal is distributed that was stalled at the time of distribution, its chamber shall immediately and automatically be set to democratic. If the Promotor knowingly distributes a stalled proposal, e commits the class 4 crime of Improper Debate. Any player can flip the Chamber of a stalled proposal to democratic without objection. The Speaker can flip the Chamber of a stalled proposal to democratic with support. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1933 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1934 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1934 by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 3990, "Agora Abhors a Vacuum", (Murphy), 26 March 2000 text: The Speaker may change a Proposal which would otherwise be an Ordinary Proposal into a Democratic Proposal, with three Supporters, provided that that the Voting Period for the Proposal has not yet concluded (the change may occur before the Voting Period commences). If a Proposal changes from being an Ordinary Proposal to being a Democratic Proposal during its Voting Period, then all votes which were cast on the Proposal prior to the change are cancelled, and its Voting Period is extended to end seven days after it became a Democratic Proposal. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4049 (Elysion), 15 August 2000 text: An Untainted Speaker may change a Proposal which would otherwise be an Ordinary Proposal into a Democratic Proposal, with three Supporters, provided that that the Voting Period for the Proposal has not yet concluded (the change may occur before the Voting Period commences). If a Proposal changes from being an Ordinary Proposal to being a Democratic Proposal during its Voting Period, then all votes which were cast on the Proposal prior to the change are cancelled, and its Voting Period is extended to end seven days after it became a Democratic Proposal. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4145 (Ian), 22 April 2001 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: An Untainted Speaker may declare an Interested Proposal, which would otherwise be an Ordinary Proposal, for which the Voting Period has not yet concluded, and which has never been Contested, a Sane Proposal, With 3 Supporters. This declaration may occur before the Voting Period commences; if it does, then this supported declaration turns the Proposal into a Democratic Proposal, and makes it Sane, requiring its Distribution Cost to be modified as required by other Rules. If this supported declaration occurs during the Voting Period for the Proposal, then the Proposal is not modified unless at least one Papyrus is transferred to the Bank for this stated purpose by any Player. If this transfer occurs, then the Proposal becomes Democratic and Sane, all Votes already cast on the Proposal prior to the change are cancelled and its Voting Period is extended to end seven days after it became a Sane Proposal. Any Player may Contest an Interested Proposal, which would otherwise be an Ordinary Proposal and for which the Voting Period has not yet concluded, by sending a message to the Public Forum stating e is doing so. If this Player is an Untainted Speaker, then the Proposal becomes Contested when e receives three Supporters. If this Player is not an Untainted Speaker, then the Proposal becomes Contested if and only if e receives three Supporters and e publicly transfers 0.1VE to the Bank for the Contest. If a Proposal is Contested, any Player may publicly transfer any number of VEs to the Bank with a clear. unambiguous statement that this transfer is made either for or against the Contest. At the end of the Voting Period, the Contest is Succesful if strictly more VEs have been publicly transferred to the Bank for the Contest than have been publicly transferred to the Bank against the Contest. If equal numbers of VEs have been publicly transferred to the Bank both for and against the Contest, then the Contest is Succesful only if the Proposal was Contested by an Untainted Speaker. If the Contest is not Succesful, the Voting Period is considered to have ended, and the Proposal is considered an ordinary Ordinary Proposal for any further actions. If the Contest is Succesful, then all Votes cast on the Proposal are cancelled. The Proposal becomes a Democratic Proposal. The Voting Period is considered not to have ended, and is extended a further seven days. The Assessor shall be required to determine whether or not the Contest is Succesful, and shall report any results of this determination as soon as possible. text: An Untainted Speaker may declare an Interested Proposal, which would otherwise be an Ordinary Proposal, for which the Voting Period has not yet concluded, and which has never been Contested, a Sane Proposal, With 3 Supporters. This declaration may occur before the Voting Period commences; if it does, then this supported declaration turns the Proposal into a Democratic Proposal, and makes it Sane, requiring its Distribution Cost to be modified as required by other Rules. If this supported declaration occurs during the Voting Period for the Proposal, then the Proposal is not modified unless at least one Papyrus is transferred to the Bank for this stated purpose by any Player. If this transfer occurs, then the Proposal becomes Democratic and Sane, all Votes already cast on the Proposal prior to the change are cancelled and its Voting Period is extended to end seven days after it became a Sane Proposal. Any Player may Contest an Interested Proposal, which would otherwise be an Ordinary Proposal and for which the Voting Period has not yet concluded, by sending a message to the Public Forum stating e is doing so. If this Player is an Untainted Speaker, then the Proposal becomes Contested when e receives three Supporters. If this Player is not an Untainted Speaker, then the Proposal becomes Contested if and only if e receives three Supporters and e publicly transfers 0.1VE to the Bank for the Contest. If a Proposal is Contested, any Player may publicly transfer any number of VEs to the Bank with a clear. unambiguous statement that this transfer is made either for or against the Contest. At the end of the Voting Period, the Contest is Succesful if strictly more VEs have been publicly transferred to the Bank for the Contest than have been publicly transferred to the Bank against the Contest. If equal numbers of VEs have been publicly transferred to the Bank both for and against the Contest, then the Contest is Succesful only if the Proposal was Contested by an Untainted Speaker. If the Contest is not Succesful, the Voting Period is considered to have ended, and the Proposal is considered an ordinary Ordinary Proposal for any further actions. If the Contest is Succesful, then all Votes cast on the Proposal are cancelled. The Proposal becomes a Democratic Proposal. The Voting Period is considered not to have ended, and is extended a further seven days. The Assessor shall be required to determine whether or not the Contest is Succesful, and shall report any results of this determination as soon as possible. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4187 (neil), 18 July 2001 text: An Untainted Speaker may, with 3 Supporters, Sanitise an Interested Proposal which would otherwise be an Ordinary Proposal, for which the Voting Period has not yet concluded, and which has never been the subject of an Attempt to Democratise. If a Proposal is Sanitised before its Voting Period commences, said Proposal becomes a Democratic Proposal, becomes a Sane Proposal, and has its Distribution Cost modified as required by other Rules. If a Proposal is Sanitised during its Voting Period, said Proposal is not modified until at least one Papyrus is publicly transferred to the Bank solely for this stated purpose by any Player during the Proposal's Voting Period. If this happens, the Proposal becomes a Democratic Proposal, the Proposal becomes a Sane Proposal, and all votes thus far cast on the Proposal are cancelled. The Assessor shall announce that the Proposal has been successfully Sanitised; the Voting Period of the Proposal is extended to end seven days after this announcement. Any Player may, With Support, make an Attempt to Democratise an Interested Proposal which would otherwise be an Ordinary Proposal, and for which the Voting Period has not yet concluded. There is a Fee of 0.1 VEs for a Player other than an Untainted Speaker to make an Attempt to Democratise. This Fee must be paid publicly. Once an Attempt to Democratise a Proposal has been made, until the end of the Proposal's Voting Period, any Player may publicly transfer any number of VEs to the Bank with a clear, unambiguous statement that this transfer is made solely for the purpose of Democratising the Proposal, or solely for the purpose of keeping the Proposal Ordinary. At the end of the Voting Period, Democratisation succeeds if at least as many VEs have been publicly transferred to the Bank for Democratisating the Proposal as for keeping the Proposal Ordinary. The Assessor shall announce as soon as possible after the end of the Voting Period whether or not Democratisation of that Proposal has succeeded. If Democratisation does not succeed, the Voting Period is considered to have ended as usual. The Attempt does not in any way modify the Proposal in question. If Democratisation succeeds, the Proposal becomes a Democratic Proposal, and all Votes thus far cast on the Proposal are cancelled. The Voting Period for that Proposal is considered not to have ended (except for the purposes of this Attempt to Democratise), and is extended to end seven days after the Assessor's announcement that Democratisation has succeeded. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1934 by Proposal 4254 (Goethe), 21 February 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1935 history: Created text: Subject to the qualifications below, the High Oligarch must cast three votes, a Middle Oligarch two votes, and a Low Oligarch one vote, on any Ordinary Proposal on which e votes at all. A Player who becomes an Oligarch during the Voting Period of an Ordinary Proposal may not vote on that Proposal (unless the Proposal becomes a Democratic Proposal). An Oligarch who changes rank during the Voting Period of an Ordinary Proposal must cast as many votes as the lower rank entitles em to cast, if e casts any votes at all on that Proposal (again, this provision applies only as long the Proposal remains an Ordinary Proposal). Multiple votes cast by an Oligarch on an Ordinary Proposal must be either all FOR or all AGAINST. Oligarchs may not declare Presence on an Ordinary Proposal. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1936 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1936 by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4000 (Steve), 2 May 2000 text: Whenever an Auction is conducted to fill a position or positions in the Oligarchy, the standard Auction procedure is used, with the following additions and exceptions: (a) Auction Currency: the Auction Currency is Voting Tokens; (b) Bidders: neither the Speaker, the Speaker-Elect, nor any Oligarch may bid; (c) Cancelling Bids: if a Player ceases to be a Player, goes On Hold, becomes a Zombie, or becomes an Oligarch during the Auction, all eir bids in the Auction are cancelled. (d) Winning Bids: when the Auctions ends, the winning bids are the N largest uncancelled bids made by different Players who are not Oligarchs. If simultaneous Auctions are being held for positions in different ranks of the Oligarchy, then the winning bids are the N largest uncancelled bids made by different Players who are neither Oligarchs nor have made a winning bid in an Auction for a higher ranking position in the Oligarchy. (e) Defaulting: a winning bidder has one week from the time e is billed by the Auctioneer for eir winning bid in which to pay the bill. If the bill remains unpaid for more than a week, then the winning bidder is considered to have defaulted. In that case, the Auctioneer shall vacate the bill, penalise the defaulting bidder 2 Blots, and conduct a fresh Auction for that position. Other winning bidders in the same Auction who have not defaulted are not affected. A winning Bidder fills the position in the Oligarchy for which e bid when the Payment Order executed by the Auctioneer billing em for eir bid in the Auction is satisfied. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4073 (Elysion), 20 September 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4084 (Steve), 9 November 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 01-005 (Steve), 2 February 2001 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(6) by Proposal 535[2001] (Elysion), 2 February 2001 text: Whenever an Auction is conducted to fill a position or positions in the Oligarchy, the standard Auction procedure is used, with the following additions and exceptions: (a) Auction Currency: the Auction Currency is Stems. (b) Bidders: Only Politicians may bid. The Speaker, the Speaker-Elect, all Zombies, and all Oligarchs may not bid. (c) If a bidder ceases to be a Player, goes On Hold, or becomes a Zombie, an Oligarch, the Speaker or the Speaker-Elect during the Auction, then all eir bids in the Auction are cancelled. (d) Winning bids: when the Auctions ends, the winning bids are the N largest uncancelled bids made by different Players who are not Oligarchs, where N is the number of positions being Auctioned. (e) Defaulting: a winning bidder has one week from the time e is billed by the Auctioneer for eir winning bid in which to pay the bill. If the bill remains unpaid for more than one week, then the winning bidder is considered to have defaulted. In that case, the Auctioneer shall forgive the debt and penalise the defaulting bidder 2 Blots. A position in the Oligarchy is pending if the position is vacant, an Auction has been held for that position and a winning bidder determined, and the winning bidder has not defaulted. When a winning bidder pays the bill for eir winning bid in the Auction, e becomes a Low Oligarch, provided the position is pending. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 text: (a) As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the GWotO shall auction off a number of Oligarchy positions equal to the Oligarchy Auction Rate. The GWotO shall conduct the Auction according to one of the Rules-defined Auction Procedures, with the following modifications: (1) Auction Currency: the Auction Currency is Stems. (2) Bidders: Only non-Oligarchy Politicians who are eligible to be Oligarchs may bid. (3) If a bidder becomes an Oligarch or becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, then all eir bids in the Auction are cancelled. (4) Winning bids: when the Auctions ends, the winning bids are the N largest valid uncancelled bids made by different Players who are not Oligarchs, where N is the number of positions being Auctioned. (5) Defaulting: a winning bidder has one week from the time e is billed by the Auctioneer for eir winning bid in which to pay the bill. If the bill remains unpaid for more than one week, then the winning bidder is considered to have defaulted. In that case, the Auctioneer shall forgive the debt and penalise the defaulting bidder 2 Blots. (b) When a winning bidder pays the bill for eir winning bid in the Auction, e becomes an Oligarch. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4307 (Steve), 28 May 2002 text: (a) As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the GWotO shall auction off a number of Oligarchy positions equal to the Oligarchy Auction Rate. The GWotO shall conduct the Auction according to one of the Rules-defined Auction Procedures, with the following modifications: (1) Auction Currency: the Auction Currency is Stems. (2) Bidders: Only non-Oligarchy Active Players who are eligible to be Oligarchs may bid. (3) If a bidder becomes an Oligarch or becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, then all eir bids in the Auction are cancelled. (4) Winning bids: when the Auctions ends, the winning bids are the N largest valid uncancelled bids made by different Players who are not Oligarchs, where N is the number of positions being Auctioned. (5) Defaulting: a winning bidder has one week from the time e is billed by the Auctioneer for eir winning bid in which to pay the bill. If the bill remains unpaid for more than one week, then the winning bidder is considered to have defaulted. In that case, the Auctioneer shall forgive the debt and penalise the defaulting bidder 2 Blots. (b) A winning bidder becomes an Oligarch upon paying the bill for eir winning bid if e is a Politician, or upon paying both the bill for eir winning bid and the Base Seating Fee if e is not a Politician. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4371 (Steve), 6 September 2002 text: (a) As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the GWotO shall auction off a number of Oligarchy positions equal to the Oligarchy Auction Rate. The GWotO shall conduct the Auction according to one of the Rules-defined Auction Procedures, with the following modifications: (1) Auction Currency: the Auction Currency is Stems. (2) Bidders: Only non-Oligarchy Active Players who are eligible to be Oligarchs may bid. (3) If a bidder becomes an Oligarch or becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, then all eir bids in the Auction are cancelled. (4) Winning bids: when the Auctions ends, the winning bids are the N largest valid uncancelled bids made by different Players who are not Oligarchs, where N is the number of positions being Auctioned. (b) A winning bidder becomes an Oligarch upon paying the bill for eir winning bid if e is a Politician, or upon paying both the bill for eir winning bid and the Base Seating Fee if e is not a Politician. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: (a) Any Player eligible to do so may become an Oligarch at any time, by announcing that they do so. The fee associated with this action is the Oligarchy Charge Requirement if the Player is not a Politician, and half the Oligarchy Charge Requirement if the Player is a Politician. (b) By default, a Player remains an Oligarch for a period of time equal to the Oligarchic Term. The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy shall remove a Player from the Oligarchy by public announcement, as soon as possible after eir term expires. Other rules may cause Players to cease to be Oligarchs. (c) An Oligarch may extend their term of service by a length of time equal to the Oligarchic Term at any time by announcement. The Fee associated with this action is the same as the fee for becoming an Oligarch. (d) The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy is reponsible for tracking membership of the Oligarchy, and individual Oligarchs' terms of service. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4534 (OscarMeyr), 8 November 2003 text: (a) Any Player eligible to do so may become an Oligarch at any time, by announcing that they do so. The fee associated with this action is the Oligarchy Charge Requirement if the Player is not a Politician, and half the Oligarchy Charge Requirement if the Player is a Politician. (b) When a Player's Term of Service expires, the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy shall remove that Player from the Oligarchy. (c) An Oligarch may extend their term of service by a length of time equal to the Oligarchic Term at any time by announcement. The Fee associated with this action is the same as the fee for becoming an Oligarch. (d) The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy is reponsible for tracking membership of the Oligarchy, and individual Oligarchs' terms of service. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1936 by Proposal 4555 (Elysion), 22 March 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1937 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1937 by Proposal 3980 (Steve), 1 March 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4000 (Steve), 2 May 2000 text: Vacancies in the Oligarchy are filled as follows, in order. 1) If there is no High Oligarch: a) The Low Oligarchs select a Middle Oligarch to become High Oligarch. b) If there are no Low Oligarchs, then the Speaker selects a Middle Oligarch to become High Oligarch. c) If there are no Middle Oligarchs, then the Speaker selects a Low Oligarch to become High Oligarch. d) If there are no Middle Oligarchs or Low Oligarchs, then the Speaker conducts three Auctions: one for High Oligarch, one for the two Middle Oligarchs, and one for as many Low Oligarch positions for which no Auction is already in progress. 2) If a Middle Oligarch position is vacant: a) The High Oligarch selects a Low Oligarch to become a Middle Oligarch. b) If there are no Low Oligarchs, then the High Oligarch conducts a single Auction for L+M positions in the Oligarchy, where L and M are, respectively, the number of vacant Low and Middle Oligarch positions for which no Auction is already in progress. The High Oligarch then selects M of the new Oligarchs to be Middle Oligarchs. 3) If a Low Oligarch position is vacant: a) The High Oligarch conducts an Auction for the number of Low Oligarchy positions for which no Auction is already in progress. For the purposes of this Rule, an Auction for a position or positions in the Oligarchy is 'in progress' from the time the Auction starts until either the positions are filled, or one week has passed from the latest time at which the Auctioneer billed any of the winning bidders in the Auction for eir winning bid, whichever comes first. Any selection required by this Rule must be announced within three days. A Player may not change eir selection once e has announced it. A Player required to make selection who fails to do so within three days commits the Class 2 Infraction of Oligardiness, which any Player may detect and report. Selections performed by two or more Oligarchs are by majority vote. If a single Oligarch who is required to make a selection fails to do so, or if a selection to be performed by majority vote does not produce a decisive result within three days, then the Oligarchs' selections (if any) are cancelled and the Speaker is required to make the selection instead. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4053 (harvel), 21 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4073c (Elysion), 26 September 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4084 (Steve), 9 November 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4098 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: When there are six Oligarchs and a number of Low Oligarchs other than three, the Oligarchy is "abnormally distributed", and an Oligarchy selection takes place as set out below. After a Player has become an Oligarch, or an Oligarch has changed rank, then if the Oligarchy is abnormally distributed, the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy shall, within three days, publish a list of the Oligarchs and their ranks, identifying those Players who are required to make the selection, and the set of Players from whom the selection is to be made. Failure to do so is the Class 2 Infraction of Oligardiness, which may be reported by any Player. However, if the Oligarchy selection occurs before the GWoTO publishes the list, the GWoTO is relieved of eir obligation to publish it. Whenever there are six Oligarchs, and no High Oligarch, the Low Oligarchs are permitted to select a Middle Oligarch to become the new High Oligarch. If there are no Middle Oligarchs, the Low Oligarchs shall instead select one of their own number to become the new High Oligarch. The immediately prior High Oligarch may not be selected as the new High Oligarch, if e is presently a Low Oligarch. Whenever there are six Oligarchs, a High Oligarch, and fewer than two Middle Oligarchs, the High Oligarch is permitted to select a Low Oligarch to become Middle Oligarch. When a selection from a set of one candidate is to be made, that candidate is selected immediately without any action by any Player. When a selection from a set of two or more candidates is to be made, and that selection is not to be made by the Speaker, the individual or individuals who are to make the selection shall announce their recommendations in the Public Forum. They are permitted to make their recommendations from the time the Oligarchy becomes abnormally distributed. They are required to make their recommendations within three days of the GWoTO's announcement. Recommendations, once made, cannot be changed. The selection occurs when one candidate has received the recommendation of a majority of those persons required to make a recommendation. If three days pass from the GWoTO's announcement without one candidate receiving the recommendation of a majority, then if there is a candidate which has received more recommendations than any other candidate, that candidate is selected; otherwise, the decision passes to the Speaker, and the Speaker shall make the selection. When a selection from a set of two or more candidates is to be made, and that selection is required to be made by the Speaker, the Speaker shall make eir selection within seven days by announcing it in the Public Forum. A Speaker who fails to make such a selection becomes Tainted. If, at the time a Player becomes Speaker, the previous Speaker was required to make a selection by this Rule and had not yet done so, the new Speaker shall be instead required to make the selection, and shall do so within seven days of becoming Speaker, or become Tainted. If a vacancy in the Oligarchy arises when the Oligarchy is abnormally distributed, then the Oligarchy selection and all requirements on Players arising from it are cancelled. Any Player required to make a recommendation by this Rule who fails to do so within the allotted time commits the Class 2 Infraction of Oligardiness; this Infraction may be reported by any Player. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4185 (Ziggy), 18 July 2001 text: When there are six Oligarchs and a number of Low Oligarchs other than three, the Oligarchy is "abnormally distributed", and an Oligarchy selection takes place as set out below. After a Player has become an Oligarch, or an Oligarch has changed rank, then if the Oligarchy is abnormally distributed, the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy shall, within three days, publish a list of the Oligarchs and their ranks, identifying those Players who are required to make the selection, and the set of Players from whom the selection is to be made. Failure to do so is the Class 1 Infraction of Oligardiness, which may be reported by any Player. However, if the Oligarchy selection occurs before the GWoTO publishes the list, the GWoTO is relieved of eir obligation to publish it. Whenever there are six Oligarchs, and no High Oligarch, the Low Oligarchs are permitted to select a Middle Oligarch to become the new High Oligarch. If there are no Middle Oligarchs, the Low Oligarchs shall instead select one of their own number to become the new High Oligarch. The immediately prior High Oligarch may not be selected as the new High Oligarch, if e is presently a Low Oligarch. Whenever there are six Oligarchs, a High Oligarch, and fewer than two Middle Oligarchs, the High Oligarch is permitted to select a Low Oligarch to become Middle Oligarch. When a selection from a set of one candidate is to be made, that candidate is selected immediately without any action by any Player. When a selection from a set of two or more candidates is to be made, and that selection is not to be made by the Speaker, the individual or individuals who are to make the selection shall announce their recommendations in the Public Forum. They are permitted to make their recommendations from the time the Oligarchy becomes abnormally distributed. They are required to make their recommendations within three days of the GWoTO's announcement. Recommendations, once made, cannot be changed. The selection occurs when one candidate has received the recommendation of a majority of those persons required to make a recommendation. If three days pass from the GWoTO's announcement without one candidate receiving the recommendation of a majority, then if there is a candidate which has received more recommendations than any other candidate, that candidate is selected; otherwise, the decision passes to the Speaker, and the Speaker shall make the selection. When a selection from a set of two or more candidates is to be made, and that selection is required to be made by the Speaker, the Speaker shall make eir selection within seven days by announcing it in the Public Forum. A Speaker who fails to make such a selection becomes Tainted. If, at the time a Player becomes Speaker, the previous Speaker was required to make a selection by this Rule and had not yet done so, the new Speaker shall be instead required to make the selection, and shall do so within seven days of becoming Speaker, or become Tainted. If a vacancy in the Oligarchy arises when the Oligarchy is abnormally distributed, then the Oligarchy selection and all requirements on Players arising from it are cancelled. Any Player required to make a recommendation by this Rule who fails to do so within the allotted time commits the Class 1 Infraction of Oligardiness; this Infraction may be reported by any Player. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1937 by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1938 [History is unresolved for this rule. Not attempting to show texts.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1939 history: Created, ca. Mar. or Apr. 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1940 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1940 by Proposal 3998 (harvel), 2 May 2000 text: The Rules may designate certain compensations to be periodic compensations. As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, each periodic compensation required to be paid out shall be paid out by the Officer required to do so. The Minimum Income, the Distributor's Gratuity, the Speaker's Gratuity, and the Salary for each wage-earning Office are periodic compensations. The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Minimum Income to each Player, and shall further pay out to each Player the designated Salary for each Office that Player held for at least 12 days of the previous month. The Registrar shall pay out the Distributor's Gratuity to the Distributor if the Distributor is a Player and was both the Distributor and a Player for at least 12 days of the previous month. The Registrar shall pay out the Speaker's Gratuity to a Player if that Player was Speaker for the whole of the previous month. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4081 (Elysion), 30 October 2000 text: The Rules may designate certain compensations to be periodic compensations. As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, each periodic compensation required to be paid out shall be paid out by the Officer required to do so. The Minimum Income, the Distributor's Gratuity, the Speaker's Gratuity, and the Salary for each wage-earning Office are periodic compensations. The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Minimum Income to each Player, and shall further pay out to each Player the designated Salary for each Office that Player held for at least 12 days of the previous month. The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Distributor's Gratuity to the Distributor if the Distributor is a Player and was both the Distributor and a Player for at least 12 days of the previous month. The Registrar shall pay out the Speaker's Gratuity to a Player if that Player was Speaker for the whole of the previous month. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4140 (Wes), 15 April 2001 text: The Rules may designate certain compensations to be periodic compensations. As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, each periodic compensation required to be paid out shall be paid out by the Officer required to do so. The Minimum Income, the Distributor's Gratuity, the Speaker's Gratuity, and the Salary for each Office are periodic compensations. The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Minimum Income to each Player, and shall further pay out to each Player the designated Salary for each Office that Player held for at least 12 days of the previous month. The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Distributor's Gratuity to the Distributor if the Distributor is a Player and was both the Distributor and a Player for at least 12 days of the previous month. The Registrar shall pay out the Speaker's Gratuity to a Player if that Player was Speaker for the whole of the previous month. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4179 (Taral), 7 July 2001 text: The Rules may designate certain compensations to be periodic compensations. As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, each periodic compensation required to be paid out shall be paid out by the Officer required to do so. The Minimum Income, the Distributor's Gratuity, the Speaker's Gratuity, and the Salary for each Office are periodic compensations. The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Minimum Income to each Player, and shall further pay out to each Player the designated Salary for each Office that Player held for at least 16 days of the previous month. The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Distributor's Gratuity to the Distributor if the Distributor is a Player and was both the Distributor and a Player for at least 16 days of the previous month. The Registrar shall pay out the Speaker's Gratuity to a Player if that Player was Speaker for the whole of the previous month. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4260 (Goethe), 21 February 2002 text: The Rules may designate certain compensations to be periodic compensations. At the beginning of each month, each periodic compensation required to be paid out shall be paid out by the Officer required to do so. The Minimum Income, the Distributor's Gratuity, the Speaker's Gratuity, and the Salary for each Office are periodic compensations. The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Minimum Income to each Player, and shall further pay out to each Player the designated Salary for each Office that Player held for at least 16 days of the previous month. The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Distributor's Gratuity to the Distributor if the Distributor is a Player and was both the Distributor and a Player for at least 16 days of the previous month. The Registrar shall pay out the Speaker's Gratuity to a Player if that Player was Speaker for the whole of the previous month. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4361 (Steve), 16 August 2002 text: (a) The Rules may designate certain compensations to be periodic compensations. At the beginning of each month, each periodic compensation required to be paid out shall be paid out by the Officer required to do so. (b) The Minimum Income, the Distributor's Gratuity, the Speaker's Gratuity, and the Salary for each Office are periodic compensations. (c) The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Minimum Income to each Player, and shall further pay out to each Player the designated Salary for each Office that Player held for at least 16 days of the previous month. (d) The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Distributor's Gratuity to the Distributor if the Distributor is a Player and was both the Distributor and a Player for at least 16 days of the previous month. (e) The Registrar shall pay out the Speaker's Gratuity to a Player if that Player was Speaker for at least 16 days of the previous month. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4385 (Steve), 17 September 2002 text: (a) The Rules may designate certain compensations to be periodic compensations. At the beginning of each month, each periodic compensation required to be paid out shall be paid out by the Officer required to do so. (b) The Minimum Income, the Distributor's Gratuity, the Speaker's Gratuity, and the Salary for each Office are periodic compensations. (c) The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Minimum Income to each active Player, and shall further pay out to each Player the designated Salary for each Office that Player held for at least 16 days of the previous month. (d) The Payroll Clerk shall pay out the Distributor's Gratuity to the Distributor if the Distributor is a Player and was both the Distributor and a Player for at least 16 days of the previous month. (e) The Registrar shall pay out the Speaker's Gratuity to a Player if that Player was Speaker for at least 16 days of the previous month. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: The boon of Public Service exists for the purpose of awarding Officers for serving. As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the Assistant Director of Personnel shall award: (A) 1 Public Service Boon for each Office, to the Player (if any) who held that Office for 16 or more days in the previous month; (B) 1 Public Service Boon to the Player (if any) who was Speaker for at least 16 days of the previous month. (C) 1 Public Service Boon to the Distributor if the Distributor is a Player and was both the Distributor and a Player for at least 16 days of the previous month. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4697 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: The boon of Public Service exists for the purpose of awarding Officers for serving. Paperwork is a stuck switch for Offices with states Low and High. The Assistant Director of Personnel is the recordkeepor for paperwork. For the purpose of this rule, the Speaker and the Distributor are considered offices. The Assistant Director of Personnel or the Speaker may switch the paperwork of an office with two supporters and without two objections. As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the Assistant Director of Personnel shall award 1 Public Service Boon for each office to the player (if any) who held that office for 16 or more days in the previous month; e shall award an additional Public Service boon to that player if the office is a high paperwork office. Each office may make one Proposal distributable per month without payment of a fee, by the electee of that office publicly invoking that office's Civil Service Exemption. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4768 (root), 25 May 2005 text: The boon of Public Service exists for the purpose of awarding Officers for serving. Paperwork is a stuck switch for Offices with states Low and High. The Associate Director of Personnel is the recordkeepor for paperwork. For the purpose of this rule, the Speaker and the Distributor are considered offices. The Associate Director of Personnel or the Speaker may switch the paperwork of an office with two supporters and without two objections. As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the Associate Director of Personnel shall award 1 Public Service Boon for each office to the player (if any) who held that office for 16 or more days in the previous month; e shall award an additional Public Service boon to that player if the office is a high paperwork office. Each office may make one Proposal distributable per month without payment of a fee, by the electee of that office publicly invoking that office's Civil Service Exemption. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4819 (root, Maud), 10 July 2005 text: The boon of Public Service exists for the purpose of awarding officers for serving. Paperwork is a stuck switch for offices with states low and high. The Associate Director of Personnel (ADoP) is the recordkeepor for paperwork. For the purpose of this rule, the Speaker and the Distributor are considered offices. The ADoP or the Speaker may flip the paperwork of an office with two supporters and without two objections. As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the ADoP shall award 1 Public Service Boon for each office to the player (if any) who held that office for 16 or more days in the previous month; e shall award an additional Public Service boon to that player if the office is a high paperwork office. While a player is electee to an office, e may make one proposal distributable per month by publicly invoking that office's Civil Service Exemption, even if this would cause em to exceed eir per-player proposal limit. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1940 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1941 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1941 by Proposal 4011 (Wes), 1 June 2000 text: A Fee is a specific quantity of some particular Currency explicitly designated as such by the Rules. To Pay a Fee is to transfer the specified quantity of that particular Currency to the Bank if and only if that transfer is made solely for the purpose of Paying that particular instance of that Fee. If the Rules specify that a particular action is associated with a Fee, or that a Fee is required for a particular action, then the entity performing the action shall Pay the Fee either before performing said action (but not more than 72 hours beforehand) or in the same email as the action is performed, else the action shall not occur. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: If the Rules associate a non-negative cost, price, charge, or fee with an action, that action is a fee-based action. If the specified cost is not an integer, the actual fee is the next highest integer. To perform a fee-based action, a Player (the Actor) who is otherwise permitted to perform the action must announce that e is performing the action and announce that there is a fee for that action. If the Actor has kudos equal to or greater than the fee, the action is performed, the Actor's kudos are decreased by the fee, and Agora's kudos are increased by the fee. Any Player (hereafter the challenger) may announce that the Actor possessed insufficient Honor (kudos) to perform the action, provided e issues eir challenge within 7 days of the attempted action. As soon as possible after such a challenge, the Herald shall confirm or deny whether the Actor possessed kudos equal to or greater than the fee at the time e attempted the action. If the Actor in fact possessed insufficient honor, the action shall be deemed to have not occurred and the kudos of the Actor shall be deemed to have not changed. Otherwise the action shall be deemed to have occurred (and the change in kudos shall be recorded). If a Player issues a challenge as above, but more than 7 days have passed since the attempted action, then the action shall be permitted to stand. As soon as possible after a late challenge is issued, the Herald shall confirm or deny its correctness. But in this case the Fee shall be recorded even if the Actor is left with negative kudos. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4528 (Goethe), 2 October 2003 text: If the Rules associate a non-negative cost, price, charge, or fee with an action, that action is a fee-based action. If the specified cost is not an integer, the actual fee is the next highest integer. To perform a fee-based action, a Player (the Actor) who is otherwise permitted to perform the action must announce that e is performing the action and announce that there is a fee for that action. Upon said announcement, the action is performed, the Actor's kudos are decreased by the fee, and Agora's kudos are increased by the fee. Any Player (hereafter the challenger) may announce that the Actor possessed insufficient Honor (kudos) to perform the action, provided e issues eir challenge within 7 days of the attempted action. As soon as possible after such a challenge, the Herald shall confirm or deny whether the Actor possessed kudos equal to or greater than the fee at the time e attempted the action. If the Actor in fact possessed insufficient honor, or the honor of the Actor cannot be determined by reasonable effort, the action shall be deemed to have not occurred and the kudos of the Actor (and Agora) shall be deemed to have not been changed by the fee. If a Player issues a challenge as above, but more than 7 days have passed since the attempted action, then the action shall be permitted to stand. As soon as possible after a late challenge is issued, the Herald shall confirm or deny its correctness. But in this case the Fee shall be recorded even if the Actor is left with negative kudos. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4598 (Elysion), 11 July 2004 text: If the Rules associate a non-negative cost, price, charge, or fee with an action, that action is a fee-based action. If the specified cost is not an integer, the actual fee is the next highest integer. To perform a fee-based action, a Player (the Actor) who is otherwise permitted to perform the action must announce that e is performing the action and announce that there is a fee for that action. Upon said announcement, the action is performed, the Actor's kudos are decreased by the fee. Any Player (hereafter the challenger) may announce that the Actor possessed insufficient Honor (kudos) to perform the action, provided e issues eir challenge within 7 days of the attempted action. As soon as possible after such a challenge, the Herald shall confirm or deny whether the Actor possessed kudos equal to or greater than the fee at the time e attempted the action. If the Actor in fact possessed insufficient honor, or the honor of the Actor cannot be determined by reasonable effort, the action shall be deemed to have not occurred and the kudos of the Actor shall be deemed to have not been changed by the fee. If a Player issues a challenge as above, but more than 7 days have passed since the attempted action, then the action shall be permitted to stand. As soon as possible after a late challenge is issued, the Herald shall confirm or deny its correctness. But in this case the Fee shall be recorded even if the Actor is left with negative kudos. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4819 (root, Maud), 10 July 2005 text: A fee-based action is an action with which the rules associate a fee, which must be a natural number. If the rules describe a fee-based action but do not indicate the fee for that action, then that fee is zero. A player (the Actor) attempts to perform a fee-based action by announcing that e performs it; specifying the action to be performed; and, if the fee is nonzero, noting that there is a fee for the action. The Actor has sufficient kudos to perform the action if the number of eir kudos meets or exceeds the fee. Upon eir announcement, the Actor's kudos are decreased by the fee, and if e had sufficient kudos, e performs the action. If the success of the Actor's attempt to perform a fee-based action is publicly challenged within a week of the time the action was attempted, then the Herald shall, as soon as possible, determine whether the Actor had sufficient kudos when e attempted to perform the action, and announce eir determination. If the Herald announces that the Actor did not have sufficient kudos to perform a fee-based action at the time of eir attempt, and eir announcement was published within a fortnight from the time the action was attempted, then the action shall be deemed not to have been performed. If the Herald made this announcement within a week of the attempt to perform the action, or the success of the attempt was publicly challenged within a week of the attempt, then the Herald shall refund the Actor eir kudos. If the success of an Actor's attempt to perform a fee-based challenge is not publicly challenged within a week of the time the action was attempted, then the action shall be deemed to have been performed. Nothing in this rule shall act to prevent a person from performing a fee-based action by another mechanism for performing that action provided by the rules. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1941 by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1942 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1942 by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 text: Any entity which the Rules permit to be possessed by another entity is a Property. An entity is not a Property unless the Rules specifically allow for it to be possessed by another entity. With respect to Property, the terms "possessor" and "owner" are synonymous, as are "possess" and "own". Individual Properties may not be created or destroyed, or their ownership changed, except in accordance with the Rules. Every Property shall have a Recordkeepor, which is some Player who is required to retain a record of who owns that Property. If, for a given Property, no other Rule provides otherwise, or if the Rules would otherwise provide for a person who is not a Player, the Treasuror shall maintain this record. If one of the Official duties of an Officer is to be the Recordkeepor of a Property, then eir Report shall include this record and any changes thereto since the last posting of eir Report. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 text: Any entity which the Rules permit to be possessed by another entity is a Property. Within the context of the Rules, the term "possess" refers to the legal status of possessing a Property; the terms "possessor" and "owner" are synonymous, as are "possess" and "own". Individual Properties may not be created or destroyed, or their ownership changed, except in accordance with the Rules. Every Property shall have a Recordkeepor, which is some Player who is required to retain a record of who owns that Property. If, for a given Property, no other Rule provides otherwise, or if the Rules would otherwise provide for a person who is not a Player, the Treasuror shall maintain this record. If one of the Official duties of an Officer is to be the Recordkeepor of a Property, then eir Report shall include this record and any changes thereto since the last posting of eir Report. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: A property is an entity which the rules permit to be possessed by another entity. The term "possess" refers to the legal status of possessing a property; the terms "possessor" and "owner" are synonyms, as are "possess" and "own". Individual properties may not be created or destroyed, or their ownership changed, except in accordance with the rules. Each property shall have a recordkeepor, which is a player required to maintain a record of who owns that property. The Treasuror is the recordkeepor for each property that would otherwise have no recordkeepor. If one of the official duties of an officer is to be the recordkeepor of a property, then eir Weekly Report shall include this record and any changes thereto since the last posting of eir Report. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: A property is an entity which the rules permit to be possessed by another entity. The term "possess" refers to the legal status of possessing a property; the terms "possessor" and "owner" are synonyms, as are "possess" and "own". Individual properties may not be created or destroyed, or their ownership changed, except in accordance with the rules. Each property shall have a recordkeepor, which is a player required to maintain a record of who owns that property. The Notary is the recordkeepor for each property that would otherwise have no recordkeepor. If one of the official duties of an officer is to be the recordkeepor of a property, then eir Weekly Report shall include this record and any changes thereto since the last posting of eir Report. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4497 (Steve), 13 May 2003 text: A property is an entity which the rules permit to be possessed by another entity. The term "possess" refers to the legal status of possessing a property; the terms "possessor" and "owner" are synonyms, as are "possess" and "own". Individual properties may not be created or destroyed, or their ownership changed, except in accordance with the rules. Each property shall have a recordkeepor, which is a player required to maintain a record of who owns that property. The Notary is the recordkeepor for each property that would otherwise have no recordkeepor. If one of the official duties of an officer is to be the recordkeepor of a property, then eir Weekly Report shall include this record and any changes thereto since the last posting of eir Report. If a category of properties ceases to exist, all debts of that property shall cease to exist. The former recordkeepor of that property category must, as soon as possible after the category ceases to exist, publish entities' holdings of that category as they existed immediately before this destruction. If a Player destroys a category of property for which e is a debtor, e commits the Class-4 Crime of Writing Bad Checks. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1942 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1943 history: Created, ca. Jun. 21 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1944 history: Created, ca. Jun. 21 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1945 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1945 by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 text: Voting Entitlements are a Bank Currency. The Recordkeepor of Voting Entitlements is the Assessor. The MUQ of Voting Entitlements is 0.1. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4203 (neil), 28 August 2001 text: Voting Entitlements are a Bank Currency. The Recordkeepor of Voting Entitlements is the Assessor. The MUQ of Voting Entitlements is 0.001. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1945 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1946 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1946 by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4058 (Peekee), 29 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 text: The Ideal Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (IVECL) is equal to the number of registered Players. The Actual Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (AVECL) is the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Voting Entitlement Auctions but not yet paid for. The Voting Entitlement Surplus is the difference between the IVECL and the AVECL; if the AVECL is greater than the IVECL, the Voting Entitlement Surplus is zero. Whenever it occurs that the Voting Entitlement Surplus is positive and no Auction of Voting Entitlements is already in progress, the Assessor shall auction off the surplus Voting Entitlements. The items to be auctioned are individual Voting Entitlements, and thus the number of items is equal to the Voting Entitlement Surplus. The Auctioneer shall be the Assessor, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Politicians may bid. Upon the satisfaction of a debt arising from an Voting Entitlement Auction, the Assessor shall pay out one Voting Entitlement to the debtor of the satisfied debt. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4117 (Blob), 6 March 2001 text: The Ideal Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (IVECL) is equal to the number of registered Players. The Actual Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (AVECL) is the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Voting Entitlement Auctions but not yet paid for. The Voting Entitlement Surplus is the difference between the IVECL and the AVECL; if the AVECL is greater than the IVECL, the Voting Entitlement Surplus is zero. Whenever it occurs that the Voting Entitlement Surplus is positive and no Auction of Voting Entitlements is already in progress, the Assessor shall auction off the surplus Voting Entitlements. The items to be auctioned are Minimum Unit Quantities of of Voting Entitlements, and thus the number of items is equal to the Voting Entitlement Surplus divided by the MUQ of VEs. The Auctioneer shall be the Assessor, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Politicians may bid. Upon the satisfaction of a debt arising from an Voting Entitlement Auction, the Assessor shall pay out one Voting Entitlement to the debtor of the satisfied debt. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4203 (neil), 28 August 2001 text: The Ideal Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (IVECL) is equal to the number of registered Players. The Actual Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (AVECL) is the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Voting Entitlement Auctions but not yet paid for. The Voting Entitlement Surplus is the difference between the IVECL and the AVECL; if the AVECL is greater than the IVECL, the Voting Entitlement Surplus is zero. Whenever it occurs that the Voting Entitlement Surplus is positive and no Auction of Voting Entitlements is already in progress, the Assessor shall auction off the surplus Voting Entitlements. The items to be auctioned are lots of 0.1 VEs; the number of items is equal to the Voting Entitlement Surplus multiplied by 10, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Assessor, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Politicians may bid. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4247 (Murphy), 19 February 2002 text: The Ideal Voting Entitlement Circulation Average (IVECA) is equal to one plus the New Player Award in Voting Entitlements. The Ideal Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (IVECL) is equal to the IVECA times the number of registered Players. The Actual Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (AVECL) is the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Voting Entitlement Auctions but not yet paid for. The Voting Entitlement Surplus is the difference between the IVECL and the AVECL; if the AVECL is greater than the IVECL, the Voting Entitlement Surplus is zero. Whenever it occurs that the Voting Entitlement Surplus is positive and no Auction of Voting Entitlements is already in progress, the Assessor shall auction off the surplus Voting Entitlements. The items to be auctioned are lots of 0.1 VEs; the number of items is equal to the Voting Entitlement Surplus multiplied by 10, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Assessor, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Politicians may bid. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4249 (Murphy), 19 February 2002 text: The Ideal Voting Entitlement Circulation Average (IVECA) is equal to one plus the New Player Award in Voting Entitlements. The Ideal Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (IVECL) is equal to the IVECA times the number of registered Players. The Actual Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (AVECL) is the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Voting Entitlement Auctions but not yet paid for. The Voting Entitlement Surplus is the difference between the IVECL and the AVECL; if the AVECL is greater than the IVECL, the Voting Entitlement Surplus is zero. Whenever it occurs that the Voting Entitlement Surplus is positive and no Auction of Voting Entitlements is already in progress, the Assessor shall auction off the surplus Voting Entitlements. The items to be auctioned are lots of 0.1 VEs; the number of items is equal to the Voting Entitlement Surplus multiplied by 10, rounded down to the nearest integer. the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Politicians may bid. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4255 (Steve), 21 February 2002 text: (a) The Ideal Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (IVECL) is equal to the number of registered Players multiplied by the Voting Entitlements per Player as set in the Assessor's Budget. (b) The Actual Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (AVECL) is the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Voting Entitlement Auctions but not yet paid for. (c) The Voting Entitlement Surplus is the difference between the IVECL and the AVECL; if the AVECL is greater than the IVECL, the Voting Entitlement Surplus is zero. (d) If the Voting Entitlement Surplus is positive at the beginning of the month, the Assessor shall as soon as possible auction off the surplus Voting Entitlements. The items to be auctioned are lots of 0.1 VEs; the number of items is equal to the Voting Entitlement Surplus multiplied by 10, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Assessor, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Politicians may bid. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4281 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: (a) The Ideal Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (IVECL) is equal to the number of registered Players multiplied by the Voting Entitlements per Player as set in the Assessor's Budget. (b) The Actual Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (AVECL) is the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by the Bank which have been auctioned off to Winning Bidders in prior Voting Entitlement Auctions but not yet paid for. (c) The Voting Entitlement Surplus is the difference between the IVECL and the AVECL; if the AVECL is greater than the IVECL, the Voting Entitlement Surplus is zero. (d) If the Voting Entitlement Surplus is positive at the beginning of the month, the Assessor shall as soon as possible auction off the surplus Voting Entitlements. The items to be auctioned are lots of 0.1 VEs; the number of items is equal to the Voting Entitlement Surplus multiplied by 10, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Assessor, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4359 (Steve), 16 August 2002 text: (a) The Ideal Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (IVECL) is equal to the number of registered Players multiplied by the Voting Entitlements per Player as set in the Assessor's Budget. (b) The Actual Voting Entitlement Circulation Level (AVECL) is the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by entities other than the Bank, augmented by the total number of Voting Entitlements owned by the Bank which either: (1) are already being Auctioned by the Bank in prior Voting Entitlement Auctions that have not yet concluded; or (2) have been auctioned in prior Voting Entitlement Auctions that have concluded, but where the debts arising from Winning Bids have neither been paid nor defaulted upon; or (3) have been Auctioned in prior Voting Entitlement Auctions that have concluded, and the debts arising from the Winning Bids have been paid, but the Voting Entitlements have not been transferred to the Winning Bidders. (c) The Voting Entitlement Surplus is the difference between the IVECL and the AVECL; if the AVECL is greater than the IVECL, the Voting Entitlement Surplus is zero. (d) If the Voting Entitlement Surplus is positive at the beginning of the month, the Assessor shall as soon as possible auction off the surplus Voting Entitlements. The items to be auctioned are lots of 0.1 VEs; the number of items is equal to the Voting Entitlement Surplus multiplied by 10, rounded down to the nearest integer. The Auctioneer shall be the Assessor, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1946 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1947 history: Created, ca. Jun. 21 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1948 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1948 by Proposal 4018 (Kelly), 21 June 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4078 (Peekee), 10 October 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: As soon as possible after a Zombie is transferred from a Player to another entity, the Herald shall bill that Zombie's former Master prorated Maintenance on that Zombie. The amount of pror-ated Maintenance on a Zombie shall be equal to 0.1 Indulgence for each nine days (or part thereof) elapsed between the time that Player most recently took possession of that Zombie, and the time that the transfer occurred, with a maximum of 1 Indulgence. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4132 (Elysion), 5 April 2001 text: As soon as possible after a Zombie is transferred from a Player to another entity, the Registrar shall bill that Zombie's former Master prorated Maintenance on that Zombie. The amount of prorated Maintenance on a Zombie shall be equal to 0.1 Indulgence for each three days (or part thereof) elapsed between the time that Player most recently took possession of that Zombie, and the time that the transfer occurred, with a maximum of 1 Indulgence. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1948 by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1949 history: Created, ca. Jul. 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1950 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1950 by Proposal 4032 (t), 24 July 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 text: An Entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (a) The High Oligarch: three; (b) A Middle Oligarch: two; (c) A Low Oligarch: one; (d) Any other entity: zero. An Entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: (a) A Player: one plus the number of Voting Entitlements e possesses rounded down, minus one for every five Blots e has, with a minimum of zero and a maximum of: (1) for the High Oligarch, one; (2) for a Middle Oligarch, two; (3) for a Low Oligarch, three; (4) for a non-Oligarch, five. (b) The Bank: zero; (c) Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. At the beginning of a week, the Assessor shall determine each entity's Voting Power on Democratic and Ordinary Proposals. These values shall then be in effect for all Proposals of the proper type distributed during that week. However, if a Proposal is made Democratic after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Proposal is made Democratic. An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exception that no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is an Oligarch at the time e casts eir vote. An entity may cast its votes in any combination e wishes. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 text: (a) An entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (1) An Oligarch: one; (2) Any other entity: zero. (b) An entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: (1) A Player: one plus the number of Voting Entitlements e possesses rounded down, minus one for every five Blots e has, with a minimum of zero and a maximum of: (a) for an Oligarch, two; (b) for a non-Oligarch, five. (2) The Bank: zero; (3) Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. (c) The value of an entity's Voting Power on Ordinary and Democratic Proposals at the beginning of each Week shall be in effect for all Proposals distributed during that Week. However, if a Proposal is made Democratic after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Proposal is made Democratic. (d) An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exception that no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is an Oligarch at the time e casts eir vote. An entity may cast its votes in any combination e wishes. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4282 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: (a) An entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (1) An Oligarch: one; (2) Any other entity: zero. (b) An entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: (1) A Player: one plus the number of Voting Entitlements e possesses rounded down, minus one for every five Blots e has, with a minimum of zero and a maximum of: (a) for an Oligarch, two; (b) for a non-Oligarch, five. (2) The Bank: zero; (3) Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. (c) An entity's Voting Power on a Parliamentary Proposal is as follows: (1) One, if the entity is one of the following: (a) The Oligarchy; (b) The Democracy; (c) The Speakership. (2) Any other entity, zero. (c) The value of an entity's Voting Power for any given Chamber at the beginning of each Week shall be in effect for all Proposals distributed during that Week. However, if a Proposal's Chamber is changed after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Chamber is changed. (d) An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, in any combination, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exceptions that: (1) no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is an Oligarch at the time e casts eir vote. (2) Votes on Parliamentary Proposals shall only be cast through specific mechanisms indicated by the Rules for each specific entity with Voting Power on Parliamentary Proposals. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4352 (OscarMeyr), 7 August 2002 text: (a) An entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (1) An Oligarch: one; (2) Any other entity: zero. (b) An entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: (1) A Player: one plus the number of Voting Entitlements e possesses rounded down, minus one for every five Blots e has, with a minimum of zero and a maximum of: (a) for an Oligarch, two; (b) for a non-Oligarch, five. (2) The Bank: zero; (3) Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. (c) An entity's Voting Power on a Parliamentary Proposal is as follows: (1) One, if the entity is one of the following: (a) The First Estate; (b) The Second Estate; (c) The Third Estate. (2) Any other entity, zero. (c) The value of an entity's Voting Power for any given Chamber at the beginning of each Week shall be in effect for all Proposals distributed during that Week. However, if a Proposal's Chamber is changed after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Chamber is changed. (d) An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, in any combination, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exceptions that: (1) no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is an Oligarch at the time e casts eir vote. (2) Votes on Parliamentary Proposals shall only be cast through specific mechanisms indicated by the Rules for each specific entity with Voting Power on Parliamentary Proposals. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4370 (OscarMeyr), 6 September 2002 text: (a) An entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (1) An Oligarch: one; (2) Any other entity: zero. (b) An entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: (1) A Player: one plus the number of Voting Entitlements e possesses rounded down, minus one for every five Blots e has, with a minimum of zero and a maximum of: (a) for an Oligarch, two; (b) for a non-Oligarch, five. (2) The Bank: zero; (3) Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. (c) An entity's Voting Power on a Parliamentary Proposal is as follows: (1) One, if the entity is one of the following: (a) The First Estate; (b) The Second Estate; (c) The Third Estate. (2) Any other entity, zero. (d) The value of an entity's Voting Power for any given Chamber at the beginning of each Week shall be in effect for all Proposals distributed during that Week. However, if a Proposal's Chamber is changed after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Chamber is changed. (e) An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, in any combination, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exceptions that: (1) no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is an Oligarch at the time e casts eir vote. (2) Votes on Parliamentary Proposals shall only be cast through specific mechanisms indicated by the Rules for each specific entity with Voting Power on Parliamentary Proposals. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: (a) An entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (1) An Oligarch: one; (2) Any other entity: zero. (b) An entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: * A Player: (a) two plus that Player's Voting Potential if that Player is a non-Oligarch Politician; (b) one plus that Player's Voting Potential otherwise. * Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. (c) An entity's Voting Power on a Parliamentary Proposal is as follows: (1) One, if the entity is one of the following: (a) The First Estate; (b) The Second Estate; (c) The Third Estate. (2) Any other entity, zero. (d) The value of an entity's Voting Power for any given Chamber at the beginning of each Week shall be in effect for all Proposals distributed during that Week. However, if a Proposal's Chamber is changed after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Chamber is changed. (e) An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, in any combination, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exceptions that: (1) no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is an Oligarch at the time e casts eir vote. (2) Votes on Parliamentary Proposals shall only be cast through specific mechanisms indicated by the Rules for each specific entity with Voting Power on Parliamentary Proposals. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4539 (Goethe), 16 November 2003 text: (a) An entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (1) An Oligarch: one; (2) Any other entity: zero. (b) An entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: * A Player: (a) two plus that Player's Voting Potential if that Player is a non-Oligarch Politician; (b) one plus that Player's Voting Potential otherwise. * Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. (c) The value of an entity's Voting Power for any given Chamber at the beginning of each Week shall be in effect for all Proposals distributed during that Week. However, if a Proposal's Chamber is changed after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Chamber is changed. (d) An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, in any combination, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exceptions that: (1) no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is an Oligarch at the time e casts eir vote. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: (a) An entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (1) A Shareholder: eir Share Holdings; (2) Any other entity: zero. (b) An entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: * A Player: (a) two plus that Player's Voting Potential if that Player has zero Share Holdings. (b) one plus that Player's Voting Potential otherwise. * Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. (c) The value of an entity's Voting Power for any given Chamber at the beginning of each Week shall be in effect for all Proposals distributed during that Week. However, if a Proposal's Chamber is changed after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Chamber is changed. (d) An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, in any combination, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exceptions that: (1) no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is a Shareholder at the time e casts eir vote. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4624 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: (a) An entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (1) A Shareholder: eir Share Holdings; (2) Any other entity: zero. (b) An entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: (1) A Player: (i) that Player's Voting Potential if that Player has Sente. (ii) one otherwise. (2) Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. (c) The value of an entity's Voting Power for any given Chamber at the beginning of each Week shall be in effect for all Proposals distributed during that Week. However, if a Proposal's Chamber is changed after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Chamber is changed. (d) An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, in any combination, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exceptions that: (1) no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is a Shareholder at the time e casts eir vote. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4665 (Kolja), 9 April 2005 text: (a) An entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (1) A Shareholder: eir Share Holdings; (2) the Deckmastor: the number of Share Cards in the Deck or three, whichever is smaller; plus eir Share Holdings (if e is a Shareholder); (3) Any other entity: zero. (b) An entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: (1) A Player: (i) that Player's Voting Potential if that Player has Sente. (ii) one otherwise. (2) Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. (c) The value of an entity's Voting Power for any given Chamber at the beginning of each Week shall be in effect for all Proposals distributed during that Week. However, if a Proposal's Chamber is changed after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Chamber is changed. (d) An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, in any combination, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exceptions that: (1) no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is a Shareholder or the Deckmastor at the time e casts eir vote. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4685 (Quazie, Murphy), 18 April 2005 text: (a) An entity's Voting Power on an Ordinary Proposal is as follows: (1) A Shareholder: eir Share Holdings; (2) the Deckmastor: the number of Share Cards in the Deck or three, whichever is smaller; plus eir Share Holdings (if e is a Shareholder); (3) Any other entity: zero. (b) An entity's Voting Power on a Democratic Proposal is as follows: (1) A Player: (i) that Player's Voting Potential if that Player has Sente. (ii) one otherwise. (2) Any other entity: as defined in the Rules, with a default of zero if the Rules don't specify the Voting power on a Democratic Proposal for that entity. (c) The value of an entity's Voting Power for any given Chamber at the beginning of each Week shall be in effect for all Proposals distributed during that Week. However, if a Proposal's Chamber is changed after it has been distributed, the Voting Power of each entity for that Proposal is redetermined at the time the Chamber is changed. (d) An entity may cast as many votes as e wishes on a Proposal, in any combination, up to the limit determined by that entity's Voting Power on that Proposal, with the exceptions that: (1) no Player may vote on an Ordinary Proposal unless e is a Shareholder or the Deckmastor at the time e casts eir vote. Other rules with Power of at least 2 may modify a player's Voting Power. history: Power changed from 2 to 3 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: The voting limit of an eligible voter on a referendum or an election is always one and cannot be changed. The voting limit of an eligible voter on a non-ordinary proposal is one. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an ordinary proposal is the sum of: (a) one; (b) eir Share Holdings; and (c) the minimum of three and the number of Share cards in the Deck, if e is the Deckmastor. After the voting period for an Agoran decision has ended, the vote collector shall permit the first valid ballots submitted by an eligible voter to remain valid, up to a number equal to that person's voting limit on that decision as determined when the voting period for that decision began, and shall invalidate all subsequent ballots submitted by that voter on that decision. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: The voting limit of an eligible voter on a democratic proposal is always one and cannot be changed. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an ordinary proposal is one, if not explicitly modified by other rules. After the voting period for an Agoran decision has ended, the vote collector shall permit the first valid ballots submitted by an eligible voter to remain valid, up to a number equal to that person's voting limit on that decision as determined when the voting period for that decision began, and shall invalidate all subsequent ballots submitted by that voter on that decision. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 4972 (Goddess Eris), 23 May 2007 text: The voting limit of an eligible voter on a democratic proposal is one and cannot be changed except by this rule. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an ordinary proposal is one if not explicitly modified by other rules. The voting limit of an eligible voter who is not a natural person is always one less than it would otherwise be. After the voting period for an Agoran decision has ended, the vote collector shall permit the first valid ballots submitted by an eligible voter to remain valid, up to a number equal to that person's voting limit on that decision as determined when the voting period for that decision began, and shall invalidate all subsequent ballots submitted by that voter on that decision. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 4964 (Murphy), 3 June 2007 text: The voting limit of an entity on a democratic proposal is one and cannot be changed except by this rule. The voting limit of an entity on an ordinary proposal is one if not explicitly modified by other rules. The voting limit of an entity who is not a natural person is always one less than it would otherwise be. After the voting period for an Agoran decision has ended, the vote collector shall permit the first valid ballots submitted by each voter to remain valid, up to a number equal to that person's voting limit on that decision as determined when the voting period for that decision began, and shall invalidate all subsequent ballots submitted by that voter on that decision. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 5000 (Murphy), 12 June 2007 text: An entity's voting limit on an Agoran decision is: (a) If the entity is not an eligible voter, then zero, not subject to modification. (b) Otherwise, if the decision is to resolve an ordinary proposal, then one, subject to modification by the rules. (c) Otherwise, one, subject to modification only by this rule. The voting limit of an entity who is not a natural person is reduced by one. At the end of the voting period of an Agoran decision, the first N ballots submitted by each entity on that decision (where N is the entity's voting limit on the decision at the start of the voting period) remain valid; all other ballots submitted on that decision are invalid. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5007 (Zefram), 18 June 2007 text: An entity's voting limit on an Agoran decision is: (a) If the entity is not an eligible voter, then zero, not subject to modification. (b) Otherwise, if the decision is to resolve an ordinary proposal, then one, subject to modification by the rules. (c) Otherwise, one, subject to modification only by this rule. The voting limit of an entity who is not a first-class person is reduced by one. At the end of the voting period of an Agoran decision, the first N ballots submitted by each entity on that decision (where N is the entity's voting limit on the decision at the start of the voting period) remain valid; all other ballots submitted on that decision are invalid. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5047 (root), 1 July 2007 text: An entity's voting limit on an Agoran decision is: (a) If the entity is not an eligible voter, then zero, not subject to modification. (b) Otherwise, if the decision is to resolve an ordinary proposal, then one, subject to modification by the rules. (c) Otherwise, one, subject to modification only by this rule. The voting limit of an entity who is not a first-class person is reduced by one. At the end of the voting period of an Agoran decision, the first N ballots submitted by each entity on that decision (where N is the entity's voting limit at the decision's ballot allotment time) remain valid; all other ballots submitted on that decision are invalid. The ballot allotment time of a proposal that becomes or ceases to be ordinary during the proposal's voting period is the time of the last such change. The ballot allotment time of any other decision is the start of the voting period. history: Retitled by Proposal 5078 (Zefram), 18 July 2007 history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5078 (Zefram), 18 July 2007 text: The eligible voters on a democratic proposal are those entities that were active first-class players at the start of its voting period. The voting limit of each eligible voter on a democratic proposal is one. history: Retitled by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 text: The eligible voters on a democratic decision are those entities that were active first-class players at the start of its voting period. The voting limit of each eligible voter on a democratic decision is one. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1951 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1951 by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 text: Papyri (singular Papyrus) are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Papyri is 0.1. The Recordkeepor for Papyri is the Promotor. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4203 (neil), 28 August 2001 text: Papyri (singular Papyrus) are a Bank Currency. The MUQ of Papyri is 0.001. The Recordkeepor for Papyri is the Promotor. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1951 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1952 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1952 by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 text: Each Proposal is either Distributable or Undistributable. Initially, each Proposal is Undistributable. When a Proposal becomes Disinterested, it immediately becomes Distributable and may not become Undistributable by any means as long as it remains Disinterested. Any Player may make any Undistributable Proposal in the Proposal Pool Distributable by publicly announcing that e is doing so and Paying a Fee of a number of Papyri equal to the amount of the Distribution Cost of the Proposal. Any Player may make any Interested Distributable Proposal in the Proposal Pool Undistributable by publicly announcing that e is doing so and Paying a Fee of a number of Papyri double the amount of the Distribution Cost of the Proposal. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4195 (Syllepsis), 26 July 2001 text: Each Proposal is either Distributable or Undistributable. Initially, each Proposal is Undistributable. When a Proposal becomes Disinterested, it immediately becomes Distributable and may not become Undistributable by any means as long as it remains Disinterested. Any Player may make any Undistributable Proposal in the Proposal Pool Distributable by publicly announcing that e is doing so and Paying a Fee of a number of Papyri equal to the amount of the Distribution Cost of the Proposal. Any Player may make any Interested Distributable Proposal in the Proposal Pool Undistributable by publicly announcing that e is doing so and Paying a Fee of a number of Papyri double the amount of the Distribution Cost of the Proposal. Any Monk may make any Undistributable Proposal in the Proposal Pool Distributable by publicly announcing that e is doing so and Paying a Fee of a number of Papyri equal to half the amount of the Distribution Cost of the Proposal, rounded up. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: Each Proposal is either Distributable or Undistributable. Initially, each Proposal is Undistributable. When a Proposal becomes Disinterested, it immediately becomes Distributable and may not become Undistributable by any means as long as it remains Disinterested. The Rules may define other mechanisms through which a Proposal becomes Distributable or Undistributable. Any Player may make any Undistributable Proposal in the Proposal Pool Distributable by publicly announcing that e is doing so and paying a fee equal to the Distribution Cost. Any Player may make an Undistributed Distributable Proposal Undistributable by paying a fee equal to twice the Distribution Cost. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4523 (Murphy), 28 August 2003 text: Depth is a stuck proposal switch with values undistributable and distributable. A player may flip a proposal's depth to distributable by paying a fee equal to its Distribution Cost, or to undistributable by paying a fee equal to twice its Distribution Cost. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4702 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: Depth is a stuck proposal switch with values undistributable and distributable. A player may flip the depth of a Proposal that e proposed to distributable by paying a fee equal to its Distribution Cost. A player may flip the depth of a Proposal that e did not propose to distributable by paying a fee equal to its Distribution Cost minus one (minimum zero). A player may flip the depth of any Proposal to undistributable by paying a fee equal to twice its Distribution Cost. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: The Promotor shall have a budget containing the per-player proposal limit, which shall be a positive integer defaulting to four. Depth is a stuck proposal switch with values undistributable and distributable. A player may flip the depth of one of eir proposals in the Proposal Pool to distributable by announcement as long as the number of eir distributable proposals in the Pool is less than the per-player proposal limit. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4829 (Maud), 30 July 2005 text: The Promotor shall have a budget containing the per-player proposal limit, which shall be a positive integer defaulting to four. Depth is a stuck proposal switch with values undistributable and distributable. Before the Promotor distributes a proposal, its proposer may flip its depth by announcement as long as the number of eir distributable proposals which have been submitted but have not been distributed or retracted is less than the per-player proposal limit. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1952 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1953 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1953 by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 text: A Proposal is Sane if all the following conditions are met: i) the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Sane Proposal, ii) The Proposal is Interested. iii) The Proposal is Democratic. A Sane Proposal has its Distribution Cost increased by 1. The Maximum Voting Power on a Sane Proposal is one for each Player and zero for each non-Player entity. Any votes cast over this limit shall be deemed invalid. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4139 (Ziggy), 15 April 2001 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4145 (Ian), 22 April 2001 text: A Proposal is Sane if all the following conditions are met: i) the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Sane Proposal, or it has been declared a Sane Proposal by other methods explicitly stated in the Rules, ii) The Proposal is Interested. iii) The Proposal is Democratic. A Sane Proposal has its Distribution Cost increased by 1. On Sane Proposals, each Player has a Voting Power of one, unless e has five or more Blots, in which case eir Voting Power is zero; all other entities have a Voting Power of zero on Sane Proposals. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which determine the Voting Power of entities. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4753 (Sherlock), 5 May 2005 text: A Proposal is Sane if all the following conditions are met: i) the text of the message wherein it is submitted explicitly states that it is a Sane Proposal, or it has been declared a Sane Proposal by other methods explicitly stated in the Rules, ii) The Proposal is Democratic. A Sane Proposal has its Distribution Cost increased by 1. On Sane Proposals, each Player has a Voting Power of one, unless e has five or more Blots, in which case eir Voting Power is zero; all other entities have a Voting Power of zero on Sane Proposals. This Rule takes precedence over other Rules which determine the Voting Power of entities. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1953 by Proposal 4829 (Maud), 30 July 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1954 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1954 by Proposal 4050 (t), 15 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4056 (t), 21 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 text: As soon as possible after the fifteenth day of each month, the Promotor shall Auction a number of Papyri. The Promotor must always auction at least one Papyrus. Otherwise, the Promotor may auction as many Papyri as e wishes. The items to be auctioned are individual Papyri, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Papyri to be Auctioned. The Auctioneer shall be the Promotor, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Scribes may bid. Upon the satisfaction of a debt arising from a Papyrus Auction, the Promotor shall pay out one Papyrus to the debtor of the satisfied debt. The Promotor may, within a week after the end of a Papyrus Auction, pay out to emself a number of Stems equal to the Winning Bid of the Auction, if there were at least three different winners in the Auction, not counting the Promotor emself. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4167 (root), 11 June 2001 text: As soon as possible after the fifteenth day of each month, the Promotor shall Auction a number of Papyri. The Promotor must always auction at least one Papyrus. Otherwise, the Promotor may auction as many Papyri as e wishes. The items to be auctioned are individual Papyri, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Papyri to be Auctioned. The Auctioneer shall be the Promotor, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Scribes may bid. Upon the satisfaction of a debt arising from a Papyrus Auction, the Promotor shall pay out one Papyrus to the debtor of the satisfied debt. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4203 (neil), 28 August 2001 text: As soon as possible after the fifteenth day of each month, the Promotor shall Auction a number of Papyri. The Promotor must always auction at least one Papyrus. Otherwise, the Promotor may auction as many Papyri as e wishes. The items to be auctioned are individual Papyri, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Papyri to be Auctioned. The Auctioneer shall be the Promotor, and the Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Scribes may bid. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4249 (Murphy), 19 February 2002 text: As soon as possible after the fifteenth day of each month, the Promotor shall Auction a number of Papyri. The Promotor must always auction at least one Papyrus. Otherwise, the Promotor may auction as many Papyri as e wishes. The items to be auctioned are individual Papyri, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Papyri to be Auctioned. The Auction shall be conducted in Stems. Only Scribes may bid. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4281 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: As soon as possible after the fifteenth day of each month, the Promotor shall Auction a number of Papyri. The Promotor must always auction at least one Papyrus. Otherwise, the Promotor may auction as many Papyri as e wishes. The items to be auctioned are individual Papyri, and thus the number of items is equal to the number of Papyri to be Auctioned. The Auction shall be conducted in Stems. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1954 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1955 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1955 by Proposal 4053 (harvel), 21 August 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4071 (Steve), 14 September 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: Amended(2) by Proposal 01-005 (Steve), 2 February 2001 text: There is an Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy, whose responsibility it is to hold Elections for Officers and to conduct Auctions for positions in the Oligarchy. The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy's Report shall include: (a) a list of all Offices; (b) for each Office, the Electee to the Office and the earliest date such that e was the Electee to the Office on that date, and no other Player has been the Electee to the Office since that date; (c) for each Office where the current holder of the Office is not the Electee, the current holder of the Office, and the date on which e became the holder of the Office; (d) for each Office, the date on which the Term of Service for the Office expires (or an indication that the Office is held in perpetuity); (e) the identity of the Speaker and the date of the next Quarterly Speaker Transition; (f) a list of all positions in the Oligarchy with their ranks, and the Players who hold those positions; and (g) the date on which the current High Oligarch, if there is one, became the High Oligarch. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4142 (Murphy), 15 April 2001 text: There is an Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy, whose responsibility it is to conduct Auctions for positions in the Oligarchy. The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy's Report shall include: (a) a list of all positions in the Oligarchy with their ranks, and the Players who hold those positions; and (b) the date on which the current High Oligarch, if there is one, became the High Oligarch. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 text: (a) There is an Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy (GWotO), whose responsibility it is to maintain a list of Oligarchs. (b) The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy's Report shall consist of a list of all Oligarchs and a list of all Elder Oligarchs (if any). (c) The GWotO shall have a budget containing the Oligarchy Auction Rate, which is an integer between 1 and 4 inclusive. The GWotO may amend eir budget Without 2 Objections from Oligarchs. There is an Office of Grand Warden of the Oligarchy, whose responsibility it is to conduct Auctions for positions in the Oligarchy. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy (GWotO) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of oligarchs and is responsible for conducting auctions for positions in the Oligarchy. The GWotO's Weekly Report shall include a list of all oligarchs identifying which, if any, are elder oligarchs. The GWotO shall have a budget containing the Oligarchy Auction Rate, which is a positive integer less than 5. The GWotO may Without 2 Objections from oligarchs replace the budget with a proto-budget e publishes when e announces eir intent to do so. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4259 (root), 22 March 2002 text: The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy (GWotO) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of oligarchs and is responsible for conducting auctions for positions in the Oligarchy. The GWotO's Weekly Report shall include a list of all oligarchs, the identity of the Speaker, and the date of the next quarterly Speaker transition. The GWotO shall have a budget containing the Oligarchy Auction Rate, which is a positive integer less than 5. The GWotO may Without 2 Objections from oligarchs replace the budget with a proto-budget e publishes when e announces eir intent to do so. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4307 (Steve), 28 May 2002 text: (a) The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy (GWotO) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of Oligarchs and is responsible for conducting auctions for positions in the Oligarchy. (b) The GWotO's Weekly Report shall include a list of all Oligarchs, the identity of the Speaker, and the date of the next quarterly Speaker transition. (c) The GWotO shall have a budget containing: (1) the Oligarchy Auction Rate, which is a positive integer less than 5; (2) the Base Seating Fee, which is a number of Voting Entitlements between 0.1 and 0.5 inclusive. (d) The GWotO may Without 2 Objections from Oligarchs replace the budget with a proto-budget e publishes when e announces eir intent to do so. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: (a) The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy (GWotO) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of Oligarchs. (b) The GWotO's Weekly Report shall include a list of all Oligarchs, when their terms as Oligarchs expire, the identity of the Speaker, and the date of the next quarterly Speaker transition. (c) The GWotO shall have a budget containing the Oligarchy Charge Requirement, which is a positive integer less than 10, and the Oligarchic Term, which is a number of days between 30 and 90. (d) The GWotO may Without 2 Objections from Oligarchs replace the budget with a proto-budget e publishes when e announces eir intent to do so. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4555 (Elysion), 22 March 2004 text: (a) The Grand Warden of the Oligarchy (GWotO) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor of Oligarchs. (b) The GWotO's Weekly Report shall include a list of all Oligarchs, the membership of each Player's Coalition, the Potency and Lobbying Strength of each Player, the identity of the Speaker, and the date of the next quarterly Speaker transition. (c) The GWotO shall have a budget containing the Political Charge, which is a positive integer less than 10, and the Potency Threshold, which is a positive integer less than 10. (d) The GWotO may Without 2 Objections from Oligarchs replace the budget with a proto-budget e publishes when e announces eir intent to do so. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1955 by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1956 history: Created, ca. Aug. 21 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1957 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1957 by Proposal 4054 (Oerjan), 21 August 2000 text: A Budget is a document maintained by a particular Office, whose holder is its Maintainer, and determining various values as explicitly required or permitted by the Rules. An Office has a Budget only if the Rules explicitly designate one. Each Budget shall be part of the Monthly Reports of its Maintainer as well as of the Treasuror. The Maintainer shall post the Budget to the Public Forum as soon as possible whenever it changes. If a current Budget is discovered to be invalid, then its Maintainer shall create a valid one as soon as possible. This valid one should be as close as possible to the most recent valid version of the Budget. While holding an Office as Electee, an Officer may amend its Budget Without Objection; the Rules regarding a particular Budget may specify a different procedure for its amendment. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4144 (Blob), 22 April 2001 text: A Budget is a document maintained by a particular Office, whose holder is its Maintainer, and determining various values as explicitly required or permitted by the Rules. An Office has a Budget only if the Rules explicitly designate one. Each Budget shall be part of the Monthly Reports of its Maintainer. The Maintainer shall post the Budget to the Public Forum as soon as possible whenever it changes. If a current Budget is discovered to be invalid, then its Maintainer shall create a valid one as soon as possible. This valid one should be as close as possible to the most recent valid version of the Budget. While holding an Office as Electee, an Officer may amend its Budget Without Objection; the Rules regarding a particular Budget may specify a different procedure for its amendment. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 text: A Budget is a document maintained by a particular Office, whose holder is its Maintainer, and determining various values as explicitly required or permitted by the Rules. An Office has a Budget only if the Rules explicitly designate one. Each Budget shall be part of the Monthly Reports of its Maintainer. The Maintainer shall publish the Budget as soon as possible whenever it changes. If a current Budget is discovered to be invalid, then its Maintainer shall create a valid one as soon as possible. This valid one should be as close as possible to the most recent valid version of the Budget. While holding an Office as Electee, an Officer may amend its Budget Without Objection; the Rules regarding a particular Budget may specify a different procedure for its amendment. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: A budget is a document maintained by an office which determines the values of various properties the office is empowered to determine. An office has a budget only if the Rules explicitly indicate that the office has a budget. Each budget shall be part of the corresponding office's Monthly Report. As soon as possible after a budget changes, the holder of the corresponding office (the maintainer) shall publish it. As soon as possible after a budget is discovered to be invalid, its maintainer shall create a valid budget as close as possible to the most recent valid version of the budget. The new budget shall be effective when the maintainer publishes it. While holding an office as electee, an officer may Without Objection amend the budget to adhere to a proto-budget which e must publish at the time e announces eir intent to amend. The Rules regarding a particular budget may specify a different procedure for its amendment. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1957 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1958 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1958 by Proposal 4054 (Oerjan), 21 August 2000 text: If an Office has a Budget, then each Nominee for the Office shall submit a valid Proto-Budget during the Nomination Period, or else eir Nomination shall automatically be withdrawn at the end of the Nomination Period. A Proto-Budget is valid if it would be valid as a Budget. When the Voting Period begins, the Vote Collector shall announce each Candidate's last valid Proto-Budget. When the Voting Period ends, the Winner's last valid Proto-Budget becomes the Budget of that Office, and e shall announce it as soon as possible. If the Election ends without a Winner, then the existing Budget remains in effect. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4480 (Steve), 23 April 2003 text: (a) If an office has a budget, then a nomination in an election for that office is not valid unless a valid proto-budget is associated with it. (b) A proto-budget submitted by a nominee during the nominating period is associated with that nominee's nomination. A proto-budget is valid if it would be valid as a budget. (c) If a nominee for an Office fails to submit a valid proto-budget during the nominating period, then by default eir nomination is associated with a proto-budget identical to the current budget for that Office. If the current budget is not valid, tough cookies. (d) When the voting period begins, the vote collector shall announce each candidate's last valid proto-budget. (e) When the voting period ends, the winner's last valid proto-budget becomes the budget of that office, and e shall announce it as soon as possible. If the election ends without a winner, then the existing Budget remains in effect. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4589 (Murphy), 4 July 2004 text: (a) If an office has a budget, then a nomination in an election for that office is not valid unless a valid proto-budget is associated with it. (b) A proto-budget submitted by a nominee during the nominating period is associated with that nominee's nomination. A proto-budget is valid if it would be valid as a budget. (c) If a nominee for an Office fails to submit a valid proto-budget during the nominating period, then by default eir nomination is associated with a proto-budget identical to the current budget for that Office. If the current budget is not valid, tough cookies. (d) As soon as possible after the end of the nominating period, the vote collector shall announce each candidate's last valid proto-budget. (e) When the election ends, the winner's last valid proto-budget becomes the budget of that office, and the winner shall announce it as soon as possible. If the election ends without a winner, then the existing budget remains in effect. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1958 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1959 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1959 by Proposal 4082 (Peekee), 30 October 2000 text: The Executor of a given entity may announce a Will for that entity, this becomes that entity's Will. A Will must describe how to distribute the entity's Property should the entity cease to have an Executor. The Notary shall keep track of all Wills. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4190 (Steve), 18 July 2001 text: (a) An entity's Will is a description of how the entity's Property should be distributed in the event that the entity ceases to have an Executor. The Notary shall keep a record of all Wills. (b) An entity creates a Will for itself by publishing it. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4506 (Sherlock), 20 June 2003 text: (a) An entity's Will is a description of how the entity's Property should be distributed in the event that the entity ceases to have an Executor. An entity may never have more than one Will. (b) An entity creates a Will for emself by publishing it. (c) An entity changes or destroys eir Will by announcing e does so. (d) The Notary shall keep a record of all Wills. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1959 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1960 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1960 by Proposal 4085 (Blob), 16 November 2000 text: Each player may have a Role, which is one of the following: (a) Politician, (b) Scribe, (c) Acolyte. A Player may have only one of these roles at a time. If a Player gains a new role, then e ceases to hold any previous roles. Initially players do not have any role. A Player who has no role, or a player who has not changed eir role in the past 3 months, may change roles by announcing publicly what role e is changing to. The Registrar shall keep track of each player's role, and include it in eir report. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4175 (Elysion), 7 July 2001 text: Each player may have a Role, which is one of the following: (a) Politician, (b) Scribe, (c) Acolyte. A Player may have only one of these roles at a time. If a Player gains a new role, then e ceases to hold any previous roles. Initially players do not have any role. A Player changes eir Role by publicly announcing which Role e is changing to, provided one of the following is true: 1) e has no role or e has not changed eir role in the past 3 months. 2) e has not changed eir role in the past six weeks and e has paid a Fee of 1 Indulgence for the purpose of making this change 3) e has paid a Fee of 3 Indulgences for the purpose of making this change. The Registrar shall keep track of each player's role, and include it in eir report. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: Each player may have a Role, which is one of the following: (a) Politician, (b) Scribe, (c) Acolyte. A Player may have only one of these roles at a time. If a Player gains a new role, then e ceases to hold any previous roles. Initially players do not have any role. A Player changes eir Role by publicly announcing which Role e is changing to, provided one of the following is true: 1) e has no role or e has not changed eir role in the past 3 months. 2) e has not changed eir role in the past six weeks and e has paid a Fee of 2 kudos for the purpose of making this change 3) e has paid a Fee of 6 kudos for the purpose of making this change. The Registrar shall keep track of each player's role, and include it in eir report. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4523 (Murphy), 28 August 2003 text: Role is a stuck player switch with values null, politician, scribe, and acolyte. A player may flip eir role if one of the following is true: a) Eir role is null. b) E has not changed eir role in the past three months. c) E has not changed eir role in the past six weeks, and e pays a fee of 2 kudos for the purpose of making this change. d) E pays a fee of 6 kudos for the purpose of making this change. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4561 (Sherlock), 22 March 2004 text: Role is a stuck player switch with values null, Acolyte, Patron, Politician, and Scribe. A player may flip eir role if one of the following is true: a) Eir role is null. b) E has not changed eir role in the past three months. c) E has not changed eir role in the past six weeks, and e pays a fee of 2 kudos for the purpose of making this change. d) E pays a fee of 6 kudos for the purpose of making this change. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1960 by Proposal 4569 (Wes), 2 May 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1961 history: Created, ca. Dec. 2000 [Missing text for this revision.] history: ... history: Repealed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1962 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1962 by Proposal 4102 (Murphy), 15 January 2001 text: Being the only Immaculate Player is a Win Condition. Upon the report of such a Win, the Herald shall expunge N Blots per Player, where N is the number of Blots possessed by the Player(s) with the least nonzero number of Blots. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4110 (Ziggy), 13 February 2001 text: Being the only Immaculate Player is a Win Condition. Upon the report of such a Win, the Herald shall expunge N Blots per Player, where N is the number of Blots on the Player(s) with the least nonzero number of Blots. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4272 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: An Immaculate Player is a Player whose Stain is zero. Not being Immaculate is a Win-Preventing Condition. Being the only Immaculate Player is a Win Condition. Upon the report of such a Win, the Herald shall expunge N Blots per Player, where N is the Stain of the Player(s) with the lowest non-zero Stain. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4375 (RedKnight), 6 September 2002 text: An Immaculate Player is a Player whose Stain is zero. Not being Immaculate is a Win-Preventing Condition. Being the only Active Immaculate Player is a Win Condition. Upon the report of such a Win, the Herald shall expunge N Blots per Player, where N is the Stain of the Active Player(s) with the lowest non-zero Stain. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: An Immaculate Player is a Player whose Stain is zero. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1962 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1963 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1963 by Proposal 01-005 (Steve), 2 February 2001 text: If an Oligarch is On Hold, is a Zombie, has three or more Blots, is the Speaker, or is rotated out of the Oligarchy, then the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy is required to remove that Player from the Oligarchy as soon as possible. The GWoTO removes a Player from the Oligarchy by correctly announcing that at least one of the above conditions has arisen for that Player. The named Player ceases to be an Oligarch as of the GWoTO's announcement, and eir position in the Oligarchy becomes vacant. An Oligarch who ceases to be a Player also ceases to be an Oligarch, and eir position in the Oligarchy becomes vacant. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 text: (a) A Player is ineligible to be an Oligarch if and only if any of the following are true: (1) e is On Hold; (2) e has three or more Blots; (3) e is the Speaker or the Speaker-Elect; or (4) e is the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy. (b) If an Oligarch becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, the GWotO shall remove that Player from the Oligarchy as soon as possible. The GWoTO removes a Player from the Oligarchy by correctly announcing that at least one of the above conditions has arisen for that Player. The named Player ceases to be an Oligarch as of the GWoTO's announcement. (c) An Oligarch who ceases to be a Player ceases to be an Oligarch. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4262 (Steve), 4 March 2002 text: (a) A Player is ineligible to be an Oligarch if and only if any of the following are true: (1) e is On Hold; (2) e has three or more Blots; (3) e is the Speaker; (4) e is the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect; or (5) e is the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy. (b) If an Oligarch becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, the GWotO shall remove that Player from the Oligarchy as soon as possible. The GWoTO removes a Player from the Oligarchy by correctly announcing that at least one of the above conditions is true for that Player. The named Player ceases to be an Oligarch as of the GWoTO's announcement. (c) An Oligarch who ceases to be a Player ceases to be an Oligarch. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: (a) A Player is ineligible to be an Oligarch if and only if any of the following are true: (1) e is not active; (2) e has three or more Blots; (3) e is the Speaker; (4) e is the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect; or (5) e is the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy. (b) If an Oligarch becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, the GWotO shall remove that Player from the Oligarchy as soon as possible. The GWoTO removes a Player from the Oligarchy by correctly announcing that at least one of the above conditions is true for that Player. The named Player ceases to be an Oligarch as of the GWoTO's announcement. (c) An Oligarch who ceases to be a Player ceases to be an Oligarch. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4458 (Steve), 3 March 2003 text: (a) A Player is ineligible to be an Oligarch if and only if any of the following are true: (1) e is not active; (2) e has three or more Blots; (3) e is the Speaker; (4) e is the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect; (5) e is the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy; or (6) e is an Oligarch, and e has defaulted on payment of eir Oligarchy Upkeep since last becoming an Oligarch. (b) If an Oligarch becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, the GWotO shall remove that Player from the Oligarchy as soon as possible. The GWoTO removes a Player from the Oligarchy by correctly announcing that at least one of the above conditions is true for that Player. The named Player ceases to be an Oligarch as of the GWoTO's announcement. (c) An Oligarch who ceases to be a Player ceases to be an Oligarch. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: (a) A Player is ineligible to be an Oligarch if and only if any of the following are true: (1) e is not active; (2) e has three or more Blots; (3) e is the Speaker; (4) e is the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect; (5) e is the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy; or (b) If an Oligarch becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, the GWotO shall remove that Player from the Oligarchy as soon as possible. The GWoTO removes a Player from the Oligarchy by correctly announcing that at least one of the above conditions is true for that Player. The named Player ceases to be an Oligarch as of the GWoTO's announcement. (c) An Oligarch who ceases to be a Player ceases to be an Oligarch. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4534 (OscarMeyr), 8 November 2003 text: (a) A Player is ineligible to be an Oligarch if and only if any of the following are true: (1) e is not active; (2) e has three or more Blots; (3) e is the Speaker; (4) e is the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect; (5) e is the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy; or (b) If an Oligarch becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, the GWotO shall remove that Player from the Oligarchy. (c) An Oligarch who ceases to be a Player ceases to be an Oligarch. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4555 (Elysion), 22 March 2004 text: (a) A Player is ineligible to be an Oligarch if and only if any of the following are true: (1) e is not active; (2) e has three or more Blots; (3) e is the Speaker; (4) e is the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect; (5) e is the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy; or (6) eir Potency is less than the Potency Threshold and has been continuously so for at least five days; (b) If an Oligarch becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, the GWotO shall remove that Player from the Oligarchy. (c) An Oligarch who ceases to be a Player ceases to be an Oligarch. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4568 (Maud), 27 April 2004 text: (a) A Player is ineligible to be an Oligarch if and only if any of the following are true: (1) e is not active; (2) e has three or more Blots; (3) e is the Speaker; (4) e is the Electee to the Office of Speaker-Elect; or (5) e is the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy. (6) eir Potency is less than the Potency Threshold and has been continuously so for at least five days; (b) If an Oligarch becomes ineligible to be an Oligarch, the GWotO shall remove that Player from the Oligarchy. (c) An Oligarch who ceases to be a Player ceases to be an Oligarch. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: A Player is an Eligible Shareholder unless: (1) e is not active; (2) e has three or more Blots; (3) e has fewer than zero points; (4) e is the Speaker; or (5) e is the Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: A Player is an Eligible Shareholder unless: (1) e is not active; (2) e has three or more Blots; (3) e is the Speaker; or (4) e is the Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: A player is an eligible shareholder unless is not active, has three or more blots, or is the Speaker. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4804 (Maud), 15 June 2005 text: A player is an eligible shareholder unless e is not active, has three or more blots, or is the Speaker. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1963 by Proposal 4829 (Maud), 30 July 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1964 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1964 by Proposal 01-005 (Steve), 2 February 2001 text: Whenever there exist Oligarchy positions which are neither occupied nor pending, and no Oligarchy Auction is in progress, the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy (GWoTO) shall initiate an Auction for a number of positions equal to the number of positions neither occupied nor pending. At most one Auction of Oligarchy positions shall be conducted at a time; if the number of vacant positions increases during an Auction, the GWoTO shall not initiate a new Auction until the current Auction ends. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1964 by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1965 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1965 by Proposal 4111 (Elysion), 20 February 2001 text: As soon as possible after an Ordinary Proposal fails quorum, the Assessor shall announce that it has done so. Upon such an announcement, the Proposal becomes Democratic, its Voting period is extended to end seven days after the announcement, and all Votes previously cast on it are cancelled. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4161 (Steve), 5 June 2001 text: As soon as possible after an Ordinary Proposal fails Quorum, the Assessor shall publish a Notice of Complacency to that effect. Publication by the Assessor of a Notice of Complacency results in a copy of the Proposal being added to the Proposal Pool. This new Proposal is Democratic and Distributable, and is deemed to have been submitted by the entity that submitted the Ordinary Proposal. If an Ordinary Proposal has achieved Quorum, publication by the Assessor of a Notice of Complacency for that Proposal is the Class 2 Crime of Sending It Back Where It Don't Belong. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4487 (root), 28 April 2003 text: As soon as possible after an ordinary proposal fails quorum, the Assessor shall publish a Notice of Complacency to that effect. In addition, at any time during the voting period of an ordinary proposal for which the number of entities eligible to vote on the proposal is less than the quorum of the proposal, the Assessor may immediately publish a Notice of Complacency without waiting for the proposal's voting period to end. Upon publication by the Assessor of a Notice of Complacency for a proposal, the proposal is immediately aborted. In addition, the copy of the proposal that is added to the proposal pool as a result of the abortion becomes democratic and distributable. Publication by the Assessor of a Notice of Complacency not strictly authorized or required by this rule is the Class 2 Crime of Sending It Back Where It Don't Belong. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: As soon as possible after an ordinary proposal fails quorum, the Assessor shall publish a Notice of Complacency to that effect. In addition, at any time during the voting period of an ordinary proposal for which the number of entities eligible to vote on the proposal is less than the quorum of the proposal, the Assessor may immediately publish a Notice of Complacency without waiting for the proposal's voting period to end. Upon publication by the Assessor of a Notice of Complacency for a proposal, the proposal is immediately aborted. In addition, the copy of the proposal that is added to the proposal pool as a result of the abortion becomes democratic and distributable. Publication by the Assessor of a Notice of Complacency not strictly authorized or required by this rule is the Class 2 Crime of Sending It Back Where It Don't Belong. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4717 (Murphy), 25 April 2005 text: As soon as possible after an ordinary proposal fails quorum, the Assessor shall publish a Notice of Complacency to that effect. In addition, at any time during the voting period of an ordinary proposal for which the number of entities eligible to vote on the proposal is less than the quorum of the proposal, the Assessor may immediately publish a Notice of Complacency without waiting for the proposal's voting period to end. When the Assessor publishes a Notice of Complacency for a proposal, it becomes extraordinary. Publication by the Assessor of a Notice of Complacency not strictly authorized or required by this rule is the Class 2 Crime of Sending It Back Where It Don't Belong. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1965 by Proposal 4817 (Goethe), 10 July 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1966 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1966 by Proposal 4126 (Kelly), 28 March 2001 text: Bonds are Property. Each Bond, in addition to being a Property, has the following characteristics: (a) an issuer (which must be a Player or an entity with an Executor); (b) a face value, expressed as the positive multiple of the MUQ of some Currency; and (c) a maturity date. A species of Bond consists of all Bonds with the same issuer, face value and maturity date. All Bonds of a given species are fungible. In any transaction involving Bonds, it is sufficient to identify the Bonds involved by species. The Recordkeeper of Bonds shall be the Usuror. A Bond is mature on and after its maturity date, and is immature prior to that date. If the maturity date of a Bond is specified only as a date, it shall be presumed to mature at midnight UTC of that day (the beginning of that day). history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1966 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1967 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1967 by Proposal 4124 (Kelly), 28 March 2001 text: New Bonds are created when an entity with Bond Issuance Authority sends a message to the Usuror stating that e is creating one or more new Bonds, provided that that message sets forth the face value and maturity date of each Bond to be created, and by paying the applicable Fee (if any) for creating those Bonds. The newly created Bonds are possessed by the entity sending the message. The issuer of the newly created Bonds is the entity sending the message. The Fee for creating Bonds shall be equal to the Basic Fee for issuing Bonds. However, the Fee shall only be required for the first Bond of a given species created in the same message; there is no additional fee for additional Bonds of the same species created in the same message. Furthermore, the Bank need never pay a Fee to create Bonds. This Rule defers to any Rule which imposes further restrictions on the ability of an entity to create new Bonds. The Bank, each Player, each Contest, and each Group all have Bond Issuance Authority. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1967 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1968 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1968 by Proposal 4126 (Kelly), 28 March 2001 text: Any entity which possesses a Bond may destroy that Bond by sending a message to the Usuror identifying the Bonds to be destroyed. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1968 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1969 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1969 by Proposal 4126 (Kelly), 28 March 2001 text: Any entity which possesses an unredeemed, mature Bond may redeem it by transferring the Bond to its Issuer, expressing in eir Notice of Transfer the purpose of redeeming the Bond. When the issuer of a Bond receives an unredeemed, mature Bond from another entity where the transfer was executed for the purpose of redemption, the Bond in question is thereby redeemed, and the issuer incurs a debt to the transferor of that Bond for the face value of the bond. If the issuer of a Bond receives an unredeemed, immature Bond from another entity where the transfer was executed for the purpose of redemption, the issuer incurs a debt to the transferor for that Bond; but if the Bond in question matures while still in the possession of the issuer, this debt is cancelled and the issuer incurs a debt to the transferor of that Bond for the face value of the Bond, as if the transfer had been made at the time the Bond matured. Once redeemed, a Bond may not be further transferred. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1969 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1970 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1970 by Proposal 4126 (Kelly), 28 March 2001 text: The Office of the Usuror is hereby established. The Usuror shall have a Budget. The Usuror's Budget shall consist of the Basic Fee for issuing Bonds. This Fee shall be expressed as a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary and shall be an integral multiple of 0.1, not less than 0, and not greater than 4. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4144 (Blob), 22 April 2001 text: The Office of the Usuror is hereby established. The Usuror shall have a Budget. The Usuror's Budget shall consist of the following items: (i) The Basic Fee for issuing Bonds. This Fee shall be expressed as a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary and shall be an integral multiple of 0.1, not less than 0, and not greater than 4. (ii) The purchase rates at which the Bank will buy Bonds in Stems. These rates are expressed as percentages, in the range 0% to 100% inclusive. Each purchase rate applies only to a single combination of face value and time to maturity. Different rates may apply to different such combinations. Any combination for which no rate is specified has a purchase rate of 0%. (iii) The Credit Limit, which is a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary, between 0 and 10 inclusive. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4171 (Blob), 26 June 2001 text: The Office of the Usuror is hereby established. The Usuror is a Limited Executor of the Bank, with the authority to satisfy debts of Bonds owed by the Bank to its creditors. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Usuror is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for Bonds and is partially responsible for the woes of revolving credit. The Usuror is a Limited Executor of the Bank, with the authority to satisfy debts of Bonds owed by the Bank to its creditors. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1970 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1971 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1971 by Proposal 4126 (Kelly), 28 March 2001 text: The Bank, by the Treasuror, may issue Bonds with two Supporters. The number and species of Bonds to be issued must be set forth at the time the Treasuror seeks Support for the action. The Bank may not otherwise issue Bonds except through the mechanism set forth in this paragraph. The Bank, by the Treasuror, may Auction Bonds Without Three Objections. Each Auction of Bank Bonds shall consist of some number of a single species of Bond. The species of Bond, the number of Bonds of that species, the Auction Currency, and the Minimum Bid of each Auction shall be determined by the Treasuror as part of the message indicating eir intent to hold a Bank Bond Auction. The Auctioneer of all Bank Bond Auctions shall be the Treasuror. The Bank is not required to actually possess the Bonds it intends to Auction at the time the intent to conduct an Auction is announced or at the time the Auction begins. However, if the Bank, by virtue of not having sufficient quantity of some species of Bond, is unable to satisfy a debt arising from a Bond Auction within seven days of when the Auction ends, the Player who was Treasuror at the time the Auction began commits the offense of Selling the Blue Sky, a Class 6 Crime. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4249 (Murphy), 19 February 2002 text: The Bank, by the Treasuror, may issue Bonds with two Supporters. The number and species of Bonds to be issued must be set forth at the time the Treasuror seeks Support for the action. The Bank may not otherwise issue Bonds except through the mechanism set forth in this paragraph. The Bank, by the Treasuror, may Auction Bonds Without Three Objections. Each Auction of Bank Bonds shall consist of some number of a single species of Bond. The species of Bond, the number of Bonds of that species, the Auction Currency, and the Minimum Bid of each Auction shall be determined by the Treasuror as part of the message indicating eir intent to hold a Bank Bond Auction. The Bank is not required to actually possess the Bonds it intends to Auction at the time the intent to conduct an Auction is announced or at the time the Auction begins. However, if the Bank, by virtue of not having sufficient quantity of some species of Bond, is unable to satisfy a debt arising from a Bond Auction within seven days of when the Auction ends, the Player who was Treasuror at the time the Auction began commits the offense of Selling the Blue Sky, a Class 6 Crime. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1971 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1972 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1972 by Proposal 4126 (Kelly), 28 March 2001 text: Whenever an entity which is the issuer of one or more nonredeemed Bonds ceases to have an Executor, all unredeemed Bonds issued by that entity are accelerated as described by this Rule. When a Bond is accelerated, the Bond immediately becomes mature and is deemed to have been redeemed. The issuer becomes liable for a debt to the current owner of the Bond for the face value of the Bond. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1972 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1973 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1973 by Proposal 4126 (Kelly), 28 March 2001 text: No Currency may be destroyed if there exist an unredeemed Bond whose face value is denominated in that Currency. This Rule takes precedence over any other Rule which permits the destruction of Currencies. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1973 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1974 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1974 by Proposal 4126 (Kelly), 28 March 2001 text: The Bank, by the Treasuror, may Mint new units of a Bank Currency only as follows: (a) Once during the thirty day period immediately following the registration of a new Player, a number of Stems not to exceed five times the Basic Officer Salary per such new Player, with Two Supporters; (b) In the event that the Voting Entitlement Surplus exceeds the Bank's holdings of VEs, a number of VEs not to exceed the difference between the Voting Entitlement Surplus and the Bank's Holdings of VEs, with Two Supporters; (c) At any time, Without Objection. The Bank may not otherwise Mint new units of a Bank Currency except through the mechanism set forth in this Rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4234 (Goethe), 22 November 2001 text: The Bank, by the Treasuror, may Mint new units of a Bank Currency only as follows: (a) At any time, Without Objection, unless the Currency to be Minted is Stems. (b) In the event that the Voting Entitlement Surplus exceeds the Bank's holdings of VEs, a number of VEs not to exceed the difference between the Voting Entitlement Surplus and the Bank's Holdings of VEs, with Two Supporters. The Bank may not otherwise Mint new units of a Bank Currency except through the mechanism set forth in this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1974 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1975 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1975 by Proposal 4142 (Murphy), 15 April 2001 text: There is an Office of Assistant Director of Personnel, whose responsibility it is to hold Elections for Officers. The Assistant Director of Personnel's Report shall include: (a) a list of all Offices; (b) for each Office, the Electee to the Office and the earliest date such that e was the Electee to the Office on that date, and no other Player has been the Electee to the Office since that date; (c) for each Office where the current holder of the Office is not the Electee, the current holder of the Office, and the date on which e became the holder of the Office; (d) for each Office, the date on which the Term of Service for the Office expires (or an indication that the Office is held in perpetuity); and (e) the identity of the Speaker and the date of the next Quarterly Speaker Transition. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Assistant Director of Personnel (ADoP) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for offices and the Speaker and is responsible for holding elections for offices. The ADoP's Weekly Report shall include: (a) a list of all offices; (b) for each office, the electee to the office and the date on which e most recently became electee to that office; (c) for each office for which the holder of the office is not the electee, the current holder of the office, and the date on which e most recently became holder of that office; (d) for each office, the date on which the term of service for that office ends, or an indication that the office is held in perpetuity; and (e) the identity of the Speaker and the date of the next quarterly speaker transition. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4259 (root), 21 February 2002 text: The Assistant Director of Personnel (ADoP) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for offices and the Speaker and is responsible for holding elections for offices. The ADoP's Weekly Report shall include: (a) a list of all offices; (b) for each office, the electee to the office and the date on which e most recently became electee to that office; (c) for each office for which the holder of the office is not the electee, the current holder of the office, and the date on which e most recently became holder of that office; (d) for each office, the date on which the term of service for that office ends, or an indication that the office is held in perpetuity; and history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4267 (root), 22 March 2002 text: The Assistant Director of Personnel (ADoP) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for offices and the Speaker and is responsible for holding elections for offices. The ADoP's Weekly Report shall include: (a) a list of all offices; (b) for each office, the electee to the office and the date on which e most recently became electee to that office; (c) for each office for which the holder of the office is not the electee, the current holder of the office, and the date on which e most recently became holder of that office; (d) for each office, the date on which the term of service for that office ends, or an indication that the office is held in perpetuity. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: The Assistant Director of Personnel (ADoP) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for offices and the Speaker and is responsible for holding elections for offices. The ADoP's Weekly Report shall include: (a) a list of all offices; (b) for each office, the electee to the office and the date on which e most recently became electee to that office; (c) for each office for which the holder of the office is not the electee, the current holder of the office, and the date on which e most recently became holder of that office; (d) for each office, the date on which the term of service for that office ends, or an indication that the office is held in perpetuity; (e) the identity of the Speaker, and the date of the next quarterly Speaker transition. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4768 (root), 25 May 2005 text: The Associate Director of Personnel (ADoP) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for offices and the Speaker and is responsible for holding elections for offices. The ADoP's Weekly Report shall include: (a) a list of all offices; (b) for each office, the electee to the office and the date on which e most recently became electee to that office; (c) for each office for which the holder of the office is not the electee, the current holder of the office, and the date on which e most recently became holder of that office; (d) for each office, the date on which the term of service for that office ends, or an indication that the office is held in perpetuity; (e) the identity of the Speaker, and the date of the next quarterly Speaker transition. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4769 (Sherlock), 25 May 2005 text: The Associate Director of Personnel (ADoP) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for offices and the Speaker and is responsible for holding elections for offices. The ADoP's Bi-Weekly Report shall include: (a) a list of all offices; (b) for each office, the electee to the office and the date on which e most recently became electee to that office; (c) for each office for which the holder of the office is not the electee, the current holder of the office, and the date on which e most recently became holder of that office; (d) for each office, the date on which the term of service for that office ends, or an indication that the office is held in perpetuity; (e) the identity of the Speaker, and the date of the next quarterly Speaker transition. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: The Associate Director of Personnel (ADoP) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for offices and the Speaker and is responsible for holding elections for offices. The ADoP's Weekly Report shall include: (a) a list of all offices; (b) for each office, the electee to the office and the date on which e most recently became electee to that office; (c) for each office for which the holder of the office is not the electee, the current holder of the office, and the date on which e most recently became holder of that office; (d) for each office, the date on which the term of service for that office ends, or an indication that the office is held in perpetuity; (e) the identity of the Speaker. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1975 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1976 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1976 by Proposal 4143 (Blob), 22 April 2001 text: In the four weeks immediately after eir Grace Period ends, a Player can award a Mentor's Bonus to any other player e deems to have been most helpful to em as a new Player. E can only make one such award. A Zombie may not make such an award. The award is made by public announcement. Upon such an announcement the Bank shall incur a debt to the named Mentor equal to the New Player Award. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4172 (root), 26 June 2001 text: In the four weeks immediately after eir Grace Period ends, a Player can award a Mentor's Bonus to any other player e deems to have been most helpful to em as a new Player. E can only make one such award. A Zombie may not make such an award. The award is made by public announcement. Upon such an announcement the Bank shall incur a debt in Stems to the named Mentor equal to the New Player Award for Stems. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 text: In the four weeks immediately after eir Grace Period ends, a Player can award a Mentor's Bonus to any other player e deems to have been most helpful to em as a new Player. E can only make one such award. The award is made by public announcement. Upon such an announcement the Bank shall incur a debt in Stems to the named Mentor equal to the New Player Award for Stems. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4316 (Craig), 28 May 2002 text: In the four weeks immediately after eir Grace Period ends, a Player can award a Mentor's Bonus to any other players e deems to have been most helpful to em as a new Player. E can only make one such award, but may split it among any number of players. The award is made by public announcement. Upon such an announcement the Bank shall incur a debt in Stems to the named Mentor equal to the New Player Award for Stems. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4468 (Sherlock), 17 March 2003 text: In the four weeks immediately after eir Grace Period ends, a Player (hereafter, the 'Protege') may award a Mentor's Bonus to each Player (hereafter, a 'Mentor') e deems to have been helpful to em as a new Player. Each award is made by public announcement and must specify the Mentor's name and a number of Stems. Upon such an announcement the Bank shall incur a debt of that number of Stems to the named Mentor. The number of Stems a Protege may award in all of eir Mentor's Bonuses shall not exceed the number of Stems in the New Player Award. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: In the four weeks immediately after eir Grace Period ends, a Player (hereafter, the 'Protege') may post a single message of Gratitude, naming up to four other Players (hereafter, 'Mentors') e deems to have been helpful to em as a new Player. The effect of such a message is to award each Mentor the Boon of mentorship and award the Protege the Boon of politeness. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1976 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1977 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1977 by Proposal 4144 (Blob), 22 April 2001 text: A Player may sell a Bond by paying a Fee equal to that Bond, and informing the Usuror that e is selling the Bond. If the rules permit this sale, then Usuror shall then pay out to that player an amount equal to the face value of the Bond multiplied by the applicable purchase rate set in the Usuror's Budget. The value of the purchase rate shall be determined as at the time the Bond was transferred. If the rules do not permit the sale, then the Bank incurs a debt to the transferor for that Bond. The Bank, by the Treasuror, may redeem any mature Bonds it owns. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1977 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1978 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1978 by Proposal 4144 (Blob), 22 April 2001 text: A Player's current credit is equal to the sum of the values of all Bonds owned by the Bank issued by that Player with a face value in Stems. Each Player's credit value shall be part of the Usuror's Weekly Report. The sale of a Bond is permitted only if it would not cause that Player's credit to exceed the Credit Limit set forth in the Usuror's Budget. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4171 (Blob), 26 June 2001 text: A Player's current credit in a given currency is equal to the sum of the values of all Bonds owned by the Bank issued by that Player with a face value in that currency. Each Player's credit value in each currency shall be part of the Usuror's Weekly Report. The sale of a Bond is permitted only if it would not cause that Player's credit to exceed the Credit Limit in the currency in question as set forth in the Usuror's Budget. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4196 (neil), 26 July 2001 text: The credit in a given currency of an entity with Bond Issuance Authority is equal to the sum of the values of all Bonds owned by the Bank issued by that entity with a face value in that currency. The Usuror's Weekly Report shall list the credit in each currency of each non-Bank entity with Bond Issuance Authority, if that credit is greater than zero. The sale of a Bond is permitted only if one of the following is the case: * it is issued by the Bank. * it is issued by a player and would not cause the issuer's credit to exceed the Player Credit Limit in the currency in question as set forth in the Usuror's Budget. * it is issued by a non-Player entity other than the Bank and would not cause the issuer's credit to exceed the Non-Player Credit Limit in the currency in question as set forth in the Usuror's Budget. The Credit Limit for non-Bank currencies is 0. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1978 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1979 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1979 by Proposal 4144 (Blob), 22 April 2001 text: The Treasuror may place or remove a moratorium on all bond purchases with Support. Once a moratorium has been placed the Bank may not purchase any Bonds until the veto is removed. If a moratorium is in place, the Treasuror must report this in eir Monthly Report. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4206 (neil), 3 September 2001 text: The Treasuror may, with Support, place or remove a moratorium on bond purchases in any specific Bank currency. Once a moratorium has been placed, the Bank may not purchase any Bonds with a face value in that currency, until that moratorium is removed. The Treasuror must report any moratoria currently in place in eir Monthly Report. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1979 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1980 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1980 by Proposal 4146 (Goethe), 22 April 2001 text: Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, a Group becomes a Parliamentary Group (P-Group) if its Vizier posts such intent to the Public Forum, provided at least two of its Members are not in eir Grace Period, and either: (a) the Group has been in existence for one month and has cast one legal Democratic Vote; or (b) the Group was formed prior to May 1, 2001. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1980 by Proposal 4254 (Goethe), 21 February 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1981 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1981 by Proposal 4156 (Ian), 18 May 2001 text: (a) A Player who intentionally makes a valid but unauthorized transfer of Property from any entity to another entity commits the Class 10 Crime of Embezzlement. (b) An entity which receives Property from any entity as the result of an intentional, valid and unauthorized transfer incurs a debt to the Bank for all such Property. (c) A Player who has been informed that e, or an entity of which e is an Executor, has incurred a debt of the type decribed in (b) and who does not act to satisfy that debt within in a week of being informed of it commits the Class 10 Crime of Receiving Stolen Property. (d) For the the purposes of this Rule, a valid but unauthorized transfer is considered to have been made intentionally if and only if, at the time of the transfer, the Player making it: (1) knew that the transfer was valid; (2) knew that the transfer was unauthorized; and (3) realized that e was making the transfer. (e) In particular, a Player who makes a valid but unauthorized transfer of Property from the Bank as the result of an accident or mistake does not commit Embezzlement. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4190 (Steve), 18 July 2001 text: (a) A transfer of Property from one entity to another entity which is made without being explicitly required or permitted by the Rules is unauthorized. (b) A Player who intentionally makes a valid but unauthorized transfer of Property from any entity to another entity commits the Class 10 Crime of Embezzlement. (c) An entity which receives Property from any entity as the result of an intentional, valid and unauthorized transfer incurs a debt to the transferor for all such Property. (d) A Player who has been informed that e, or an entity of which e is the Prime Executor, has incurred a debt of the type decribed in (c) and who does not act to satisfy that debt within in a week of being informed of it commits the Class 10 Crime of Receiving Stolen Property. (e) For the the purposes of this Rule, a valid but unauthorized transfer is considered to have been made intentionally if and only if, at the time of the transfer, the Player making it: (1) knew that the transfer was valid; (2) knew that the transfer was unauthorized; and (3) realized that e was making the transfer. (f) In particular, a Player who makes a valid but unauthorized transfer of Property as the result of an accident or mistake does not commit Embezzlement. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4256 (Murphy), 21 February 2002 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: (a) A transfer of Property from one entity to another entity which is made without being explicitly required or permitted by the Rules is unauthorized. (b) A Player who intentionally makes a valid but unauthorized transfer of Property from any entity to another entity commits the Class 10 Crime of Embezzlement. (c) An entity which receives Property as the result of a valid but unauthorized transfer incurs a debt to the Payor of that transfer for all Property thus received. (d) A Player who has been informed that e, or an entity of which e is the Prime Executor, has incurred a debt of the type decribed in (c) and who does not act to satisfy that debt within in a week of being informed of it commits the Class 10 Crime of Receiving Stolen Property. (e) For the the purposes of this Rule, a valid but unauthorized transfer is considered to have been made intentionally if and only if, at the time of the transfer, the Player making it: (1) knew that the transfer was valid; (2) knew that the transfer was unauthorized; and (3) realized that e was making the transfer. (f) In particular, a Player who makes a valid but unauthorized transfer of Property as the result of an accident or mistake does not commit Embezzlement. text: (a) A transfer of Property from one entity to another entity which is made without being explicitly required or permitted by the Rules is unauthorized. (b) A Player who intentionally makes a valid but unauthorized transfer of Property from any entity to another entity commits the Class 10 Crime of Embezzlement. (c) An entity which receives Property as the result of a valid but unauthorized transfer incurs a debt to the Payor of that transfer for all Property thus received. (d) A Player who has been informed that e, or an entity of which e is the Prime Executor, has incurred a debt of the type decribed in (c) and who does not act to satisfy that debt within in a week of being informed of it commits the Class 10 Crime of Receiving Stolen Property. (e) For the the purposes of this Rule, a valid but unauthorized transfer is considered to have been made intentionally if and only if, at the time of the transfer, the Player making it: (1) knew that the transfer was valid; (2) knew that the transfer was unauthorized; and (3) realized that e was making the transfer. (f) In particular, a Player who makes a valid but unauthorized transfer of Property as the result of an accident or mistake does not commit Embezzlement. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4312 (root), 28 May 2002 text: (a) A transfer of Property from one entity to another entity which is made without being explicitly required or permitted by the Rules is unauthorized. (b) Unless otherwise specified, Players and Organizations are always permitted to transfer their own Property. (c) A Player who intentionally makes a valid but unauthorized transfer of Property from any entity to another entity commits the Class 10 Crime of Embezzlement. (d) An entity which receives Property as the result of a valid but unauthorized transfer incurs a debt to the Payor of that transfer for all Property thus received. (e) A Player who has been informed that e, or an entity of which e is the Prime Executor, has incurred a debt of the type decribed in (c) and who does not act to satisfy that debt within in a week of being informed of it commits the Class 10 Crime of Receiving Stolen Property. (f) For the the purposes of this Rule, a valid but unauthorized transfer is considered to have been made intentionally if and only if, at the time of the transfer, the Player making it: (1) knew that the transfer was valid; (2) knew that the transfer was unauthorized; and (3) realized that e was making the transfer. (g) In particular, a Player who makes a valid but unauthorized transfer of Property as the result of an accident or mistake does not commit Embezzlement. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1981 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1982 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1982 by Proposal 4163 (Kelly), 11 June 2001 text: At any time, the issuer of a Bond may call that Bond by publishing a notice stating that e is calling it. When the issuer of a Bond calls the bond, it is immediately accelerated, as described elsewhere. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1982 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1983 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1983 by Proposal 4167 (root), 11 June 2001 text: The Auction Procedure for a Vickrey Auction is the same as the Default Auction Procedure with the following modifications: (a) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. Any Player with the same Executor as the Auctioneer may bid only in the first 72 hours of the Auction. (b) Making Bids: If the Bidder has the same Executor as the Auctioneer, then the Bids must be made in a message to a Public Forum. Otherwise, the Bidder may either Bid in a Public Forum or privately to the Auctioneer. (c) End of Auction: The Auction shall end one week after it begins. (d) The Final Auction Price is: (1) The amount of the largest nonwinning uncancelled valid Bid, if there were N or more valid uncancelled Bids in the Auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were fewer than N valid uncancelled Bids. For the purpose of this Rule, N is equal to the number of items being Auctioned. The Auctioneer and eir Executor must treat all bids made in a Vickrey Auction as secret while the Auction is in progress. Other players, however, are free to reveal as much about their bidding as they wish. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4176 (root), 7 July 2001 text: The Auction Procedure for a Vickrey Auction is the same as the Default Auction Procedure with the following modifications: (a) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. Any Player with the same Executor as the Auctioneer may bid only in the first 72 hours of the Auction. (b) Making Bids: If the Bidder has the same Executor as the Auctioneer, then the Bids must be made in a message to a Public Forum. Otherwise, the Bidder may either Bid in a Public Forum or privately to the Auctioneer. (c) End of Auction: The Auction shall end one week after it begins. (d) The Final Auction Price is: (1) The amount of the largest nonwinning uncancelled valid Bid, if there were more than N valid uncancelled Bids in the Auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were N or fewer valid uncancelled Bids. For the purpose of this Rule, N is equal to the number of items being Auctioned. The Auctioneer and eir Executor must treat all bids made in a Vickrey Auction as secret while the Auction is in progress. Other players, however, are free to reveal as much about their bidding as they wish. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: The Auction Procedure for a Vickrey Auction is the same as the Default Auction Procedure with the following modifications: (a) Bidders: Every Player not on Hold may Bid in an Auction. Activity is measured at the time a Player sends eir Bid. Any Player with the same Executor as the Auctioneer may bid only in the first 72 hours of the Auction. (b) Making Bids: If the Bidder has the same Executor as the Auctioneer, then the Bids must be made in a message to a Public Forum. Otherwise, the Bidder may either Bid in a Public Forum or privately to the Auctioneer. (c) End of Auction: The Auction shall end one week after it begins. (d) The Final Auction Price is: (1) The amount of the largest nonwinning uncancelled valid Bid, if there were more than N valid uncancelled Bids in the Auction; (2) The Starting Bid, if there were N or fewer valid uncancelled Bids. For the purpose of this Rule, N is equal to the number of items being Auctioned. The Auctioneer and eir Executor must treat all bids made in a Vickrey Auction as secret while the Auction is in progress. Other players, however, are free to reveal as much about their bidding as they wish. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4356 (Steve), 7 August 2002 text: The Auction Procedure for a Vickrey Auction is the same as the Default Auction Procedure with the following modifications: (a) Bidders: any Player with the same Executor as the Auctioneer may bid only in the first 72 hours of the Auction. (b) Bidding: if a bidder has the same Executor as the Auctioneer, then eir bids must be made publically. Otherwise, bidders may bid either publically, or privately to the Auctioneer. (c) End of Auction: the Auction shall end one week after it begins. (d) The Final Auction Price is either: (1) The amount of the largest nonwinning uncancelled valid bid, if there were more than N valid uncancelled bids in the Auction; or (2) the Starting Bid, if there were N or fewer valid uncancelled bids. For the purpose of this Rule, N is equal to the number of items being Auctioned. The Auctioneer and eir Executor must treat all bids made in a Vickrey Auction as secret while the Auction is in progress. Other players, however, are free to reveal as much about their bidding as they wish. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4358 (Sir Toby), 16 August 2002 text: The Auction Procedure for a Vickrey Auction is the same as the Default Auction Procedure with the following modifications: (a) Bidders: any Player with the same Executor as the Auctioneer may bid only in the first 72 hours of the Auction. (b) Bidding: if a bidder has the same Executor as the Auctioneer, then eir bids must be made publically. Otherwise, bidders may bid either publically, or privately to the Auctioneer. (d) End of Auction: the Auction shall end one week after it begins. (e) The Final Auction Price is either: (1) The amount of the largest nonwinning uncancelled valid bid, if there were more than N valid uncancelled bids in the Auction; or (2) the Starting Bid, if there were N or fewer valid uncancelled bids. For the purpose of this Rule, N is equal to the number of items being Auctioned. The Auctioneer and eir Executor must treat all bids made in a Vickrey Auction as secret while the Auction is in progress. Other players, however, are free to reveal as much about their bidding as they wish. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4372 (Sir Toby), 6 September 2002 text: The Auction Procedure for a Vickrey Auction is the same as the Default Auction Procedure with the following modifications: (a) Bidders: any Player with the same Executor as the Auctioneer may bid only in the first 72 hours of the Auction. (b) Bidding: if a bidder has the same Executor as the Auctioneer, then eir bids must be made publically. Otherwise, bidders may bid either publically, or privately to the Auctioneer. (c) Canceling Bids: if a Bidder has the same Executor as the Auctioneer, then eir Bids must be canceled publically. Otherwise, bidders may cancel bids either publically, or privately to the Auctioneer. (d) End of Auction: the Auction shall end one week after it begins. (e) The Final Auction Price is either: (1) The amount of the largest nonwinning uncancelled valid bid, if there were more than N valid uncancelled bids in the Auction; or (2) the Starting Bid, if there were N or fewer valid uncancelled bids. For the purpose of this Rule, N is equal to the number of items being Auctioned. The Auctioneer and eir Executor must treat all bids made in a Vickrey Auction as secret while the Auction is in progress. Other players, however, are free to reveal as much about their bidding as they wish. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1983 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1984 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1984 by Proposal 4167 (root), 11 June 2001 text: There is a type of Auction named a Raffle. The Auction Procedure for a Raffle is as follows: (a) Riff-Raff: The Riff-Raff is responsible for selling Raffle tickets and announcing the result of the Raffle. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Riff-Raff. (b) Entrants: Every Player not on Hold may enter the Raffle. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player enters the Raffle. (c) Raffle Currency: Each Raffle is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Raffle must specify the currency to be used, or the Raffle cannot take place. (d) Number of Items: Each Raffle is conducted for 1 or more identical items. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of items up for bid in the Raffle. (e) Start of Auction: The Raffle begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Raffle is begun, as defined in other Rules, is published, together with the identity of the Riff-Raff, the Raffle Currency, the number of items, and the Ticket Price. (f) Ticket Price: All tickets shall have the same Ticket Price. If not otherwise specified, the Ticket Price shall be equal to the MUQ of the Raffle Currency. (g) Buying Tickets: An Entrant buys a ticket by paying a Fee of the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency to the Bank, provided that the purchase is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. Each Entrant may buy as many tickets as e desires during the Auction. (h) End of Raffle: If, one week after the Raffle started, no Raffle tickets have been bought, the Raffle ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Raffle ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid ticket purchase having been made. The Raffle shall end 14 days after the Raffle has started, if it has not ended earlier. (i) Winning Tickets: When the Raffle ends, the Riff-Raff shall randomly determine N valid Raffle tickets as having won the Raffle. Each Raffle ticket has one chance to win, and multiple Raffle tickets bought by the same Entrant may win. If there were less than N valid Raffle tickets, then all valid Raffle tickets shall be considered to have won the Raffle. (j) Final Auction Price: The Final Auction Price for a Raffle is equal to the Ticket Price. (k) Riff-Raff's Gratuity: Within a week after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff may pay out to emself the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency if: (1) The Raffle had at least three separate winning Entrants, not including the Riff-Raff; and (2) The Riff-Raff has not already done so for that Raffle. (l) Announcing Winners: As soon as possible after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff shall announce the winning tickets and transfer to each winning Entrant a separate Auctioned item for each of eir winning tickets. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4176 (root), 7 July 2001 text: There is a type of Auction named a Raffle. The Auction Procedure for a Raffle is as follows: (a) Riff-Raff: The Riff-Raff is responsible for selling Raffle tickets and announcing the result of the Raffle. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Riff-Raff. (b) Entrants: Every Player not on Hold may enter the Raffle. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player enters the Raffle. (c) Raffle Currency: Each Raffle is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Raffle must specify the currency to be used, or the Raffle cannot take place. (d) Number of Lots: Each Raffle is conducted for 1 or more identical lots of identical items, which must all be owned by the same entity. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of lots up for bid in the Raffle. (e) Start of Auction: The Raffle begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Raffle is begun, as defined in other Rules, is published, together with the identity of the Riff-Raff, the Raffle Currency, the number of items, and the Ticket Price. (f) Ticket Price: All tickets shall have the same Ticket Price. If not otherwise specified, the Ticket Price shall be equal to the MUQ of the Raffle Currency. (g) Buying Tickets: An Entrant buys a ticket by paying a Fee of the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency to the Bank, provided that the purchase is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. Each Entrant may buy as many tickets as e desires during the Auction. (h) End of Raffle: If, one week after the Raffle started, no Raffle tickets have been bought, the Raffle ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Raffle ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid ticket purchase having been made. The Raffle shall end 14 days after the Raffle has started, if it has not ended earlier. (i) Winning Tickets: When the Raffle ends, the Riff-Raff shall randomly determine N valid Raffle tickets as having won the Raffle. Each Raffle ticket has one chance to win, and multiple Raffle tickets bought by the same Entrant may win. If there were less than N valid Raffle tickets, then all valid Raffle tickets shall be considered to have won the Raffle. (j) Final Auction Price: The Final Auction Price for a Raffle is equal to the Ticket Price. (k) Riff-Raff's Gratuity: Within a week after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff may pay out to emself the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency if: (1) The Raffle had at least three separate winning Entrants, not including the Riff-Raff; and (2) The Riff-Raff has not already done so for that Raffle. (l) Announcing Winners: As soon as possible after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff shall announce the winning tickets. Upon this announcement, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to each winning Entrant for each of eir winning tickets. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4177 (Elysion), 7 July 2001 text: There is a type of Auction named a Raffle. The Auction Procedure for a Raffle is as follows: (a) Riff-Raff: The Riff-Raff is responsible for selling Raffle tickets and announcing the result of the Raffle. Unless otherwise specified, the Speaker shall be the Riff-Raff. (b) Entrants: Every Player not on Hold may enter the Raffle. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player enters the Raffle. However, if a rule prohibits a player from bidding in this Auction, then e is also prohibited from buying tickets. (c) Raffle Currency: Each Raffle is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Raffle must specify the currency to be used, or the Raffle cannot take place. (d) Number of Lots: Each Raffle is conducted for 1 or more identical lots of identical items, which must all be owned by the same entity. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of lots up for bid in the Raffle. (e) Start of Auction: The Raffle begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Raffle is begun, as defined in other Rules, is published, together with the identity of the Riff-Raff, the Raffle Currency, the number of items, and the Ticket Price. (f) Ticket Price: All tickets shall have the same Ticket Price. If not otherwise specified, the Ticket Price shall be equal to the MUQ of the Raffle Currency. (g) Buying Tickets: An Entrant buys a ticket by paying a Fee of the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency to the Bank, provided that the purchase is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. Each Entrant may buy as many tickets as e desires during the Auction. (h) End of Raffle: If, one week after the Raffle started, no Raffle tickets have been bought, the Raffle ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Raffle ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid ticket purchase having been made. The Raffle shall end 14 days after the Raffle has started, if it has not ended earlier. (i) Winning Tickets: When the Raffle ends, the Riff-Raff shall randomly determine N valid Raffle tickets as having won the Raffle. Each Raffle ticket has one chance to win, and multiple Raffle tickets bought by the same Entrant may win. If there were less than N valid Raffle tickets, then all valid Raffle tickets shall be considered to have won the Raffle. (j) Final Auction Price: The Final Auction Price for a Raffle is equal to the Ticket Price. (k) Riff-Raff's Gratuity: Within a week after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff may pay out to emself the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency if: (1) The Raffle had at least three separate winning Entrants, not including the Riff-Raff; and (2) The Riff-Raff has not already done so for that Raffle. (l) Announcing Winners: As soon as possible after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff shall announce the winning tickets. Upon this announcement, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to each winning Entrant for each of eir winning tickets. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4265 (Steve), 17 March 2002 text: There is a type of Auction named a Raffle. The Auction Procedure for a Raffle is as follows: (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is responsible for conducting the Raffle. The Auctioneer is herein known as the Riff-Raff. (b) Entrants: Every Player not on Hold may enter the Raffle. On Hold status is measured at the time a Player enters the Raffle. However, if a rule prohibits a player from bidding in this Auction, then e is also prohibited from buying tickets. (c) Raffle Currency: Each Raffle is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Raffle must specify the currency to be used, or the Raffle cannot take place. (d) Number of Lots: Each Raffle is conducted for 1 or more identical lots of identical items, which must all be owned by the same entity. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of lots up for bid in the Raffle. (e) Start of Auction: The Raffle begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Raffle is begun, as defined in other Rules, is published, together with the identity of the Riff-Raff, the Raffle Currency, the number of items, and the Ticket Price. (f) Ticket Price: All tickets shall have the same Ticket Price. If not otherwise specified, the Ticket Price shall be equal to the MUQ of the Raffle Currency. (g) Buying Tickets: An Entrant buys a ticket by paying a Fee of the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency to the Bank, provided that the purchase is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. Each Entrant may buy as many tickets as e desires during the Auction. (h) End of Raffle: If, one week after the Raffle started, no Raffle tickets have been bought, the Raffle ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Raffle ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid ticket purchase having been made. The Raffle shall end 14 days after the Raffle has started, if it has not ended earlier. (i) Winning Tickets: When the Raffle ends, the Riff-Raff shall randomly determine N valid Raffle tickets as having won the Raffle. Each Raffle ticket has one chance to win, and multiple Raffle tickets bought by the same Entrant may win. If there were less than N valid Raffle tickets, then all valid Raffle tickets shall be considered to have won the Raffle. (j) Riff-Raff's Gratuity: Within a week after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff may pay out to emself the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency if: (1) The Raffle had at least three separate winning Entrants, not including the Riff-Raff; and (2) The Riff-Raff has not already done so for that Raffle. (k) Announcing Winners: As soon as possible after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff shall announce the winning tickets. Upon this announcement, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to each winning Entrant for each of eir winning tickets. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4278 (harvel), 3 April 2002 text: There is a type of Auction named a Raffle. The Auction Procedure for a Raffle is as follows: (a) Auctioneer: The Auctioneer is responsible for conducting the Raffle. The Auctioneer is herein known as the Riff-Raff. (b) Entrants: Every Player not on Hold may enter the Raffle. Activity is measured at the time a Player enters the Raffle. However, if a rule prohibits a player from bidding in this Auction, then e is also prohibited from buying tickets. (c) Raffle Currency: Each Raffle is conducted in one particular currency. The Rule requiring a particular Raffle must specify the currency to be used, or the Raffle cannot take place. (d) Number of Lots: Each Raffle is conducted for 1 or more identical lots of identical items, which must all be owned by the same entity. Throughout this Rule, N indicates the number of lots up for bid in the Raffle. (e) Start of Auction: The Raffle begins at the time the first correct and legal announcement that a Raffle is begun, as defined in other Rules, is published, together with the identity of the Riff-Raff, the Raffle Currency, the number of items, and the Ticket Price. (f) Ticket Price: All tickets shall have the same Ticket Price. If not otherwise specified, the Ticket Price shall be equal to the MUQ of the Raffle Currency. (g) Buying Tickets: An Entrant buys a ticket by paying a Fee of the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency to the Bank, provided that the purchase is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. Each Entrant may buy as many tickets as e desires during the Auction. (h) End of Raffle: If, one week after the Raffle started, no Raffle tickets have been bought, the Raffle ends, and has no winner. Otherwise the Raffle ends when 72 hours have passed without a valid ticket purchase having been made. The Raffle shall end 14 days after the Raffle has started, if it has not ended earlier. (i) Winning Tickets: When the Raffle ends, the Riff-Raff shall randomly determine N valid Raffle tickets as having won the Raffle. Each Raffle ticket has one chance to win, and multiple Raffle tickets bought by the same Entrant may win. If there were less than N valid Raffle tickets, then all valid Raffle tickets shall be considered to have won the Raffle. (j) Riff-Raff's Gratuity: Within a week after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff may pay out to emself the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency if: (1) The Raffle had at least three separate winning Entrants, not including the Riff-Raff; and (2) The Riff-Raff has not already done so for that Raffle. (k) Announcing Winners: As soon as possible after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff shall announce the winning tickets. Upon this announcement, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to each winning Entrant for each of eir winning tickets. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4356 (Steve), 7 August 2002 text: There is a type of Auction called a Raffle. The Auction Procedure for a Raffle is the same as the Default Auction Procedure, with the following modifications: (a) Auctioneer: the Auctioneer is known as the Riff-Raff. (b) Start of Raffle: the Raffle begins when the first announcement that a Raffle has begun is made by a Player authorized to initiate the Raffle. The announcement must contain: (1) the identity of the Riff-Raff; (2) the Raffle Currency; (3) the number of items, N, being Raffled; and (4) the Ticket Price, a multiple of the MUQ of the Raffle Currency. (c) Ticket Price: all tickets shall have the same Ticket Price. If not otherwise specified, the Ticket Price shall be equal to the MUQ of the Raffle Currency. (d) Buying tickets: an entrant buys a ticket by paying a Fee equal to the Ticket Price to the Bank, provided that the purchase is not made before the start of the Auction, or after its end. Each entrant may buy as many tickets as e likes during the Auction. (e) End of Raffle: the Raffle ends if any of the following occur: (1) one week has passed from the start of the Raffle, and no tickets have been purchased; or (2) a ticket has been purchased in the Raffle, and 72 hours have passed without another ticket being purchased in the Raffle; (3) 14 days have passed since the Raffle began. (f) Winning tickets: When the Raffle ends, the Riff-Raff shall randomly determine N valid Raffle tickets to be winning tickets. Each Raffle ticket has one chance to win, and multiple Raffle tickets bought by the same entrant may win. If there were less than N valid Raffle tickets, then all valid Raffle tickets are winning tickets. (g) Announcing winners: as soon as possible after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff shall announce the winning tickets. Upon this announcement, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to each winning entrant for each of eir winning tickets. (h) Riff-Raff's Gratuity: within a week after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff may pay out to emself the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency if: (1) the Raffle had at least three separate winning entrants, not including the Riff-Raff; and (2) the Riff-Raff has not already done so for that Raffle. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4385 (Steve), 17 September 2002 text: There is a type of Auction called a Raffle. The Auction Procedure for a Raffle is the same as the Default Auction Procedure, with the following modifications: (a) Auctioneer: the Auctioneer is known as the Riff-Raff. (b) Start of Raffle: the Raffle begins when the first announcement that a Raffle has begun is made by a Player authorized to initiate the Raffle. The announcement must contain: (1) the identity of the Riff-Raff; (2) the Raffle Currency; (3) the number of items, N, being Raffled; and (4) the Ticket Price, a multiple of the MUQ of the Raffle Currency. (c) Ticket Price: all tickets shall have the same Ticket Price. If not otherwise specified, the Ticket Price shall be equal to the MUQ of the Raffle Currency. (d) Buying tickets: each active Player may buy tickets in the Raffle; non-active Players may not buy tickets. An entrant buys a ticket by paying a Fee equal to the Ticket Price to the Bank, provided that the purchase is not made before the start of the Raffle, or after its end. Each entrant may buy as many tickets as e likes during the Raffle. (e) End of Raffle: the Raffle ends if any of the following occur: (1) one week has passed from the start of the Raffle, and no tickets have been purchased; or (2) a ticket has been purchased in the Raffle, and 72 hours have passed without another ticket being purchased in the Raffle; (3) 14 days have passed since the Raffle began. (f) Winning tickets: When the Raffle ends, the Riff-Raff shall randomly determine N valid Raffle tickets to be winning tickets. Each Raffle ticket has one chance to win, and multiple Raffle tickets bought by the same entrant may win. If there were less than N valid Raffle tickets, then all valid Raffle tickets are winning tickets. (g) Announcing winners: as soon as possible after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff shall announce the winning tickets. Upon this announcement, the owner of the Auctioned items shall incur a debt of one Auctioned lot of items to each winning entrant for each of eir winning tickets. (h) Riff-Raff's Gratuity: within a week after the end of the Raffle, the Riff-Raff may pay out to emself the Ticket Price in the Raffle Currency if: (1) the Raffle had at least three separate winning entrants, not including the Riff-Raff; and (2) the Riff-Raff has not already done so for that Raffle. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1984 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1985 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1985 by Proposal 4171 (Blob), 26 June 2001 text: The Usuror shall have a Budget. The Usuror's Budget shall consist of the following items: (i) The Basic Fee for issuing Bonds. This Fee shall be expressed as a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary and shall be an integral multiple of 0.1, not less than 0, and not greater than 4. (ii) The purchase rates at which the Bank will buy Bonds in each Bank Currency. These rates are expressed as percentages, in the range 0% to 100% inclusive. Each purchase rate applies only to a single combination of face value and time to maturity. Different rates may apply to different such combinations. Any combination for which no rate is specified has a purchase rate of 0%. (iii) The Credit Limit for Stems which is a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary, between 0 and 10 inclusive. (iv) The Credit Limit for each Bank currency, other than Stems, which is a multiple of the MUQ of that Currency between 0 and 10 inclusive. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4196 (neil), 26 July 2001 text: The Usuror shall have a Budget. The Usuror's Budget shall consist of the following items: (i) The Basic Fee for issuing Bonds. This Fee shall be expressed as a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary and shall be an integral multiple of 0.1, not less than 0, and not greater than 4. (ii) The purchase rates at which the Bank will buy Bonds in each Bank Currency. These rates are expressed as percentages, in the range 0% to 100% inclusive. Each purchase rate applies only to a single combination of face value and time to maturity. Different rates may apply to different such combinations. Any combination for which no rate is specified has a purchase rate of 0%. (iii) The Player Credit Limit for Stems, which is a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary, between 0 and 10 inclusive. (iv) The Non-Player Entity Credit Limit for Stems, which is a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary, between 0 and 10 inclusive. (v) The Player Credit Limit for each Bank currency, other than Stems, which is a multiple of the MUQ of that Currency between 0 and 20 inclusive. (vi) The Non-Player Credit Limit for each Bank currency, other than Stems, which is a multiple of the MUQ of that Currency between 0 and 20 inclusive. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4203 (neil), 28 August 2001 text: The Usuror shall have a Budget. The Usuror's Budget shall consist of the following items: (i) The Basic Fee for issuing Bonds. This Fee shall be expressed as a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary and shall be an integral multiple of 0.1, not less than 0, and not greater than 4. (ii) The purchase rates at which the Bank will buy Bonds in each Bank Currency. These rates are expressed as percentages, in the range 0% to 100% inclusive. Each purchase rate applies only to a single combination of face value and time to maturity. Different rates may apply to different such combinations. Any combination for which no rate is specified has a purchase rate of 0%. (iii) The Player Credit Limit for Stems, which is a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary, between 0 and 10 inclusive. (iv) The Non-Player Entity Credit Limit for Stems, which is a multiple of the Basic Officer Salary, between 0 and 10 inclusive. (v) The Player Credit Limit for each Bank currency, other than Stems, which is a multiple of the MUQ of that Currency between 0 and 2000 inclusive. (vi) The Non-Player Credit Limit for each Bank currency, other than Stems, which is a multiple of the MUQ of that Currency between 0 and 2000 inclusive. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1985 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1986 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1986 by Proposal 4174 (Kelly), 7 July 2001 text: The set of all Players who are currently Scribes is known as the Scribes' Council. Any Player may make any Undistributable Proposal Distributable (without payment of any Fee) with the Support of a majority of the Scribes' Council. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4254 (Goethe), 21 February 2002 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4254 (Goethe), 21 February 2002 text: A Scribe may lower the Distribution Cost of a Proposal by 1 with the Support of another Scribe, to a minimum cost of 0, provided the Cost of the Proposal has not already been so lowered. An Acolyte may expunge 1 Blot from any Entity with the Support of another Acolyte, provided the Acolyte has not so Expunged a Blot in the same Nomic Week. An Acolyte with the Support of a Scribe, or a Scribe with the Support of an Acolyte, may Bless an Undistributed Proposal. A moment after its Distribution, a Blessed Ordinary Proposal becomes Democratic. A Politician, with the Support of another Poltician, may Unbless an Undistributed Blessed Proposal. An Unblessed Proposal is no longer Blessed. An Untainted Speaker, with 2 Supporters, may Sanitise a Distributed Proposal for which the Voting Period has not ended. If this happens, the Proposal is Aborted as described elsewhere, but remains Distributable and becomes Democratic and Sane. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4281 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: A Scribe may Rubberstamp a Proposal by paying a Fee in Papyri, or receiving the Support of a number of other Scribes, equal to the number of Proposals that the Scribe has previously Rubberstamped in the current Nomic Week (minimum zero). A Rubberstamped Proposal becomes Distributable: this does not change its Distribution Fee. An Acolyte may absolve (remove) 1 Blot from any Entity by paying Fee in Indulgences, or receiving the Support of a number of other Acolytes, equal to the number of such Absolutions the Acolyte has previously performed in the current Nomic Week (minimum zero). An Acolyte may Exorcise a Dissolute Entity with the Support of another Acolyte. The effect of Exorcism is to instantly transfer all of the Entity's Indulgences to the Bank. An Acolyte with the Support of a Scribe, or a Scribe with the Support of an Acolyte, may Bless an Undistributed Proposal. A moment after its Distribution, a Blessed Proposal becomes Democratic if it is not already. A Politician, with the Support of another Poltician, may Unbless an Undistributed Blessed Proposal. An Unblessed Proposal is no longer Blessed. An Untainted Speaker, with 2 Supporters, may Sanitise a Distributed Proposal for which the Voting Period has not ended. If this happens, the Proposal is Aborted as described elsewhere, but remains Distributable and becomes Democratic and Sane. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4282 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: A Scribe may Rubberstamp a Proposal by paying a Fee in Papyri, or receiving the Support of a number of other Scribes, equal to the number of Proposals that the Scribe has previously Rubberstamped in the current Nomic Week (minimum zero). A Rubberstamped Proposal becomes Distributable: this does not change its Distribution Fee. An Acolyte may absolve (remove) 1 Blot from any Entity by paying Fee in Indulgences, or receiving the Support of a number of other Acolytes, equal to the number of such Absolutions the Acolyte has previously performed in the current Nomic Week (minimum zero). An Acolyte may Exorcise a Dissolute Entity with the Support of another Acolyte. The effect of Exorcism is to instantly transfer all of the Entity's Indulgences to the Bank. An Acolyte with the Support of a Scribe, or a Scribe with the Support of an Acolyte, may Bless an Undistributed Proposal. A moment after its Distribution, a Blessed Proposal becomes Democratic if it is not already. A Politician, with the Support of another Poltician, may Unbless an Undistributed Blessed Proposal. An Unblessed Proposal is no longer Blessed. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: A Scribe may Rubberstamp a Proposal by paying a Fee in Papyri, or receiving the Support of a number of other Scribes, equal to the number of Proposals that the Scribe has previously Rubberstamped in the current Agoran Week (minimum zero). A Rubberstamped Proposal becomes Distributable: this does not change its Distribution Fee. An Acolyte may absolve (remove) 1 Blot from any Entity by paying Fee in Indulgences, or receiving the Support of a number of other Acolytes, equal to the number of such Absolutions the Acolyte has previously performed in the current Agoran Week (minimum zero). An Acolyte may Exorcise a Dissolute Entity with the Support of another Acolyte. The effect of Exorcism is to instantly transfer all of the Entity's Indulgences to the Bank. An Acolyte with the Support of a Scribe, or a Scribe with the Support of an Acolyte, may Bless an Undistributed Proposal. A moment after its Distribution, a Blessed Proposal becomes Democratic if it is not already. A Politician, with the Support of another Poltician, may Unbless an Undistributed Blessed Proposal. An Unblessed Proposal is no longer Blessed. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4401 (Goddess Eris), 23 October 2002 text: A Scribe may Rubberstamp a Proposal by paying a Fee in Papyri, or receiving the Support of a number of other Scribes, equal to the number of Proposals that the Scribe has previously Rubberstamped in the current Agoran Week (minimum zero). A Rubberstamped Proposal becomes Distributable: this does not change its Distribution Fee. An Acolyte may absolve (remove) 1 Blot from any Entity by paying Fee in Indulgences, or receiving the Support of a number of other Acolytes, equal to the number of such Absolutions the Acolyte has previously performed in the current Agoran Week (minimum zero). An Acolyte may Exorcise a Dissolute Entity with the Support of another Acolyte. The effect of Exorcism is to instantly transfer all of the Entity's Indulgences to the Bank. An Acolyte with the Support of a Scribe, or a Scribe with the Support of an Acolyte, may Bless an Undistributed Proposal. A moment after its Distribution, a Blessed Proposal becomes Democratic if it is not already. A Politician, with the Support of another Politician, may Unbless an Undistributed Blessed Proposal. An Unblessed Proposal is no longer Blessed. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: An action is a Progressive action if the rules so state. If an action is progressive, a Player (the Actor) may perform the action either: (a) with the Support of a number Players equal to one plus the number of times that actor has performed that action in the current week; (b) by paying a fee equal to the amount of Support required in (a); (c) if the number calculated in (a) is zero, by public announcement. A progressive action may be associated with a role if the rules so state. If an energetic action is associated with a role, only players who hold that role may perform, or support performance of, that action. Rubberstamping a Proposal is a progressive action for Scribes. A Rubberstamped Proposal becomes Distributable. Absolving an entity is a progressive action for Acolytes. Absolving an entity expunges 1 Blot from that entity. Debating an Undistributed Proposal is a progressive Action for Politicians. The effect of Debating a Proposal is to change its Chamber to one named by the Politician, provided it is legal for that Proposal to be in the named Chamber and the Proposal is not Sane. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4493 (Steve), 13 May 2003 text: An action is a Progressive action if the rules so state. If an action is progressive, a Player (the Actor) may perform the action either: (a) with the Support of a number Players equal to one plus the number of times that actor has performed that action in the current week; (b) by paying a fee equal to the amount of Support required in (a); (c) if the number calculated in (a) is zero, by public announcement. A progressive action may be associated with a role if the rules so state. If an progressive action is associated with a role, only players who hold that role may perform, or support performance of, that action. Rubberstamping a Proposal is a progressive action for Scribes. A Rubberstamped Proposal becomes Distributable. Absolving an entity is a progressive action for Acolytes. Absolving an entity expunges 1 Blot from that entity. Debating an Undistributed Proposal is a progressive Action for Politicians. The effect of Debating a Proposal is to change its Chamber to one named by the Politician, provided it is legal for that Proposal to be in the named Chamber and the Proposal is not Sane. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1986 by Proposal 4569 (Wes), 2 May 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1987 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1987 by Proposal 4181 (Murphy), 9 July 2001 text: The following Classes of Organizations exist: a) Groups. b) Contests. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4436 (RedKnight), 28 January 2003 text: The following Classes of Organizations exist: a) Groups. b) Contests. c) Monasteries history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: The following Classes of Organizations exist: a) Contests. b) Monasteries. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1987 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1988 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1988 by Proposal 4182 (Oerjan), 9 July 2001 text: July 14 of each year shall be known as Bastille Day. For a Revolt called on this day the normal procedure is modified, as follows: i) Each Rebellious Player shall count twice for the purpose of determining success if, during that Bastille Day, e publicly hums a few bars of 'La Marseillaise'. This includes the determination of the number of players, and the Miscreant adjustment, which may become 2 rather than 1. ii) On success, rather than having all eir Blots expunged, each Rebellious Player shall be left with 1 Blot each, even if e was previously Immaculate. This Rule takes precedence over the normal Revolt Procedure. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1988 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1989 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1989 by Proposal 4190 (Steve), 18 July 2001 text: (a) The Prime Executor of an entity with respect to a certain action is the Player who is responsible for performing that action. For each action that an entity is required to perform, there shall be at most one Prime Executor of that entity with respect to that action. Any penalty incurred due to an entity's failure to perform as required by the Rules is incurred by the Prime Executor of that entity. (b) Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the Prime Executor of an entity with respect to a certain action must be an Executor of that entity, or a Limited Executor of that entity who is permitted to perform that action on behalf of that entity. (c) If the Rules designate a Player to be the Prime Executor of an entity, without specifying particular actions that the Prime Executor is responsible for performing, then that Player is the Prime Executor of that entity with respect to all actions that the entity is required to perform. (d) Unless otherwise specified by the Rules, each Player is eir own Prime Executor. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4389 (Steve), 5 October 2002 text: (a) The Prime Executor of an entity with respect to a certain action is the Player who is responsible for performing that action. For each action that an entity is required to perform, there shall be at most one Prime Executor of that entity with respect to that action. Any penalty incurred due to an entity's failure to perform as required by the Rules is incurred by the Prime Executor of that entity. (b) Any other Rule to the contrary notwithstanding, the Prime Executor of an entity with respect to a certain action must be an Executor of that entity, or a Limited Executor of that entity who is permitted to perform that action on behalf of that entity. (c) If the Rules designate a Player to be the Prime Executor of an entity, without specifying particular actions that the Prime Executor is responsible for performing, then that Player is the Prime Executor of that entity with respect to all actions that the entity is required to perform. (d) Unless otherwise specified by the Rules, each Player is eir own Prime Executor. (e) If a Player is the sole Executor of an entity, then e is the Prime Executor of that entity. This provision does not apply to a Player who is the sole Limited Executor, but not the Executor, of an entity. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1989 by Proposal 4839 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1990 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1990 by Proposal 4191 (Goethe), 18 July 2001 text: A Contest may be a Points Contest if its ACO specifically states that it is a Points Contest. A Player may not be the Contestsmaster of more than one Points Contest in a single Nomic month. PWIN is the number of points required for a Player to achieve a win condition, as defined elsewhere in the Rules. PPP (Points Per Player) is PWIN divided by twenty. Once during each month that starts while the Contest exists, a Points Contest's Contestmaster may post a single valid Notice of Award to the Public Forum, listing any number of the Contest's Contestants, and a listing a positive number of Points to be awarded to each Contestant on the list. Different Contestants may be awarded different numbers of points in the same listing. The posting must obey all regulations for such posting contained in the Contest's SLC to be valid. The total Points listed to be awarded to all Contestants in each such monthly Notice may not exceed PPP times the number of Players who were Contestants of the Contest at any time in the 14 days prior to the Notice. If more points than this are listed the Notice is invalid. The total number of Points that a single Player may receive from all Points Contests in a single month may not exceed PWIN divided by five. If a Points Contest Notice would bring a Player's total to more points than this than the Notice is invalid for that Player only. The posting of such a Notice of Award, if valid, is an event Awarding the listed Points to the listed Players. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4357 (Sir Toby), 16 August 2002 text: A Contest may be a Points Contest if its ACO specifically states that it is a Points Contest. A Player may not be the Contestmaster of more than one Points Contest in a single Nomic month. PWIN is the number of points required for a Player to achieve a win condition, as defined elsewhere in the Rules. PPP (Points Per Player) is PWIN divided by twenty. Once during each month that starts while the Contest exists, a Points Contest's Contestmaster may post a single valid Notice of Award to the Public Forum, listing any number of the Contest's Contestants, and a listing a positive number of Points to be awarded to each Contestant on the list. Different Contestants may be awarded different numbers of points in the same listing. The posting must obey all regulations for such posting contained in the Contest's SLC to be valid. The total Points listed to be awarded to all Contestants in each such monthly Notice may not exceed PPP times the number of Players who were Contestants of the Contest at any time in the 14 days prior to the Notice. If more points than this are listed the Notice is invalid. The total number of Points that a single Player may receive from all Points Contests in a single month may not exceed PWIN divided by five. If a Points Contest Notice would bring a Player's total to more points than this than the Notice is invalid for that Player only. The posting of such a Notice of Award, if valid, is an event Awarding the listed Points to the listed Players. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: A Contest may be a Points Contest if its ACO specifically states that it is a Points Contest. A Player may not be the Contestmaster of more than one Points Contest in a single Agoran month. PWIN is the number of points required for a Player to achieve a win condition, as defined elsewhere in the Rules. PPP (Points Per Player) is PWIN divided by twenty. Once during each month that starts while the Contest exists, a Points Contest's Contestmaster may post a single valid Notice of Award to the Public Forum, listing any number of the Contest's Contestants, and a listing a positive number of Points to be awarded to each Contestant on the list. Different Contestants may be awarded different numbers of points in the same listing. The posting must obey all regulations for such posting contained in the Contest's SLC to be valid. The total Points listed to be awarded to all Contestants in each such monthly Notice may not exceed PPP times the number of Players who were Contestants of the Contest at any time in the 14 days prior to the Notice. If more points than this are listed the Notice is invalid. The total number of Points that a single Player may receive from all Points Contests in a single month may not exceed PWIN divided by five. If a Points Contest Notice would bring a Player's total to more points than this than the Notice is invalid for that Player only. The posting of such a Notice of Award, if valid, is an event Awarding the listed Points to the listed Players. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4492 (Peekee), 6 May 2003 text: A Contest may be a Points Contest if its ACO specifically states that it is a Points Contest. A Player may not be the Contestmaster of more than one Points Contest in a single Agoran month. PWIN is 100. PPP (Points Per Player) is PWIN divided by twenty. Once during each month that starts while the Contest exists, a Points Contest's Contestmaster may post a single valid Notice of Award to the Public Forum, listing any number of the Contest's Contestants, and a listing a positive number of Points to be awarded to each Contestant on the list. Different Contestants may be awarded different numbers of points in the same listing. The posting must obey all regulations for such posting contained in the Contest's SLC to be valid. The total Points listed to be awarded to all Contestants in each such monthly Notice may not exceed PPP times the number of Players who were Contestants of the Contest at any time in the 14 days prior to the Notice. If more points than this are listed the Notice is invalid. The total number of Points that a single Player may receive from all Points Contests in a single month may not exceed PWIN divided by five. If a Points Contest Notice would bring a Player's total to more points than this than the Notice is invalid for that Player only. The posting of such a Notice of Award, if valid, is an event Awarding the listed Points to the listed Players. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4502 (Peekee), 5 June 2003 text: A Contest may be a Points Contest if its ACO specifically states that it is a Points Contest. A Player may not be the Contestmaster of more than one Points Contest in a single Agoran month. The PLIMIT and PPP (Points Per Player) are as set in the Scorekeepor's Budget. Once during each month that starts while the Contest exists, a Points Contest's Contestmaster may post a single valid Notice of Award to the Public Forum, listing any number of the Contest's Contestants, and a listing a positive number of Points to be awarded to each Contestant on the list. Different Contestants may be awarded different numbers of points in the same listing. The posting must obey all regulations for such posting contained in the Contest's SLC to be valid. The total Points listed to be awarded to all Contestants in each such monthly Notice may not exceed PPP times the number of Players who were Contestants of the Contest at any time in the 14 days prior to the Notice. If more points than this are listed the Notice is invalid. The total number of Points that a single Player may receive from all Points Contests in a single month may not exceed the PLIMIT. If a Points Contest Notice would bring a Player's total to more points than this than the Notice is invalid for that Player only. The posting of such a Notice of Award, if valid, is an event Awarding the listed Points to the listed Players. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4542 (Murphy), 23 November 2003 text: A Contest may be a Points Contest if its ACO specifically states that it is a Points Contest. A Player may not be the Contestmaster of more than one Points Contest in a single Agoran month. The Players Points Limit and Points Per Player are as set in the Scorekeepor's Budget. Once during each month that starts while the Contest exists, a Points Contest's Contestmaster may post a single valid Notice of Award to the Public Forum, listing any number of the Contest's Contestants, and a listing a positive number of Points to be awarded to each Contestant on the list. Different Contestants may be awarded different numbers of points in the same listing. The posting must obey all regulations for such posting contained in the Contest's SLC to be valid. The total Points listed to be awarded to all Contestants in each such monthly Notice may not exceed Points Per Player times the number of Players who were Contestants of the Contest at any time in the 14 days prior to the Notice. If more points than this are listed the Notice is invalid. The total number of Points that a single Player may receive from all Points Contests in a single month may not exceed the Players Points Limit. If a Points Contest Notice would bring a Player's total to more points than this than the Notice is invalid for that Player only. The posting of such a Notice of Award, if valid, is an event Awarding the listed Points to the listed Players. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1990 by Proposal 4550 (Goethe), 24 January 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1991 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1991 by Proposal 4194 (neil), 18 July 2001 text: Each time the Promotor distributes Proposals, e shall first select at random a single distributable Proposal, to be known as the Target. E may then distribute with these Proposals an Opposite Proposal for the Target. If e does so, e may, Without 2 Objections, pay out 0.1 Papyri to eirself. An Opposite Proposal should be clearly marked as such. It should be substantially the opposite, in spirit or effect, of its Target. An Opposite Proposal shall have the same status as its Target, including AI, Sanity, Insanity, Urgentness, Disinterestedness, and Democraticity; except that, if the Target does not have an AI of at least 2, the Opposite Proposal shall be neither Democratic nor Sane. The Promotor shall be considered to be the proposer of the Opposite Proposal, but shall incur no penalties as a result of being its proposer. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules which would impose such penalties. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4320 (t), 28 May 2002 text: Each time the Promotor distributes Proposals, e shall first select at random a single distributable Proposal, to be known as the Target. E may then distribute with these Proposals an Opposite Proposal for the Target. If e does so, e may, Without 2 Objections, pay out 0.1 Papyri to emself. An Opposite Proposal should be clearly marked as such. It should be substantially the opposite, in spirit or effect, of its Target. An Opposite Proposal shall have the same status as its Target, including AI, Sanity, Urgentness, Disinterestedness, and Democraticity; except that, if the Target does not have an AI of at least 2, the Opposite Proposal shall be neither Democratic nor Sane. The Promotor shall be considered to be the proposer of the Opposite Proposal, but shall incur no penalties as a result of being its proposer. This Rule takes precedence over all Rules which would impose such penalties. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1991 by Proposal 4378 (Steve), 11 September 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1992 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1992 by Proposal 4195 (Syllepsis), 26 July 2001 text: A player is Sanctimonious if e satisfies all of the following conditiions: 1. E is not a Zombie. 2. E is not a Zombie Master. 3. E possesses less than four times the Basic Officer Salary of Stems. 4. E does not possess any Voting Entitlements. 5. E is a Senator. 6. E is not the Executor or Limited Executor of any entity other than the Bank or Monastery which possesses Voting Entitlements, Zombies, or Stems. 7. E is Immaculate. A Sanctimonious player becomes a Monk by notifying the Registrar that e becomes a Monk, provided that e has been Sanctimonious for at least one week. The condition of being a Monk is revoked upon the beginning of a Nomic Week after the dissatisfaction of any of the aforementioned conditions for at least 48 hours, if and only if a player reports this dissatisfaction to the Registrar before the beginning of the week. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4202 (neil), 28 August 2001 text: A player is Sanctimonious if e satisfies all of the following conditiions: 1. E is not a Zombie. 2. E is not a Zombie Master. 3. E possesses less than four times the Basic Officer Salary of Stems. 4. E does not possess any Voting Entitlements. 5. E is a Senator. 6. E is not the Executor or Limited Executor of any entity other than emself, the Bank, or Monastery which possesses Voting Entitlements, Zombies, or Stems. 7. E is Immaculate. A Sanctimonious player becomes a Monk by notifying the Registrar that e becomes a Monk, provided that e has been Sanctimonious for at least one week. The condition of being a Monk is revoked upon the beginning of a Nomic Week after the dissatisfaction of any of the aforementioned conditions for at least 48 hours, if and only if a player reports this dissatisfaction to the Registrar before the beginning of the week. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 text: A player is Sanctimonious if e satisfies all of the following conditions: 1. E possesses less than four times the Basic Officer Salary of Stems. 2. E does not possess any Voting Entitlement.s 3. E is a Senator. 4. E is not the Executor or Limited Executor of any entity other than emself, the Bank, or Monastery which possesses Voting Entitlements or Stems. 5. E is Immaculate. A player who has been Sanctimonious continuously for the most recent week becomes a Monk by notifying the Registrar that e becomes a Monk. Whenever a Monk has not satisfied all conditions for Sanctimony for at least 48 hours, any player may report this to the Registrar. On the Registrar's public confirmation of this report, the Monk ceases to be a Monk. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1992 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1993 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1993 by Proposal 4197 (Goethe), 8 August 2001 text: Arcadia is a land entirely defined by the Arcadian Map (the Map). The Map is a record kept by the Office of the Mapkeepor. The Map divides Arcadia into a finite, discrete number of Units of Land, or simply Land. Each Unit of Land is a unique instance of nonfungible Property specified by a pair of integers known as its Latitude and Longitude. Every unique pair of integers within the limits defined in the Rules for Latitude and Longitude signifies an existent Unit of Land. No other Units of Land may exist. Units of Land may only be created or destroyed by changing the limits of Latitude and Longitude defined in the Rules. All values for Latitude must lie between -25 and +25, inclusive. All values for Longitude must lie between -25 and +25, inclusive. The Total Land Area of Arcadia is the number of existent Units of Land defined by permissible Latitude and Longitude pairs. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4283 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: Arcadia is a land entirely defined by the Arcadian Map (the Map). The Map is a record kept by the Office of the Mapkeepor. The Map divides Arcadia into a finite, discrete number of Units of Land, or simply Land. Each Unit of Land is a unique instance of nonfungible Property specified by a pair of integers known as its Latitude and Longitude. Every unique pair of integers within the limits defined in the Rules for Latitude and Longitude signifies an existent Unit of Land. No other Units of Land may exist. Units of Land may only be created or destroyed by changing the limits of Latitude and Longitude defined in the Rules. All values for Latitude must lie between -9 and +9, inclusive. All values for Longitude must lie between -9 and +9, inclusive. The Total Land Area of Arcadia is the number of existent Units of Land defined by permissible Latitude and Longitude pairs. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1993 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1994 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1994 by Proposal 4197 (Goethe), 8 August 2001 text: Any existent Land for which ownership has not been explicitly changed belongs to an entity known as the Land Bureau (the Bureau). Land belonging to the Bureau is called Unclaimed Land. Land belonging to the Bank is called Public Land. Land belonging to any other entity is called Private Land. A Unit of Land for which a debt exists is considered to be In Escrow. The Mapkeepor is the Executor of the Land Bureau. The Mapkeepor is also a Limited Executor of the Bank, with the authority to satisfy debts of Land owed by the Bank to its creditors, and the authority to demand the payment of Land owed to the Bank by its debtors. The transfer of Unclaimed or Public Land to any entity must be specifically permitted by the Rules, or be performed by the explicit action of an instrument of Power 2 or greater, to be an authorized Transfer. Private Land may be transferred from its owner to any other entity by the owner's Executor. Any other transfer of Private Land must be performed by the explicit Action of an instrument of Power 2 or greater to be an authorized transfer. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1994 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1995 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 1995 by Proposal 4197 (Goethe), 8 August 2001 text: Each Unit of Land shall have a single Land Type. Each Unit of Land that has a Land Type shall have either zero or one Land Subtypes. The Land Type or Subtype of a Unit may only be changed as specifically permitted by the Rules, or by an instrument of Power 2 or greater. The phrase "Units of X", where X is a Land Type (or Subtype) defined by the Rules, shall be considered a synonym for "Units of Land that have Land Type (or Subtype) X". When existent Land has not had its Type changed as explicitly permitted by the Rules, or has a Type that is not currently defined by the Rules, it shall be considered to have the Land Type of Aether. Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, Units of Aether may not be transferred from the Bureau, or owned by any entity other than the Bureau. If Private or Public Land becomes Aether it shall be transferred to the Bureau as soon as possible. When existent Land has not had its Subtype changed as explicitly permitted by the Rules, or has a Subtype that is not currently defined by the Rules as permissible for its Land Type, it shall be considered to have no Subtype. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 1995 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1996 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1996 by Proposal 4197 (Goethe), 8 August 2001 text: There exists the Office of Mapkeepor, whose responsibility is to be the recordkeeper for the Land of Arcadia. The Mapkeepor shall produce a Weekly Report including: (a) The Ownership and Land Type of all existent Land; (b) All changes in the Ownership and Land Type of existent Land since the most recent report; (c) The Location of all Entities or Instruments that have a defined Location. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 text: The Mapkeepor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for the Land of Arcadia. The Mapkeepor's Weekly Report shall include: (i) the ownership and land type of all existing land; (ii) all changes in the ownership and land type of existing land since the most recent report; and (iii) the location of each entity or instrument with a defined non-secret location. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4280 (OscarMeyr), 3 April 2002 text: The Mapkeepor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for the Land of Arcadia. The Mapkeepor's Weekly Report shall include: (i) the ownership and land type of all existing land; (ii) all changes in the ownership and land type of existing land since the most recent report; and (iii) the location for the previous week and the current week of each entity or instrument with a defined non-secret location. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4425 (SirToby), 2 January 2003 text: The Mapkeepor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for the Land of Arcadia. The Mapkeepor's Weekly Report shall include: (i) the ownership and land type of all existing land; (ii) all changes in the ownership and land type of existing land since the most recent report; and (iii) the location for the previous week and the current week of each entity or instrument with a defined non-secret location. (iv) The number of action units available to each entity for the current week. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1996 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1997 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1997 by Proposal 4197 (Goethe), 8 August 2001 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: In addition to Aether, the following Land Types are defined: (a) Wilderness; (b) Farmland; (c) Water; (d) Urbana. The following Land Subtypes are permissible for Units of Wilderness: (a) Mountans; (b) Hills; (c) Forest; (d) Desert; The following Land Subtypes are permissible for Units of Urbana: (a) City; (b) Road; (c) Aqueduct. text: In addition to Aether, the following Land Types are defined: (a) Wilderness; (b) Farmland; (c) Water; (d) Urbana. The following Land Subtypes are permissible for Units of Wilderness: (a) Mountans; (b) Hills; (c) Forest; (d) Desert; The following Land Subtypes are permissible for Units of Urbana: (a) City; (b) Road; (c) Aqueduct. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4283 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: In addition to Aether, the following Land Types are defined: (a) Black; (b) White. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4471 (OscarMyer), 26 March 2003 text: In addition to Aether, the following Land Types are defined: (a) Black; (b) White; (c) Purple. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1997 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1998 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1998 by Proposal 4197 (Goethe), 8 August 2001 text: Two Units of Land are Adjacent if neither their Latitudes nor their Longitudes differ by more than one from each other. The Penguin Distance between two given Units of Land is the minimum number of Single Waddles required to Travel from one of the given Units to the other given Unit, where one Single Waddle is the Penguin Distance required to Travel from one Unit of Land to an Adjacent Unit of Land. Of a Land Unit: (1) the Land Unit with the same Longitude and a Latitude greater by 1 is its Northern Neighbor. (2) the Land Unit with the same Longitude and a Latitude less by 1 is its Southern Neighbor. (3) the Land Unit with the same Latitude and a Longitude greater by 1 is its Eastern Neighbor. (4) the Land Unit with the same Latitude and a Longitude less by 1 is its Western Neighbor. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4217 (Syllepsis), 29 September 2001 text: Two Units of Land are Adjacent if neither their Latitudes nor their Longitudes differ by more than one from each other. The Penguin Distance between two given Units of Land is the minimum number of Single Waddles required to Travel from one of the given Units to the other given Unit, where one Single Waddle is the Penguin Distance required to Travel from one Unit of Land to an Adjacent Unit of Land. Of a Land Unit: (1) the Land Unit with the same Longitude and a Latitude greater by 1 is its Northern Neighbor. (2) the Land Unit with the same Longitude and a Latitude less by 1 is its Southern Neighbor. (3) the Land Unit with the same Latitude and a Longitude greater by 1 is its Eastern Neighbor. (4) the Land Unit with the same Latitude and a Longitude less by 1 is its Western Neighbor. Two Units of Land are said to be Connected by a specific Type or Subtype of Land if it is possible to travel from the first Unit to the second by Waddling only over Land of that specific Type or Subtype. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4283 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: Two Units of Land are Adjacent if and only if: (i) They have the same Latitude, and their Longitudes differ by exactly one; or (ii) They have the same Longitude, and their Latitudes differ by exactly one. The Penguin Distance between two given Units of Land is the minimum number of Single Waddles required to Travel from one of the given Units to the other given Unit, where one Single Waddle is the Penguin Distance required to Travel from one Unit of Land to an Adjacent Unit of Land. Two Units of Land are said to be Connected by a specific Type or Subtype of Land if it is possible to travel from the first Unit to the second by Waddling only over Land of that specific Type or Subtype. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1998 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 1999 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 1999 by Proposal 4197 (Goethe), 8 August 2001 text: The following Entities shall each have a single defined Location corresponding to a single Latitude, Longitude pair within the limits set in the Rules for Latitude and Longitude on the Map of Arcadia: (a) Every Player; (b) Every Organization. No other Entity shall have a location unless it is defined in other Rules. The Location of an Entity may not be set or changed except as explicitly permitted by the Rules or an instrument of Power 1 or greater. If an Entity is specified by this Rule as having a defined Location, but its Location has not been explicity set or changed, its Location shall be Latitude 0, Longitude 0. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 1999 by Proposal 4496 (Sherlock), 13 May 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2000 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2000 by Proposal 4197 (Goethe), 8 August 2001 text: The Rule Mapping is a Rules-defined calculation that maps a single integer (a Rule Number as defined elsewhere in the Rules) onto a single Latitude, Longitude pair within the limits of Latitude and Longitude on the Map of Arcadia. The Rule Mapping must be such that no two possible Rule Numbers between 101 and the Total Land Area of Arcadia are mapped to the same Latitude, Longitude pair. For any existent Rule, the Latitude and Longitude pair resulting from a Rule Mapping of the Rule's Number is the Rule's Location. A Rule's Location only changes if its Rule Number changes or if the Rule Mapping contained in this Rule changes. The Rule Mapping is defined by the following procedure: 1. The number 100 is subtracted from the Rule Number to calculate the number of Vulture Steps in the Rule Number's Vulture Journey. 2. The Latitude and Longitude of the Mapping shall be that of the Land Unit Visited when the final Vulture Step of the Rule Number's Vulture Journey is taken, where each Vulture Step in the Journey is taken as follows: (a) If no Vulture Steps have yet been taken in the Journey, by visiting the Land Unit with Latitude 0, Longitude 0; otherwise, (b) From the Land Unit most recently visited in the specific Vulture Journey: (i) If neither its Northern, nor Western, nor Southern, nor Eastern Neighbor has been visited in the Journey, by visiting its Eastern Neighbor; otherwise, (ii) If its Nothern, Western, and Southern Neighbors have all been visited, by visiting its Eastern Neighbor; otherwise, (iii) If its Western Neighbor has been visited but its Northern Neighbor has not, by visiting its Northern Neighbor, otherwise; (iv) If the Southern Neighbor has been visited but the Western Neightbor has not, by visiting the Western Neighbor, otherwise; (v) If the Eastern Neighbor has been visited but the Southern Neighbor has not, by visiting the Southern Neighbor, otherwise; (vi) If the Northern Neigbor has been visited but the Eastern Neighbor has not, by visiting the Eastern Neighbor. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2000 by Proposal 4283 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2001 history: Enacted by Proposal 4197 (Goethe), 8 August 2001 text: Upon the adoption of this Rule, if a number which maps onto the Latitude, Longitude pair of an existent Unit of Land using the Rule Mapping, is not an existent Rule Number, the Unit's Land Type shall be changed to Aether. Otherwise, the Land Type of the Unit of Land at the Latitude, Longitude representing each Rule Number's Location: (i) shall be changed to Land Type Wilderness if the Rule has a Power greater than or equal to 1, but less than 2. (ii) shall be changed to Land Type Farmland if the Rule has a Power greater than or equal to 2, but less than 3. (iii) shall be changed to Land Type Urbana if the Rule has a Power of 3 or more. If a Rule Change enacts a new Rule, repeals an existing Rule, or changes the Power of a Rule, the Land Type at the Rule's Location shall be changed as above. Land Types may still be changed by other Rules. history: Repealed by Proposal 4283 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2002 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2002 by Proposal 4206 (neil), 3 September 2001 text: A Player who sells to the Bank a Bond issued by an entity: * of which e is an Executor, which e is in collusion with, or an Executor of which e is in collusion with, and * that e believes will not, at the date of maturity, or does not, if the Bond is already mature, have funds to cover redemption of said Bond, commits the Class 5 Crime of Bond Fraud. If it is judged that a player has committed Bond Fraud, the Judge shall order that all unlawful gains from said instance of Bond Fraud be disgorged. If the Executor of the issuer of a Bond used to commit Bond Fraud is not the Player who was charged with Bond Fraud, and said Executor knew that the Bond in question would be used for such a purpose, e commits the Class 4 Crime of Conspiracy to Commit Bond Fraud. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2002 by Proposal 4319 (t), 28 May 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2003 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2003 by Proposal 4207 (neil), 3 September 2001 text: Every week, each Player may expend up to 10 Movement Units to move about in the Land of Arcadia. Movement Units are not transferrable, and do not persist from one week to the next. A player makes a Move by notifying the Mapkeepor of the location (the Destination) into which e is attempting to move. If the Player has enough Movement Units left this week, and the Move is valid, the Player's Location is changed to the Destination. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Movement Units, a Player may move as many times as e wishes in a single week. The Mapkeepor's Report shall list, for each Player: * the Player's location at the beginning of the last week * the Player's location at the beginning of the current week Players may expend: * 10 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Mountains. * 5 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Hills. * 3 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Forest or Desert. * 3 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness with no Subtype. * 2 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Farmland. * 1 Movement Unit to move into an adjacent unit of Type Urbana. A player may also expend 10 Movement Units to Explore, by notifying the Mapkeepor that e does so. If a Player Explores, all units of Aether within a Penguin Distance of 2 from the Player's current location are assigned a new Land Type and possibly Subtype. For each unit of Aether affected, there is a: * 0.10 probability it becomes Winderness/Mountains; * 0.20 probability it becomes Winderness/Hills; * 0.20 probability it becomes Winderness/Forest; * 0.10 probability it becomes Winderness/Desert; * 0.10 probability it becomes Farmland, no subtype; * 0.30 probability it becomes Water, no subtype. The random choice of new Land Type and Subtype is to be made by the Mapkeepor. Affected units take on the new Land Type at the beginning of the next week, and all such changes shall be indicated in the Mapkeepor's Report for that week. Moves explicitly allowed by this Rule, including Exploring, are valid, unless made invalid by other Rules. Unless explicity permitted by other Rules, all other Moves are invalid. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4215 (neil), 29 September 2001 text: Every week, each Player may expend up to 10 Movement Units to move about in the Land of Arcadia. Movement Units are not transferrable, and do not persist from one week to the next. A player makes a Move by notifying the Mapkeepor of the location (the Destination) into which e is attempting to move. If the Player has enough Movement Units left this week, and the Move is valid, the Player's Location is changed to the Destination. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Movement Units, a Player may move as many times as e wishes in a single week. The Mapkeepor's Report shall list, for each Player: * the Player's location at the beginning of the last week * the Player's location at the beginning of the current week Players may expend: * 10 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Mountains. * 5 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Hills. * 3 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Forest or Desert. * 3 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness with no Subtype. * 2 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Farmland. * 1 Movement Unit to move into an adjacent unit of Type Urbana. A player may also expend 10 Movement Units to Explore, by notifying the Mapkeepor that e does so. If a Player Explores, all units of Aether within a Penguin Distance of 2 from the Player's current location are assigned a new Land Type and possibly Subtype. For each unit of Aether affected, there is a: * 0.10 probability it becomes Wilderness/Mountains; * 0.20 probability it becomes Wilderness/Hills; * 0.20 probability it becomes Wilderness/Forest; * 0.10 probability it becomes Wilderness/Desert; * 0.10 probability it becomes Farmland, no subtype; * 0.30 probability it becomes Water, no subtype. The random choice of new Land Type and Subtype is to be made by the Mapkeepor. Affected units take on the new Land Type at the beginning of the next week, and all such changes shall be indicated in the Mapkeepor's Report for that week. Moves explicitly allowed by this Rule, including Exploring, are valid, unless made invalid by other Rules. Unless explicity permitted by other Rules, all other Moves are invalid. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4229 (Goethe), 22 November 2001 text: Every week, each Player may expend up to 10 Movement Units to move about in the Land of Arcadia. Movement Units are not transferrable, and do not persist from one week to the next. A player makes a Move by notifying the Mapkeepor of the location (the Destination) into which e is attempting to move. If the Player has enough Movement Units left this week, and the Move is valid, the Player's Location is changed to the Destination. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Movement Units, a Player may move as many times as e wishes in a single week. The Mapkeepor's Report shall list, for each Player: * the Player's location at the beginning of the last week * the Player's location at the beginning of the current week Players may expend: * 10 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Mountains. * 5 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Hills. * 3 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Forest or Desert. * 3 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness with no Subtype. * 2 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Farmland. * 1 Movement Unit to move into an adjacent unit of Type Urbana. A player may also expend 10 Movement Units to Explore, by notifying the Mapkeepor that e does so. If a Player Explores, all units of Aether within a Penguin Distance of 2 from the Player's current location are assigned a new Land Type and possibly Subtype. For each unit of Aether affected, there is a: * 0.15 probability it becomes the same type and subtype as the land at the location of the exploring Player; * 0.10 probability it becomes Wilderness/Mountains; * 0.20 probability it becomes Wilderness/Hills; * 0.20 probability it becomes Wilderness/Forest; * 0.10 probability it becomes Wilderness/Desert; * 0.05 probability it becomes Farmland, no subtype; * 0.20 probability it becomes Water, no subtype. The random choice of new Land Type and Subtype is to be made by the Mapkeepor. Affected units take on the new Land Type at the beginning of the next week, and all such changes shall be indicated in the Mapkeepor's Report for that week. Moves explicitly allowed by this Rule, including Exploring, are valid, unless made invalid by other Rules. Unless explicity permitted by other Rules, all other Moves are invalid. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4280 (OscarMeyr), 3 April 2002 text: Every week, each Player may expend up to 10 Movement Units to move about in the Land of Arcadia, and each Organization may expend up to 5 Movement Units. Movement Units are not transferable, and do not persist from one week to the next. A player makes a Move by notifying the Mapkeepor of the location (the Destination) into which e is attempting to move. If the Player has enough Movement Units left this week, and the Move is valid, the Player's Location is changed to the Destination. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Movement Units, a Player may move as many times as e wishes in a single week. Players may expend: * 10 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Mountains. * 5 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Hills. * 3 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness, Subtype Forest or Desert. * 3 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Wilderness with no Subtype. * 2 Movement Units to move into an adjacent unit of Type Farmland. * 1 Movement Unit to move into an adjacent unit of Type Urbana. A player may also expend 10 Movement Units to Explore, by notifying the Mapkeepor that e does so. If a Player Explores, all units of Aether within a Penguin Distance of 2 from the Player's current location are assigned a new Land Type and possibly Subtype. For each unit of Aether affected, there is a: * 0.15 probability it becomes the same type and subtype as the land at the location of the exploring Player; * 0.10 probability it becomes Wilderness/Mountains; * 0.20 probability it becomes Wilderness/Hills; * 0.20 probability it becomes Wilderness/Forest; * 0.10 probability it becomes Wilderness/Desert; * 0.05 probability it becomes Farmland, no subtype; * 0.20 probability it becomes Water, no subtype. The random choice of new Land Type and Subtype is to be made by the Mapkeepor. Affected units take on the new Land Type at the beginning of the next week, and all such changes shall be indicated in the Mapkeepor's Report for that week. Moves explicitly allowed by this Rule, including Exploring, are valid, unless made invalid by other Rules. Unless explicity permitted by other Rules, all other Moves are invalid. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4283 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: Every week, each Player may expend up to 10 Movement Units, and an Organization may expend up to 5 Movement Units, to move about in the Land of Arcadia. Movement Units are not transferrable, and do not persist from one week to the next. A player makes a move by notifying the Mapkeepor of the specifics of the move. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Movement Units, a Player may move as many times as e wishes in a single week. Entities may expend: * 2 Movement Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types are the same and the destination is not Aether. * 5 Movement Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types differ and the destination is not Aether; * 5 Movement Units to set Land Type of a Land Unit which e owns to any Land Type other than Aether, whether or not e is located at that Land Unit. * 10 Movement Units to set the Land Type of the Entity's current location to any Land Type of eir choice other than Aether, if and only if the Unit is owned by the Land Bureau. Unless explicity permitted by other Rules, all other Moves are invalid. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4293 (Sir Toby), 10 May 2002 text: Every week, each Player may expend up to 10 Movement Units, and an Organization may expend up to 5 Movement Units, to move about in the Land of Arcadia. Movement Units are not transferrable, and do not persist from one week to the next. A player makes a move by notifying the Mapkeepor of the specifics of the move. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Movement Units, a Player may move as many times as e wishes in a single week. Entities may expend: * 2 Movement Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types are the same and the destination is not Aether. * 5 Movement Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types differ and the destination is not Aether; * 5 Movement Units to set Land Type of a Land Unit which e owns to any Land Type other than Aether, whether or not e is located at that Land Unit. * 10 Movement Units to set the Land Type of the Entity's current location to any Land Type of eir choice other than Aether, if and only if the Unit is owned by the Land Bureau. * 10 Movement Units to set the Land Type of a random Land Unit that is adjacent to the Entity's current location, is of type Aether, and is owned by the Land Bureau, to any Land Type of eir choice other than Aether. The Mapkeepor will make the random determination. This movement has no effect if there are no qualifying Land Units. The Mapkeepor must announce which Land Unit, if any, is changed by this movement. The change occurs at the time of the first legal announcement from the Mapkeepor declaring which Land Unit's Land Type has changed. Unless explicity permitted by other Rules, all other Moves are invalid. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4373 (Sir Toby), 6 September 2002 text: Every week, each Player may expend up to 10 Movement Units, and an Organization may expend up to 5 Movement Units, to move about in the Land of Arcadia. Movement Units are not transferrable, and do not persist from one week to the next. A player makes a move by notifying the Mapkeepor of the specifics of the move. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Movement Units, a Player may move as many times as e wishes in a single week. When a move specifies an alternating Land Type, the Land Type chosen will be based upon the Land Type used as the previous alternating Land Type. The next Land Type will be the one non-Aether Land Type that is defined next in the Rules, after the previous Land Type. If the previous Land Type is the last Land Type defined in the Rules, or if no alternating Land Type has ever been picked before, the next Land Type is the first non-Aether Land Type defined in the Rules. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of a move that specifies an alternating Land Type, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Type was used for that move. Entities may expend: * 2 Movement Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types are the same and the destination is not Aether; * 5 Movement Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types differ and the destination is not Aether; * 5 Movement Units to set Land Type of a Land Unit which e owns to any Land Type other than Aether, whether or not e is located at that Land Unit; * 5 Movement Units to set the Land Type of a random Land Unit that is adjacent to the Entity's current location, is of type Aether, and is owned by the Land Bureau, to an alternating Land Type. The Mapkeepor will make the random determination. This movement has no effect if there are no qualifying Land Units. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of this move, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Unit, if any, is changed by this movement. The change occurs at the time of the first legal announcement from the Mapkeepor declaring which Land Unit's Land Type has changed. * 10 Movement Units to set the Land Type of the Entity's current location to any Land Type of eir choice other than Aether, if and only if the Unit is owned by the Land Bureau. * 10 Movement Units to set the Land Type of any Land Unit that is of type Aether to an alternating Land Type. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4405 (Peekee), 23 October 2002 text: Every week, the number of Actions Units an entity may expend to perform actions in the Land of Arcadia is as follows, - If the entity is a Player 10 minus 1 for every 5 Blots in the Player's Stain - If the entity is a Group 1 plus 3 for every Member of the Group located on or adjacent to the location of the Group at the start of the week. - All other entities zero. Action Units are not transferable, and do not persist from one week to the next. An entity may expend Action Units to carry out an action in Arcadia by notifying the Mapkeepor of the specifics of the act. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Action Units, e may make as many actions e wishes in a single week. When an act specifies an alternating Land Type, the Land Type chosen will be based upon the Land Type used as the previous alternating Land Type, so that consecutive alternating Land Types alternate between Black and White. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of an act that specifies an alternating Land Type, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Type was used for that act. Players may expend: * 2 Action Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types are the same and the destination is not Aether. * 5 Action Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types differ and the destination is not Aether; Groups may expend: * 5 Action Units to move from its current location to the location of one of its Members. Any entity may expend: * 5 Action Units to set Land Type of a Land Unit which e owns to any Land Type other than Aether, whether or not e is located at that Land Unit. * 5 Movement Units to set the Land Type of a random Land Unit that is adjacent to the Entity's current location, is of type Aether, and is owned by the Land Bureau, to an alternating Land Type. The Mapkeepor will make the random determination. This movement has no effect if there are no qualifying Land Units. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of this move, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Unit, if any, is changed by this movement. The change occurs at the time of the first legal announcement from the Mapkeepor declaring which Land Unit's Land Type has changed. * 10 Movement Units to set the Land Type of the Entity's current location to any Land Type of eir choice other than Aether, if and only if the Unit is owned by the Land Bureau. * 10 Movement Units to set the Land Type of any Land Unit that is of type Aether to an alternating Land Type. Unless explicitly permitted by other Rules, all other actions and moves in Arcadia are invalid. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4425 (SirToby), 2 January 2003 text: Every week, the number of Actions Units an entity may expend to perform actions in the Land of Arcadia is as follows, - If the entity is a Player, 10, minus 1 for every 5 Blots in the Player's Stain as recorded in the most recent Herald's report before the week started, plus 1 for every unit of Land with Gote owned by the Player. - If the entity is a Group, 1, plus 3 for every Member of the Group located on or adjacent to the location of the Group at the start of the week, plus 1 for every unit of Land with Gote owned by the Group. - All other entities zero. Action Units are not transferable, and do not persist from one week to the next. An entity may expend Action Units to carry out an action in Arcadia by notifying the Mapkeepor of the specifics of the act. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Action Units, e may make as many actions e wishes in a single week. When an act specifies an alternating Land Type, the Land Type chosen will be based upon the Land Type used as the previous alternating Land Type, so that consecutive alternating Land Types alternate between Black and White. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of an act that specifies an alternating Land Type, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Type was used for that act. Players may expend: * 2 Action Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types are the same and the destination is not Aether. * 5 Action Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types differ and the destination is not Aether; Groups may expend: * 5 Action Units to move from its current location to the location of one of its Members. Any entity may expend: * 5 Action Units to set Land Type of a Land Unit which e owns to any Land Type other than Aether, whether or not e is located at that Land Unit. * 5 Movement Units to set the Land Type of a random Land Unit that is adjacent to the Entity's current location, is of type Aether, and is owned by the Land Bureau, to an alternating Land Type. The Mapkeepor will make the random determination. This movement has no effect if there are no qualifying Land Units. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of this move, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Unit, if any, is changed by this movement. The change occurs at the time of the first legal announcement from the Mapkeepor declaring which Land Unit's Land Type has changed. * 10 Movement Units to set the Land Type of the Entity's current location to any Land Type of eir choice other than Aether, if and only if the Unit is owned by the Land Bureau. * 10 Movement Units to set the Land Type of any Land Unit that is of type Aether to an alternating Land Type. Unless explicitly permitted by other Rules, all other actions and moves in Arcadia are invalid. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4431 (Peekee), 16 January 2003 text: Every week, the number of Actions Units an entity may expend to perform actions in the Land of Arcadia is as follows, - If the entity is a Player, 10, minus 1 for every 5 Blots in the Player's Stain as recorded in the most recent Herald's report before the week started, plus 1 for every unit of Land with Gote owned by the Player. - If the entity is a Group, 1, plus 3 for every Member of the Group located on or adjacent to the location of the Group at the start of the week, plus 1 for every unit of Land with Gote owned by the Group. - All other entities zero. Action Units are not transferable, and do not persist from one week to the next. An entity may expend Action Units to carry out an action in Arcadia by notifying the Mapkeepor of the specifics of the act. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Action Units, e may make as many actions e wishes in a single week. When an act specifies an alternating Land Type, the Land Type chosen will be based upon the Land Type used as the previous alternating Land Type, so that consecutive alternating Land Types alternate between Black and White. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of an act that specifies an alternating Land Type, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Type was used for that act. Players may expend: * 2 Action Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types are the same and the destination is not Aether. * 5 Action Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types differ and the destination is not Aether; Groups may expend: * 5 Action Units to move from its current location to the location of one of its Members. Any entity may expend: * 5 Action Units to set Land Type of a Land Unit which e owns to any Land Type other than Aether, whether or not e is located at that Land Unit. * 5 Action Units to set the Land Type of a random Land Unit that is adjacent to the Entity's current location, is of type Aether, and is owned by the Land Bureau, to an alternating Land Type. The Mapkeepor will make the random determination. This action has no effect if there are no qualifying Land Units. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of this move, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Unit, if any, is changed by this action. The change occurs at the time of the first legal announcement from the Mapkeepor declaring which Land Unit's Land Type has changed. * 10 Action Units to set the Land Type of the Entity's current location to any Land Type of eir choice other than Aether, if and only if the Unit is owned by the Land Bureau. * 10 Action Units to set the Land Type of any Land Unit that is of type Aether to an alternating Land Type. Unless explicitly permitted by other Rules, all other actions and moves in Arcadia are invalid. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4434 (SirToby), 28 January 2003 text: Every week, the number of Actions Units an entity may expend to perform actions in the Land of Arcadia is as follows, - If the entity is a Player, 10, minus 1 for every 5 Blots in the Player's Stain as recorded in the most recent Herald's report before the week started, plus 1 for every unit of Land with Gote owned by the Player at the start of the week. - If the entity is a Group, 1, plus 3 for every Member of the Group located on or adjacent to the location of the Group at the start of the week, plus 1 for every unit of Land with Gote owned by the Group at the start of the week. - All other entities zero. Action Units are not transferable, and do not persist from one week to the next. An entity may expend Action Units to carry out an action in Arcadia by notifying the Mapkeepor of the specifics of the act. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Action Units, e may make as many actions e wishes in a single week. When an act specifies an alternating Land Type, the Land Type chosen will be based upon the Land Type used as the previous alternating Land Type, so that consecutive alternating Land Types alternate between Black and White. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of an act that specifies an alternating Land Type, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Type was used for that act. Players may expend: * 2 Action Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types are the same and the destination is not Aether. * 5 Action Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types differ and the destination is not Aether; Groups may expend: * 5 Action Units to move from its current location to the location of one of its Members. Any entity may expend: * 5 Action Units to set Land Type of a Land Unit which e owns to any Land Type other than Aether, whether or not e is located at that Land Unit. * 5 Action Units to set the Land Type of a random Land Unit that is adjacent to the Entity's current location, is of type Aether, and is owned by the Land Bureau, to an alternating Land Type. The Mapkeepor will make the random determination. This action has no effect if there are no qualifying Land Units. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of this move, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Unit, if any, is changed by this action. The change occurs at the time of the first legal announcement from the Mapkeepor declaring which Land Unit's Land Type has changed. * 10 Action Units to set the Land Type of the Entity's current location to any Land Type of eir choice other than Aether, if and only if the Unit is owned by the Land Bureau. * 10 Action Units to set the Land Type of any Land Unit that is of type Aether to an alternating Land Type. Unless explicitly permitted by other Rules, all other actions and moves in Arcadia are invalid. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: Every week, the number of Actions Units an entity may expend to perform actions in the Land of Arcadia is as follows, - If the entity is a Player, 10, minus 1 for every 5 Blots in the Player's Stain as recorded in the most recent Herald's report before the week started, plus 1 for every unit of Land with Gote owned by the Player at the start of the week. - All other entities zero. Action Units are not transferable, and do not persist from one week to the next. An entity may expend Action Units to carry out an action in Arcadia by notifying the Mapkeepor of the specifics of the act. So long as e does not spend more than eir allotted number of Action Units, e may make as many actions e wishes in a single week. When an act specifies an alternating Land Type, the Land Type chosen will be based upon the Land Type used as the previous alternating Land Type, so that consecutive alternating Land Types alternate between Black and White. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of an act that specifies an alternating Land Type, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Type was used for that act. Players may expend: * 2 Action Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types are the same and the destination is not Aether. * 5 Action Units to move from one Land Unit to an adjacent Unit if their Land Types differ and the destination is not Aether; Any entity may expend: * 5 Action Units to set Land Type of a Land Unit which e owns to any Land Type other than Aether, whether or not e is located at that Land Unit. * 5 Action Units to set the Land Type of a random Land Unit that is adjacent to the Entity's current location, is of type Aether, and is owned by the Land Bureau, to an alternating Land Type. The Mapkeepor will make the random determination. This action has no effect if there are no qualifying Land Units. As soon as possible after a Player notifies the Mapkeepor of this move, the Mapkeepor must announce which Land Unit, if any, is changed by this action. The change occurs at the time of the first legal announcement from the Mapkeepor declaring which Land Unit's Land Type has changed. * 10 Action Units to set the Land Type of the Entity's current location to any Land Type of eir choice other than Aether, if and only if the Unit is owned by the Land Bureau. * 10 Action Units to set the Land Type of any Land Unit that is of type Aether to an alternating Land Type. Unless explicitly permitted by other Rules, all other actions and moves in Arcadia are invalid. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2003 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2004 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2004 by Proposal 4210 (neil), 10 September 2001 text: As soon as possible after the tenth day of each Month, the Mapkeepor shall, if the number of units of Land held by players is less than one half the total number of units of Land, auction a number of units of Land not to exceed 10. The units of Land to be Auctioned are: * if there exist at least 10 Units of non-Aether Land in the possession of the Land Bureau: any 10 such Units of Land, to be chosen by the Mapkeepor; * if there exist fewer than 10 Units of non-Aether Land in the possession of the Land Bureau: all such Units. There shall be a separate Auction for each Unit of Land under consideration. These Auctions shall be conducted concurrently. For each of these Auctions: * The item to be Auctioned is the piece of Land in question. * The Procedure to be used is the Vickrey Auction. * The Auctioneer shall be the Mapkeepor. * The Auction shall be conducted in Indulgences. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4234 (Goethe), 29 November 2001 text: As soon as possible after the tenth day of each Month, the Mapkeepor shall, if the number of units of Land held by players is less than one half the total number of units of Land, auction a number of units of Land not to exceed 10. The units of Land to be Auctioned are: * if there exist at least 10 Units of non-Aether Land in the possession of the Land Bureau: any 10 such Units of Land, to be chosen by the Mapkeepor; * if there exist fewer than 10 Units of non-Aether Land in the possession of the Land Bureau: all such Units. There shall be a separate Auction for each Unit of Land under consideration. These Auctions shall be conducted concurrently. For each of these Auctions: * The item to be Auctioned is the piece of Land in question. * The Procedure to be used is the Vickrey Auction. * The Auctioneer shall be the Mapkeepor. * The Default Auction Currency shall be Indulgences; however, the Auctioneer may select a different Bank Currency with 2 Supporters. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4249 (Murphy), 19 February 2002 text: As soon as possible after the tenth day of each Month, the Mapkeepor shall, if the number of units of Land held by players is less than one half the total number of units of Land, auction a number of units of Land not to exceed 10. The units of Land to be Auctioned are: * if there exist at least 10 Units of non-Aether Land in the possession of the Land Bureau: any 10 such Units of Land, to be chosen by the Mapkeepor; * if there exist fewer than 10 Units of non-Aether Land in the possession of the Land Bureau: all such Units. There shall be a separate Auction for each Unit of Land under consideration. These Auctions shall be conducted concurrently. For each of these Auctions: * The item to be Auctioned is the piece of Land in question. * The Procedure to be used is the Vickrey Auction. * The Default Auction Currency shall be Indulgences; however, the Auctioneer may select a different Bank Currency with 2 Supporters. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4387 (Peekee), 25 September 2002 text: As soon as possible after the tenth day of each Month, the Mapkeepor shall, if the number of units of Private Land is less than one half the total number of units of Land, auction a number of units of Land not to exceed 10. The units of Land to be Auctioned are: * if there exist at least 10 Units of non-Aether Land in the possession of the Land Bureau: any 10 such Units of Land, to be chosen by the Mapkeepor; * if there exist fewer than 10 Units of non-Aether Land in the possession of the Land Bureau: all such Units. There shall be a separate Auction for each Unit of Land under consideration. These Auctions shall be conducted concurrently. For each of these Auctions: * The item to be Auctioned is the piece of Land in question. * The Procedure to be used is the Vickrey Auction. * The Default Auction Currency shall be Indulgences; however, the Auctioneer may select a different Bank Currency with 2 Supporters. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2004 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2005 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2005 by Proposal 4210 (neil), 10 September 2001 text: A Player who owns Land may impose a Toll on any (currently un-Tolled) piece of Land e owns. To do so, e must pay a Fee of 0.2 Indulgences and clearly and unambiguously identify the Unit of Land in question, as well as the amount of the Toll for that Unit of Land. A Toll is a number of VEs, Indulgences, or Papyri. No Unit of Land may have a Toll in other currencies, or in more than one of these currencies. No Toll shall be greater than 200 times the MUQ of the currency in which it is denominated. If a Player (the Tollee) Moves into a Unit of Land which is at the time owned by another Player (the Toller), and for which there is at the time a Toll established, e (the Tollee) is said to be In Toll to the Unit of Land in question, for the amount of the Toll on that unit of land (at the time of the Move) The owner (Toller) of a Unit of Land may notify the Mapkeepor that e believes a Player has been In Toll to a Unit of Land owned by em; to do so, e submits a Notification of Toll, which must unambiguously describe the Unit of Land in question, the amount of the Toll, and the Player (alleged Tollee) in question. The alleged Move must have occurred within the past week. A Player may submit only one such Notification for a given Unit of Land in a single week, and may not submit substantially the same Notification two weeks in a row. Any Notification of Toll contrary to this Rule is invalid and shall be discarded. If, in the Mapkeepor's determination, the alleged Tollee was in fact, in the week before the Notification, In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, the Mapkeepor shall confirm the Toll by publicly informing the Tollee and the Toller. The Tollee then incurs to the Toller a debt equal to the Toll specified in the Notification. If, in the Mapkeepor's determination, the alleged Tollee was not In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, e shall deny the Notification by informing the Toller of eir determination. If the Mapkeepor fails to respond to a valid Notification of Toll, e commits the Class 2 Crime of Looking the Other Way. If the Mapkeepor confirms a Notification of Toll when in fact the alleged Tollee was not In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, e (the Mapkeepor) commits the Class 3 Crime of Conspiracy to Commit Highway Robbery. If the Mapkeeper denies a Notification of Toll when in fact the alleged Tollee was In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, e (the Mapkeepor) commits the Class 3 Crime of Not Feeding the Toll Under the Bridge. A Player may remove a Toll from any Tolled Unit of Land e owns. If a Player loses possession of a Unit of Land, all Tolls imposed on that Unit by that Player are removed. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4228 (root), 22 November 2001 text: A Player who owns Land may impose a Toll on any (currently un-Tolled) piece of Land e owns. To do so, e must pay a Fee of 0.2 Indulgences and publicly announce that e is imposing a Toll, clearly and unambiguously identifying the Unit of Land in question, as well as the amount of the Toll for that Unit of Land. A Toll is a number of VEs, Indulgences, or Papyri. No Unit of Land may have a Toll in other currencies, or in more than one of these currencies. No Toll shall be greater than 200 times the MUQ of the currency in which it is denominated. If a Player (the Tollee) Moves into a Unit of Land which is at the time owned by another Player (the Toller), and for which there is at the time a Toll established, e (the Tollee) is said to be In Toll to the Unit of Land in question, for the amount of the Toll on that unit of land (at the time of the Move) The owner (Toller) of a Unit of Land may notify the Mapkeepor that e believes a Player has been In Toll to a Unit of Land owned by em; to do so, e submits a Notification of Toll, which must unambiguously describe the Unit of Land in question, the amount of the Toll, and the Player (alleged Tollee) in question. The alleged Move must have occurred within the past week. A Player may submit only one such Notification for a given Unit of Land in a single week, and may not submit substantially the same Notification two weeks in a row. Any Notification of Toll contrary to this Rule is invalid and shall be discarded. If, in the Mapkeepor's determination, the alleged Tollee was in fact, in the week before the Notification, In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, the Mapkeepor shall confirm the Toll by publicly informing the Tollee and the Toller. The Tollee then incurs to the Toller a debt equal to the Toll specified in the Notification. If, in the Mapkeepor's determination, the alleged Tollee was not In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, e shall deny the Notification by informing the Toller of eir determination. If the Mapkeepor fails to respond to a valid Notification of Toll, e commits the Class 2 Crime of Looking the Other Way. If the Mapkeepor confirms a Notification of Toll when in fact the alleged Tollee was not In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, e (the Mapkeepor) commits the Class 3 Crime of Conspiracy to Commit Highway Robbery. If the Mapkeeper denies a Notification of Toll when in fact the alleged Tollee was In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, e (the Mapkeepor) commits the Class 3 Crime of Not Feeding the Toll Under the Bridge. A Player may remove a Toll from any Tolled Unit of Land e owns by publicly announcing that e does so. If a Player loses possession of a Unit of Land, all Tolls imposed on that Unit by that Player are removed. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4405 (Peekee), 23 October 2002 text: An Entity who owns Land may impose a Toll on any (currently un-Tolled) piece of Land e owns. To do so, e must pay a Fee of 0.2 Indulgences and publicly announce that e is imposing a Toll, clearly and unambiguously identifying the Unit of Land in question, as well as the amount of the Toll for that Unit of Land. A Toll is a number of VEs, Indulgences, or Papyri. No Unit of Land may have a Toll in other currencies, or in more than one of these currencies. No Toll shall be greater than 200 times the MUQ of the currency in which it is denominated. If an entity (the Tollee) Moves into a Unit of Land which is at the time owned by another Entity (the Toller), and for which there is at the time a Toll established, e (the Tollee) is said to be In Toll to the Unit of Land in question, for the amount of the Toll on that unit of land (at the time of the Move) The owner (Toller) of a Unit of Land may notify the Mapkeepor that e believes an entity has been In Toll to a Unit of Land owned by em; to do so, e submits a Notification of Toll, which must unambiguously describe the Unit of Land in question, the amount of the Toll, and the Entity (alleged Tollee) in question. The alleged Move must have occurred within the past week. A Entity may submit only one such Notification for a given Unit of Land in a single week, and may not submit substantially the same Notification two weeks in a row. Any Notification of Toll contrary to this Rule is invalid and shall be discarded. If, in the Mapkeepor's determination, the alleged Tollee was in fact, in the week before the Notification, In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, the Mapkeepor shall confirm the Toll by publicly informing the Tollee and the Toller. The Tollee then incurs to the Toller a debt equal to the Toll specified in the Notification. If, in the Mapkeepor's determination, the alleged Tollee was not In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, e shall deny the Notification by informing the Toller of eir determination. If the Mapkeepor fails to respond to a valid Notification of Toll, e commits the Class 2 Crime of Looking the Other Way. If the Mapkeepor confirms a Notification of Toll when in fact the alleged Tollee was not In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, e (the Mapkeepor) commits the Class 3 Crime of Conspiracy to Commit Highway Robbery. If the Mapkeeper denies a Notification of Toll when in fact the alleged Tollee was In Toll to the specified Unit of Land for the specified amount, e (the Mapkeepor) commits the Class 3 Crime of Not Feeding the Toll Under the Bridge. An Entity may remove a Toll from any Tolled Unit of Land e owns by publicly announcing that e does so. If an entity loses possession of a Unit of Land, all Tolls imposed on that Unit by that Entity are removed. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2005 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2006 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2006 by Proposal 4211 (harvel), 10 September 2001 text: As soon as possible after a player becomes a Dissolute, the Notary shall initiate an Auction for the privilege of Looting the Corpse of the Dissolute. Once a Looting Auction begins, the Notary may not transfer property on behalf of the Dissolute until either the Auction ends without any winning bids or the winning bidder defaults on eir bid or loses eir privilege to Loot the Corpse of that Dissolute. Looting Auctions shall follow the default procedure for Auctions with the following modifications: (1) The Auctioneer shall be the Notary. (2) The Auction Currency shall be Indulgences. (3) The Starting Price shall be the number of Blots the Dissolute had when e became a Dissolute, or one Indulgence if the Dissolute was Immaculate. (4) The Auction shall be for a temporary privilege, not for an item, and so no debt of items to the winning Bidder when eir bill is paid shall be incurred. If there are no winning bids for the privilege of Looting the Corpse of that Dissolute, the Notary must, as soon as possible after the end of the Looting Auction, transfer all the Dissolute's property to the Bank. When the winning bidder pays eir bill from the Looting Auction, e gains the privilege of Looting the Corpse of that Dissolute; e becomes a Limited Executor of the Dissolute, with the authority to transfer property from the Dissolute to emself. One week after e gains this privilege, e loses it, and ceases to be a Limited Executor of the Dissolute. If the Dissolute still has property after the winning bidder loses this privilege, the Notary must transfer the Dissolute's remaining property to the Bank as soon as possible afterward. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4249 (Murphy), 19 February 2002 text: As soon as possible after a player becomes a Dissolute, the Notary shall initiate an Auction for the privilege of Looting the Corpse of the Dissolute. Once a Looting Auction begins, the Notary may not transfer property on behalf of the Dissolute until either the Auction ends without any winning bids or the winning bidder defaults on eir bid or loses eir privilege to Loot the Corpse of that Dissolute. Looting Auctions shall follow the default procedure for Auctions with the following modifications: (1) The Auction Currency shall be Indulgences. (2) The Starting Price shall be the number of Blots the Dissolute had when e became a Dissolute, or one Indulgence if the Dissolute was Immaculate. (3) The Auction shall be for a temporary privilege, not for an item, and so no debt of items to the winning Bidder when eir bill is paid shall be incurred. If there are no winning bids for the privilege of Looting the Corpse of that Dissolute, the Notary must, as soon as possible after the end of the Looting Auction, transfer all the Dissolute's property to the Bank. When the winning bidder pays eir bill from the Looting Auction, e gains the privilege of Looting the Corpse of that Dissolute; e becomes a Limited Executor of the Dissolute, with the authority to transfer property from the Dissolute to emself. One week after e gains this privilege, e loses it, and ceases to be a Limited Executor of the Dissolute. If the Dissolute still has property after the winning bidder loses this privilege, the Notary must transfer the Dissolute's remaining property to the Bank as soon as possible afterward. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2006 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2007 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2007 by Proposal 4217 (Syllepsis), 29 September 2001 text: A Player who owns a Unit of Land and is Located at that Unit of Land may change the Land Type and/or Subtype in the following manner: a) If the Unit of Land is of Type Wilderness, e may change that Unit of Land to Type Farmland by expending 5 Movement Points and paying a Fee of: i) 0.1 BOS in Stems, rounded up, if the Unit is of Subtype Forest; ii) 0.25 BOS in Stems, rounded up, if the Unit is of Subtype Desert; or iii) 1 BOS in Stems, rounded up, if the Unit is of Subtype Mountain. b) If the Unit of Land is of Type Farmland, e may change that Unit of Land to Type Urbana by expending 5 Movement Points and paying a Fee of: i) 0.1 BOS in Stems, rounded up, in which case the Unit will have Subtype Road; ii) 0.25 BOS in Stems, rounded up, in which case the Unit will have Subtype Aqueduct; or iii) if there are no Units of subtype City within a Penguin Distance of 3 from the Unit, The Unit is Connected to a Unit of Water by Aqueduct, and there are at least 8 Units of Farmland within a Penguin Distance of 2 from the Unit, 1 BOS in Stems, in which case the Unit will have Subtype City. In this case the Player is required to give a unique name to the City. Units affected by this Rule take on the new Land Type at the beginning of the next week, and all such changes shall be indicated in the Mapkeepor's Report for that week. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2007 by Proposal 4283 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2008 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2008 by Proposal 4217 (Syllepsis), 29 September 2001 text: A Unit of Land of Subtype City may be referred to as just a City, Arcadian City, or by its unique name, if any. The Unit of Land at (0,0) shall always remain a City. This city shall be named Tripolis, the Capital of Arcadia, and shall always be Public Land, owned by the Bank. This takes precedence over any Rule to the contrary. Any City other than Tripolis ceases to be a City and becomes a Unit of Land of Subtype Road whenever: a) It is not Connected to Water by Aqueduct; or b) There are less than 8 Units of Farmland within a Penguin Distance of 2 from the City. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2008 by Proposal 4283 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2009 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2009 by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 text: (a) Upon the creation of this Rule, all Players who were Low, Middle, or High Oligarchs when the Proposal creating this Rule was adopted become Oligarchs. Each of these Players is an Elder Oligarch until e ceases to be an Oligarch or until e has been an Elder Oligarch for 3 months. (b) The Rulekeepor may repeal this Rule Without Objection if there are no Elder Oligarchs. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2009 by Proposal 4928 (Zefram), 18 April 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2010 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2010 by Proposal 4221 (Steve), 10 October 2001 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the GWotO shall bill each non-Elder Oligarch 0.1 VEs. The GWotO shall remove from the Oligarchy any Oligarch who does not pay a debt resulting from this Rule within 7 days of the announcement of such a debt. text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the GWotO shall bill each non-Elder Oligarch 0.1 VEs. The GWotO shall remove from the Oligarchy any Oligarch who does not pay a debt resulting from this Rule within 7 days of the announcement of such a debt. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4268 (Steve), 22 March 2002 text: (a) As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the GWotO shall bill each non-Elder Oligarch 0.1 VEs. (b) If an Oligarch does not pay eir Oligarchy Upkeep within a week of the GWotO's announcement of the debt, then the GWotO shall forgive the Upkeep debt, and remove the Oligarch from the Oligarchy. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4307 (Steve), 28 May 2002 text: (a) At the beginning of each month, the GWotO shall bill each Oligarch who has occupied eir position in the Oligarchy for at least the previous 21 days as follows: (1) for an Oligarch who is a Politician, the Base Seating Fee; (2) for an Oligarch who is not a Politician, twice the Base Seating Fee. (b) If an Oligarch does not pay eir Oligarchy Upkeep within a week of the GWotO's announcement of the debt, then the GWotO shall forgive the Upkeep debt, and remove the Oligarch from the Oligarchy. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4371 (Steve), 6 September 2002 text: (a) At the beginning of each month, the GWotO shall bill each Oligarch who has occupied eir position in the Oligarchy for at least the previous 21 days as follows: (1) for an Oligarch who is a Politician, the Base Seating Fee; (2) for an Oligarch who is not a Politician, twice the Base Seating Fee. (b) If an Oligarch does not pay eir Oligarchy Upkeep within a week of the GWotO's announcement of the debt, then the GWotO shall remove the Oligarch from the Oligarchy, and Order the Bank to forgive the Upkeep debt. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2010 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2011 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2011 by Proposal 4234 (Goethe), 29 November 2001 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the Treasuror shall randomly Determine the Weather for the month. The Weather can be one of either Foul, Fair, or Plenty, and shall be determined using the following probabilities: 0.20 Foul. 0.30 Fair. 0.20 Plenty. 0.30 Same as the previous month. When the Treasuror posts eir Determination of the Weather for a month, the following events shall occur in the listed sequence immediately after the Weather is Determined: (a) A number of Stems in the Bank's possession, equal to the number of Players in the game multiplied by the Minimum Income, shall be Destroyed. If this value is greater than the number of Stems in the Possession of the Bank, all the Stems in the Possession of the Bank shall be Destroyed instead. (b) A number of Stems shall be Created in the Bank's Possession, equal to the number Destroyed in (a) above multiplied by: 0.50 if the Weather is Foul; 1.00 if the Weather is Fair; 1.50 if the Weather is Plenty. The Treasuror shall announce the number of Stems Created and Destroyed by this Rule in the message in which e announces the Weather. text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the Treasuror shall randomly Determine the Weather for the month. The Weather can be one of either Foul, Fair, or Plenty, and shall be determined using the following probabilities: 0.20 Foul. 0.30 Fair. 0.20 Plenty. 0.30 Same as the previous month. When the Treasuror posts eir Determination of the Weather for a month, the following events shall occur in the listed sequence immediately after the Weather is Determined: (a) A number of Stems in the Bank's possession, equal to the number of Players in the game multiplied by the Minimum Income, shall be Destroyed. If this value is greater than the number of Stems in the Possession of the Bank, all the Stems in the Possession of the Bank shall be Destroyed instead. (b) A number of Stems shall be Created in the Bank's Possession, equal to the number Destroyed in (a) above multiplied by: 0.50 if the Weather is Foul; 1.00 if the Weather is Fair; 1.50 if the Weather is Plenty. The Treasuror shall announce the number of Stems Created and Destroyed by this Rule in the message in which e announces the Weather. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4383 (Sir Toby), 11 September 2002 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of each month, the Treasuror shall randomly Determine the Weather for the month. The Weather can be one of either Foul, Fair, or Plenty, and shall be determined as follows: - Let FOUL be the number of Stems owned by the Bank, multiplied by the Foul Weather Factor as set in the Treasuror's Budget, and then rounded up to the nearest integer. - Let PLENTY be the number of Stems owned by all Entities, excluding the Bank. - Let SAME and FAIR both be the sum of FOUL and PLENTY, divided by 4, rounding up to the nearest integer. - Let TOTAL by the sum of FOUL, PLENTY, SAME, and FAIR. - The weather shall be determined using the following probabilities: (FOUL / TOTAL) Foul. (FAIR / TOTAL) Fair. (PLENTY / TOTAL) Plenty. (SAME / TOTAL) Same as the previous month. When the Treasuror posts eir Determination of the Weather for a month, the following events shall occur in the listed sequence immediately after the Weather is Determined: (a) A number of Stems in the Bank's possession, equal to the number of Players in the game multiplied by the Minimum Income, multiplied by the Weather Intensity Factor as set in the Treasuror's Budget, and then rounded up to the nearest integer, shall be Destroyed. If this value is greater than the number of Stems in the Possession of the Bank, all the Stems in the Possession of the Bank shall be Destroyed instead. (b) A number of Stems shall be Created in the Bank's Possession, equal to the number Destroyed in (a) above multiplied by: 0.50 if the Weather is Foul; 1.00 if the Weather is Fair; 1.50 if the Weather is Plenty. The Treasuror shall announce the number of Stems Created and Destroyed by this Rule in the message in which e announces the Weather. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2011 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2012 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2012 by Proposal 4251 (Steve), 19 February 2002 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: (a) There is a type of Auction called a Single-Bid Auction. The procedure for conducting a Single-Bid Auction is the same as that used in the Default Auction Procedure, with the following additions and exceptions: (1) Bid Inflation Factor: As part of any correct and legal announcement that a Single-Bid Auction is commencing, the Auctioneer must announce the value of the Bid Inflation Factor for the Auction, a real number between 0 and 1 inclusive. (2) Making Bids: Each Player eligible to bid in the Auction is permitted to make only one bid, called the initial Bid. Any bids made by a Player after eir initial Bid in the Auction are invalid. A Player who cancels eir bid is ineligible to make further bids in the Auction. All Bids must be made publically. (3) Value of Bids: at each midnight GMT during the Auction, the value of each valid, uncancelled Bid remaining in the Auction is increased by an amount equal to the Bid Inflation Factor multiplied by the initial Bid. (4) Final Auction Price: for the purposes of determining the Winner(s) of the Auction, the value of each Bid as calculated in (3) above is used. However, the debt incurred by a Winner of the Auction is equal to eir initial Bid. text: (a) There is a type of Auction called a Single-Bid Auction. The procedure for conducting a Single-Bid Auction is the same as that used in the Default Auction Procedure, with the following additions and exceptions: (1) Bid Inflation Factor: As part of any correct and legal announcement that a Single-Bid Auction is commencing, the Auctioneer must announce the value of the Bid Inflation Factor for the Auction, a real number between 0 and 1 inclusive. (2) Making Bids: Each Player eligible to bid in the Auction is permitted to make only one bid, called the initial Bid. Any bids made by a Player after eir initial Bid in the Auction are invalid. A Player who cancels eir bid is ineligible to make further bids in the Auction. All Bids must be made publically. (3) Value of Bids: at each midnight GMT during the Auction, the value of each valid, uncancelled Bid remaining in the Auction is increased by an amount equal to the Bid Inflation Factor multiplied by the initial Bid. (4) Final Auction Price: for the purposes of determining the Winner(s) of the Auction, the value of each Bid as calculated in (3) above is used. However, the debt incurred by a Winner of the Auction is equal to eir initial Bid. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4321 (Steve), 31 May 2002 text: (a) There is a type of Auction called a Single-Bid Auction. The procedure for conducting a Single-Bid Auction is the same as that used in the Default Auction Procedure, with the following additions and exceptions: (1) Bid Inflation Factor: As part of any correct and legal announcement that a Single-Bid Auction is commencing, the Auctioneer must announce the value of the Bid Inflation Factor for the Auction, a real number between 0 and 1 inclusive. (2) Making Bids: Each Player eligible to bid in the Auction is permitted to make only one bid, called the initial Bid. Any bids made by a Player after eir initial Bid in the Auction are invalid. A Player who cancels eir bid is ineligible to make further bids in the Auction. All Bids must be made publically. (3) Value of Bids: at each midnight GMT during the Auction, the value of each valid, uncancelled Bid remaining in the Auction is increased by an amount equal to the Bid Inflation Factor multiplied by the initial Bid. (4) Final Auction Price: for the purposes of determining the Winner(s) of the Auction, the value of each Bid as calculated in (3) above is used. However, the debt incurred by a Winner of the Auction is equal to the Nth highest Winning Initial Bid, where N is the number of items being Auctioned, or to the Starting Bid, if there were fewer than N bids. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4446 (Steve), 22 February 2003 text: There is a type of auction called a single-bid auction. The procedure for conducting a single-bid auction is the same as that used in the default auction procedure, with the following additions and exceptions: (a) Bid inflation factor: As part of any correct and legal announcement that a single-bid auction is commencing, the Auctioneer must announce the value of the bid inflation factor for the auction, a real number between 0 and 1 inclusive. (b) Making bids: each player eligible to bid in the auction is permitted to make only one bid, called the initial bid. Any bids made by a player after eir initial bid in the auction are invalid. A player who cancels eir bid is ineligible to make further bids in the auction. All bids must be made publically. (c) Value of bids: at each midnight GMT during the auction, the value of each valid, uncancelled bid remaining in the auction is increased by an amount equal to the bid inflation factor multiplied by the initial bid. (d) End of auction: the auction ends if any of the following occur: (1) one week has passed from the start of the auction, and no bids have been made; or (2) a bid has been made in the auction, and there has been no change in the N highest initial bids for 72 hours; or (3) fourteen days have passed since the Auction began. (e) Final auction price: for the purposes of determining the winner(s) of the auction, the value of each bid as calculated in (c) above is used. However, the debt incurred by a winner of the auction is equal to the Nth highest winning initial bid, where N is the number of items being auctioned, or to the starting bid, if there were fewer than N bids. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2012 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2013 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2013 by Proposal 4253 (Goethe), 19 February 2002 text: A Contest may be a Champion's Contest if and only if: (i) its Contestmaster bears the Patent Title Current Champion; (ii) no other Contest is a Champion's Contest; (iii) the Contest's Regulations state that it is a Champion's Contest. If any of these criteria cease to be true, the Contest immediately ceases being a Champion's Contest. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4550 (Goethe), 24 January 2004 text: If no Champion's Contest exists, the Scorekeepor or the Speaker may, with 2 Support, name an existing Contest to be a Champion's Contest. The namers are encouraged to select Contests that they feel would give the maximum enjoyment to Agorans as a whole, and give preference to Contests run by Players who were members of the most recently winning team. The Contestmaster of a Champion's Contest ceases to be a member of any team, rules to the contrary nonwithstanding. If e ceases to be Contestmaster of a Champion's Contest, e shall be assigned to a team as if e were a new Player. Each Champion's Contest begins with zero awardable points, as tracked by the Scorekeepor. At the beginning of each month, the Contest's awardable points are increased by the Champion's Grant contained in the Scorekeepor's Budget. A Champion's Contest Contestmaster may publish a Notice of Award, listing a positive number of Points to be awarded to a team or teams. The posting must obey all regulations for such posting contained in the Contest's SLC, and award no more than the Contest's awardable points, to be valid. The effect of a valid Notice of Award is to increase the named teams' points as indicated, and decrease the Contest's awardable points by the same amount. When a Team Win occurs, any Champion's Contest ceases to be a Champion's Contest and loses all awardable points. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2013 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2014 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2014 by Proposal 4253 (Goethe), 19 February 2002 text: SemiGenius is a defined regular Patent Title. Bearing the Patent Title SemiGenius is a Win Condition. If at any time a Player Wins the Game, the Patent Title SemiGenius is revoked from all those who bear it. The Patent Title SemiGenius may only be Awarded by an valid Public Announcement of SemiGeniosity naming the Awardee. Such an Announcement may only be made by the Contestmaster of a Champion's Contest. To be valid, the Announcement must be made only as explicitly permitted by the Regulations of the Contest. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2014 by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2015 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2015 by Proposal 4253 (Goethe), 19 February 2002 text: Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, the Winner's Stipend may not be changed except as permitted by this Rule. If a Player Wins the Game by Bearing the Patent Title SemiGenius, The Winner's Stipend shall be set equal to proportion, rounded to the nearest multiple of 0.1, of Active Players (out of total number of Active Players at the time of the Win) that were Contestants, at any time since the most recent previous Win, in the Champion's Contest that Awarded that Patent Title. In this case, the Scorekeepor shall pay out the Champion's Pension, equal to this new Winner's Stipend times the BOS, to the Contestmaster who awarded the Patent Title. If a Player Wins the Game by any other Win Condition, the Winner's Stipend shall be set to 0.5, and no Champion's Pension shall be awarded. If a Player bears the Patent Title Current Champion at the beginning of four consecutive Nomic months without a Win occuring, then at the beginning each month thereafter, until a Win occurs, the Scorekeepor shall Bill the Player an amount equal to twice the current Winner's Stipend times the BOS. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, the Winner's Stipend may not be changed except as permitted by this Rule. If a Player Wins the Game by Bearing the Patent Title SemiGenius, The Winner's Stipend shall be set equal to proportion, rounded to the nearest multiple of 0.1, of Active Players (out of total number of Active Players at the time of the Win) that were Contestants, at any time since the most recent previous Win, in the Champion's Contest that Awarded that Patent Title. In this case, the Scorekeepor shall pay out the Champion's Pension, equal to this new Winner's Stipend times the BOS, to the Contestmaster who awarded the Patent Title. If a Player Wins the Game by any other Win Condition, the Winner's Stipend shall be set to 0.5, and no Champion's Pension shall be awarded. If a Player bears the Patent Title Current Champion at the beginning of four consecutive Agoran months without a Win occuring, then at the beginning each month thereafter, until a Win occurs, the Scorekeepor shall Bill the Player an amount equal to twice the current Winner's Stipend times the BOS. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2015 by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2016 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2016 by Proposal 4264 (Steve), 4 March 2002 text: (a) A null Proposal is a Proposal containing no provisions, i.e., one that does not propose any Rule Changes, or any other changes to the game state. (b) Any Player may make a null Proposal Distributable without payment of the usual Fee, provided that no other null Proposal in the current Nomic Month has been made Distributable under this provision. (c) The first null Proposal to be distributed in each Nomic Month is a Contested Proposal. (d) A Contested Proposal is Democratic. (e) Notwithstanding the prevailing Mode of Voting on Proposals, voting on a Contested Proposal is always Unrestricted. This Rule takes precedence over Rules that determine the permissible methods for casting votes on Proposals. (f) If a Contested Proposal fails Quorum, no Points are Awarded. (g) If a Contested Proposal achieves Quorum, but fails, each Player who voted against the Proposal and did not vote for it may be Awarded 10 Points. (h) If a Contested Proposal is adopted, each Player who voted for the Proposal and did not vote against it may be Awarded 10 Points. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: (a) A null Proposal is a Proposal containing no provisions, i.e., one that does not propose any Rule Changes, or any other changes to the game state. (b) Any Player may make a null Proposal Distributable without payment of the usual Fee, provided that no other null Proposal in the current Agoran Month has been made Distributable under this provision. (c) The first null Proposal to be distributed in each Agoran Month is a Contested Proposal. (d) A Contested Proposal is Democratic. (e) Notwithstanding the prevailing Mode of Voting on Proposals, voting on a Contested Proposal is always Unrestricted. This Rule takes precedence over Rules that determine the permissible methods for casting votes on Proposals. (f) If a Contested Proposal fails Quorum, no Points are Awarded. (g) If a Contested Proposal achieves Quorum, but fails, each Player who voted against the Proposal and did not vote for it may be Awarded 10 Points. (h) If a Contested Proposal is adopted, each Player who voted for the Proposal and did not vote against it may be Awarded 10 Points. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2016 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2017 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2017 by Proposal 4272 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: A entity's Stain is a measure of that entity's cleanliness, measured in Blots. The Stain of each entity is at all times a non-negative number. If the Rules state that an entity gains, is assessed, or is penalised some number of Blots, then, as soon as possible after the Herald is informed of the change, e shall record an increase of that amount in the entity's Stain. (If the entity was an Unready Player at the time of the change, then the Herald shall instead record an increase of half that amount.) If the Rules state that some number of a entity's Blots are expunged, then, as soon as possible after the Herald is informed of the change, e shall record a decrease of that amount in the entity's Stain. (If this would result in a negative Stain, then it instead results in a Stain of zero.) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: The stain of an entity is an index measuring how unclean that entity is. An entity is immaculate, or squeaky clean, if its stain is zero. If an entity gains, is assessed, or is penalised a given number of Blots, then as soon as possible after the Herald is informed, either by emself or by others, of the change, e shall record an increase in that entity's stain of that amount (or half that amount if the entity is an unready player at the time of the change). If some number of an entity's Blots are expunged, then as soon as possible after the Herald is informed of the change, e shall record a decrease of that amount in the entity's stain. If this would result in a negative stain, then it instead results in a stain of zero. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2017 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2018 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2018 by Proposal 4272 (Murphy), 22 March 2002 text: When an entity transfers an amount of Indulgences to the Bank, and specifies in the Notice of Transfer that the transfer is for the purpose of expunging the Blots of a specified entity, then an equal amount of the entity's Blots are expunged. (If the amount of the transfer exceeds the entity's Stain at the time of the transfer, then all of the entity's Blots are expunged, and the Bank incurs an Indulgence debt to the transferor equal to the amount of the original transfer minus the entity's previous Stain.) history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: A non-Immaculate entity may expunge a number of eir Blots, up to eir total Stain, by announcing the number of eir Blots e expunges; this has a Fee of 2 Kudos per expunged Blot. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2018 by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2019 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2019 by Proposal 4276 (Steve), 28 March 2002 text: At any time during the Voting Period of an Ordinary Proposal, the Speaker may Veto that Proposal with the Support of one-third of all Oligarchs, rounded down. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 text: At any time during the Voting Period of an Ordinary Proposal, the Speaker may Veto that Proposal with the Support of one-third of all Shareholders, rounded down. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4717 (Murphy), 25 April 2005 text: At any time during the voting period of an ordinary proposal, the Speaker may veto that proposal with the support of one-third of all shareholders, rounded down. When e does so, the proposal becomes extraordinary. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: During the voting period of a non-democratic proposal, the Speaker may veto it, with two support. When e does so, the adoption index of that proposal is increased by one. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4836 (Goethe, Maud), 2 October 2005 text: The Speaker may veto an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Whenever a proposal is vetoed, its quorum is set to the current number of eligible voters on that proposal plus one, other rules governing quorum notwithstanding. As soon as possible after a vetoed proposal fails quorum, the Assessor shall a copy of that proposal to the Proposal Pool. When e does so, that copy shall become distributable and democratic, and its adoption index shall be increased by one. The Speaker may Rubberstamp an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Quorum for a rubberstamped ordinary proposal is three, other rules governing quorum nonwithstanding. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4840 (Goethe), 27 October 2005 text: The Speaker may veto an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Whenever a proposal is vetoed, its quorum is set to the current number of eligible voters on that proposal plus one, other rules governing quorum notwithstanding. As soon as possible after a vetoed proposal fails quorum, the Assessor shall place a copy of that proposal to the Proposal Pool. When e does so, that copy shall become distributable and democratic, and its adoption index shall be increased by one. The Speaker may Rubberstamp an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Quorum for a rubberstamped ordinary proposal is three, other rules governing quorum nonwithstanding. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4885 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: The Speaker may veto an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Whenever a proposal is vetoed, its quorum is set to the current number of eligible voters on that proposal plus one, other rules governing quorum notwithstanding. As soon as possible after a vetoed proposal fails quorum, the Promotor shall add a copy of that proposal to the Proposal Pool. When e does so, that copy shall become distributable and democratic, and its adoption index shall be increased by one. The Speaker may Rubberstamp an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Quorum for a rubberstamped ordinary proposal is three, other rules governing quorum nonwithstanding. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: The Speaker may veto an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Whenever a proposal is vetoed, its quorum is set to the current number of eligible voters on that proposal plus one, other rules governing quorum notwithstanding. As soon as possible after a vetoed proposal fails quorum, the Promotor shall add a copy of that proposal to the Proposal Pool. When e does so, that copy shall become distributable and democratic, and its adoption index shall be increased by one. The Speaker may Rubberstamp an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Quorum for a rubberstamped ordinary proposal is three, other rules governing quorum notwithstanding. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5049 (Zefram), 1 July 2007 text: The Speaker may veto an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Quorum for a vetoed proposal is positive infinity, other rules governing quorum notwithstanding. The Speaker may rubberstamp an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Quorum for a rubberstamped proposal is three, other rules governing quorum notwithstanding. history: Retitled by Proposal 5049 (Zefram), 1 July 2007 history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5138 (Zefram; disi.), 17 August 2007 text: The Speaker may rubberstamp an Ordinary Proposal in its voting period by announcement. Quorum for a rubberstamped proposal is three, other rules governing quorum notwithstanding. history: Retitled by Proposal 5138 (Zefram; disi.), 17 August 2007 history: Retitled by Proposal 5257 (AFO), 27 October 2007 history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5257 (AFO), 27 October 2007 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of the month, the Speaker SHALL randomly assign each Minister Without Portfolio a different Prerogative for the remainder of that month. If there are more members in one set than the other, then e SHALL randomly choose which members of the larger set take part in the assignment. The following Prerogatives are defined: a) Default Officeholder. The Default Officeholder CAN become holder of a vacant office by announcement, unless e is prevented from holding that office on an ongoing basis. b) Default Justice. Whenever the Clerk of the Courts assigns a judicial panel, e SHALL assign one with the Default Justice as a member, unless no such panel is eligible to be so assigned. c) Wielder of Veto. The Wielder of Veto CAN veto an ordinary proposal in its voting period by announcement; this increases its Adoption Index by 1. d) Wielder of Rubberstamp. The Wielder of Rubberstamp CAN rubberstamp an ordinary proposal in its voting period by announcement; this decreases its quorum to 3, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5407 (root), 22 January 2008 text: As soon as possible after the beginning of the month, the Speaker SHALL randomly assign each Minister Without Portfolio a different Prerogative for the remainder of that month. If there are more members in one set than the other, then e SHALL randomly choose which members of the larger set take part in the assignment. The following Prerogatives are defined: a) Default Officeholder. The Default Officeholder CAN become holder of a vacant elected office by announcement, unless e is prevented from holding that office on an ongoing basis. b) Default Justice. Whenever the Clerk of the Courts assigns a judicial panel, e SHALL assign one with the Default Justice as a member, unless no such panel is eligible to be so assigned. c) Wielder of Veto. The Wielder of Veto CAN veto an ordinary proposal in its voting period by announcement; this increases its Adoption Index by 1. d) Wielder of Rubberstamp. The Wielder of Rubberstamp CAN rubberstamp an ordinary proposal in its voting period by announcement; this decreases its quorum to 3, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 5408 (root), 22 January 2008 text: In a timely fashion before the beginning of each month, the Speaker SHALL randomly assign each Minister Without Portfolio a different Prerogative for the upcoming month. If there are more members in one set than the other, then e SHALL randomly choose which members of the larger set take part in the assignment. The following Prerogatives are defined: a) Default Officeholder. The Default Officeholder CAN become holder of a vacant elected office by announcement, unless e is prevented from holding that office on an ongoing basis. b) Default Justice. Whenever the Clerk of the Courts assigns a judicial panel, e SHALL assign one with the Default Justice as a member, unless no such panel is eligible to be so assigned. c) Wielder of Veto. The Wielder of Veto CAN veto an ordinary proposal in its voting period by announcement; this increases its Adoption Index by 1. d) Wielder of Rubberstamp. The Wielder of Rubberstamp CAN rubberstamp an ordinary proposal in its voting period by announcement; this decreases its quorum to 3, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 text: In a timely fashion before the beginning of each month, the Speaker SHALL randomly assign each Minister Without Portfolio a different Prerogative for the upcoming month. If there are more members in one set than the other, then e SHALL randomly choose which members of the larger set take part in the assignment. The following Prerogatives are defined: a) Default Officeholder. The Default Officeholder CAN become holder of a vacant elected office by announcement, unless e is prevented from holding that office on an ongoing basis. b) Default Justice. Whenever the Clerk of the Courts assigns a judicial panel, e SHALL assign one with the Default Justice as a member, unless no such panel is eligible to be so assigned. c) Wielder of Veto. The Wielder of Veto CAN veto an ordinary decision in its voting period by announcement; this increases its Adoption Index by 1. d) Wielder of Rubberstamp. The Wielder of Rubberstamp CAN rubberstamp an ordinary decision in its voting period by announcement; this decreases its quorum to 3, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 5432 (Goethe), 9 February 2008 text: In a timely fashion before the beginning of each month, the Speaker SHALL randomly assign each Minister Without Portfolio a different Prerogative for the upcoming month by announcement. If there are more members in one set than the other, then e SHALL randomly choose which members of the larger set take part in the assignment. The following Prerogatives are defined: a) Default Officeholder. The Default Officeholder CAN become holder of a vacant elected office by announcement, unless e is prevented from holding that office on an ongoing basis. b) Default Justice. Whenever the Clerk of the Courts assigns a judicial panel, e SHALL assign one with the Default Justice as a member, unless no such panel is eligible to be so assigned. c) Wielder of Veto. The Wielder of Veto CAN veto an ordinary decision in its voting period by announcement; this increases its Adoption Index by 1. d) Wielder of Rubberstamp. The Wielder of Rubberstamp CAN rubberstamp an ordinary decision in its voting period by announcement; this decreases its quorum to 3, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5461 (Wooble), 13 March 2008 text: In a timely fashion before the beginning of each month, the Speaker SHALL randomly assign each Player who bears the patent title Minister Without Portfolio a different Prerogative for the upcoming month by announcement. If there are more members in one set than the other, then e SHALL randomly choose which members of the larger set take part in the assignment. The following Prerogatives are defined: a) Default Officeholder. The Default Officeholder CAN become holder of a vacant elected office by announcement, unless e is prevented from holding that office on an ongoing basis. b) Default Justice. Whenever the Clerk of the Courts assigns a judicial panel, e SHALL assign one with the Default Justice as a member, unless no such panel is eligible to be so assigned. c) Wielder of Veto. The Wielder of Veto CAN veto an ordinary decision in its voting period by announcement; this increases its Adoption Index by 1. d) Wielder of Rubberstamp. The Wielder of Rubberstamp CAN rubberstamp an ordinary decision in its voting period by announcement; this decreases its quorum to 3, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2020 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2020 by Proposal 4282 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: For a Parliamentary Proposal, the Assessor will count as "Preliminary Votes" after the voting period has ended: 1. Communications from Oligarch Players or their executors which would have been legal votes if the Proposal had been Ordinary. 2. Communications from non-Oligarch Players or their executors which would have been legal votes if the Proposal had been Democratic. 3. Public communications from an untainted Speaker, indicating a Veto of the Proposal. If the preliminary votes of the Oligarch Players (both voting index and quorum, with the exception that the Speaker's Veto does not affect this determination of quorum) would have passed the Proposal were they deemed to be Ordinary Votes on an Ordinary Proposal, the Oligarchy shall be deemed to have cast 1 vote FOR the Proposal, otherwise the Oligarchy will be deemed to have cast 1 vote AGAINST. If the preliminary votes of the non-Oligarch Players (both voting index and quorum) would have passed the Proposal were they deemed to be Democratic Votes on a Democratic Proposal, the Democracy shall be deemed to have cast 1 vote FOR the Proposal, otherwise the Democracy will be deemed to have cast 1 vote AGAINST. If the untainted Speaker Vetoed the Proposal, the Speakership shall be deemed to have cast 1 vote AGAINST the Proposal, otherwise the Speakership shall be deemed to have cast 1 vote FOR the Proposal. The timing of all votes cast on Parliamentary Proposals shall be deemed to be an instant before the end of the Voting Period. There are no other specific mechanisms for casting votes on Parliamentary Proposals. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4352 (OscarMeyr), 7 August 2002 text: For a Parliamentary Proposal, the Assessor will count as "Preliminary Votes" after the voting period has ended: 1. For the First Estate, communications from Acolyte Players or their executors that would have been legal votes if the Proposal had been Sane. 2. For the Second Estate, communications from Politician Players or their executors that would have been legal votes if the Proposal had been Sane. 3. For the Third Estate, communications from Scribe Players or their executors that would have been legal votes if the Proposal had been Sane. For each Estate, if the preliminary votes of Players in that Estate (both voting index and quorum) would have passed the Proposal were they deemed to be Democratic votes on a Sane Proposal, then that Estate shall be deemed to have cast 1 vote FOR the Proposal; otherwise, that Estate shall be deemed to have cast 1 vote AGAINST the Proposal. The timing of all votes cast on Parliamentary Proposals shall be deemed to be an instant before the end of the Voting Period. There are no other specific mechanisms for casting votes on Parliamentary Proposals. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4410 (Steve), 6 November 2002 text: (a) The First Estate consists of all Players who are Acolytes, the Second Estate of all Players who are Politicians, and the Third Estate of all Players who are Scribes. (b) To count the votes on a parliamentary proposal, the Assessor shall first count as preliminary votes all communications from Players and their Executors that would have been legal votes on the proposal if it had been sane. (c) For each Estate, the Assessor shall then use the preliminary votes of the Players in that Estate to determine a voting index for the Estate on the Proposal. If the voting index is greater than or equal to the adoption index of the proposal, then the Estate is deemed to have cast 1 vote FOR the proposal; otherwise, the Estate is deemed to have cast one vote AGAINST the proposal. The Estates are deemed to have cast their votes a moment before the end of the voting period. (d) Quorum for parliamentary proposals is determined using preliminary votes, and is calculated as it would be for a democratic proposal. (e) Votes cannot be cast on parliamentary proposals except as described in this Rule. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2020 by Proposal 4539 (Goethe), 16 November 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2021 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2021 by Proposal 4282 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 text: The Chamber Fee for a Proposal is initially 0.1 Voting Entitlements. Any Politician may change the Chamber of a Proposal that is not Sane to another Chamber of eir choice, by publicly paying this fee, provided that it is legal for the Proposal to be in the new Chamber. When a Proposal's Chamber is changed via this Rule: (i) The Chamber Fee for the Proposal is doubled; (ii) If the Proposal is in its Voting Period, it is Aborted as described elsewhere, and returned to the Proposal Pool with its Distributability and other characteristics intact. An Untainted Speaker, with 2 Supporters, may Sanitise a Distributed Proposal for which the Voting Period has not ended. If this happens, the Proposal is Aborted as described elsewhere, but remains Distributable and becomes Democratic and Sane. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4329 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 text: The Chamber Fee for a Proposal is initially 0.1 Voting Entitlements. Any Politician may change the Chamber of a Proposal that is not Sane to another Chamber of eir choice, by publicly paying this fee, provided that it is legal for the Proposal to be in the new Chamber. When a Proposal's Chamber is changed via this Rule: (i) The Chamber Fee for the Proposal is doubled; (ii) If the Proposal is in its Voting Period, it is Aborted as described elsewhere, and returned to the Proposal Pool with its Distributability and other characteristics intact. An Untainted Speaker, with 2 Supporters, may Sanitise a Distributed Proposal that is not already Sane and for which the Voting Period has not ended. If this happens, the Proposal is Aborted as described elsewhere, but remains Distributable and becomes Democratic and Sane. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4355 (Steve), 7 August 2002 text: (a) The Chamber Fee for a Proposal is initially 0.1 Voting Entitlements. Any Politician may change the Chamber of a Proposal that is not Sane to another Chamber of eir choice, by publically paying this Fee, provided that it is legal for the Proposal to be in the new Chamber. (b) When a Proposal's Chamber is changed via this Rule: (1) the Chamber Fee for the Proposal is doubled; and (2) if the Proposal is in its Voting Period, it is Aborted as described elsewhere, and returned to the Proposal Pool with its Distributability and other characteristics intact. (c) An Untainted Speaker, with 2 Supporters, may Sanitise a Distributed Proposal that is not already Sane and for which the Voting Period has not ended. If the Speaker Sanitises a Proposal, the Proposal is Aborted as described elsewhere; the Proposal remains Distributable, but becomes Democratic and Sane. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: (a) The Chamber Fee for a Proposal is a Fee for changing the Chamber of a Proposal. For any given Proposal, the Chamber Fee is initially 1. (b) When a Proposal's Chamber is changed via this Rule: (1) the Chamber Fee for the Proposal is doubled; and (2) if the Proposal is in its Voting Period, it is Aborted as described elsewhere, and returned to the Proposal Pool with its Distributability and other characteristics intact. (c) An Untainted Speaker, with 2 Supporters, may Sanitise a Distributed Proposal that is not already Sane and for which the Voting Period has not ended. If the Speaker Sanitises a Proposal, the Proposal is Aborted as described elsewhere; the Proposal remains Distributable, but becomes Democratic and Sane. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4599 (root), 11 July 2004 text: (a) The Chamber Fee for a Proposal is a Fee for changing the Chamber of a Proposal. For any given Proposal, the Chamber Fee is initially 1. When a Proposal's Chamber is changed via this Rule, the Chamber Fee for the Proposal is doubled. (b) An Untainted Speaker, with 2 Supporters, may Sanitise a Distributed Proposal that is not already Sane and for which the Voting Period has not ended. If the Speaker Sanitises a Proposal, the Proposal is Aborted as described elsewhere; the Proposal remains Distributable, but becomes Democratic and Sane. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4725 (root), 25 April 2005 text: (a) The Chamber Fee for a Proposal is a Fee for changing the Chamber of a Proposal. For any given Proposal, the Chamber Fee is initially 1. When a Proposal's Chamber is changed via this Rule, the Chamber Fee for the Proposal is doubled. (b) An Untainted Speaker, with 2 Supporters, may Sanitize a Distributed Proposal that is not already Sane and for which the Voting Period has not ended. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2021 by Proposal 4829 (Maud), 30 July 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2022 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2022 by Proposal 4283 (Goethe), 16 April 2002 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: On the fifteenth of each Nomic Month, the following actions occur in sequence, and these changes must be reported by the Mapkeepor as soon as possible after they occur: (i) Every Land Unit that is not connected by its own type to a unit of Aether shall be transformed to Aether; (ii) Any entities whose locations are on land units so transformed shall have their locations set to 0,0. (iii) If any land unit so transformed is not property of the Land Bureau, it becomes property of the Land Bureau. (iv) If there are more Land Units of a single defined Land Type, Aether excepted, then there are of all other Land Types combined (other than Aether), then all Land Units of that majority Type are said to have Sente. Land Units of all other defined Types are said to have Gote. (v) the Mapkeepor shall Pay Out: (a) an amount of Stems equal to the Minimum Income times the Basic Officer's Salary to all Players whose location has Sente; (b) to the owner of each Land Unit that has Sente as is not owned by the Bank or the Land Bureau * 3 Stems if the Weather is Plenty; * 2 Stems if the Weather is Fair; * 1 Stem if the Weather is Foul. Sente and Gote shall only be changed as defined by this Rule, on the fifteenth of each Nomic Month. text: On the fifteenth of each Nomic Month, the following actions occur in sequence, and these changes must be reported by the Mapkeepor as soon as possible after they occur: (i) Every Land Unit that is not connected by its own type to a unit of Aether shall be transformed to Aether; (ii) Any entities whose locations are on land units so transformed shall have their locations set to 0,0. (iii) If any land unit so transformed is not property of the Land Bureau, it becomes property of the Land Bureau. (iv) If there are more Land Units of a single defined Land Type, Aether excepted, then there are of all other Land Types combined (other than Aether), then all Land Units of that majority Type are said to have Sente. Land Units of all other defined Types are said to have Gote. (v) the Mapkeepor shall Pay Out: (a) an amount of Stems equal to the Minimum Income times the Basic Officer's Salary to all Players whose location has Sente; (b) to the owner of each Land Unit that has Sente as is not owned by the Bank or the Land Bureau * 3 Stems if the Weather is Plenty; * 2 Stems if the Weather is Fair; * 1 Stem if the Weather is Foul. Sente and Gote shall only be changed as defined by this Rule, on the fifteenth of each Nomic Month. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4308 (Sir Toby), 28 May 2002 text: On the fifteenth of each Nomic Month, the following actions occur in sequence, and these changes must be reported by the Mapkeepor as soon as possible after they occur: (i) Every Land Unit, excluding (0, 0), that is not directly connected to a unit of Aether, and is not connected by its own type to a unit of Aether, shall be transformed to Aether. (ii) Any entities whose locations are on land units so transformed shall have their locations set to 0,0. (iii) If any land unit so transformed is not property of the Land Bureau, it becomes property of the Land Bureau. (iv) If there are more Land Units of a single defined Land Type, Aether excepted, then there are of all other Land Types combined (other than Aether), then all Land Units of that majority Type are said to have Sente. Land Units of all other defined Types are said to have Gote. (v) the Mapkeepor shall Pay Out: (a) an amount of Stems equal to the Minimum Income times the Basic Officer's Salary to all Players whose location has Sente; (b) to the owner of each Land Unit that has Sente as is not owned by the Bank or the Land Bureau * 3 Stems if the Weather is Plenty; * 2 Stems if the Weather is Fair; * 1 Stem if the Weather is Foul. Sente and Gote shall only be changed as defined by this Rule, on the fifteenth of each Nomic Month. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4367 (Steve), 23 August 2002 text: On the fifteenth of each Nomic Month, the following actions occur in sequence, and these changes must be reported by the Mapkeepor as soon as possible after they occur: (i) Every Land Unit, excluding (0, 0), that is not directly connected to a unit of Aether, and is not connected by its own type to a unit of Aether, shall be transformed to Aether. (ii) Any entities whose locations are on land units so transformed shall have their locations set to 0,0. (iii) If any land unit so transformed is not property of the Land Bureau, it becomes property of the Land Bureau. (iv) If there are more Land Units of a single defined Land Type, Aether excepted, then there are of all other Land Types combined (other than Aether), then all Land Units of that majority Type are said to have Sente. Land Units of all other defined Types are said to have Gote. (v) the Mapkeepor shall Pay Out: (a) an amount of Stems equal to the Minimum Income times the Basic Officer's Salary to all Players whose location has Sente; (b) to the owner of any Land Unit that has Sente and is not owned by the Bank or the Land Bureau: * if the Weather is Plenty, 3 Stems for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; * if the Weather is Fair, 2 Stems for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; * if the Weather is Foul, 1 Stem for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; Sente and Gote shall only be changed as defined by this Rule, on the fifteenth of each Nomic Month. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4387 (Peekee), 25 September 2002 text: On the fifteenth of each Nomic Month, the following actions occur in sequence, and these changes must be reported by the Mapkeepor as soon as possible after they occur: (i) Every Land Unit, excluding (0, 0), that is not directly connected to a unit of Aether, and is not connected by its own type to a unit of Aether, shall be transformed to Aether. (ii) Any entities whose locations are on land units so transformed shall have their locations set to 0,0. (iii) If any land unit so transformed is not property of the Land Bureau, it becomes property of the Land Bureau. (iv) If there are more Land Units of a single defined Land Type, Aether excepted, then there are of all other Land Types combined (other than Aether), then all Land Units of that majority Type are said to have Sente. Land Units of all other defined Types are said to have Gote. (v) the Mapkeepor shall Pay Out: (a) an amount of Stems equal to the Minimum Income times the Basic Officer's Salary to all Players and Groups whose location has Sente; (b) to the owner of any Land Unit that has Sente and is not owned by the Bank or the Land Bureau: * if the Weather is Plenty, 3 Stems for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; * if the Weather is Fair, 2 Stems for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; * if the Weather is Foul, 1 Stem for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; Sente and Gote shall only be changed as defined by this Rule, on the fifteenth of each Nomic Month. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: On the fifteenth of each Agoran Month, the following actions occur in sequence, and these changes must be reported by the Mapkeepor as soon as possible after they occur: (i) Every Land Unit, excluding (0, 0), that is not directly connected to a unit of Aether, and is not connected by its own type to a unit of Aether, shall be transformed to Aether. (ii) Any entities whose locations are on land units so transformed shall have their locations set to 0,0. (iii) If any land unit so transformed is not property of the Land Bureau, it becomes property of the Land Bureau. (iv) If there are more Land Units of a single defined Land Type, Aether excepted, then there are of all other Land Types combined (other than Aether), then all Land Units of that majority Type are said to have Sente. Land Units of all other defined Types are said to have Gote. (v) the Mapkeepor shall Pay Out: (a) an amount of Stems equal to the Minimum Income times the Basic Officer's Salary to all Players and Groups whose location has Sente; (b) to the owner of any Land Unit that has Sente and is not owned by the Bank or the Land Bureau: * if the Weather is Plenty, 3 Stems for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; * if the Weather is Fair, 2 Stems for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; * if the Weather is Foul, 1 Stem for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; Sente and Gote shall only be changed as defined by this Rule, on the fifteenth of each Agoran Month. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: On the fifteenth of each Agoran Month, the following actions occur in sequence, and these changes must be reported by the Mapkeepor as soon as possible after they occur: (i) Every Land Unit, excluding (0, 0), that is not directly connected to a unit of Aether, and is not connected by its own type to a unit of Aether, shall be transformed to Aether. (ii) Any entities whose locations are on land units so transformed shall have their locations set to 0,0. (iii) If any land unit so transformed is not property of the Land Bureau, it becomes property of the Land Bureau. (iv) If there are more Land Units of a single defined Land Type, Aether excepted, then there are of all other Land Types combined (other than Aether), then all Land Units of that majority Type are said to have Sente. Land Units of all other defined Types are said to have Gote. (v) the Mapkeepor shall Pay Out: (a) an amount of Stems equal to the Minimum Income times the Basic Officer's Salary to all Players whose location has Sente; (b) to the owner of any Land Unit that has Sente and is not owned by the Bank or the Land Bureau: * if the Weather is Plenty, 3 Stems for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; * if the Weather is Fair, 2 Stems for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; * if the Weather is Foul, 1 Stem for each 5 Land Units with Sente that e owns; Sente and Gote shall only be changed as defined by this Rule, on the fifteenth of each Agoran Month. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2022 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2023 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2023 by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: A CFJ may be submitted to the Justiciar. For such a CFJ, the Justiciar shall perform all duties and fulfill all roles that would otherwise be assigned to the Clerk of the Courts. All persons are encouraged to submit a CFJ to the Justiciar only when there is a good reason not to submit it to the Clerk of the Courts. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4452 (Sir Toby), 22 February 2003 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4452 (Sir Toby), 22 February 2003 text: A CFJ may be submitted to the Justiciar. For such a CFJ, the Justiciar shall perform all duties and fulfill all roles that would otherwise be assigned to the Clerk of the Courts. This takes precedence over Rules that would otherwise assign duties and roles regarding a CFJ to the Clerk of the Courts. All persons are encouraged to submit a CFJ to the Justiciar only when there is a good reason not to submit it to the Clerk of the Courts. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2023 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2024 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2024 by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: Linked CFJs are multiple Calls for Judgement submitted in a single message and clearly labelled as Linked CFJs. The Clerk of the Courts shall assign a Judge to a set of Linked CFJs, as if they were a single CFJ. The Judge must be eligible to Judge each of the Linked CFJs, and is simultaneously assigned as Judge of each of the Linked CFJs. The Judge of a set of Linked CFJs shall submit eir Judgement of each of those CFJs in a single message. If one or more Linked CFJs are Excess CFJs, then the Clerk of the Courts shall either assign them all or dismiss them all, at eir discretion. If e assigns them all, then e does not commit Allowing Excess CFJing by doing so, Rules to the contrary notwithstanding. If one or more Linked CFJs beyond the first are unrelated in subject matter to the first, then a Trial Judge may remand those CFJs to the Clerk of the Courts; e ceases to be Judge of those CFJs. The Clerk of the Courts shall either treat those CFJs as Linked (to each other) or not Linked, as e sees fit. In either case, those CFJs are no longer Linked to any of the non-remanded CFJs. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4579 (Murphy), 15 June 2004 text: Linked CFJs are multiple Calls for Judgement submitted in a single message and clearly labelled as Linked CFJs. The Clerk of the Courts shall assign a Judge to a set of Linked CFJs, as if they were a single CFJ. The Judge must be eligible to Judge each of the Linked CFJs, and is simultaneously assigned as Judge of each of the Linked CFJs. The Judge of a set of Linked CFJs shall submit eir Judgement of each of those CFJs in a single message. If one or more Linked CFJs are Excess CFJs, then the Clerk of the Courts shall either assign them all or dismiss them all, at eir discretion. If e assigns them all, then e does not commit Allowing Excess CFJing by doing so, Rules to the contrary notwithstanding. If one or more Linked CFJs beyond the first are unrelated in subject matter to the first, then a Trial Judge may remand those CFJs to the Clerk of the Courts; e ceases to be Judge of those CFJs. The Clerk of the Courts shall either treat those CFJs as Linked (to each other) or not Linked, as e sees fit. In either case, those CFJs are no longer Linked to any of the non-remanded CFJs. If a Trial Judge is recused from a Linked CFJ, then it ceases to be Linked to any other CFJ. If a Trial Judge is recused from two or more Linked CFJs in a single message, then those CFJs continue to be Linked to each other, but not to any other CFJs to which the Judge is still assigned. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4659 (root), 29 March 2005 text: Linked CFJs are multiple Calls for Judgement submitted in a single message and clearly labelled as Linked CFJs. The Clerk of the Courts shall assign a Judge to a set of Linked CFJs, as if they were a single CFJ. The Judge must be eligible to Judge each of the Linked CFJs, and is simultaneously assigned as Judge of each of the Linked CFJs. The Judge of a set of Linked CFJs shall submit eir Judgement of each of those CFJs in a single message. If one or more Linked CFJs are Excess CFJs, then the Clerk of the Courts shall either assign them all or dismiss them all, at eir discretion. If e assigns them all, then e does not commit Allowing Excess CFJing by doing so, Rules to the contrary notwithstanding. If one or more Linked CFJs beyond the first are unrelated in subject matter to the first, then a Trial Judge may remand those CFJs to the Clerk of the Courts; e ceases to be Judge of those CFJs. The Clerk of the Courts shall either treat those CFJs as Linked (to each other) or not Linked, as e sees fit. In either case, those CFJs are no longer Linked to any of the non-remanded CFJs. If a Trial Judge is recused from a Linked CFJ, then it ceases to be Linked to any other CFJ. If a Trial Judge is recused from two or more Linked CFJs in a single message, or if a Trial Judge is simultaneously and automatically recused from two or more Linked CFJs, then those CFJs continue to be Linked to each other, but not to any other CFJs to which the Judge is still assigned. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: Linked CFJs are multiple Calls for Judgement that are submitted in a single message and clearly labelled as Linked CFJs. The Clerk of the Courts shall assign a Judge to a set of Linked CFJs, as if they were a single CFJ. The Judge must be eligible to Judge each of the Linked CFJs, and is simultaneously assigned as Judge of each of the Linked CFJs. A Judge (the first judge) may transfer a CFJ to a second judge by announcement, thus linking the first and second CFJs and unlinking the first CFJ with any it was previously linked to, with the second judge's consent and provided the second judge has not been barred or recused from the first CFJ. The Judge of a set of Linked CFJs shall submit eir Judgement of each of those CFJs in a single message. If one or more Linked CFJs beyond the first are unrelated in subject matter to the first, then a Trial Judge may remand those CFJs to the Clerk of the Courts; e ceases to be Judge of those CFJs. If a Trial Judge is recused from a Linked CFJ, then it ceases to be Linked to any other CFJ. If a Trial Judge is recused from two or more Linked CFJs in a single message, or if a Trial Judge is simultaneously and automatically recused from two or more Linked CFJs, then those CFJs continue to be Linked to each other, but not to any other CFJs to which the Judge is still assigned. A CFJ made by a person who has previously made five or more CFJs during the same Agoran Week is an Excess CFJ. The Clerk of the Courts may dismiss any Excess CFJ. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: Linked CFJs are multiple Calls for Judgement that are submitted in a single message and clearly labeled as Linked CFJs. The Clerk of the Courts shall assign a Judge to a set of Linked CFJs, as if they were a single CFJ. The Judge must be eligible to Judge each of the Linked CFJs, and is simultaneously assigned as Judge of each of the Linked CFJs. A Judge (the first judge) may transfer a CFJ to a second judge by announcement, thus linking the first and second CFJs and unlinking the first CFJ with any it was previously linked to, with the second judge's consent and provided the second judge has not been barred or recused from the first CFJ. The Judge of a set of Linked CFJs shall submit eir Judgement of each of those CFJs in a single message. If one or more Linked CFJs beyond the first are unrelated in subject matter to the first, then a Trial Judge may remand those CFJs to the Clerk of the Courts; e ceases to be Judge of those CFJs. If a Trial Judge is recused from a Linked CFJ, then it ceases to be Linked to any other CFJ. If a Trial Judge is recused from two or more Linked CFJs in a single message, or if a Trial Judge is simultaneously and automatically recused from two or more Linked CFJs, then those CFJs continue to be Linked to each other, but not to any other CFJs to which the Judge is still assigned. A CFJ made by a person who has previously made five or more CFJs during the same Agoran Week is an Excess CFJ. The Clerk of the Courts may dismiss any Excess CFJ. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4895 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 text: Linked CFJs are multiple Calls for Judgement that are submitted in a single message and clearly labeled as Linked CFJs. When submitting Linked CFJs, the players (if any) barred by the caller from judging the first CFJ are the only players e may bar from judging any of the other CFJs. The Clerk of the Courts shall assign a Judge to a set of Linked CFJs, as if they were a single CFJ. The Judge must be eligible to Judge each of the Linked CFJs, and is simultaneously assigned as Judge of each of the Linked CFJs. A Judge (the first judge) may transfer a CFJ to a second judge by announcement, thus linking the first and second CFJs and unlinking the first CFJ with any it was previously linked to, with the second judge's consent and provided the second judge has not been barred or recused from the first CFJ. The Judge of a set of Linked CFJs shall submit eir Judgement of each of those CFJs in a single message. If one or more Linked CFJs beyond the first are unrelated in subject matter to the first, then a Trial Judge may remand those CFJs to the Clerk of the Courts; e ceases to be Judge of those CFJs. If a Trial Judge is recused from a Linked CFJ, then it ceases to be Linked to any other CFJ. If a Trial Judge is recused from two or more Linked CFJs in a single message, or if a Trial Judge is simultaneously and automatically recused from two or more Linked CFJs, then those CFJs continue to be Linked to each other, but not to any other CFJs to which the Judge is still assigned. A CFJ made by a person who has previously made five or more CFJs during the same Agoran Week is an Excess CFJ. The Clerk of the Courts may dismiss any Excess CFJ. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4912 (Murphy), 21 March 2007 text: Linked CFJs are multiple Calls for Judgement deemed to be sufficiently similar that they should have a single judge. Linkage is transitive. When a set of one or more linked CFJs change jurisdiction, they remain linked to each other, but become unlinked from any other CFJs; they may become linked to one or more CFJs within the new jurisdiction. Multiple CFJs, submitted in a single message and clearly labelled as Linked CFJs, become linked. The players (if any) barred by the caller from judging the first CFJ are the only players e may bar from judging the others. The Clerk of the Courts shall not assign judges directly to the members of a set of Linked CFJs, but shall assign a judge to the set, as if it was a single CFJ. The judge must be eligible to judge each member of the set, and is simultaneously assigned as judge of each member of the set. The judge of a set of Linked CFJs shall submit eir judgement of each of those CFJs in a single message. A trial judge may remand one or more linked CFJs to the Clerk of the Courts by announcement. E ceases to be their judge. A trial judge may transfer one or more of eir CFJs to a second trial judge by announcement (identifying one of the second judge's CFJs), provided that the second judge consents, and is eligible to judge all of them. The transferred CFJs become linked to the second judge's CFJ (and any others to which it is already linked). history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2024 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2025 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2025 by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: The Judge of a CFJ (the First Case) may transfer it to the Judge of another CFJ (the Second Case), if all of the following are true: a) The Second Judge is eligible to Judge the First Case (or is ineligible solely due to the Rule "Turns for All"). b) The First Judge announces the transfer. c) The Second Judge consents to the transfer within a week after it is announced. The First CFJ becomes assigned to the Second Judge, and ceases to be assigned to the First Judge. The First CFJ becomes Linked to the Second CFJ, and to any CFJs to which the Second CFJ had been Linked. It ceases to be Linked to any other CFJs. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4343 (Steve), 11 July 2002 text: (a) A CFJ (the First Case) is transferred to the Judge of another CFJ (the Second Case), if all of the following are true: (1) the Second Judge is eligible to Judge the First Case (or is ineligible solely due to the Rule "Turns for All"); (2) the First Judge announces the transfer; and (3) the Second Judge consents to the transfer within a week after it is announced. (b) When the First Case is transferred in this way: (1) the First Case is assigned to the Second Judge, and ceases to be assigned to the First Judge; (2) the First Judge becomes eligible to Judge CFJs for the purposes of the Rule "Turns for All"; and (3) the First CFJ becomes Linked to the Second CFJ, and to any CFJs to which the Second CFJ had been Linked. It ceases to be Linked to any other CFJs. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2025 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2026 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2026 by Proposal 4298 (Murphy), 17 May 2002 text: As soon as possible after all members of a Board of Appeals have submitted eir Judgement, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce that this has happened. If a majority of the Appelate Judges Judge SUSTAIN, then the subject of the Appeal is sustained. Otherwise, it is overturned. The Board of Appeals shall execute whatever Appelate Orders are necessary to enforce its determination. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 text: As soon as possible after all members of a Board of Appeals have submitted eir Judgement, the Clerk of the Courts shall announce that this has happened. If a majority of the Appellate Judges Judge SUSTAIN, then the subject of the Appeal is sustained. Otherwise, it is overturned. The Board of Appeals shall execute whatever Appelate Orders are necessary to enforce its determination. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2026 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2027 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2027 by Proposal 4307 (Steve), 28 May 2002 text: At any time at which the number of Oligarchs is less than Quorum for an Ordinary Proposal, the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy may do either of the following: (a) conduct an Auction for positions in the Oligarchy sufficient (but no more than this) to bring the number of Oligarchs up to Quorum for an Ordinary Proposal; (b) appoint any eligible Player to be an Oligarch, with the Support of the appointed Player and Without 3 Objections. The appointed Player becomes an Oligarch upon payment of the Base Seating Fee if e is a Politician, or twice the Base Seating Fee if he is not a Politician, provided that payment is made within a week of the appointment. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4354 (RedKnight), 7 August 2002 text: At any time at which the number of Oligarchs is less than Quorum for an Ordinary Proposal, the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy may do either of the following: (a) conduct an Auction for positions in the Oligarchy sufficient (but no more than this) to bring the number of Oligarchs up to Quorum for an Ordinary Proposal; (b) appoint any eligible Player to be an Oligarch, with the Support of the appointed Player and Without 3 Objections. The appointed Player becomes an Oligarch upon payment of the Base Seating Fee if e is a Politician, or twice the Base Seating Fee if e is not a Politician, provided that payment is made within a week of the appointment. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: At any time at which the number of Oligarchs is less than Quorum for an Ordinary Proposal, the Grand Warden of the Oligarchy may appoint any eligible Player to be an Oligarch, with the Support of the appointed Player and Without 3 Objections. The appointed Player becomes an Oligarch with a term of service equal to half of the Oligarchic Term. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2027 by Proposal 4555 (Elysion), 22 March 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2028 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2028 by Proposal 4327 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 text: Steve, Goethe, Murphy, OscarMeyr and root are each a Member of The Cabal. There are no other Members of The Cabal. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2028 by Proposal 4329 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2029 history: Enacted as Power=4 Rule 2029 by Proposal 4329 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 text: /\ /\ / \ / \ T his Power-4 Rule (the first ever) was placed to honor The Agoran Spirit Of The Game by Goethe, Steve, Murphy, root and OscarMeyr, Scamsters. Look on our works, ye Marvy, but do always Dance a Powerful Dance. Hail Eris! history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2030 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2030 by Proposal 4329 (Goethe), 9 June 2002 text: Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, a provision of an adopted Proposal that attemps to change the ownership of Property or create a debt by any means other than by changing the Ruleset shall be considered without effect, unless (a) the Proposal is Democratic; and (b) the Proposal has an Adoption Index of 2 or greater. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4340 (root), 8 July 2002 history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2030 by Proposal 4533 (Murphy), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2031 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2031 by Proposal 4337 (Sir Toby), 30 June 2002 text: A Contest may be a Money Grubbing Contest if its ACO specifically states that it is a Money Grubbing Contest. A Player may not be the Contestsmaster of more than one Money Grubbing Contest in a single Nomic month. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4357 (Sir Toby), 16 August 2002 text: A Contest may be a Money Grubbing Contest if its ACO specifically states that it is a Money Grubbing Contest. A Player may not be the Contestmaster of more than one Money Grubbing Contest in a single Nomic month. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4398 (harvel), 23 October 2002 text: A Contest may be a Money Grubbing Contest if its ACO specifically states that it is a Money Grubbing Contest. A Player may not be the Contestmaster of more than one Money Grubbing Contest in a single Agoran month. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2031 by Proposal 4531 (root), 26 October 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2032 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2032 by Proposal 4342 (root), 8 July 2002 text: If the Clerk of the Courts errs in good faith by selecting a Player to Judge a CFJ or Appeal, who: a) e believes at the time of selection to be eligible to judge the CFJ or Appeal; and b) is not eligible to judge the CFJ or Appeal at the time of selection solely because e is Turning Around And Around; then that selection shall stand and the selected Player shall become a Judge of that CFJ or Appeal, as if e had been eligible to judge it. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4523 (Murphy), 28 August 2003 text: If the Clerk of the Courts errs in good faith by selecting a Player to Judge a CFJ or Appeal, who: a) e believes at the time of selection to be eligible to judge the CFJ or Appeal; and b) is not eligible to judge the CFJ or Appeal at the time of selection solely because e is turned; then that selection shall stand and the selected Player shall become a Judge of that CFJ or Appeal, as if e had been eligible to judge it. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4579 (Murphy), 15 June 2004 text: If the Clerk of the Courts errs in good faith by selecting a Player to Judge a CFJ or Appeal, who: a) e believes at the time of selection to be eligible to judge the CFJ or Appeal; and b) is not eligible to judge the CFJ or Appeal at the time of selection solely because e is turned; then that selection shall stand and the selected Player shall become a Judge of that CFJ or Appeal, as if e had been eligible to judge it; unless the Clerk of the Courts points out eir error and makes a new selection before the selected Player returns Judgement. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2032 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2033 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2033 by Proposal 4355 (Steve), 7 August 2002 text: (a) When a Proposal is aborted: (1) the Voting Period for the Proposal immediately ends, if it has not ended already; (2) all Votes cast on the Proposal are cancelled, and the Proposal fails; (3) the Assessor is relieved of any duty to report on Votes cast on the Proposal; and (4) a copy of the Proposal is added to the Proposal Pool. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2033 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2034 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2034 by Proposal 4366 (Steve), 23 August 2002 text: Any Proposal that, as all or part of its effect, would change an entity's vote on an Issue for which the voting period has begun but for which no official voting report has been published at the time of the Proposal's adoption shall be wholly without effect, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Once an official voting report has been published for that Issue, no votes on that Issue may be changed or cancelled, and the outcome of the Issue may not be changed in any way, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Nothing in this Rule shall be construed as preventing the correction of errors in reporting the results of voting on Issues. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4637 (Murphy), 19 February 2005 text: Any Proposal that, as all or part of its effect, would change an entity's vote on an Issue for which the voting period has begun but for which no official voting report has been published at the time of the Proposal's adoption shall be wholly without effect, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Once an official voting report has been published for that Issue, no votes on that Issue may be changed or cancelled, and the outcome of the Issue may not be changed in any way, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Nothing in this Rule shall be construed as preventing the correction of errors in reporting the results of voting on Issues. If the results of an issue are not challenged within seven days after the Vote Collector announces them, then the announced results are the true results of that issue, even if they would otherwise be in error. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: Any proposal that, as all or part of its effect, would change the validity of one or more of a voter's ballots on an Agoran decision whose voting period has begun but which has not yet been resolved shall be wholly without effect, any rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Once an Agoran decision has been resolved, no ballots on that decision may be validly submitted or retracted, and the outcome of the decision may not be changed in any way, any rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Nothing in this rule shall be construed as preventing the correction of errors in reporting the resolution of an Agoran decision. If the success of the resolution of an Agoran decision is not challenged within one week from the time the vote collector announces it, then the announced result is the true result of that decision, even if it would otherwise be in error. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5212 (Murphy), 8 September 2007 text: Any proposal that, as all or part of its effect, would change the validity of one or more of a voter's ballots on an Agoran decision whose voting period has begun but which has not yet been resolved shall be wholly without effect, any rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Once an Agoran decision has been resolved, no ballots on that decision may be validly submitted or retracted, and the outcome of the decision may not be changed in any way, any rule to the contrary notwithstanding. Nothing in this rule shall be construed as preventing the correction of errors in reporting the resolution of an Agoran decision. The resolution of an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5275 (Murphy), 7 November 2007 text: Any proposal that would otherwise change the validity of any existing vote on any specific unresolved Agoran decision is wholly without effect, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. This does not prevent amendment of the rules governing the validity of votes on Agoran decisions in general. Once an Agoran decision has been resolved, votes on it CANNOT be validly submitted or retracted, and its outcome CANNOT be changed in any way, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. This does not prevent correcting errors in reporting its resolution. A public document purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2035 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2035 by Proposal 4397 (RedKnight), 17 October 2002 text: When a player becomes unready e begins to Turn Around And Around. If at any time an Unready player is not Turning Around And Around e begins to Turn Around And Around. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4527 (Murphy), 16 September 2003 text: Whenever an unready player is unturned, e becomes turned. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4579 (Murphy), 15 June 2004 text: While a player is unready, e is ineligible to be Judge of any CFJ. While a player is not noisy, e is ineligible to become Judge of any CFJ. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2035 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2036 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2036 by Proposal 4407 (Steve), 30 October 2002 text: (a) The publication of a Notice of Abandonment commences the Silent Treatment for the player identified in it. (b) The requirement to perform the actions described in this Rule is subject to the Notice of Abandonment remaining valid. If at any time during the Silent Treatment the Notice of Abandonment is invalid, then the Treatment is terminated, and the Registrar is relieved of all powers and responsibilities regarding it. (c) As soon as possible after the commencement of the Silent Treatment, the Registrar shall: (1) publically confirm whether the Notice of Abandonment was valid at the commencement of the Silent Treatment, and whether it remains valid; (2) publish in all designated Public Fora, and send to the preferred email address of the player, if e has one, a Notice of Intent to Deregister, identifying the player to be deregistered (the same as in the Notice of Abandonment), and announcing the Registrar's intent to deregister that player after one month has passed. (d) If the Notice of Abandonment remains valid a month after the publication of the Notice of Intent to Deregister, then the Registrar shall, as soon as possible, publish in all designated Public Fora, and send to the preferred email address of the player, if e has one, a Notice of Deregistration, identifying the player being deregistered (the same as in the Notice of Abandonment). A Notice of Deregistration is valid if and only if it is published by the Registrar, following the procedures described in this Rule. (e) Upon publication of a valid Notice of Deregistration, the following events occur in order: (1) if the player identified in the Notice of Deregistration is the Speaker, e commits the Class 15 Crime of Speaker Abandonment; e ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker; (2) the player identified in the Notice of Deregistration is deregistered; (3) the Silent Treatment for that player concludes. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4511 (Murphy), 10 July 2003 text: (a) The publication of a Notice of Abandonment commences the Silent Treatment for the player identified in it. (b) The requirement to perform the actions described in this Rule is subject to the Notice of Abandonment remaining valid. If at any time during the Silent Treatment the Notice of Abandonment is invalid, then the Treatment is terminated, and the Registrar is relieved of all powers and responsibilities regarding it. (c) As soon as possible after the commencement of the Silent Treatment, the Registrar shall: (1) publically confirm whether the Notice of Abandonment was valid at the commencement of the Silent Treatment, and whether it remains valid; (2) publish in all designated Public Fora, and send to each listed e-mail address of the player, a Notice of Intent to Deregister, identifying the player to be deregistered (the same as in the Notice of Abandonment), and announcing the Registrar's intent to deregister that player after one month has passed. (d) If the Notice of Abandonment remains valid a month after the publication of the Notice of Intent to Deregister, then the Registrar shall, as soon as possible, publish in all designated Public Fora, and send to each listed e-mail address of the player, a Notice of Deregistration, identifying the player being deregistered (the same as in the Notice of Abandonment). A Notice of Deregistration is valid if and only if it is published by the Registrar, following the procedures described in this Rule. (e) Upon publication of a valid Notice of Deregistration, the following events occur in order: (1) if the player identified in the Notice of Deregistration is the Speaker, e commits the Class 15 Crime of Speaker Abandonment; e ceases to be Speaker, and the Speaker-Elect becomes Speaker; (2) the player identified in the Notice of Deregistration is deregistered; (3) the Silent Treatment for that player concludes. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 text: (a) The publication of a Notice of Abandonment commences the Silent Treatment for the player identified in it. (b) The requirement to perform the actions described in this Rule is subject to the Notice of Abandonment remaining valid. If at any time during the Silent Treatment the of Abandonment is invalid, then the Treatment is terminated, and the Registrar is relieved of all powers and responsibilities regarding it. (c) As soon as possible after the commencement of the Silent Treatment, the Registrar shall: (1) publicly confirm whether the Notice of Abandonment was valid at the commencement of the Silent Treatment, and whether it remains valid; (2) publish in all designated Public Fora, and send to each listed e-mail address of the player, a Notice of Intent to Deregister, identifying the player to be deregistered (the same as in the Notice of Abandonment), and announcing the Registrar's intent to deregister that player after one month has passed. (d) If the Notice of Abandonment remains valid a month after the publication of the Notice of Intent to Deregister, then the Registrar shall, as soon as possible, publish in all designated Public Fora, and send to each listed e-mail address of the player, a Notice of Deregistration, identifying the player being deregistered (as in the Notice of Abandonment). The only player so far to have returned to the game after becoming a zombie is Oerjan. The Notice is valid if and only if it is published by the Registrar, following the procedures described in this Rule. (e) Upon publication of a valid Notice of Deregistration, the following events occur in order: (1) if the player identified in the Notice of Deregistration is the Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker; (2) the player identified in the Notice of Deregistration is deregistered; (3) the Silent Treatment for that player concludes. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4820 (Goethe), 10 July 2005 text: If a player (hereafter the Silent One) has been inactive continuously for three months, then any player may publish a Notice of Abandonment, identifying the silent one and alleging that e has abandoned the game. The publication of a Notice of Abandonment commences the Silent Treatment for the silent one. If at any time during the silent treatment the silent one is not, or ceases to be, inactive, then the treatment is terminated, and the Registrar is relieved of all powers and responsibilities regarding it. As soon as possible after the commencement of the silent treatment, the Registrar shall publish in all designated Public Fora, and send to each listed e-mail address of the silent one, a Notice of Intent to Deregister, announcing the Registrar's intent to deregister the silent one after one month has passed. If the silent treatement has not terminated a month after the publication of the Notice of Intent to Deregister, then the Registrar shall, as soon as possible, publish in all designated Public Fora, and send to each listed e-mail address of the silent one, a Notice of Deregistration identifying the silent one. A Notice of Deregistration is valid if and only if it is published by the Registrar, following the procedures described in this Rule. Upon publication of a valid Notice of Deregistration, the following events occur in order: (1) if the silent one is the Speaker, e ceases to be Speaker; (2) the silent one is deregistered; (3) the silent treatment for that player concludes. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2036 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2037 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2037 by Proposal 4435 (Murphy), 28 January 2003 text: If a Player has no listed e-mail address, then the address used to send eir next public message becomes listed. If each Player has at least one listed address, then the Registrar may repeal this Rule by announcing that e does so. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2037 by Proposal 4929 (Zefram), 18 April 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2038 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2038 by Proposal 4436 (RedKnight), 28 January 2003 text: A Player shall be added to the Membership of a Monastery only when the Player to be added has sent the Administrator of the Monastery in question a message requesting the be added to the membership of that Monastery and the addition of that Player to that Monastery's membership is otherwise permitted by that Monastery's SLC. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2038 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2039 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2039 by Proposal 4440 (Steve), 3 February 2003 text: Other Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, the failure to perform an action required by the Rules, where the person required to act was not empowered to do so, shall never constitute the commission of a Crime or Infraction. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4833 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: No player may be required to do anything e is not empowered to do, and the failure of a player to do something e was not empowered to do shall never constitute the commission of a crime or infraction. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 2039 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2040 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2040 by Proposal 4456 (Maud), 22 February 2003 text: A switch is a set of states associated with a class of entities. Each switch shall have a default state, which if not otherwise specified shall be the first state mentioned in the rule defining the switch. The recordkeepor for a class of entities shall also maintain records of any switches associated with that class, as well as for each entity of the class the current state of the switch. If the recordkeepor is required to publish a report, that report shall include records of these switches. Whenever an entity is created in a class of entities associated with a switch, it shall be in the state of the switch specified by the order or provision creating it; if no state is specified, it shall be in the default state of the switch. Whenever an entity joins a class of entities associated with a switch, the entity shall be in the default state of the switch. A player who may flip a switch on an entity to some state may do so by announcement. In eir announcement, e must indicate the entity, switch, and new state. When a switch on an entity is flipped to some state, the entity shall come to be in that state and simultaneously cease to be in any other state of the switch. Viscosity is a stuck switch for switches with values loose and stuck. An executor of an entity may flip any of the loose switches on that entity, unless the rules otherwise prohibit doing so. The stuck switches on an entity can be flipped only when the rules so indicate. Whenever a switch is created, or becomes associated with a class of entities, then each entity in the class that had previously been in a state that is now a state of the switch shall continue to be in that state; all other entities in the class shall be in the default state of the switch. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4527 (Murphy), 16 September 2003 text: A switch is a set of states associated with a class of entities. Each switch shall have a default state, which if not otherwise specified shall be the first state mentioned in the rule defining the switch. The recordkeepor for a class of entities shall also maintain records of any switches associated with that class, as well as the current state of the switch for each entity of the class. If the recordkeepor is required to publish a report, that report shall include records of these switches. The rules may require a different player to maintain and report these records. Whenever an entity is created in a class of entities associated with a switch, it shall be in the state of the switch specified by the order or provision creating it; if no state is specified, it shall be in the default state of the switch. Whenever an entity joins a class of entities associated with a switch, the entity shall be in the default state of the switch. A player who may flip a switch on an entity to some state may do so by announcement. In eir announcement, e must indicate the entity, switch, and new state. When a switch on an entity is flipped to some state, the entity shall come to be in that state and simultaneously cease to be in any other state of the switch. A switch is loose unless the rules define it as stuck. An executor of an entity may flip any of the loose switches on that entity, unless the rules otherwise prohibit doing so. The stuck switches on an entity can be flipped only when the rules so indicate. Whenever a switch is created, or becomes associated with a class of entities, then each entity in the class that had previously been in a state that is now a state of the switch shall continue to be in that state; all other entities in the class shall be in the default state of the switch. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4685 (Quazie, Murphy), 18 April 2005 text: A switch is a set of states associated with a class of entities. Each switch shall have a default state, which if not otherwise specified shall be the first state mentioned in the rule defining the switch. The recordkeepor for a class of entities shall also maintain records of any switches associated with that class, as well as the current state of the switch for each entity of the class. If the recordkeepor is required to publish a report, that report shall include records of these switches. The rules may require a different player to maintain and report these records. Whenever an entity is created in a class of entities associated with a switch, it shall be in the state of the switch specified by the order or provision creating it; if no state is specified, it shall be in the default state of the switch. Whenever an entity joins a class of entities associated with a switch, the entity shall be in the default state of the switch. A player who may flip a switch on an entity to some state may do so by announcement. In eir announcement, e must indicate the entity, switch, and new state. When a switch on an entity is flipped to some state, the entity shall come to be in that state and simultaneously cease to be in any other state of the switch. A switch is loose unless the rules define it as stuck. An executor of an entity may flip any of the loose switches on that entity, unless the rules otherwise prohibit doing so. The stuck switches on an entity can be flipped only when the rules so indicate. Whenever a switch is created, or becomes associated with a class of entities, then each entity in the class that had previously been in a state that is now a state of the switch shall continue to be in that state; all other entities in the class shall be in the default state of the switch. Whenever a state ceases to be a state of a switch, all entities in the class that had previously been in that state shall be flipped to the default state of the switch. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4691 (root), 18 April 2005 text: A switch is a set of states associated with a class of entities. Each switch shall have a default state, which if not otherwise specified shall be the first state mentioned in the rule defining the switch. The recordkeepor for a class of entities shall also maintain records of any switches associated with that class, as well as the current state of the switch for each entity of the class. If the recordkeepor is required to publish a report, that report shall include records of these switches. The rules may require a different player to maintain and report these records. Whenever an entity is created in a class of entities associated with a switch, it shall be in the state of the switch specified by the order or provision creating it; if no state is specified, it shall be in the default state of the switch. Whenever an entity joins a class of entities associated with a switch, the entity shall be in the default state of the switch. Whenever an instrument indicates that a switch on an entity is set or changed to some state, and the rules do not otherwise forbid it, the entity shall come to be in that state and simultaneously cease to be in any other state of the switch. A player who may flip a switch on an entity to some state other than the current state of the switch may do so by announcement. In eir announcement, e must indicate the entity, switch, and new state. Upon this announcement, provided it is valid, the switch is set to the named state. A switch is loose unless the rules define it as stuck. An executor of an entity may flip any of the loose switches on that entity, unless the rules otherwise prohibit doing so. The stuck switches on an entity can be flipped only when the rules so indicate. Whenever a switch is created, or becomes associated with a class of entities, then each entity in the class that had previously been in a state that is now a state of the switch shall continue to be in that state; all other entities in the class shall be in the default state of the switch. Whenever a state ceases to be a state of a switch, all entities in the class that had previously been in that state shall be flipped to the default state of the switch. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4823 (root), 17 July 2005 text: A switch is a set of states associated with a class of entities. Each switch shall have a default state, which if not otherwise specified shall be the first state mentioned in the rule defining the switch. The recordkeepor for a class of entities shall also maintain records of any switches associated with that class, as well as the current state of the switch for each entity of the class. If the recordkeepor is required to publish a report, that report shall include records of these switches. The rules may require a different player to maintain and report these records. Whenever an entity is created in a class of entities associated with a switch, it shall be in the state of the switch specified by the order or provision creating it; if no state is specified, it shall be in the default state of the switch. Whenever an entity joins a class of entities associated with a switch, the entity shall be in the default state of the switch. Whenever an instrument indicates that a switch on an entity is set or changed to some state, and the rules do not otherwise forbid it, the entity shall come to be in that state and simultaneously cease to be in any other state of the switch. A player who may flip a switch on an entity to some state other than the current state of the switch may do so by announcement. In eir announcement, e must indicate the entity, switch, and new state. Upon this announcement, provided it is valid, the switch is set to the named state. A switch is loose unless the rules define it as stuck. An executor of an entity may flip any of the loose switches on that entity, unless the rules otherwise prohibit doing so. The stuck switches on an entity can be flipped only when the rules so indicate. Whenever a switch is created, or becomes associated with a class of entities, then each entity in the class that had previously been in a state that is now a state of the switch shall continue to be in that state; all other entities in the class shall be in the default state of the switch. Whenever a state ceases to be a state of a switch, all entities in the class that had previously been in that state shall be in the default state of the switch. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2040 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2041 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2041 by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: All Players are grouped into units known as Teams. No Player may belong to more than one Team at any time. Each Team shall have a Team Name by which it is known. A Player in a Team may change that Team's Team Name with the Support of two other Players in the same Team. A Team Score is at all times an integer. The Team Score of a Team is the total sum of all Points of all Players grouped into that Team. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4494 (Peekee), 13 May 2003 text: All Players are grouped into units known as Teams. No Player may belong to more than one Team at any time. Each Team shall have a Team Name by which it is known. A Player in a Team may change that Team's Team Name with the Support of two other Players in the same Team. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2041 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2042 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2042 by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: A Team achieves a Team Win when its Team Score reaches 400. The Scorekeepor shall make a public announcement of the Team Win as soon as possible after the Team Win is achieved. The Scorekeepor shall then pay out 25 Stems to each Player in the winning Team. Upon the Scorekeepor's announcement, all Players' Scores are set to zero. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: A Team achieves a Team Win when its Team Score reaches 400. The Scorekeepor shall make a public announcement of the Team Win as soon as possible after the Team Win is achieved. The Scorekeepor shall then award each team member the Boon Team Ribbon. Upon the Scorekeepor's announcement, all Players' Scores are set to zero. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4491 (Peekee), 6 May 2003 text: A Team achieves a Team Win when its Team Score reaches 400. The Scorekeepor shall make a public announcement of the Team Win as soon as possible after the Team Win is achieved. In the announcement the Scorekeepor shall payout 25 Stems to each Player in the winning Team. Later in the same announcement the Scorekeepor shall reassign the grouping of Players into Teams as follows; 1) The Player with the highest Score in the Team with the highest Team Score is assigned to the Team with the lowest Team Score. 2) The Player who has the lowest Score in the Team with the lowest Team Score is assigned as to distribute the players as evenly as possible among the Teams. 3) All other Players remain assigned to the same Teams. If in any of the above there is a choice of more than one Player or Team, the Scorekeepor shall choose between the applicable Players or Teams as e sees fit. The Scorekeepor shall include the details of the reassignments in eir announcement. Upon the Scorekeepor's announcement, all Players' Scores are set to zero. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4502 (Peekee), 5 June 2003 text: A Team achieves a Team Win when its Team Score reaches reaches the Team Points Goal, as set in the Scorekeepor's Budget. The Scorekeepor shall make a public announcement of the Team Win as soon as possible after the Team Win is achieved. In the announcement the Scorekeepor shall payout 25 Stems to each Player in the winning Team. Later in the same announcement the Scorekeepor shall reassign the grouping of Players into Teams as follows; 1) The Player with the highest Score in the Team with the highest Team Score is assigned to the Team with the lowest Team Score. 2) The Player who has the lowest Score in the Team with the lowest Team Score is assigned as to distribute the players as evenly as possible among the Teams. 3) All other Players remain assigned to the same Teams. If in any of the above there is a choice of more than one Player or Team, the Scorekeepor shall choose between the applicable Players or Teams as e sees fit. The Scorekeepor shall include the details of the reassignments in eir announcement. Upon the Scorekeepor's announcement, all Players' Scores are set to zero. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4503 (Peekee), 15 June 2003 text: A Team achieves a Team Win when its Team Score reaches reaches the Team Points Goal, as set in the Scorekeepor's Budget. The Scorekeepor shall make a public announcement of the Team Win as soon as possible after the Team Win is achieved. In the announcement the Scorekeepor shall award the Boon of Teamwork to each Player in the winning Team. Later in the same announcement the Scorekeepor shall reassign the grouping of Players into Teams as follows; 1) The Player with the highest Score in the Team with the highest Team Score is assigned to the Team with the lowest Team Score. 2) The Player who has the lowest Score in the Team with the lowest Team Score is assigned as to distribute the players as evenly as possible among the Teams. 3) All other Players remain assigned to the same Teams. If in any of the above there is a choice of more than one Player or Team, the Scorekeepor shall choose between the applicable Players or Teams as e sees fit. The Scorekeepor shall include the details of the reassignments in eir announcement. Upon the Scorekeepor's announcement, all Players' Scores are set to zero. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4530 (OscarMeyr), 26 October 2003 text: A Team achieves a Team Win when its Team Score reaches reaches the Team Points Goal, as set in the Scorekeepor's Budget. The Scorekeepor shall make a public announcement of the Team Win as soon as possible after the Team Win is achieved. In the announcement the Scorekeepor shall award the Boon of Teamwork to each Player in the winning Team. Later in the same announcement the Scorekeepor shall reassign the grouping of Players into Teams as follows; 1) The Player with the highest Score in the Team with the highest Team Score is assigned to the Team with the lowest Team Score. 2) The Player who has the lowest Score in the Team with the lowest Team Score is assigned as to distribute the players as evenly as possible among the Teams. 3) All other Players remain assigned to the same Teams. If in any of the above there is a choice of more than one Player or Team, the Scorekeepor shall choose between the applicable Players or Teams as e sees fit. The Scorekeepor shall include the details of the reassignments in eir announcement. Upon the Scorekeepor's announcement, all Players' Scores and all Teams' Scores are set to zero. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4547 (Sherlock), 13 January 2004 text: A Team achieves a Team Win when its Team Score reaches reaches the Team Points Goal, as set in the Scorekeepor's Budget. The Scorekeepor shall make a public announcement of the Team Win as soon as possible after the Team Win is achieved. In the announcement the Scorekeepor shall award the Boon of Teamwork to each Player in the winning Team. Later in the same announcement the Scorekeepor shall reassign the grouping of Players into Teams as follows; 1) The Player with the highest Score in the Team with the highest Team Score is assigned to the Team with the lowest Team Score. 2) The Player who has the lowest Score in the Team with the lowest Team Score is assigned as to distribute the players as evenly as possible among the Teams. 3) All other Players remain assigned to the same Teams. If in any of the above there is a choice of more than one Player or Team, the Scorekeepor shall choose between the applicable Players or Teams as e sees fit. The Scorekeepor shall include the details of the reassignments in eir announcement. The Scorekeepor may rename any Team in this announcement, if e chooses to do so. That Team shall be known by its new name henceforth. Upon the Scorekeepor's announcement, all Players' Scores and all Teams' Scores are set to zero. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4612 (Murphy), 10 September 2004 text: A Team achieves a Team Win when its Team Score reaches the Team Points Goal, as set in the Scorekeepor's Budget. When this occurs, no other Team may achieve a Team Win until after the next Score Reset. The Scorekeepor shall announce a Team Win as soon as possible after it occurs. Upon this announcement, a Score Reset occurs. In the announcement, the Scorekeepor shall award the Boon of Teamwork to each Winner. In the announcement, the Scorekeepor shall reassign Players to Teams as follows, based on Scores immediately before the Score Reset: 1) The Player with the highest Score in the Team with the highest Team Score is assigned to the Team with the lowest Team Score. 2) The Player who has the lowest Score in the Team with the lowest Team Score is assigned as to distribute the players as evenly as possible among the Teams. 3) All other Players remain assigned to the same Teams. If in any of the above there is a choice of more than one Player or Team, the Scorekeepor shall choose between the applicable Players or Teams as e sees fit. The Scorekeepor shall include the details of the reassignments in eir announcement. In the announcement, the Scorekeepor may rename one or more Teams by specifying the new name of each Team e is renaming. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2042 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2043 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2043 by Proposal 4453 (Sherlock), 22 February 2003 text: As soon as possible after a Player registers, the Scorekeepor shall assign em to a Team and publicly announce the assignment. The Scorekeepor shall make the assignment so as to distribute the players as evenly as possible among the teams. If more than one assignment would achieve this, the Scorekeepor may choose among them. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2043 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2044 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2044 by Proposal 4462 (Goethe), 17 March 2003 text: The Degree of Associate of Nomic requires a Thesis of at least 150 words. A Candidate who already holds an AN Degree receives a credit of 100 words towards the Thesis requirement for any higher Degree, unless the Candidate also holds a BN Degree. The Degree of Bachelor of Nomic requires a Thesis of at least 500 words. A Candidate who already holds an BN Degree receives a credit of 250 words towards the Thesis requirement for any higher Degree. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic History requires a Thesis of at least 750 words and containing a narrative covering significant events which have occurred in Agora within the eight weeks prior to the publication of the Thesis. The Degree of Master of Nomic requires a Thesis of at least 750 words. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic Philosophy requires a Thesis of at least 1000 words, and that the candidate has also published an additional creative work authored by emself whose topic or theme is related to Agora or Nomic in general. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4671 (Goethe), 9 April 2005 text: The Degree of Associate of Nomic requires a Thesis of at least 150 words. A Candidate who already holds an AN Degree receives a credit of 100 words towards the Thesis requirement for any higher Degree, unless the Candidate also holds a BN Degree. The Degree of Bachelor of Nomic requires a Thesis of at least 500 words. A Candidate who already holds an BN Degree receives a credit of 250 words towards the Thesis requirement for any higher Degree. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic History requires a Thesis of at least 750 words and containing a narrative and analysis of past events of specific significance to Agora. The Degree of Master of Nomic requires a Thesis of at least 750 words. The Degree of Doctor of Nomic Philosophy requires a Thesis of at least 1000 words, and that the candidate has also published an additional creative work authored by emself whose topic or theme is related to Agora or Nomic in general. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2044 by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2045 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2045 by Proposal 4464 (root), 17 March 2003 text: 1) The Default Adoption Index of a Proposal is the maximum of: a) 1; and b) any minimum values required for that Proposal by the Rules. 2) The Proposer of a Proposal may, at the time when e submits the Proposal or at any time while it is in the Pool, request an Adoption Index for that Proposal by announcement, specifying the requested value. 3) When a Proposal is distributed, its Adoption Index is set to the maximum of: a) its Default Adoption Index; and b) any values requested by its Proposer as permitted in 2). 4) This is the only mechanism for setting or changing the Adoption Index of a Proposal. This Rule takes precedence over Rules that would allow other mechanisms for setting or changing the Adoption Index of a Proposal. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: When a decision on whether to adopt a proposal or referendum is initiated, it shall be assigned an adoption index, which shall be one unless otherwise specified. Once the voting period for a decision has begun, the adoption index of that decision can only be changed by the Speaker's veto. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 2045 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2046 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2046 by Proposal 4471 (OscarMyer), 26 March 2003 text: Q*Bert (tm) is an entity in Arcadia. Q*Bert moves one space per week, according to the following procedure: Q*Bert moves one space in a random direction, but not to the space it last moved from. Q*Bert is permitted to move to an undefined destination or to Aether. If Q*Bert moves to an undefined destination, its location becomes undefined, and the next week it will move to (0,0). Normally, Q*Bert moves in a diagonal direction. If Q*Bert ends its diagonal movement at a location that another entity ends eir movement at for that week, then in the following week Q*Bert will say "@!#?@!" and move in a random orthogonal direction. Q*Bert has a color, which is a defined Land Type other than Aether and that does not have Sente. When Q*Bert moves to a space, it changes the Land Type of that space. If the current Type is not the same as Q*Bert's color, Q*Bert changes that space's type to its color. Otherwise, Q*Bert changes that space's type to the Land Type that currently has Sente. The Mapkeepor is a Limited Executor of Q*Bert, and its Prime Executor for its movement in Arcadia. The Mapkeepor is to make the random determination of Q*Bert's movement direction and publish Q*Bert's movement and its effect as soon as possible after the start of the Agoran week. Upon the Mapkeepor's report that Q*Bert's color has Sente, Q*Bert's color becomes a random Land Type other than Aether or the old color. The Mapkeepor will make this random determination. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2046 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2047 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2047 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: Kudos (singular Kudo) are an integral measure of a Player's Kismet and noteworthiness within the game of Agora. The Herald is the recordkeepor of Kudos. The kudos of a Player may only be changed as specified by the rules or by an instrument of Power 2 or greater. Agora, as a whole, also has a defined number of Kudos. No other non-Player entity has a defined number of Kudos. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4520 (Goethe), 30 July 2003 text: Kudos (singular Kudo) are an integral measure of a Player's Kismet and noteworthiness within the game of Agora. The Herald is the recordkeepor of Kudos. The kudos of a Player may only be changed as specified by the rules or by an instrument of Power 2 or greater. Agora, as a whole, also has a defined number of Kudos. No other non-Player entity has a defined number of Kudos. If an entity has a defined number of Kudos, but the number has not been set by the Rules, then the entity has 1 Kudo. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4598 (Elysion), 11 July 2004 text: Kudos (singular Kudo) are an integral measure of a Player's Kismet and noteworthiness within the game of Agora. The Herald is the recordkeepor of Kudos. The kudos of a Player may only be changed as specified by the rules or by an instrument of Power 2 or greater. If an entity has a defined number of Kudos, but the number has not been set by the Rules, then the entity has 1 Kudo. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2047 by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2048 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2048 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: A Player (the Sensei) may, by public announcement, enlighten Agora by choosing two Players to be the Yin and the Yang respectively. Such enlightenment has the effect of decreasing the Yin's kudos by one and increasing the Yang's kudos by one, provided: (i) the Sensei has at least one kudo; (ii) the Sensei has not previously enlightened Agora in the current week; (iii) the Sensei is not the Yang; (iv) the Sensei gives eir reasons for choosing both the Yin and Yang for a lesson. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2048 by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2049 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2049 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: A Patent Title is Ephemeral if the rules state that the Patent Title is ephemeral. Karma is a stuck switch for ephemeral patent titles with states Boon and Albatross. Defining something to be a 'boon' or an 'albatross' is equivalent to defining it to be an ephemeral Patent Title with its Karma set as defined. Players may be permitted or required by the Rules to award or revoke Boons or Albatrosses. If so, these awards are performed by public announcement by the specified Players. A Player may hold multiple instances of a given type of ephemeral Patent title; if so, The Herald need only note the number of instances of these Patent Titles that each player holds. history: Amended(???) by Proposal 4497 (Steve), 13 May 2003 text: A Patent Title has Ephemeral significance if the rules state that the Patent Title is ephemeral. Karma is a stuck switch for ephemeral patent titles with states Boon and Albatross. Defining something to be a 'boon' or an 'albatross' is equivalent to defining it to be an ephemeral Patent Title with its Karma set as defined. Players may be permitted or required by the Rules to award or revoke Boons or Albatrosses. If so, these awards are performed by public announcement by the specified Players. A Player may hold multiple instances of a given type of ephemeral Patent title; if so, The Herald need only note the number of instances of these Patent Titles that each player holds. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4691 (root), 18 April 2005 text: A Patent Title has Ephemeral significance if the rules state that the Patent Title is ephemeral. Karma is a stuck switch for ephemeral patent titles with states Boon and Albatross. Defining something to be a 'boon' or an 'albatross' is equivalent to defining it to be an ephemeral Patent Title with its Karma set as defined, and the Karma of a title defined in this way is said to be Static. A Static Karma switch may never be changed except by modifying its definition. A Karma switch that is not Static is said to be Dynamic. Players may be permitted or required by the Rules to award or revoke Boons or Albatrosses. If so, these awards are performed by public announcement by the specified Players. A Player may hold multiple instances of a given type of ephemeral Patent title; if so, The Herald need only note the number of instances of these Patent Titles that each player holds. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: Players may be permitted or required by the Rules to grant Boons or Albatrosses to other Players. If so, these awards are performed by public announcement. The Herald shall note the granting of all such awards. A Player who gains a Boon is considered to have drawn a free card for that boon. A Player who gains an Albatross loses a pending draw. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4851 (Murphy), 18 March 2006 text: Players may be permitted or required by the Rules to grant Boons or Albatrosses to other Players. If so, these awards are performed by public announcement. The Herald shall note the granting of all such awards. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2049 by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2050 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2050 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: A Daffodil is a Boon that may be awarded as the Rules specify or by an Instrument of Power 2 or greater. A Weed is an Albatross that may be awarded as the Rules specify or by an Instrument of Power 2 or greater. If there are no Players that hold at least one Weed or Daffodil, the Herald may repeal this Rule without Objection. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2050 by Proposal 4683 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2051 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2051 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: The Herald's Budget shall consist of a positive integer between 5 and 25, known as the Tabla Rasa. As soon as possible after the beginning of each quarter, the Herald shall announce the Turning of a New Parchment. The effect of such an announcement is to: (A) set each Player's kudos equal to: (i) the Tabla Rasa; (ii) plus the number of boons e holds; (iii) minus the number of albatrosses e holds; (iv) minus one for every 3 Blots e has. (B) set Agora's kudos equal to the Tabla Rasa times the current number of Players; (C) revoke all ephemeral Patent Titles. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4598 (Elysion), 11 July 2004 text: The Herald's Budget shall consist of a positive integer between 5 and 25, known as the Tabla Rasa. As soon as possible after the beginning of each quarter, the Herald shall announce the Turning of a New Parchment. The effect of such an announcement is to: (A) set each Player's kudos equal to: (i) the Tabla Rasa; (ii) plus the number of boons e holds; (iii) minus the number of albatrosses e holds; (iv) minus one for every 3 Blots e has. (B) revoke all ephemeral Patent Titles. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4691 (root), 18 April 2005 text: The Herald's Budget shall consist of a positive integer between 5 and 25, known as the Tabla Rasa. As soon as possible after the beginning of each quarter, the Herald shall announce the Turning of a New Parchment. The effect of such an announcement is to: (A) set each Player's kudos equal to: (i) the Tabla Rasa; (ii) plus the number of boons e holds; (iii) minus the number of albatrosses e holds; (iv) minus one for every 3 Blots e has. (B) revoke all ephemeral Patent Titles. (C) set each Dynamic Karma switch to its original state. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2051 by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2052 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2052 by Proposal 4486 (Michael), 24 April 2003 text: (a) Associated with every Player is a non-negative integral number known as that Player's Voting Potential. At the beginning of each new month, every Player's Voting Potential is set to zero. (b) At any time, a Player may, by announcement, set their Voting Potential to any positive integer N. The Fee associated with this action is the Oligarchy Charge Requirement multiplied by N. (c) The Assessor is responsible for tracking these announcements, and recording Players' Voting Potentials. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4526 (Steve), 8 September 2003 text: (a) Associated with every Player is a non-negative integral number known as that Player's Voting Potential. At the beginning of each new month, every Player's Voting Potential is set to zero. (b) At any time, a Player may, by announcement, increase their Voting Potential by a positive integral amount, N. The Fee associated with this action is the Oligarchy Charge Requirement multiplied by N. (c) The Assessor is responsible for tracking these announcements, and recording Players' Voting Potentials. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4555 (Elysion), 22 March 2004 text: (a) Associated with every Player is a non-negative integral number known as that Player's Voting Potential. At the beginning of each new month, every Player's Voting Potential is set to zero. (b) At any time, a Player may, by announcement, increase their Voting Potential by a positive integral amount, N. The Fee associated with this action is the Political Charge multiplied by N. (c) The Assessor is responsible for tracking these announcements, and recording Players' Voting Potentials. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4621 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: (a) Associated with every Player is a non-negative integral number known as that Player's Voting Potential. At the beginning of each new month, every Player's Voting Potential is divided by two and rounded down. (b) At any time, a Player may, by announcement, increase their Voting Potential by a positive integral amount, N. The Fee associated with this action is the Political Charge multiplied by N. (c) The Assessor is responsible for tracking these announcements, and recording Players' Voting Potentials. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4626 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: (a) Associated with every Player is a non-negative integral number known as that Player's Voting Potential. At the beginning of each new month, every Player's Voting Potential is divided by two and rounded down. (b) At any time, a Player may, by announcement, increase their Voting Potential by a positive integral amount, N. The Fee associated with this action is the Political Charge multiplied by N. (c) The Assessor is responsible for tracking these announcements, and recording Players' Voting Potentials. (d) the Political Charge is a positive integer that is initially 4, and may be changed only as defined by instruments of a power of 2 or greater. Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, if the current value of the Political Charge cannot be determined by reasonable effort, it shall be considered to be reset to 4. The Assessor is responsible for tracking the current Political Charge. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2052 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2053 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2053 by Proposal 4494 (Peekee), 13 May 2003 text: A Team Score is at all times an integer. The Team Score of a Team is the total sum of all Points of all Players grouped into that Team, plus the Team's Team Points. A Team who has not been Awarded or Penalized since the last Team Win has zero Team Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Team to be Awarded or Penalised Team Points. If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Team Points. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is ineffective: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first valid notification for that specific event history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4542 (Murphy), 23 November 2003 text: A Team Score is at all times an integer. The Team Score of a Team is the total sum of all Points of all Players grouped into that Team, plus the Team's Team Points. A Team who has not been Awarded or Penalized since the last Team Win has zero Team Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Team to be Awarded or Penalised Team Points. If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Team Points. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is ineffective: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first valid notification for that specific event If the event did not actually occur, and the notification is challenged within 7 days for this reason, then the notification is invalid and points do not change. If the event did not actually occur, and the notification is not challenged within 7 days for this reason, then the notification is valid and points change. If the notification is challenged later, then the team may be penalized/awarded a number of points equal to the original award/penalty. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4612 (Murphy), 10 September 2004 text: A Team Score is at all times an integer. The Team Score of a Team is the total sum of all Points of all Players grouped into that Team, plus the Team's Team Points. A Team who has not been Awarded or Penalized since the last Score Reset has zero Team Points. The Rules may specify that certain events may cause a certain Team to be Awarded or Penalised Team Points. If said event occurs, then any Player may notify the Scorekeepor of the Award or Penalty. The Scorekeepor shall then note the change in the affected Team Points. Such a notification must meet the following requirements, else it is ineffective: -- It must be sent within 7 days of the event -- It must unambiguously describe the event -- It must indicate the Rule allowing the Award or Penalty -- It must be the first valid notification for that specific event If the event did not actually occur, and the notification is challenged within 7 days for this reason, then the notification is invalid and points do not change. If the event did not actually occur, and the notification is not challenged within 7 days for this reason, then the notification is valid and points change. If the notification is challenged later, then the team may be penalized/awarded a number of points equal to the original award/penalty. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2053 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2054 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2054 by Proposal 4494 (Peekee), 13 May 2003 text: (a) If all the Players on a Team Vote on a Democratic Proposal, the Team may be Awarded 10 Team Points. (b) If none of the Players on a Team Vote on a Democratic Proposal, the Team may be Penalised 20 Team Points. (c) If all the players on a Team vote FOR a Democratic Proposal and none of them vote AGAINST it, or all the players on a Team vote AGAINST a Democratic Proposal and none of them vote FOR it, the Team may be awarded 10 Team points. (d) If all the Players on a Team Vote in an Election, the Team may be Awarded 10 Team Points. (e) If none of the Players on a Team Vote in an Election, the Team may be Penalised 20 Team Points. (f) If all the Players on a Team Vote for the same Candidate in an Election, the Team may be awarded 10 Team Points. (g) If a Revolt succeeds, and every Player on a Team is Rebellious, the Team may be Awarded 30 Points. (h) If a Revolt fails, and every Player on a Team is Rebellious, the Team may be Penalised 30 Points. (i) Once in each Agoran week if all the Players on a Team are Immaculate, the Team may be Awarded 5 Team Points. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2054 by Proposal 4502 (Peekee), 5 June 2003 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2055 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2055 by Proposal 4502 (Peekee), 5 June 2003 text: The Scorekeepor's Budget shall contain the following: (a) The Team Points Goal, which is a positive integer; (b) The PLIMIT and PPP, which are both positive integers; and (c) Various Scoring Events; Each Scoring Event must contain the following information: (1) Whether it is an Award or a Penalty; (2) The amount of the Award or Penalty, which is a positive integer; (3) The conditions required for the Event to occur; (4) A description of which Player or Team is to receive the Award or Penalty. If the conditions for a Scoring Event are met then the given Player or Team may be Awarded or Penalized an amount of Points as in that Event's description in the Scorekeepor's Budget. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4542 (Murphy), 23 November 2003 text: The Scorekeepor's Budget shall contain the following: a) The Team Points Goal, a positive integer. b) The Player Points Limit, a positive integer. c) Points Per Player, a positive integer. d) One or more scoring events, each with the following information: i) Whether it is an award or a penalty. ii) The amount of the award/penalty, a positive integer. iii) The conditions required for the event to occur. iv) A description of which player/team receives the award/penalty. Each scoring event in the Scorekeepor's Budget may cause the specified player/team to be awarded/penalized the specified number of points, as defined by other rules. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4565 (Goethe), 6 April 2004 text: The Scorekeepor's Budget shall contain the following: a) The Team Points Goal, a positive integer. b) The Champion's Grant, a positive integer. c) One or more scoring events, each with the following information: i) Whether it is an award or a penalty. ii) The amount of the award/penalty, a positive integer. iii) The conditions required for the event to occur. iv) A description of which player/team receives the award/penalty. Each scoring event in the Scorekeepor's Budget may cause the specified player/team to be awarded/penalized the specified number of points, as defined by other rules. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4566 (Goethe), 11 April 2004 text: The Scorekeepor's Budget shall contain the following: a) The Team Points Goal, a positive integer. b) The Champion's Grant, a positive integer. c) One or more scoring events, each with the following information: i) Whether it is an award or a penalty. ii) The amount of the award/penalty, a positive integer. iii) The conditions required for the event to occur. iv) A description of which player/team receives the award/penalty. Each scoring event in the Scorekeepor's Budget may cause the specified player/team to be awarded/penalized the specified number of points, as defined by other rules. If no Team Score is greater than half the Team Points Goal, then: (a) Any Player may amend the Scorekeepor's budget by adding a valid scoring event, provided e does so both without Objection from the Scorekeepor and with Support from a member of a different team; (b) The Scorekeepor may amend the budget by adding, removing, or changing scoring events, provided e does so both without 3 Objections and with Support from a member of a different team. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2055 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2056 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2056 by Proposal 4513 (Steve), 10 July 2003 text: Each player is authorised to report the Infraction of Invisibilitating. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2056 by Proposal 4759 (Manu, Sherlock), 15 May 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2057 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2057 by Proposal 4514 (Murphy), 10 July 2003 text: When an election fails quorum, each eligible voter who did not vote commits the Class 1 Infraction of Apathy, to be reported by the vote collector. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4524 (root), 28 August 2003 text: When an election fails quorum, each eligible voter who did not vote or declare emself present commits the Class 1 Infraction of Apathy, to be reported by the vote collector. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2057 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2058 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2058 by Proposal 4532 (OscarMeyr), 26 October 2003 text: When the Rules direct the GWotO to remove a Player from the Oligarchy, the GWotO shall publicly announce: (i) the Oligarch to be removed; (ii) the reason for the removal; and (iii) the Rule that authorizes that reason. If this notice is correct, the named Player ceases to be an Oligarch as of the GWotO's announcement. The GWotO's announcement is to be made as soon as possible after the governing event happens, unless the governing Rule specifies a different time period. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4555 (Elysion), 22 March 2004 text: When the Rules direct the GWotO to remove a Player from the Oligarchy, the GWotO shall publicly announce: (i) the Oligarch to be removed; (ii) the reason for the removal; and (iii) the Rule that authorizes that reason. If this notice is correct, the named Player's class is flipped to Plebeian as of the GWotO's announcement. The GWotO's announcement is to be made as soon as possible after the governing event happens, unless the governing Rule specifies a different time period. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2058 by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2059 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2059 by Proposal 4537 (Murphy), 16 November 2003 text: Advertising is a stuck proposal switch with values none, positive, negative. A player may pay 2 kudos to flip a proposal's advertising switch from none to another value, or from another value to none. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4562 (root), 22 March 2004 text: Advertising is a stuck proposal switch with values none, positive, negative. A player may pay 2 kudos to flip the advertising switch of any proposal in the pool from none to another value, or from another value to none. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4622 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: The following Element is defined for cards: Grafty: If a card is Grafty, then it is Budgeted, with its initial quota set equal to one plus the number of Players who voted FOR the Proposal that first defined that class of card as Grafty. When the Deckmastor initially creates cards to fulfil this quota, e shall, Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, first destroy all existing copies of the card, then create one copy in the possession of the Deck, and finally create one copy in the possession of each Player who voted FOR said proposal. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 text: The following Element is defined for cards: Grafty: If a card is Grafty, then it is Budgeted, with its initial quota set equal to one plus the number of Players who voted FOR the Proposal that first defined that class of card as Grafty. When the Deckmastor initially creates cards to fulfil this quota, e shall, Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, first destroy all existing copies of the card, then create one copy in the possession of the Deck, and finally create one copy in the possession of each Player who voted FOR said proposal. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2059 by Proposal 4826 (Goethe), 22 July 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2060 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2060 by Proposal 4539 (Goethe), 16 November 2003 text: Any Proposal submitted on the Fifth of November shall become upon delivery Distributable, Democratic, Urgent, and Sane, rules to the contrary nonwithstanding. If a Proposal so submitted is subsequently adopted, the Assessor shall award the Proposer the Boon of A Penny. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2060 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2061 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2061 by Proposal 4540 (Murphy), 23 November 2003 text: If an Interested Democratic Proposal passes, and no Votes were cast AGAINST it, then the Assessor shall award the Proposor the Boon of Zeitgeist. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2061 by Proposal 4696 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2062 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2062 by Proposal 4544 (OscarMeyr), 16 December 2003 text: Leadership is a loose Team switch with values null and each of the Team's Members. The Scorekeepor shall maintain and report records for this switch. If a Team's leadership is null, any Member of that Team may flip the Team's leadership, Without Objection from the other Members of that Team. If a Team's leadership is non-null, the leadership identifies the Team Captain, who is the Executor of that Team. The Captain may flip eir Team's leadership without restriction; any other Member of the Team may flip the Team's leadership with N Supporters, where N + 1 is the minimal majority of that Team's Members. If the Team Captain ceases to be a member of the Team, that Team's leadership becomes null. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2062 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2063 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2063 by Proposal 4555 (Elysion), 22 March 2004 text: Each Player shall have associated with them a list known as that Player's Coalition. A Coalition consists of a set (possibly null) of registered Players. At any time, a player may be a member of at most one Coalition. A player may be a member of eir own Coalition. Whenever a member of a Coalition ceases to be a Player, e is removed from that Coalition. A Player may join a Coalition by announcing e does so and specifying which Coalition e is joining, provided e has not successfully made such an announcement in the past week and is not currently a member of another Coalition. A Player may leave a Coalition e is a member of by announcing e does so. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2063 by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2064 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2064 by Proposal 4555 (Elysion), 22 March 2004 text: Each Player has two associated non-negative integral numbers known as that Player's Potency and Lobbying Strength. A Player's Potency is equal to the sum of the Lobbying Strengths of the members of eir Coalition. At any time, a Player may, by announcement, increase their Lobbying Strength by a positive integral amount, N. The Fee associated with this action is the Political Charge multiplied by N, or half that amount (rounded up) if the Player is a Politician. At the beginning of each new month, every Player's Lobbying Strength is set to 1. Whenever a Player registers, eir Lobbying Strength is set to 1. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2064 by Proposal 4576 (root), 31 May 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2065 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2065 by Proposal 4561 (Sherlock), 22 March 2004 text: For Acolytes, Absolving an entity is a progressive action. Absolving an entity expunges 1 Blot from that entity. For Patrons, Donating to a Team is a progressive Action. The effect of Donating to a Team is to increase that Team's Team Points by 5. For Politicians, Debating an Undistributed Proposal is a progressive Action. The effect of Debating a Proposal is to change its Chamber to one named by the Politician, provided it is legal for that Proposal to be in the named Chamber and the Proposal is not Sane. For Scribes, Rubberstamping a Proposal is a progressive action. A Rubberstamped Proposal becomes Distributable. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2065 by Proposal 4569 (Wes), 2 May 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2066 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2066 by Proposal 4564 (OscarMeyr), 6 April 2004 text: When a Player becomes Silent, e becomes turned. Whenever a Silent Player becomes unturned, e becomes turned. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2066 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2067 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2067 by Proposal 4569 (Wes), 2 May 2004 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Distrib-u-Matic Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Cause any one Proposal to become Distributable. * Caption: Absolv-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted, Limited [Immaculate Players] [1] Exploit: Expunge one Blot from any one entity. * Caption: Debate-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Change the Chamber of any one non-Sane Proposal to the Chamber of your choice, provided it is legal for that Proposal to be in the named Chamber. * Caption: Boost-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Increase any one Team's Team Points by 5. Exploit: Increase any one Team's Team Points by 10 for a Fee of 1 Kudo. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Distrib-u-Matic Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Cause any one Proposal to become Distributable. * Caption: Absolv-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted, Limited [Immaculate Players] [1] Exploit: Expunge one Blot from any one entity. * Caption: Debate-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Change the Chamber of any one non-Sane Proposal to the Chamber of your choice, provided it is legal for that Proposal to be in the named Chamber. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4626 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4631 (root), 19 December 2004 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Distrib-u-Matic Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Cause any one Proposal to become Distributable. * Caption: Absolv-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted, Limited [Immaculate Players] [1] Exploit: Expunge one Blot from any one entity. * Caption: Debate-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted, Powered [2] Exploit: Change the Chamber of any one non-Sane Proposal to the Chamber of your choice, provided it is legal for that Proposal to be in the named Chamber. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4682 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Distrib-u-Matic Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Cause any one Proposal to become Distributable. * Caption: Absolv-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted Exploit: If you are immaculate, you may expunge N blots from an entity for a fee of N-1. Otherwise, you may expunge one blot from an entity for no fee. * Caption: Debate-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted, Powered [2] Exploit: Change the Chamber of any one non-Sane Proposal to the Chamber of your choice, provided it is legal for that Proposal to be in the named Chamber. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4687 (Quazie, Manu), 18 April 2005 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Distrib-u-Matic Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Cause any one Proposal to become Distributable. * Caption: Absolv-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted Exploit: If you are immaculate, you may expunge N blots from an entity for a fee of N-1. Otherwise, you may expunge one blot from an entity for no fee. * Caption: Debate-o-Matic Elements: Budgeted, Powered [2] Exploit: Change the Chamber of any one non-Sane Proposal to the Chamber of your choice, provided it is legal for that Proposal to be in the named Chamber. * Caption: Two for One Elements: Budgeted Exploit: For a fee of one Kudo make 2 undistributable proposals, provided that each has a Distribution Cost of 1, distributable. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2067 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2068 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2068 by Proposal 4573 (Wes), 14 May 2004 text: The Deckmastor is an office which acts as the recordkeepor for Cards. The Deckmastor's Weekly Report shall contain a record of all Cards in existence and what entity possesses each Card. The Deckmastor shall have a budget containing the Maximum Hand Size, which is a positive integer between 3 and 10. In the absence of a budget, the Maximum Hand Size shall be 5. The Deck is a Gambler. The Deckmastor shall be the sole Executor of The Deck, but may take no action on behalf of The Deck except as explicitly permitted by the Rules. The Deck may not transfer Cards to any other entity except as explicitly required by the Rules. Only the Deckmastor may create or destroy Cards, and e may do if and only if the Rules require it by announcing the Card being created or destroyed and the entity who either possesses it now or possessed it at the time of destruction as appropriate. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: The Deckmastor is an office which acts as the recordkeepor for Cards. The Deckmastor's Weekly Report shall contain a record of all Cards in existence and what entity possesses each Card. The Deckmastor shall have a budget containing the Maximum Hand Size and the Minimum Hand Size, each of which is a positive integer between 2 and 10, with the Minimum being less than the Maximum. In the absence of a budget, the Maximum Hand Size shall be 5 and the Minimum Hand Size shall be 2. The Deck is a Gambler. The Deckmastor shall be the sole Executor of The Deck, but may take no action on behalf of The Deck except as explicitly permitted by the Rules. The Deck may not transfer Cards to any other entity except as explicitly required by the Rules. Only the Deckmastor may create or destroy Cards, and e may do if and only if the Rules require it by announcing the Card being created or destroyed and the entity who either possesses it now or possessed it at the time of destruction as appropriate. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4694 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: The Deckmastor is an office which acts as the recordkeepor for Cards. The Deckmastor's Weekly Report shall contain a record of all Cards in existence and what entity possesses each Card. The Deckmastor shall have a budget containing the Maximum Hand Size and the Minimum Hand Size, each of which is a positive integer between 2 and 10, with the Minimum being less than the Maximum. In the absence of a budget, the Maximum Hand Size shall be 5 and the Minimum Hand Size shall be 2. The Deck and the Discard Pile are Gamblers. The Deckmastor shall be the sole Executor of both entities, but may take no action on behalf of them except as explicitly permitted by the Rules. The Deck and Discard Pile may not transfer cards to any other entity except as explicitly required by the Rules. Only the Deckmastor may create or destroy Cards, and e may do if and only if the Rules require it by announcing the Card being created or destroyed and the entity who either possesses it now or possessed it at the time of destruction as appropriate. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4734 (Sherlock), 5 May 2005 text: The Deckmastor is an office which acts as the recordkeepor for Cards. The Deckmastor's Weekly Report shall contain a record of all Cards in existence and what entity possesses each Card. The Deckmastor shall have a budget containing the Maximum Hand Size and the Minimum Hand Size, each of which is a positive integer between 2 and 10, with the Minimum being less than the Maximum. In the absence of a budget, the Maximum Hand Size shall be 5 and the Minimum Hand Size shall be 2. The Deck and the Discard Pile are Gamblers. The Deckmastor shall be the sole Executor of both entities, but may take no action on behalf of them except as explicitly permitted by the Rules. The Deck and Discard Pile may not transfer cards to any other entity except as explicitly required by the Rules. Only the Deckmastor may create or destroy Cards not in eir Trial Run, and e may do if and only if the Rules require it by announcing the Card being created or destroyed and the entity who either possesses it now or possessed it at the time of destruction as appropriate. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: The Deckmastor is an office whose responsibilities include shuffling, dealing, and other random actions concerning cards, and who acts as the recordkeepor for Cards. The Deckmastor's Weekly Report shall contain a record of all Cards in existence, recent card actions, and what entity possesses each Card. The Deck and the Discard Pile are Gamblers. The Deckmastor shall be the sole Executor of both entities, but may take no action on behalf of them except as explicitly permitted by the Rules. The Deck and Discard Pile may not transfer cards to any other entity except as explicitly required by the Rules. Only the Deckmastor may create or destroy Cards, and e only may do so when the rules require it. The Deckmastor creates or destroys a card by announcement, specifying as appropriate the entity who now possesses it or previously possessed it. If at any time fewer Copies of a defined Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall create a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck, unless otherwise specified. If at any time more Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall destroy a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck, unless no such Copies exist, in which case the Deckmastor shall destroy a random Copy. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4834 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: The Deckmastor is an office; its holder is responsible for fair play, shuffling, and dealing, and is the recordkeepor for cards. The Deckmastor's weekly report shall contain a record of all cards in existence, recent card actions, and what entity holds each card. The Deckmastor need not record or report transfers of cards to the table. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4851 (Murphy), 18 March 2006 text: The Deckmastor is an office; its holder is responsible for fair play, shuffling, and dealing, and is the recordkeepor for cards and chips. The Deckmastor's weekly report shall contain a record of all cards and chips in existence, recent card and chip actions, and what entity holds each card and chip. The Deckmastor need not record or report transfers of cards to the table. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2068 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2069 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2069 by Proposal 4573 (Wes), 14 May 2004 text: I. Possession Cards may be possessed by Gamblers. All Players are Gamblers. If at any time a Card is not possessed by a Gambler, it immediately and automatically returns to the possession of The Deck. The Gambler that possesses a Card is that Card's Holder and Holds that Card. All Cards possessed by a particular Gambler are collectively referred to as that Gambler's Hand. A Gambler's Hand Size is the number of Cards in eir Hand plus one for each Pending Draw for that Gambler. II. Definitions The Rules may define a Class of Card by specifying a Caption, a Quota, zero or more Elements, and zero or more Exploits. All Cards of the same Class shall be identical and fungible. Each individual instance of a Card shall be considered to be a Copy of that Class of Card. (a) The Caption shall be the name of a particular Class of Cards. No two Classes of Cards shall have the same Caption. (b) The Quota shall be a non-negative integer. If at any time fewer Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall create a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck. If at any time more Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall destroy a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck, unless no such Copies exist, in which case the Deckmastor shall destroy a random Copy. (c) The Rules may define Elements for Cards. Each Element shall have a name and a description. Any Card possessing the Element of that name shall behave according to the description associated with that Element. An Element not defined in the Rules has no effect. (d) An Exploit is an action that the Holder of that Card (and only the Holder of that Card) may take if and only if e meets the requirements and/or pays the costs outlined in that Exploit. Any reference to "you," "your" or a similar pronoun in the text of an Exploit refers to the Holder of that Card. Taking an action described in an Exploit is known as Playing the Card. Unless a Rule says otherwise, a Card is automatically transferred to The Deck immediately after being Played. III. Actions No action involving Cards may be simultaneous with any other action. No such action may be performed more than once simultaneously. If any attempt is made to perform more than one such action in such a way that the order of said actions is unclear, all such actions fail. (a) Unless restricted from doing so by the rules, any Gambler possessing a Card may transfer that Card to any other Gambler by announcing which Card is to be transferred and the Gambler it shall be transferred to. All such transfers take place at the time they are announced. Discarding a Card is synonymous with transfering said Card to The Deck. (b) Drawing a Card and Drawing from The Deck are synonymous. When a Gambler Draws a Card, the Deckmastor shall be required to randomly select one Card from among those currently in The Deck's Hand and transfer it to that Gambler as soon as possible. Until this transfer takes place, that Gambler is said to have one Pending Draw for each such transfer the Deckmastor is required to make, but has not yet made. A Gambler may Draw from The Deck for a Fee equal to the number of times that Gambler has previously Drawn from the Deck during the current month so long as the Gambler's Hand Size is smaller than the Maximum Hand Size. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4625 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: I. Possession Cards may be possessed by Gamblers. All Players are Gamblers. If at any time a Card is not possessed by a Gambler, it immediately and automatically returns to the possession of The Deck. The Gambler that possesses a Card is that Card's Holder and Holds that Card. All Cards possessed by a particular Gambler are collectively referred to as that Gambler's Hand. A Gambler's Hand Size is the number of Cards in eir Hand plus one for each Pending Draw for that Gambler. II. Definitions The Rules may define a Class of Card by specifying a Caption, a Quota, zero or more Elements, and zero or more Exploits. All Cards of the same Class shall be identical and fungible. Each individual instance of a Card shall be considered to be a Copy of that Class of Card. (a) The Caption shall be the name of a particular Class of Cards. No two Classes of Cards shall have the same Caption. (b) The Quota shall be a non-negative integer. If at any time fewer Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall create a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck. If at any time more Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall destroy a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck, unless no such Copies exist, in which case the Deckmastor shall destroy a random Copy. (c) The Rules may define Elements for Cards. Each Element shall have a name and a description. Any Card possessing the Element of that name shall behave according to the description associated with that Element. An Element not defined in the Rules has no effect. (d) An Exploit is an action that the Holder of that Card (and only the Holder of that Card) may take if and only if e meets the requirements and/or pays the costs outlined in that Exploit. Any reference to "you," "your" or a similar pronoun in the text of an Exploit refers to the Holder of that Card. Taking an action described in an Exploit is known as Playing the Card. Unless a Rule says otherwise, a Card is automatically transferred to The Deck immediately after being Played. III. Actions No action involving Cards may be simultaneous with any other action. No such action may be performed more than once simultaneously. If any attempt is made to perform more than one such action in such a way that the order of said actions is unclear, all such actions fail. (a) Unless restricted from doing so by the rules, any Gambler possessing a Card may transfer that Card to any other Gambler by announcing which Card is to be transferred and the Gambler it shall be transferred to. All such transfers take place at the time they are announced. Discarding a Card is synonymous with transfering said Card to The Deck. (b) Drawing a Card and Drawing from The Deck are synonymous. When a Gambler Draws a Card, the Deckmastor shall be required to randomly select one Card from among those currently in The Deck's Hand and transfer it to that Gambler as soon as possible. Until this transfer takes place, that Gambler is said to have one Pending Draw for each such transfer the Deckmastor is required to make, but has not yet made. A Gambler may Draw from The Deck for a Fee equal to the number of times that Gambler has previously Drawn from the Deck during the current month so long as the Gambler's Hand Size is smaller than the Maximum Hand Size plus the number of Offices e holds. For the purposes of this Rule, the Speakership is considered an office. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4633 (Goethe), 9 January 2005 text: I. Possession Cards may be possessed by Gamblers. All Players are Gamblers. If at any time a Card is not possessed by a Gambler, it immediately and automatically returns to the possession of The Deck. The Gambler that possesses a Card is that Card's Holder and Holds that Card. All Cards possessed by a particular Gambler are collectively referred to as that Gambler's Hand. A Gambler's Hand Size is the number of Cards in eir Hand plus one for each Pending Draw for that Gambler. II. Definitions The Rules may define a Class of Card by specifying a Caption, a Quota, zero or more Elements, and zero or more Exploits. All Cards of the same Class shall be identical and fungible. Each individual instance of a Card shall be considered to be a Copy of that Class of Card. (a) The Caption shall be the name of a particular Class of Cards. No two Classes of Cards shall have the same Caption. (b) The Quota shall be a non-negative integer. If at any time fewer Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall create a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck. If at any time more Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall destroy a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck, unless no such Copies exist, in which case the Deckmastor shall destroy a random Copy. (c) The Rules may define Elements for Cards. Each Element shall have a name and a description. Any Card possessing the Element of that name shall behave according to the description associated with that Element. An Element not defined in the Rules has no effect. (d) An Exploit is an action that the Holder of that Card (and only the Holder of that Card) may take if and only if e meets the requirements and/or pays the costs outlined in that Exploit. Any reference to "you," "your" or a similar pronoun in the text of an Exploit refers to the Holder of that Card. Taking an action described in an Exploit is known as Playing the Card. Unless a Rule says otherwise, a Card is automatically transferred to The Deck immediately after being Played. III. Actions No action involving Cards may be simultaneous with any other action. No such action may be performed more than once simultaneously. If any attempt is made to perform more than one such action in such a way that the order of said actions is unclear, all such actions fail. (a) Unless restricted from doing so by the rules, any Gambler possessing a Card may transfer that Card to any other Gambler by announcing which Card is to be transferred and the Gambler it shall be transferred to. All such transfers take place at the time they are announced. Discarding a Card is synonymous with transfering said Card to The Deck. (b) Drawing a Card and Drawing from The Deck are synonymous. When a Gambler Draws a Card, the Deckmastor shall be required to randomly select one Card from among those currently in The Deck's Hand and transfer it to that Gambler as soon as possible. Until this transfer takes place, that Gambler is said to have one Pending Draw for each such transfer the Deckmastor is required to make, but has not yet made. A Gambler may Draw from The Deck for a Fee equal to the number of times that Gambler has previously Drawn from the Deck during the current month so long as the Gambler's Hand Size is smaller than the Maximum Hand Size plus the number of Offices e holds. For the purposes of this Rule, the Speakership is considered an office. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4674 (OscarMeyr), 13 April 2005 text: I. Possession Cards may be possessed by Gamblers. All Players are Gamblers. If at any time a Card is not possessed by a Gambler, it immediately and automatically returns to the possession of The Deck. The Gambler that possesses a Card is that Card's Holder and Holds that Card. All Cards possessed by a particular Gambler are collectively referred to as that Gambler's Hand. A Gambler's Hand Size is the number of Cards in eir Hand plus one for each Pending Draw for that Gambler. II. Definitions The Rules may define a Class of Card by specifying a Caption, a Quota, zero or more Elements, and zero or more Exploits. All Cards of the same Class shall be identical and fungible. Each individual instance of a Card shall be considered to be a Copy of that Class of Card. (a) The Caption shall be the name of a particular Class of Cards. No two Classes of Cards shall have the same Caption. (b) The Quota shall be a non-negative integer. If at any time fewer Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall create a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck. If at any time more Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall destroy a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck, unless no such Copies exist, in which case the Deckmastor shall destroy a random Copy. (c) The Rules may define Elements for Cards. Each Element shall have a name and a description. Any Card possessing the Element of that name shall behave according to the description associated with that Element. An Element not defined in the Rules has no effect. (d) An Exploit is an action that the Holder of that Card (and only the Holder of that Card) may take if and only if e meets the requirements and/or pays the costs outlined in that Exploit. Any reference to "you," "your" or a similar pronoun in the text of an Exploit refers to the Holder of that Card. Taking an action described in an Exploit is known as Playing the Card. Unless a Rule says otherwise, a Card is automatically transferred to The Deck immediately after being Played. III. Actions No action involving Cards may be simultaneous with any other action. No such action may be performed more than once simultaneously. If any attempt is made to perform more than one such action in such a way that the order of said actions is unclear, all such actions fail. (a) Unless restricted from doing so by the rules, any Gambler possessing a Card may transfer that Card to any other Gambler by announcing which Card is to be transferred and the Gambler it shall be transferred to. All such transfers take place at the time they are announced. Discarding a Card is synonymous with transfering said Card to The Deck. (b) Drawing a Card and Drawing from The Deck are synonymous. When a Gambler Draws a Card, the Deckmastor shall be required to randomly select one Card from among those currently in The Deck's Hand and transfer it to that Gambler as soon as possible. Until this transfer takes place, that Gambler is said to have one Pending Draw for each such transfer the Deckmastor is required to make, but has not yet made. A Gambler whose Hand Size is smaller than the maximum Hand Size, plus the number of Offices e holds, plus one if e is Speaker, may draw a card from The Deck. The fee for this action is a number of Kudos equal to the number of times during the current month e has previously drawn a card in this manner. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4694 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: I. Possession Cards may be possessed by Gamblers. All Players are Gamblers. If at any time a Card is not possessed by a Gambler, it immediately and automatically returns to the possession of The Deck. The Gambler that possesses a Card is that Card's Holder and Holds that Card. All Cards possessed by a particular Gambler are collectively referred to as that Gambler's Hand. A Gambler's Hand Size is the number of Cards in eir Hand plus one for each Pending Draw for that Gambler. II. Definitions The Rules may define a Class of Card by specifying a Caption, a Quota, zero or more Elements, and zero or more Exploits. All Cards of the same Class shall be identical and fungible. Each individual instance of a Card shall be considered to be a Copy of that Class of Card. (a) The Caption shall be the name of a particular Class of Cards. No two Classes of Cards shall have the same Caption. (b) The Quota shall be a non-negative integer. If at any time fewer Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall create a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck. If at any time more Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall destroy a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck, unless no such Copies exist, in which case the Deckmastor shall destroy a random Copy. (c) The Rules may define Elements for Cards. Each Element shall have a name and a description. Any Card possessing the Element of that name shall behave according to the description associated with that Element. An Element not defined in the Rules has no effect. (d) An Exploit is an action that the Holder of that Card (and only the Holder of that Card) may take if and only if e meets the requirements and/or pays the costs outlined in that Exploit. Any reference to "you," "your" or a similar pronoun in the text of an Exploit refers to the Holder of that Card. Taking an action described in an Exploit is known as Playing the Card. Unless a Rule says otherwise, a Card is automatically transferred to the Discard Pile immediately after being Played. III. Actions No action involving Cards may be simultaneous with any other action. No such action may be performed more than once simultaneously. If any attempt is made to perform more than one such action in such a way that the order of said actions is unclear, all such actions fail. (a) Unless restricted from doing so by the rules, any Gambler possessing a Card may transfer that Card to any other Gambler by announcing which Card is to be transferred and the Gambler it shall be transferred to. All such transfers take place at the time they are announced. If a Gambler transfers a card to the Deck, it is instead transferred to the discard pile, unless the transfer is made as part of the Deckmastor's required duties. Discarding a Card is synonymous with transfering said Card to the Discard Pile. (b) Drawing a Card and Drawing from The Deck are synonymous. When a Gambler Draws a Card, the Deckmastor shall be required to randomly select one Card from among those currently in The Deck's Hand and transfer it to that Gambler as soon as possible. Until this transfer takes place, that Gambler is said to have one Pending Draw for each such transfer the Deckmastor is required to make, but has not yet made. If, at any time, the number of pending draws for all gamblers is greater than the number of cards in the Deck, then the Deckmastor shall transfer all of the cards in the Discard Pile to the Deck before dealing any cards. This transfer is known as a Reshuffle and is performed as a single action. A Gambler whose Hand Size is smaller than the maximum Hand Size, plus the number of Offices e holds, plus one if e is Speaker, may draw a card from The Deck. The fee for this action is a number of Kudos equal to the number of times during the current month e has previously drawn a card in this manner. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4733 (root), 5 May 2005 text: I. Possession Cards may be possessed by Gamblers. All Players are Gamblers. If at any time a Card is not possessed by a Gambler, it immediately and automatically returns to the possession of The Deck. The Gambler that possesses a Card is that Card's Holder and Holds that Card. All Cards possessed by a particular Gambler are collectively referred to as that Gambler's Hand. A Gambler's Hand Size is the number of Cards in eir Hand plus one for each Pending Draw for that Gambler. II. Definitions The Rules may define a Class of Card by specifying a Caption, a Quota, zero or more Elements, and zero or more Exploits. All Cards of the same Class shall be identical and fungible. Each individual instance of a Card shall be considered to be a Copy of that Class of Card. (a) The Caption shall be the name of a particular Class of Cards. No two Classes of Cards shall have the same Caption. (b) The Quota shall be a non-negative integer. If at any time fewer Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall create a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck. If at any time more Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall destroy a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck, unless no such Copies exist, in which case the Deckmastor shall destroy a random Copy. (c) The Rules may define Elements for Cards. Each Element shall have a name and a description. Any Card possessing the Element of that name shall behave according to the description associated with that Element. An Element not defined in the Rules has no effect. (d) An Exploit is an action that the Holder of that Card (and only the Holder of that Card) may take if and only if e clearly indicates the card whose Exploit e is performing and e meets the requirements and/or pays the costs outlined in that Exploit. Any reference to "you," "your" or a similar pronoun in the text of an Exploit refers to the Holder of that Card. Taking an action described in an Exploit is known as Playing the Card. Unless a Rule says otherwise, a Card is automatically transferred to the Discard Pile immediately after being Played. III. Actions No action involving Cards may be simultaneous with any other action. No such action may be performed more than once simultaneously. If any attempt is made to perform more than one such action in such a way that the order of said actions is unclear, all such actions fail. (a) Unless restricted from doing so by the rules, any Gambler possessing a Card may transfer that Card to any other Gambler by announcing which Card is to be transferred and the Gambler it shall be transferred to. All such transfers take place at the time they are announced. If a Gambler transfers a card to the Deck, it is instead transferred to the discard pile, unless the transfer is made as part of the Deckmastor's required duties. Discarding a Card is synonymous with transfering said Card to the Discard Pile. (b) Drawing a Card and Drawing from The Deck are synonymous. When a Gambler Draws a Card, the Deckmastor shall be required to randomly select one Card from among those currently in The Deck's Hand and transfer it to that Gambler as soon as possible. Until this transfer takes place, that Gambler is said to have one Pending Draw for each such transfer the Deckmastor is required to make, but has not yet made. If, at any time, the number of pending draws for all gamblers is greater than the number of cards in the Deck, then the Deckmastor shall transfer all of the cards in the Discard Pile to the Deck before dealing any cards. This transfer is known as a Reshuffle and is performed as a single action. A Gambler whose Hand Size is smaller than the maximum Hand Size, plus the number of Offices e holds, plus one if e is Speaker, may draw a card from The Deck. The fee for this action is a number of Kudos equal to the number of times during the current month e has previously drawn a card in this manner. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4739 (root), 5 May 2005 text: I. Possession Cards may be possessed by Gamblers. All Players are Gamblers. If at any time a Card is not possessed by a Gambler, it immediately and automatically returns to the possession of The Deck. The Gambler that possesses a Card is that Card's Holder and Holds that Card. All Cards possessed by a particular Gambler are collectively referred to as that Gambler's Hand. A Gambler's Hand Size is the number of Cards in eir Hand plus one for each Pending Draw for that Gambler. II. Definitions The Rules may define a Class of Card by specifying a Caption, a Quota, zero or more Elements, and zero or more Exploits. All Cards of the same Class shall be identical and fungible. Each individual instance of a Card shall be considered to be a Copy of that Class of Card. (a) The Caption shall be the name of a particular Class of Cards. No two Classes of Cards shall have the same Caption. (b) The Quota shall be a non-negative integer. If at any time fewer Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall create a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck. If at any time more Copies of a Class of Cards exist than its Quota, then the Deckmastor shall destroy a Copy of that Card in the possession of The Deck, unless no such Copies exist, in which case the Deckmastor shall destroy a random Copy. (c) The Rules may define Elements for Cards. Each Element shall have a name and a description. Any Card possessing the Element of that name shall behave according to the description associated with that Element. An Element not defined in the Rules has no effect. (d) An Exploit is an action that the Holder of that Card (and only the Holder of that Card) may take if and only if e clearly indicates the card whose Exploit e is performing and e meets the requirements and/or pays the costs outlined in that Exploit. Any reference to "you," "your" or a similar pronoun in the text of an Exploit refers to the Holder of that Card. Taking an action described in an Exploit is known as Playing the Card. Unless a Rule says otherwise, a Card is automatically transferred to the Discard Pile immediately after being Played. III. Actions No action involving Cards may be simultaneous with any other action. No such action may be performed more than once simultaneously. If any attempt is made to perform more than one such action in such a way that the order of said actions is unclear, all such actions fail. (a) Unless restricted from doing so by the rules, any Gambler possessing a Card may transfer that Card to any other Gambler by announcing which Card is to be transferred and the Gambler it shall be transferred to. All such transfers take place at the time they are announced. If a Gambler transfers a card to the Deck, it is instead transferred to the discard pile, unless the transfer is made as part of the Deckmastor's required duties. Discarding a Card is synonymous with transfering said Card to the Discard Pile. (b) Drawing a Card and Drawing from The Deck are synonymous. When a Gambler Draws a Card, the Deckmastor shall be required to randomly select one Card from among those currently in The Deck's Hand and transfer it to that Gambler as soon as possible. Until this transfer takes place, that Gambler is said to have one Pending Draw for each such transfer the Deckmastor is required to make, but has not yet made. Whenever a player makes a true announcement that the number of pending draws for all gamblers is greater than the number of cards in the Deck, or that there are no cards in the Deck, then the Deckmastor shall transfer all of the cards in the Discard Pile to the Deck before dealing any cards. This transfer is known as a Reshuffle and is performed as a single action. A Gambler whose Hand Size is smaller than the maximum Hand Size, plus the number of Offices e holds, plus one if e is Speaker, may draw a card from The Deck. The fee for this action is a number of Kudos equal to the number of times during the current month e has previously drawn a card in this manner. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. history: Amended(???) by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: I. Possession Cards may be possessed by Gamblers. All Players are Gamblers. If at any time a Card is not possessed by a Gambler, it immediately and automatically returns to the possession of The Deck. The Gambler that possesses a Card is that Card's Holder and Holds that Card. All Cards possessed by a particular Gambler are collectively referred to as that Gambler's Hand. A Gambler's Hand Size is the number of Cards in eir Hand plus one for each Pending Draw for that Gambler. II. Actions No action involving Cards may be simultaneous with any other action. No such action may be performed more than once simultaneously. If any attempt is made to perform more than one such action in such a way that the order of said actions is unclear, all such actions fail. (a) Unless restricted from doing so by the rules, any Gambler possessing a Card may transfer that Card to any other Gambler by announcing which Card is to be transferred and the Gambler it shall be transferred to. All such transfers take place at the time they are announced. If a Gambler transfers a card to the Deck, it is instead transferred to the discard pile, unless the transfer is made as part of the Deckmastor's required duties. Discarding a Card is synonymous with transfering said Card to the Discard Pile. (b) Drawing a Card and Drawing from The Deck are synonymous. When a Gambler Draws a Card, the Deckmastor shall be required to randomly select one Card from among those currently in The Deck's Hand and transfer it to that Gambler as soon as possible. Until this transfer takes place, that Gambler is said to have one Pending Draw for each such transfer the Deckmastor is required to make, but has not yet made. Whenever a player makes a true announcement that the number of pending draws for all gamblers is greater than the number of cards in the Deck, or that there are no cards in the Deck, then the Deckmastor shall transfer all of the cards in the Discard Pile to the Deck before dealing any cards. This transfer is known as a Reshuffle and is performed as a single action. A Gambler whose Hand Size is smaller than the maximum Hand Size, plus the number of Offices e holds, plus one if e is Speaker, may draw a card from The Deck. The fee for this action is a number of Kudos equal to the number of times during the current month e has previously drawn a card in this manner. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 text: I. Possession Cards may be possessed by Gamblers. All Players are Gamblers. If at any time a Card is not possessed by a Gambler, it immediately and automatically returns to the possession of The Deck. The Gambler that possesses a Card is that Card's Holder and Holds that Card. All Cards possessed by a particular Gambler are collectively referred to as that Gambler's Hand. A Gambler's Hand Size is the number of Cards in eir Hand plus one for each Pending Draw for that Gambler. II. Actions No action involving Cards may be simultaneous with any other action. No such action may be performed more than once simultaneously. If any attempt is made to perform more than one such action in such a way that the order of said actions is unclear, all such actions fail. (a) Unless restricted from doing so by the rules, any Gambler possessing a Card may transfer that Card to any other Gambler by announcing which Card is to be transferred and the Gambler it shall be transferred to. All such transfers take place at the time they are announced. If a Gambler transfers a card to the Deck, it is instead transferred to the discard pile, unless the transfer is made as part of the Deckmastor's required duties. Discarding a Card is synonymous with transferring said Card to the Discard Pile. (b) Drawing a Card and Drawing from The Deck are synonymous. When a Gambler Draws a Card, the Deckmastor shall be required to randomly select one Card from among those currently in The Deck's Hand and transfer it to that Gambler as soon as possible. Until this transfer takes place, that Gambler is said to have one Pending Draw for each such transfer the Deckmastor is required to make, but has not yet made. Whenever a player makes a true announcement that the number of pending draws for all gamblers is greater than the number of cards in the Deck, or that there are no cards in the Deck, then the Deckmastor shall transfer all of the cards in the Discard Pile to the Deck before dealing any cards. This transfer is known as a Reshuffle and is performed as a single action. A Gambler whose Hand Size is smaller than the maximum Hand Size, plus the number of Offices e holds, plus one if e is Speaker, may draw a card from The Deck. The fee for this action is a number of Kudos equal to the number of times during the current month e has previously drawn a card in this manner. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4834 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: (a) A nonperson entity is a site if so designated by the rules or a cardbook. A site may have one or more Elements. (b) A gambler is a player or a site. All gamblers may hold cards. If a card is held by a nongambler, the Deckmastor shall transfer that card to the Deck as soon as possible. A gambler's hand is the collection of cards held by that gambler. A gambler's hand size is the size of this collection, plus one for each pending draw for that gambler. (c) When a card must be created or destroyed, the Deckmastor shall be empowered to create or destroy that card, as appropriate, and must do so as soon as possible. The Deckmastor creates or destroys a card by announcement, specifying as appropriate its holder or its former holder. Cards can be neither created nor destroyed otherwise. Whenever the quota for a class of cards exceeds the number of existing copies of that card, a copy of that card must be created. The copy must be created in the deck's hand unless otherwise specified. Whenever the number of existing copies of a card exceeds the quota for its class, if the deck holds a copy of that card, a copy held by the deck must be destroyed, and if the deck does not, then a random copy of the card must be destroyed. (d) If a card would be transferred to the deck or the table, and the transfer is not performed automatically, as part of the Deckmastor's duties, or as the result of a card play, it is discarded instead. When a card is otherwise transferred from one gambler to another, the former gambler shall cease to hold the card and the latter gambler shall simultaneously come to hold the card. Discarding a card is synonymous with transferring it to the discard pile. Dealing a card to a gambler is synonymous with selecting a random card from the deck and transferring it from the deck to that gambler. A gambler may transfer a card e holds to another gambler by announcement, specifying the card to transfer and, if not discarding it, the gambler to receive the card. (e) A nonsite gambler whose hand size is smaller than the maximum hand size, plus the number of offices e holds, may draw a card for a fee equal to the number of times during the current month e has previously drawn a card in this manner. (f) When a gambler draws a card, e gains a pending draw. As soon as possible afterward, the Deckmastor shall deal a card to that gambler. When e does so, the draw is no longer pending. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. As soon as possible after a player correctly announces that the sum of the number of pending draws for each gambler is greater than the number of cards in the deck, or that there are no cards in the deck, then the Deckmastor shall reshuffle the deck. Whenever the deck is reshuffled, all cards in the discard pile are automatically transferred to the deck. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: (a) A nonperson entity is a site if so designated by the rules or a cardbook. A site may have one or more Elements. (b) A gambler is a player or a site. All gamblers may hold cards. If a card is held by a nongambler, the Deckmastor shall transfer that card to the Deck as soon as possible. A gambler's hand is the collection of cards held by that gambler. A gambler's hand size is the size of this collection, plus one for each free pending draw for that gambler. (c) When a card must be created or destroyed, the Deckmastor shall be empowered to create or destroy that card, as appropriate, and must do so as soon as possible. The Deckmastor creates or destroys a card by announcement, specifying as appropriate its holder or its former holder. Cards can be neither created nor destroyed otherwise. Whenever the quota for a class of cards exceeds the number of existing copies of that card, a copy of that card must be created. The copy must be created in the deck's hand unless otherwise specified. Whenever the number of existing copies of a card exceeds the quota for its class, if the deck holds a copy of that card, a copy held by the deck must be destroyed, and if the deck does not, then a random copy of the card must be destroyed. (d) If a card would be transferred to the deck or the table, and the transfer is not performed automatically, as part of the Deckmastor's duties, or as the result of a card play, it is discarded instead. When a card is otherwise transferred from one gambler to another, the former gambler shall cease to hold the card and the latter gambler shall simultaneously come to hold the card. Discarding a card is synonymous with transferring it to the discard pile. Dealing a card to a gambler is synonymous with selecting a random card from the deck and transferring it from the deck to that gambler. A gambler may transfer a card e holds to another gambler by announcement, specifying the card to transfer and, if not discarding it, the gambler to receive the card. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. As soon as possible after a player correctly announces that the sum of the number of pending draws for each gambler is greater than the number of cards in the deck, or that there are no cards in the deck, then the Deckmastor shall reshuffle the deck. Whenever the deck is reshuffled, all cards in the discard pile are automatically transferred to the deck. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 4846 (Goethe), 1 January 2006 text: (a) A nonperson entity is a site if so designated by the rules or a cardbook. A site may have one or more Elements. (b) A gambler is a player or a site. All gamblers may hold cards. If a card is held by a nongambler, the Deckmastor shall transfer that card to the Deck as soon as possible. A gambler's hand is the collection of cards held by that gambler. A gambler's hand size is the size of this collection. (c) When a card must be created or destroyed, the Deckmastor shall be empowered to create or destroy that card, as appropriate, and must do so as soon as possible. The Deckmastor creates or destroys a card by announcement, specifying as appropriate its holder or its former holder. Cards can be neither created nor destroyed otherwise. Whenever the quota for a class of cards exceeds the number of existing copies of that card, a copy of that card must be created. The copy must be created in the deck's hand unless otherwise specified. Whenever the number of existing copies of a card exceeds the quota for its class, if the deck holds a copy of that card, a copy held by the deck must be destroyed, and if the deck does not, then a random copy of the card must be destroyed. (d) If a card would be transferred to the deck or the table, and the transfer is not performed automatically, as part of the Deckmastor's duties, or as the result of a card play, it is discarded instead. When a card is otherwise transferred from one gambler to another, the former gambler shall cease to hold the card and the latter gambler shall simultaneously come to hold the card. Discarding a card is synonymous with transferring it to the discard pile. Dealing a card to a gambler is synonymous with selecting a random card from the deck and transferring it from the deck to that gambler. A gambler may transfer a card e holds to another gambler by announcement, specifying the card to transfer and, if not discarding it, the gambler to receive the card. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. As soon as possible after a player correctly announces that the sum of the number of pending draws for each gambler is greater than the number of cards in the deck, or that there are no cards in the deck, then the Deckmastor shall reshuffle the deck. Whenever the deck is reshuffled, all cards in the discard pile are automatically transferred to the deck. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 4851 (Murphy), 18 March 2006 text: (a) A nonperson entity is a site if so designated by the rules or a cardbook. A site may have one or more Elements. (b) A gambler is a player or a site. All gamblers may hold cards. If a card is held by a nongambler, the Deckmastor shall transfer that card to the Deck as soon as possible. A gambler's hand is the collection of cards held by that gambler. A gambler's hand size is the size of this collection. (c) When a card must be created or destroyed, the Deckmastor shall be empowered to create or destroy that card, as appropriate, and must do so as soon as possible. The Deckmastor creates or destroys a card by announcement, specifying as appropriate its holder or its former holder. Cards can be neither created nor destroyed otherwise. Whenever the quota for a class of cards exceeds the number of existing copies of that card, a copy of that card must be created. The copy must be created in the deck's hand unless otherwise specified. Whenever the number of existing copies of a card exceeds the quota for its class, if the deck holds a copy of that card, a copy held by the deck must be destroyed, and if the deck does not, then a random copy of the card must be destroyed. (d) If a card would be transferred to the deck or the table, and the transfer is not performed automatically, as part of the Deckmastor's duties, or as the result of a card play, it is discarded instead. When a card is otherwise transferred from one gambler to another, the former gambler shall cease to hold the card and the latter gambler shall simultaneously come to hold the card. Discarding a card is synonymous with transferring it to the discard pile. Dealing a card to a gambler is synonymous with selecting a random card from the deck and transferring it from the deck to that gambler. A gambler may transfer a card e holds to another gambler by announcement, specifying the card to transfer and, if not discarding it, the gambler to receive the card. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. As soon as possible after a player correctly announces that there are no cards in the deck, then the Deckmastor shall reshuffle the deck. Whenever the deck is reshuffled, all cards in the discard pile are automatically transferred to the deck. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 4859 (root), 22 May 2006 text: (a) A nonperson entity is a site if so designated by the rules or a cardbook. A site may have one or more Elements. (b) A gambler is a player or a site. All gamblers may hold cards. If a card is held by a nongambler, the Deckmastor shall transfer that card to the Deck as soon as possible. A gambler's hand is the collection of cards held by that gambler. A gambler's hand size is the size of this collection. (c) When a card must be created or destroyed, the Deckmastor shall be empowered to create or destroy that card, as appropriate, and must do so as soon as possible. The Deckmastor creates or destroys a card by announcement, specifying as appropriate its holder or its former holder. Cards can be neither created nor destroyed otherwise. Whenever the quota for a class of cards exceeds the number of existing copies of that card, a copy of that card must be created. The copy must be created in the deck's hand unless otherwise specified. Whenever the number of existing copies of a card exceeds the quota for its class, if the deck holds a copy of that card, a copy held by the deck must be destroyed, and if the deck does not, then a random copy of the card must be destroyed. (d) If a card would be transferred to the deck or the table, and the transfer is not performed automatically, as part of the Deckmastor's duties, or as the result of a card play, it is discarded instead. When a card or chip is otherwise transferred from one gambler to another, the former gambler shall cease to hold it and the latter gambler shall simultaneously come to hold it. Discarding a card is synonymous with transferring it to the discard pile. Dealing a card to a gambler is synonymous with selecting a random card from the deck and transferring it from the deck to that gambler. A gambler may transfer a card e holds to another gambler by announcement, specifying the card to transfer and, if not discarding it, the gambler to receive the card. If the Deckmastor errs, in good faith, in selecting a particular card to deal, and that error does not greatly change the probability of selecting that card, that deal shall be allowed to stand. As soon as possible after a player correctly announces that there are no cards in the deck, then the Deckmastor shall reshuffle the deck. Whenever the deck is reshuffled, all cards in the discard pile are automatically transferred to the deck. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2069 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2070 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2070 by Proposal 4573 (Wes), 14 May 2004 text: The following Elements for Cards are defined: * Budgeted: The Quota for this Card is determined in the Deckmastor's budget. If the budget is undefined, or does not set the Quota for this Card, then the Quota shall be 3. * Handed [X], where X is a non-negative integer: When calculating Hand Size, this Card counts as X Cards. * Restricted [X], where X is a type of entity: Only entities considered to be an X may Activate any Exploit possessed by the Card. * Limited [X] [Y], where X is a type of entity and Y is a positive integer: For an entity not considered to be an X to Activate any Exploit possessed by the Card requires em to pay a Fee of Y. * Persistent: Playing this Card does not result in its being transferred to The Deck. * Bleed [X], where X is a non-negative integer: At the beginning of each week, the Holder of this card loses X Points. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: The following Elements for Cards are defined: * Budgeted: The Quota for this Card is determined in the Deckmastor's budget. If the budget is undefined, or does not set the Quota for this Card, then the Quota shall be 3. * Handed [X], where X is a non-negative integer: When calculating Hand Size, this Card counts as X Cards. * Restricted [X], where X is a type of entity: Only entities considered to be an X may Activate any Exploit possessed by the Card. * Limited [X] [Y], where X is a type of entity and Y is a positive integer: For an entity not considered to be an X to Activate any Exploit possessed by the Card requires em to pay a Fee of Y. * Persistent: Playing this Card does not result in its being transferred to The Deck. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4620 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: The following Elements for Cards are defined: * Budgeted: The Quota for this Card is determined in the Deckmastor's budget. If the budget is undefined, or does not set the Quota for this Card, then the Quota shall be 3. * Handed [X], where X is a non-negative integer: When calculating Hand Size, this Card counts as X Cards. * Restricted [X], where X is a type of entity: Only entities considered to be an X may Activate any Exploit possessed by the Card. * Limited [X] [Y], where X is a type of entity and Y is a positive integer: For an entity not considered to be an X to Activate any Exploit possessed by the Card requires em to pay a Fee of Y. * Persistent: Playing this Card does not result in its being transferred to The Deck. * Delayed[N]: You may not play this card if you have played a copy of this card in the past N times 24 hours. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4631 (root), 19 December 2004 text: The following Elements for Cards are defined: * Budgeted: The Quota for this Card is determined in the Deckmastor's budget. If the budget is undefined, or does not set the Quota for this Card, then the Quota shall be 3. * Handed [X], where X is a non-negative integer: When calculating Hand Size, this Card counts as X Cards. * Restricted [X], where X is a type of entity: Only entities considered to be an X may Activate any Exploit possessed by the Card. * Limited [X] [Y], where X is a type of entity and Y is a positive integer: For an entity not considered to be an X to Activate any Exploit possessed by the Card requires em to pay a Fee of Y. * Persistent: Playing this Card does not result in its being transferred to The Deck. * Delayed[N]: You may not play this card if you have played a copy of this card in the past N times 24 hours. * Powered [X], where X is a positive integer: This Card has a Power of X. To Activate any Exploit possessed by this Card, a Fee of X - 1 must be paid in addition to any other Fees required to Activate that Exploit, unless that Exploit explicitly specifies otherwise. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4678 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: The following Elements for Cards are defined: * Budgeted: The Quota for this Card is determined in the Deckmastor's budget. If the budget is undefined, or does not set the Quota for this Card, then the Quota shall be 3. * Handed [X], where X is a non-negative integer: When calculating Hand Size, this Card counts as X Cards. * Restricted [X], where X is a type of entity: Only entities considered to be an X may Activate any Exploit possessed by the Card. * Limited [X] [Y], where X is a type of entity and Y is a positive integer: For an entity not considered to be an X to Activate any Exploit possessed by the Card requires em to pay a Fee of Y. * Persistent: Playing this Card does not result in its being transferred to The Deck. * Delayed[N]: You may not play this card if you have played a copy of this card in the past N times 24 hours. * Asleep[N]: No one may play a copy of this card if anyone has played a copy of this card in the past N times 24 hours. * Powered [X], where X is a positive integer: This Card has a Power of X. To Activate any Exploit possessed by this Card, a Fee of X - 1 must be paid in addition to any other Fees required to Activate that Exploit, unless that Exploit explicitly specifies otherwise. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2070 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2071 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2071 by Proposal 4574 (Wes), 14 May 2004 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: ZOT! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [3] Exploit: For a Fee of X Kudos, an entity of your choice loses (X times 10) Points. If this would cause that entity to have fewer than zero Points, e shall instead have zero Points. * Caption: Albatross Flies Away Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Immaculate Players] [3] Exploit: You may revoke one of your own Albatrosses. * Caption: Point Mine Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: So long as you have not done so already during the current week, you may gain 1 Point. * Caption: Dud Elements: Budgeted, Persistent Exploit: You may wish in your own mind that you had a luckier Draw. * Caption: Dud Fusion Quota: 1 Elements: Bleed [2] Exploit: You may discard X Dud Cards to gain X times 20 Points. * Caption: Player Stasis Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: A Player of your choice is unable to Play a Card for the next 88 hours. * Caption: Hot Potato Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If that entity does not post to a Public Forum the phrase "Hot Potato" with 48 hours, they are guilty of the Class 1 Infraction of Dropping the Potato which you are authorized to Report. * Caption: It's a Surprise! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [2] Exploit: You may Draw two Cards without paying a Fee. history: Amended(???) by Proposal 4597 (Sir Toby), 4 July 2004 [Have 2 texts for this nominal revision, differing trivially.] text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: ZOT! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [3] Exploit: For a Fee of X Kudos, an entity of your choice loses (X times 10) Points. If this would cause that entity to have fewer than zero Points, e shall instead have zero Points. * Caption: Albatross Flies Away Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Immaculate Players] [3] Exploit: You may revoke one of your own Albatrosses. * Caption: Point Mine Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: So long as you have not done so already during the current week, you may gain 1 Point. * Caption: Dud Elements: Budgeted, Persistent Exploit: You may wish in your own mind that you had a luckier Draw. * Caption: Dud Fusion Quota: 1 Elements: Bleed [2] Exploit: You may discard X Dud Cards to gain X times 20 Points. * Caption: Player Stasis Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: A Player of your choice is unable to Play a Card for the next 88 hours. * Caption: Hot Potato Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If that entity does not post to a Public Forum the phrase "Hot Potato" within 48 hours, they are guilty of the Class 1 Infraction of Dropping the Potato which you are authorized to Report. * Caption: It's a Surprise! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [2] Exploit: You may Draw two Cards without paying a Fee. text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: ZOT! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [3] Exploit: For a Fee of X Kudos, an entity of your choice loses (X times 10) Points. If this would cause that entity to have fewer than zero Points, e shall instead have zero Points. * Caption: Albatross Flies Away Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Immaculate Players] [3] Exploit: You may revoke one of your own Albatrosses. * Caption: Point Mine Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: So long as you have not done so already during the current week, you may gain 1 Point. * Caption: Dud Elements: Budgeted, Persistent Exploit: You may wish in your own mind that you had a luckier Draw. * Caption: Dud Fusion Quota: 1 Elements: Bleed [2] Exploit: You may discard X Dud Cards to gain X times 20 Points. * Caption: Player Stasis Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: A Player of your choice is unable to Play a Card for the next 88 hours. * Caption: Hot Potato Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If that entity does not post to a Public Forum the phrase "Hot Potato" within 48 hours, they are guilty of the Class 1 Infraction of Dropping the Potato which you are authorized to Report. * Caption: It's a Surprise! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [2] Exploit: You may Draw two Cards without paying a Fee. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4607 (Goethe), 8 August 2004 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: ZOT! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [3] Exploit: For a Fee of X Kudos, an entity of your choice loses (X times 10) Points. If this would cause that entity to have fewer than zero Points, e shall instead have zero Points. * Caption: Albatross Flies Away Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Immaculate Players] [3] Exploit: You may revoke one of your own Albatrosses. * Caption: Point Mine Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: So long as you have not done so already during the current week, you may gain 1 Point. * Caption: Dud Elements: Budgeted, Persistent Exploit: You may wish in your own mind that you had a luckier Draw. * Caption: Dud Fusion Quota: 1 Elements: Bleed [2] Exploit: You may discard X Dud Cards to gain X times 20 Points. * Caption: Player Stasis Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: A Player of your choice is unable to Play a Card for the next 88 hours. * Caption: Hot Potato Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If that entity does not post to a Public Forum the phrase "Hot Potato" within 48 hours, they are guilty of the Class 1 Infraction of Dropping the Potato which you are authorized to Report. * Caption: It's a Surprise! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [2] Exploit: You may Draw two Cards without paying a Fee. * Caption: Discard and Draw Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: Discard X cards from your hand. For a fee of X Kudos, draw X cards. Do not include this card as one of the discarded cards. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4611 (OscarMeyr), 10 September 2004 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: ZOT! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [3] Exploit: For a Fee of X Kudos, an entity of your choice loses (X times 10) Points. If this would cause that entity to have fewer than zero Points, e shall instead have zero Points. * Caption: Albatross Flies Away Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Immaculate Players] [3] Exploit: You may revoke one of your own Albatrosses. * Caption: Point Mine Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: So long as you have not done so already during the current week, you may gain 1 Point. * Caption: Dud Elements: Budgeted, Persistent Exploit: You may wish in your own mind that you had a luckier Draw. * Caption: Dud Fusion Quota: 1 Elements: Bleed [2] Exploit: You may discard X Dud Cards to gain X times 20 Points. * Caption: Player Stasis Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: A Player of your choice is unable to Play a Card for the next 88 hours. * Caption: Hot Potato Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If that entity does not post to a Public Forum the phrase "Hot Potato" within 48 hours, they are guilty of the Class 1 Infraction of Dropping the Potato which you are authorized to Report. * Caption: It's a Surprise! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [2] Exploit: You may Draw two Cards without paying a Fee. * Caption: Discard and Draw Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: Discard X cards from your hand. For a fee of X Kudos, draw X cards. Do not include this card as one of the discarded cards. * Caption: Rebel Rabble Elements: Budgeted, Restricted [Rebellious] Exploit: For a fee of N Kudos, where N is the current number of Rebellious Players, increase the effective number of Rebellious Players by 1 for 10 days (which is one week on the Revolutionary Calendar). Count the day this Card is played as day #1. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Albatross Flies Away Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Immaculate Players] [3] Exploit: You may revoke one of your own Albatrosses. * Caption: Dud Elements: Budgeted, Persistent Exploit: You may wish in your own mind that you had a luckier Draw. * Caption: Player Stasis Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: A Player of your choice is unable to Play a Card for the next 88 hours. * Caption: Hot Potato Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If that entity does not post to a Public Forum the phrase "Hot Potato" within 48 hours, they are guilty of the Class 1 Infraction of Dropping the Potato which you are authorized to Report. * Caption: It's a Surprise! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [2] Exploit: You may Draw two Cards without paying a Fee. * Caption: Discard and Draw Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: Discard X cards from your hand. For a fee of X Kudos, draw X cards. Do not include this card as one of the discarded cards. * Caption: Rebel Rabble Elements: Budgeted, Restricted [Rebellious] Exploit: For a fee of N Kudos, where N is the current number of Rebellious Players, increase the effective number of Rebellious Players by 1 for 10 days (which is one week on the Revolutionary Calendar). Count the day this Card is played as day #1. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4627 (root), 4 December 2004 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Albatross Flies Away Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Immaculate Players] [3] Exploit: You may revoke one of your own Albatrosses. * Caption: Dud Elements: Budgeted, Persistent Exploit: You may wish in your own mind that you had a luckier Draw. * Caption: Player Stasis Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: A Player of your choice is unable to Play a Card for the next 88 hours. * Caption: Hot Potato Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If that entity does not post to a Public Forum the phrase "Hot Potato" within 48 hours, they are guilty of the Class 1 Infraction of Dropping the Potato which you are authorized to Report. * Caption: It's a Surprise! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [2], Delayed [3] Exploit: You may Draw two Cards without paying a Fee. * Caption: Discard and Draw Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: Discard X cards from your hand. For a fee of X Kudos, draw X cards. Do not include this card as one of the discarded cards. * Caption: Rebel Rabble Elements: Budgeted, Restricted [Rebellious] Exploit: For a fee of N Kudos, where N is the current number of Rebellious Players, increase the effective number of Rebellious Players by 1 for 10 days (which is one week on the Revolutionary Calendar). Count the day this Card is played as day #1. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4666 (Quazie), 9 April 2005 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Albatross Flies Away Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Immaculate Players] [3] Exploit: You may revoke one of your own Albatrosses. * Caption: Dud Elements: Budgeted, Persistent Exploit: You may wish in your own mind that you had a luckier Draw. * Caption: Player Stasis Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: A Player of your choice is unable to Play a Card for the next 88 hours. * Caption: Hot Potato Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If that entity does not post to a Public Forum the phrase "Hot Potato" within 48 hours, they are guilty of the Class 1 Infraction of Dropping the Potato which you are authorized to Report. * Caption: It's a Surprise! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [2], Delayed [3] Exploit: You may Draw two Cards without paying a Fee. * Caption: Discard and Draw Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: Discard X cards from your hand. For a fee of X Kudos, draw X cards. Do not include this card as one of the discarded cards. * Caption: Rebel Rabble Elements: Budgeted, Restricted [Rebellious] Exploit: For a fee of N Kudos, where N is the current number of Rebellious Players, increase the effective number of Rebellious Players by 1 for 10 days (which is one week on the Revolutionary Calendar). Count the day this Card is played as day #1. * Caption: Dud Development Quota: 2 Elements: None Exploit: You may discard X Dud Cards to draw X Cards for free. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4709 (Manu), 18 April 2005 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Albatross Flies Away Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Immaculate Players] [3] Exploit: You may revoke one of your own Albatrosses. * Caption: Dud Elements: Budgeted, Persistent Exploit: You may wish in your own mind that you had a luckier Draw. * Caption: Player Stasis Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: A Player of your choice is unable to Play a Card for the next 88 hours. * Caption: Hot Potato Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If that entity does not post to a Public Forum the phrase "Hot Potato" within 48 hours, they are guilty of the Class 1 Infraction of Dropping the Potato which you are authorized to Report. * Caption: It's a Surprise! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [2], Delayed [3] Exploit: You may Draw two Cards without paying a Fee. * Caption: Discard and Draw Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: Discard X cards from your hand. For a fee of X Kudos, draw X cards. Do not include this card as one of the discarded cards. * Caption: Rebel Rabble Elements: Budgeted, Restricted [Rebellious] Exploit: For a fee of N Kudos, where N is the current number of Rebellious Players, increase the effective number of Rebellious Players by 1 for 10 days (which is one week on the Revolutionary Calendar). Count the day this Card is played as day #1. * Caption: Dud Development Quota: 2 Elements: None Exploit: You may discard X Dud Cards to draw X Cards for free. * Caption: Police State Elements: Budgeted, Restricted [Abiding] Exploit: For a fee of N Kudos, where N is the current number of Rebellious Players, decrease the effective number of Rebellious Players by 1 for seven days. Count the day this Card is played as day #1. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4722 (Quazie), 25 April 2005 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Albatross Flies Away Quota: 1 Elements: Limited [Immaculate Players] [3] Exploit: You may revoke one of your own Albatrosses. * Caption: Dud Elements: Budgeted, Persistent Exploit: You may wish in your own mind that you had a luckier Draw. * Caption: Player Stasis Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: A Player of your choice is unable to Play a Card for the next 88 hours. * Caption: Hot Potato Quota: 1 Elements: Persistent Exploit: Transfer this Card to another entity. If that entity does not post to a Public Forum the phrase "Hot Potato" within 48 hours, they are guilty of the Class 1 Infraction of Dropping the Potato which you are authorized to Report. * Caption: It's a Surprise! Quota: 1 Elements: Handed [2], Delayed [3] Exploit: You may Draw two Cards without paying a Fee. * Caption: Discard and Draw Quota: 1 Elements: None Exploit: Discard X cards from your hand. For a fee of X Kudos, draw X cards. Do not include this card as one of the discarded cards. * Caption: Rebel Rabble Elements: Budgeted, Restricted [Rebellious] Exploit: For a fee of N Kudos, where N is the current number of Rebellious Players, increase the effective number of Rebellious Players by 1 for 10 days (which is one week on the Revolutionary Calendar). Count the day this Card is played as day #1. * Caption: Dud Development Quota: 2 Elements: None Exploit: You may discard X Dud Cards to draw X Cards for free. * Caption: Police State Elements: Budgeted, Restricted [Abiding] Exploit: For a fee of N Kudos, where N is the current number of Rebellious Players, decrease the effective number of Rebellious Players by 1 for seven days. Count the day this Card is played as day #1. * Caption: Loot the Dead Quota: 1 Exploit: You may indicate one silent player. All of eir cards are immediately discarded from their hand. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2071 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2072 history: Enacted as Power=3.01 Rule 2072 by Proposal 4582 (Murphy), 15 June 2004 text: Upon the creation of this rule, the Gamestate becomes what it would have been if Steve's Voting Power on Democratic Proposals had been continuously equal to 2 from October 1, 2003, at 00:00:00 UTC, to November 30, 2003, at 23:59:59 UTC. In particular, this ensures that the following proposals have been adopted and have taken effect: 4532 Clean Up Oligarchy Removal 4533 Bolshevik Revolution of 2003, with Glasnost 4534 Clean Up Oligarchy Removal, take 2 4540 Boon of Zeitgeist 4542 Pragmatize Scoring One second after the creation of this rule, this rule is repealed. history: Repealed as Power=3.01 Rule 2072 by Rule 2072, 15 June 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2073 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2073 by Proposal 4594 (Murphy), 4 July 2004 text: Whenever the Speaker is Electee to the Office of Assistant Director of Personnel, e is retired from that Office. The Assistant Director of Personnel cannot be Nominated for the Office of Speaker-Elect. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4613 (Murphy), 10 September 2004 text: Whenever the Speaker is Electee to the Office of Assistant Director of Personnel, e is retired from that Office. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4768 (root), 25 May 2005 text: Whenever the Speaker is Electee to the Office of Associate Director of Personnel, e is retired from that Office. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2073 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2074 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2074 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: Flux is a stuck switch for Gamblers with states Free and Frozen. Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, a Gambler with frozen flux may not play, discard, or transfer cards from eir hand, nor may the Deckmastor satisfy pending draws for that hand. The Deck's flux shall always be free, rules to the contrary nonwithstanding. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4660 (root), 29 March 2005 text: Flux is a stuck switch for Gamblers with states Free and Frozen. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a Gambler with frozen flux may not play, discard, or transfer cards from eir hand, nor may the Deckmastor satisfy pending draws for that hand. However, the Deckmastor may by public announcement discard cards from any Frozen Gambler as required by the Rules. The Deck's flux shall always be free, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2074 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2075 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2075 by Proposal 4614 (Goethe), 21 September 2004 text: The Deckmastor's Budget shall contain between one and three Winning Hands, each of which is a list of cards with a hand size at least two greater than the Maximum Hand Size. If a Gambler's Hand is identical to a winning hand at any particular moment, any Gambler has 72 hours from that moment to announce that a Gambler holds or has held a winning hand. If the announcement is false, the Deckmastor shall, as soon as possible, transfer 1 card at random from the announcing Gambler's Hand to the Deck. If the announcement is true, the holding Gambler Wins the Game, and is awarded the boon of Pokerface and the defined regular Patent Title Champion. Exactly one week after a true announcement, the Flux of all Gamblers except the Deck shall become frozen. The Deckmastor shall transfer random cards from the hands of each frozen gambler to the deck, until each frozen gambler has either (a) a hand size equal to or less than the Minimum hand size or (b) no cards. Then, the Deckmaster shall deal cards to the winner up to the maximum hand size. When these tasks have been peformed, the Flux of every Gambler shall become free. If no one has won the game in the last six months, then any Gambler may announce a Skunk, which shall trigger the effects of a true announcement of a win above, except that no boon shall be awarded nor shall extra winner's be dealt. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4626 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: The Deckmastor's Budget shall contain between one and three Winning Hands, each of which is a list of cards with a hand size at least two greater than the Maximum Hand Size. If a Gambler's Hand is identical to a winning hand at any particular moment, any Gambler has 72 hours from that moment to announce that a Gambler holds or has held a winning hand. If the announcement is false, the Deckmastor shall, as soon as possible, transfer 1 card at random from the announcing Gambler's Hand to the Deck. If the announcement is true, the holding Gambler Wins the Game, and is awarded the boon of Pokerface and the defined regular Patent Title Champion. Exactly one week after a true announcement, the Flux of all Gamblers except the Deck shall become frozen. The Deckmastor shall transfer random cards from the hands of each frozen gambler to the deck, until each frozen gambler has either (a) a hand size equal to or less than the Minimum hand size or (b) no cards. Then, the Deckmaster shall deal cards to the winner up to the maximum hand size. When these tasks have been peformed, the Flux of every Gambler shall become free. If no one has won the game in the last six months, then any Gambler may announce a Skunk, which shall trigger the effects of a true announcement of a win above, except that no boon shall be awarded nor shall extra winner's cards be dealt. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4644 (root), 12 March 2005 text: The Deckmastor's Budget shall contain between one and three Winning Hands, each of which is a list of cards with a hand size at least two greater than the Maximum Hand Size. If a Gambler's Hand is identical to a winning hand at any particular moment, any Gambler has 72 hours from that moment to announce that a Gambler holds or has held a winning hand. If the announcement is false, the Deckmastor shall, as soon as possible, transfer 1 card at random from the announcing Gambler's Hand to the Deck. If the announcement is true, the holding Gambler Wins the Game, and is awarded the boon of Pokerface and the defined regular Patent Title Champion. Exactly one week after a true announcement, the Flux of all Gamblers except the Deck shall become frozen. If no one has won the game in the last six months, then any Gambler may announce a Skunk, which shall trigger the effects of a true announcement of a win above, except that no boon shall be awarded. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4740 (Quazie), 5 May 2005 text: The Deckmastor's Budget shall contain between one and five Winning Hands, each of which is a list of cards with a hand size at least two greater than the Maximum Hand Size. If a Gambler's Hand is identical to a winning hand at any particular moment, any Gambler has 72 hours from that moment to announce that a Gambler holds or has held a winning hand. If the announcement is false, the Deckmastor shall, as soon as possible, transfer 1 card at random from the announcing Gambler's Hand to the Deck. If the announcement is true, the holding Gambler Wins the Game, and is awarded the boon of Pokerface and the defined regular Patent Title Champion. Exactly one week after a true announcement, the Flux of all Gamblers except the Deck shall become frozen. If no one has won the game in the last six months, then any Gambler may announce a Skunk, which shall trigger the effects of a true announcement of a win above, except that no boon shall be awarded. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4764 (root), 25 May 2005 text: The Deckmastor's Budget shall contain between one and five Winning Hands, each of which is a list of cards with a hand size at least two greater than the Maximum Hand Size. If a Gambler's Hand is identical to a winning hand at any particular moment, any Gambler has 72 hours from that moment to announce that a Gambler holds or has held a winning hand. If the announcement is false, the Deckmastor shall, as soon as possible, transfer 1 card at random from the announcing Gambler's Hand to the Deck. If the announcement is true, the holding Gambler Wins the Game, and is awarded the boon of Pokerface and the defined regular Patent Title Champion. Exactly one week after a true announcement, the Flux of all Gamblers except the Deck shall become frozen. If no true announcement of a winning hand or a Skunk has been made in the last six months, then any Gambler may announce a Skunk, which shall trigger the effects of a true announcement of a win above, except that no boon shall be awarded. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: The Deckmastor's Budget shall contain between one and five Winning Hands, each of which is a list of cards with a hand size at least two greater than the Maximum Hand Size. If a Gambler's Hand is identical to a winning hand at any particular moment, any Gambler has 72 hours from that moment to announce that a Gambler holds or has held a winning hand. If the announcement is false, the Deckmastor shall, as soon as possible, transfer 1 card at random from the announcing Gambler's Hand to the Deck. If the announcement is true, the holding Gambler Wins the Game, and is awarded the boon of Pokerface and the defined regular Patent Title Champion. Exactly one week after a true announcement, the Flux of all Gamblers except the Deck shall become frozen, and all heavy pending draws shall be deemed satisfied. If no true announcement of a winning hand or a Skunk has been made in the last six months, then any Gambler may announce a Skunk, which shall trigger the effects of a true announcement of a win above, except that no boon shall be awarded. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4838 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: The Scoring Instructions contained in cardbooks, interpreted collectively, may define a nonsite gambler as holding a winning hand at a particular moment. If so, any Gambler has 72 hours from that moment to announce that a Gambler holds or has held a winning hand. If the announcement is false, the Deckmastor shall, as soon as possible, transfer 1 card at random from the announcing Gambler's Hand to the Deck. If the announcement is true, the holding Gambler Wins the Game, and is awarded the boon of Pokerface and the defined regular Patent Title Champion. Exactly one week after a true announcement, the Flux of all Gamblers except the Deck shall become frozen, and all heavy pending draws shall be deemed satisfied. If no true announcement of a winning hand or a Skunk has been made in the last six months, then any Gambler may announce a Skunk, which shall trigger the effects of a true announcement of a win above, except that no boon shall be awarded. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4846 (Goethe), 1 January 2006 text: The Scoring Instructions contained in cardbooks, interpreted collectively, may define a nonsite gambler as holding a winning hand at a particular moment. If so, any Gambler has 72 hours from that moment to announce that a Gambler holds or has held a winning hand. If the announcement is false, the Deckmastor shall, as soon as possible, transfer 1 card at random from the announcing Gambler's Hand to the Deck. If the announcement is true, the holding Gambler Wins the Game, and is awarded the boon of Pokerface and the defined regular Patent Title Champion. All Players' hands become subject to a Hand Reduction to the Minimum Hand Size. After the winner's hand is so reduced, e gains a number of pending draws equal to the Maximum Hand Size. If no true announcement of a winning hand or a Skunk has been made in the last six months, then any Gambler may announce a Skunk, which shall trigger the effects of a true announcement of a win above, except that no boon shall be awarded nor extra winner's cards dealt. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4851 (Murphy), 18 March 2006 text: The Scoring Instructions contained in cardbooks, interpreted collectively, may define a nonsite gambler as holding a winning hand at a particular moment. If so, any Gambler has 72 hours from that moment to announce that a Gambler holds or has held a winning hand. If the announcement is false, the Deckmastor shall, as soon as possible, transfer 1 card at random from the announcing Gambler's Hand to the Deck. If the announcement is true, the holding Gambler Wins the Game, and is awarded the boon of Pokerface, the defined regular Patent Title Champion, and a blue chip (non-transferrable) marked with the number of red and white chips in the Pot (after which the Pot is emptied). All Players' hands become subject to a Hand Reduction to the Minimum Hand Size. After the winner's hand is so reduced, e gains a number of pending draws equal to the Maximum Hand Size. If no true announcement of a winning hand or a Skunk has been made in the last six months, then any Gambler may announce a Skunk, which shall trigger the effects of a true announcement of a win above, except that no boon shall be awarded nor extra winner's cards dealt. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 4856 (Goethe), 22 May 2006 text: The Scoring Instructions contained in cardbooks, interpreted collectively, may define a nonsite gambler as holding a winning hand. Any Player may allege that a nonsite gambler holds a winning hand. The allegation is considered true if any nonsite gambler holds a winning hand at the time of the allegation. If the allegation is true, the following events occur in order, immediately upon the allegation being made: (i) All nonsite gamblers holding winning hands are deemed to win the game simultaneously, and are awarded the defined regular Patent Title Champion, five white chips, and a blue chip (non-transferrable) marked with the number of red and white chips in the Pot. (ii) The pot is emptied. (iii) All Scoring Instructions in the Blueprints Cardbook are repealed. (iv) All Players' hands become subject to a Hand Reduction to the Minimum Hand Size. If the allegation is false, the Deckmastor shall, as soon as possible, discard 1 card at random from the hand of the Gambler who made the allegation. If no true allegation of a winning hand or a Skunk has been made in the last six months, then any Gambler may allege a Skunk, which, if true, triggers the effects of (iii) and (iv) above. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2075 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2076 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2076 by Proposal 4620 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: Caption: Your Turn Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A Player you name must play or discard a card in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-1 Infraction of Delay of Game, reportable by you. Caption: Discard Picking Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[4] Exploit: If a copy of a card was played or discarded in the past 72 hours, you may name it, and a copy of that card, if one is still in the deck, is automatically transferred from the Deck to your hand. Caption: Enforced Charity Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[3] Exploit: A Player you name must transfer a card of eir choice to you in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-2 Infraction of Greed, reportable by you. Caption: Drop your Weapon Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically Discarded, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Presto! Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[7] Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically transferred to your hand, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4678 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: Caption: Your Turn Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A Player you name must play or discard a card in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-1 Infraction of Delay of Game, reportable by you. Caption: Discard Picking Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[4] Exploit: If a copy of a card was played or discarded in the past 72 hours, you may name it, and a copy of that card, if one is still in the deck, is automatically transferred from the Deck to your hand. Caption: Enforced Charity Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[3] Exploit: A Player you name must transfer a card of eir choice to you in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-2 Infraction of Greed, reportable by you. Caption: Drop your Weapon Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically Discarded, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Presto! Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[7] Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically transferred to your hand, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Not Your Turn Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[2] Exploit: You may specify a card play that has occurred in the past 48 hours, and (1) that card shall be deemed to have not been played, and (2) the gambler who originally played that card may not play a copy of that card for the next 72 hours. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4694 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: Caption: Your Turn Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A Player you name must play or discard a card in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-1 Infraction of Delay of Game, reportable by you. Caption: Discard Picking Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[4] Exploit: If a copy of a card was played or discarded in the past 72 hours, you may name it, and a copy of that card, if one is still in the discard pile, is automatically transferred from the discard pile to your hand. Caption: Enforced Charity Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[3] Exploit: A Player you name must transfer a card of eir choice to you in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-2 Infraction of Greed, reportable by you. Caption: Drop your Weapon Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically Discarded, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Presto! Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[7] Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically transferred to your hand, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Not Your Turn Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[2] Exploit: You may specify a card play that has occurred in the past 48 hours, and (1) that card shall be deemed to have not been played, and (2) the gambler who originally played that card may not play a copy of that card for the next 72 hours. Caption: Reshuffle Quota: 3 Elements: Asleep[15] Exploit: The Deckmastor must Reshuffle before dealing any cards. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4714 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: The following classes of cards are defined: Caption: Your Turn Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A Player you name must play or discard a card in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-1 Infraction of Delay of Game, reportable by you. Caption: Discard Picking Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[4] Exploit: If a copy of a card was played or discarded in the past 72 hours, you may name it, and a copy of that card, if one is still in the discard pile, is automatically transferred from the discard pile to your hand. Caption: Enforced Charity Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[3] Exploit: A Player you name must transfer a card of eir choice to you in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-2 Infraction of Greed, reportable by you. Caption: Drop your Weapon Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically Discarded, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Presto! Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[7] Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically transferred to your hand, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Not Your Turn Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[2] Exploit: You may specify a card play that has occurred in the past 48 hours, and (1) that card shall be deemed to have not been played, and (2) the gambler who originally played that card may not play a copy of that card for the next 72 hours. Caption: Reshuffle Quota: 3 Elements: Asleep[15] Exploit: The Deckmastor must Reshuffle before dealing any cards. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4744 (Quazie, root), 5 May 2005 text: The following classes of cards are defined: Caption: Your Turn Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A Player you name must play or discard a card in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-1 Infraction of Delay of Game, reportable by you. Caption: Discard Picking Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[4] Exploit: If a copy of a card was played or discarded in the past 72 hours, you may name it, and a copy of that card, if one is still in the discard pile, is automatically transferred from the discard pile to your hand. Caption: Enforced Charity Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[3] Exploit: A Player you name must transfer a card of eir choice to you in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-2 Infraction of Greed, reportable by you. Caption: Drop your Weapon Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically Discarded, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Presto! Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[7] Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically transferred to your hand, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Not Your Turn Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[2] Exploit: You may specify a card play that has occurred in the past 48 hours, and (1) that card shall be deemed to have not been played, and (2) the gambler who originally played that card may not play a copy of that card for the next 72 hours. Caption: Reshuffle Quota: 3 Elements: Asleep[15] Exploit: You may perform a Reshuffle. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4799 (root), 15 June 2005 text: The following classes of cards are defined: Caption: Your Turn Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A Player you name must play or discard a card in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-1 Infraction of Delay of Game, reportable by you. Caption: Discard Picking Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[4] Exploit: If a copy of a card was played or discarded in the past 72 hours, you may name it, and a copy of that card, if one is still in the discard pile, is automatically transferred from the discard pile to your hand. Caption: Enforced Charity Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[3] Exploit: A Player you name must transfer a card of eir choice to you in the next 72 hours, or commit the Class-2 Infraction of Greed, reportable by you. Caption: Drop your Weapon Elements: Budgeted Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically Discarded, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Presto! Elements: Budgeted, Delayed[7] Exploit: A card of your choice, from the Gambler of your choice, is automatically transferred to your hand, provided that Gambler has a copy of that card. Caption: Reshuffle Quota: 3 Elements: Asleep[15] Exploit: You may perform a Reshuffle. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2076 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2077 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2077 by Proposal 4623 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Coalition Elements: Grafty, Budgeted Exploit: You may increase or decrease the Voting Potential of an indicated Player by N by paying a fee of N for yourself, or 2 times N for another Player. * Caption: Patronage Elements: Grafty, Budgeted Exploit: You may increase or decrease the Political Charge by N by paying a fee of 4 times N. If undefined elsewhere, the Political Charge is a positive integer, tracked by the Assessor, which begins at 4. * Caption: Policy Elements: Budgeted Exploit: You may sanitize a Proposal, as described elsewhere in the Rules. * Caption: Procedure Elements: Budgeted Exploit: You may abort and make undistributable any non-sane Proposal. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4663 (root), 9 April 2005 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Coalition Elements: Grafty, Budgeted Exploit: You may increase or decrease the Voting Potential of an indicated Player by N by paying a fee of N for yourself, or 2 times N for another Player. * Caption: Patronage Elements: Grafty, Budgeted, Powered [2] Exploit: You may increase or decrease the Political Charge by N by paying a fee of 4 times N. If undefined elsewhere, the Political Charge is a positive integer, tracked by the Assessor, which begins at 4. No fee required by the Powered [X] element need be paid to activate this exploit. * Caption: Policy Elements: Budgeted Exploit: You may sanitize a Proposal, as described elsewhere in the Rules. * Caption: Procedure Elements: Budgeted Exploit: You may abort and make undistributable any non-sane Proposal. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4675 (root), 13 April 2005 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4725 (root), 25 April 2005 text: The following Classes of Cards are defined: * Caption: Coalition Elements: Grafty, Budgeted Exploit: You may increase or decrease the Voting Potential of an indicated Player by N by paying a fee of N for yourself, or 2 times N for another Player. * Caption: Patronage Elements: Grafty, Budgeted, Powered [2] Exploit: You may increase or decrease the Political Charge by N by paying a fee of 4 times N. If undefined elsewhere, the Political Charge is a positive integer, tracked by the Assessor, which begins at 4. No fee required by the Powered [X] element need be paid to activate this exploit. * Caption: Policy Elements: Budgeted, Powered [2] Exploit: You may sanitize a Proposal, as described elsewhere in the Rules. * Caption: Procedure Elements: Budgeted Exploit: You may abort and make undistributable any non-sane Proposal. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2077 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2078 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2078 by Proposal 4624 (Goethe), 20 November 2004 text: Initiative is a stuck player switch, tracked by the Assessor, with values Gote and Sente. A Takeover Proposal is a proposal meeting these requirements: (a) It is labelled as a Takeover Proposal. (b) No Takeover Proposal has been submitted earlier in the same month. (c) It specifies a set of players (hereafter the Corporate Raiders) that is no larger than P/2 or smaller than P/3, where P is the number of active noisy players at the time of submission. Rules to the Contrary nonwithstanding, a Takeover Proposal is both Democratic and Sane. At the beginning of a Takeover Proposal's voting period, all players have their initiative flipped to Gote. At the end of a Takeover Proposal's voting period, all players have their initiative flipped as follows: (a) Adopted: All Corporate Raiders gain Sente. (b) Rejected: All other players gain Sente. (c) Failed quorum: No one gains Sente. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4691 (root), 18 April 2005 text: Initiative is a stuck player switch, tracked by the Assessor, with values Gote and Sente. A Takeover Proposal is a proposal meeting these requirements: (a) It is labelled as a Takeover Proposal. (b) No Takeover Proposal has been submitted earlier in the same month. (c) It specifies a set of players (hereafter the Corporate Raiders) that is no larger than P/2 or smaller than P/3, where P is the number of active noisy players at the time of submission. Rules to the Contrary nonwithstanding, a Takeover Proposal is both Democratic and Sane. At the beginning of a Takeover Proposal's voting period, the initiative of each player is set to Gote. At the end of a Takeover Proposal's voting period, the initiative of each player is set as follows: (a) Adopted: All Corporate Raiders gain Sente. (b) Rejected: All other players gain Sente. (c) Failed quorum: No one gains Sente. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4751 (The Goddess Eris), 5 May 2005 text: Initiative is a stuck player switch, tracked by the Assessor, with values Gote and Sente. A Takeover Proposal is a proposal meeting these requirements: (a) It is labelled as a Takeover Proposal. (b) No Takeover Proposal has been submitted earlier in the same month. (c) It specifies a set of players (hereafter the Corporate Raiders) that is no larger than P/2 or smaller than P/3, where P is the number of active noisy players at the time of submission. Rules to the Contrary nonwithstanding, a Takeover Proposal is both Democratic and Sane. Upon submission of a Takeover Proposal, all other Takeover Proposals become Undistributable and are removed from the Pool. At the beginning of a Takeover Proposal's voting period, the initiative of each player is set to Gote. At the end of a Takeover Proposal's voting period, the initiative of each player is set as follows: (a) Adopted: All Corporate Raiders gain Sente. (b) Rejected: All other players gain Sente. (c) Failed quorum: No one gains Sente. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2078 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2079 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2079 by Proposal 4630 (Goethe), 19 December 2004 text: The following card is defined: Caption: Chaos Apple Quota: 1 Elements: Handed[5], Delayed[7], Kallisti! Exploit: If this card has not been Played in the current quarter, then, as soon as possible after this card is played, the Deckmaster shall simultaneously transfer all cards from non-Deck hands to a temporary Gambler known as Fate. E shall then deal cards at random from Fate to each Gambler until each Gambler has the same number of cards as e had immediately before Fate took a hand. If, between the time this card is Played and the time Fate's cards are dealt, exactly a single Player publicly claims to be The Prettiest One, the Deckmastor shall transfer this card to em as soon as possible after Fate's cards are dealt. The Deckmastor is encouraged use Heisenberg's Law in dealing hands from Fate. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4703 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: The following card is defined: Caption: Chaos Apple Quota: 1 Elements: Handed[5], Delayed[7], Kallisti! Exploit: If this card has not been Played in the current quarter, then, as soon as possible after this card is played, the Deckmastor shall simultaneously transfer all cards from non-Deck hands to a temporary Gambler known as Fate. E shall then deal cards at random from Fate to each Gambler until each Gambler has the same number of cards as e had immediately before Fate took a hand. If, between the time this card is Played and the time Fate's cards are dealt, exactly a single Player publicly claims to be The Prettiest One, the Deckmastor shall transfer this card to em as soon as possible after Fate's cards are dealt. The Deckmastor is encouraged use Heisenberg's Law in dealing hands from Fate. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4729 (Quazie), 25 April 2005 text: The following classes of cards are defined: Caption: Chaos Apple Quota: 1 Elements: Handed[5], Delayed[7], Kallisti! Exploit: If this card has not been Played in the current quarter, then, as soon as possible after this card is played, the Deckmastor shall simultaneously transfer all cards from non-Deck hands to a temporary Gambler known as Fate. E shall then deal cards at random from Fate to each Gambler until each Gambler has the same number of cards as e had immediately before Fate took a hand. If, between the time this card is Played and the time Fate's cards are dealt, exactly a single Player publicly claims to be The Prettiest One, the Deckmastor shall transfer this card to em as soon as possible after Fate's cards are dealt. The Deckmastor is encouraged use Heisenberg's Law in dealing hands from Fate. Caption: Chaos Reborn Quota: 1 Elements: Handed[2], Kallisti! Exploit: If Chaos Apple has been Played in the current quarter, then, you may play Chaos Apple within five minutes of playing this card as if Chaos Apple did not have the words "If this card has not been Played in the current quarter" in its exploit. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4744 (Quazie, root), 5 May 2005 text: The following classes of cards are defined: Caption: Chaos Apple Quota: 1 Elements: Handed[5], Delayed[7], Kallisti! Exploit: If this card has not been played in the current quarter, then you may simultaneously transfer all cards that are not in the Deck or Discard Pile to a temporary Gambler known as Fate. As soon as possible after this card is played, the Deckmastor shall then deal cards at random from Fate to each Gambler until each Gambler has the same number of cards as e had immediately before Fate took a hand. If, between the time this card is Played and the time Fate's cards are dealt, exactly a single Player publicly claims to be The Prettiest One, the Deckmastor shall transfer this card to em as soon as possible after Fate's cards are dealt. The Deckmastor is encouraged use Heisenberg's Law in dealing hands from Fate. Caption: Chaos Reborn Quota: 1 Elements: Handed[2], Kallisti! Exploit: If Chaos Apple has been Played in the current quarter, then, you may play Chaos Apple within five minutes of playing this card as if Chaos Apple did not have the words "If this card has not been Played in the current quarter" in its exploit. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2079 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2080 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2080 by Proposal 4635 (OscarMeyr), 23 January 2005 text: When an Interested Proposal is adopted, the Proposer shall gain one pending draw, regardless of any applicable Hand Limit. When a Disinterested Proposal is adopted, the Proposer shall gain one pending draw, subject to any applicable Hand Limit. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4644 (root), 12 March 2005 text: If an Interested Proposal is adopted, the Proposer may draw from the deck by announcing the Proposal number while drawing, provided that e does so within a week after the proposal's adoption and that e has not already done so for the same proposal. If a Disinterested Proposal is adopted, the Proposer may draw from the deck by announcing the Proposal number while drawing; so long as the Proposer's Hand Size is smaller than the Maximum Hand Size plus the number of Offices e holds, the Proposer performs the draw within a week after the proposal's adoption, and the Proposer has not already done so for the same proposal. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4753 (Sherlock), 5 May 2005 text: If a Proposal is adopted, the Proposer may draw from the deck by announcing the Proposal number while drawing, provided that e does so within a week after the proposal's adoption and that e has not already done so for the same proposal. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4761 (root), 15 May 2005 text: If a Proposal is adopted, the Proposer may draw from the deck by announcing the Proposal number while drawing; so long as the Proposer's Hand Size is smaller than the Maximum Hand Size plus the number of Offices e holds, the Proposer performs the draw within a week after the proposal's adoption, and the Proposer has not already done so for the same proposal. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4834 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: Within a week after a proposal's adoption, if its proposer would be permitted to draw a card for a fee, then e may draw a card by announcement, specifying in eir announcement that proposal's number. E can only perform this action once for the adoption of that proposal. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: The maximum hand size for a Player is defined as the maximum hand size in the Deckmastor's Budget plus the number of Offices (including the Speakership) that the Player holds. Any Player may draw up to three heavy cards in a single month by announcement. If a Player draws a card without specifying the explicit circumstances allowing the draw, it shall be considered an attempt to draw one of these heavy cards. Any Player may draw one free card in a single month, by noting it is eir free draw for the month. Any Player may draw one heavy card for each Proposal e proposes that is adopted, by noting the Proposal's number. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4846 (Goethe), 1 January 2006 text: Any Player may draw up to three cards in a single month by announcement. Any Player may draw one card for each Proposal e proposes that is adopted, by noting the Proposal's number. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4851 (Murphy), 18 March 2006 text: At the beginning of each month, each player gains three white chips and one red chip. Upon the adoption of a proposal, the author gains one white chip. A player who gains a Boon gains a red chip. A player who gains an Albatross loses a chip. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2080 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2081 history: Enacted as Power=3.01 Rule 2081 by Proposal 4637 (Murphy), 19 February 2005 text: The gamestate hereby becomes what it would be if the following vote reports were accurate: * Fri, 03 Dec 2004 16:20:53 -0800 : Proposal 4627 * Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:48:23 -0800 : Proposals 4628 - 4630 * Sun, 09 Jan 2005 14:59:32 -0800 : Proposal 4633 * Sun, 23 Jan 2005 14:39:37 -0800 : Proposal 4635 One second later, this rule is repealed. history: Repealed as Power=3.01 Rule 2081 by Rule 2081, 19 February 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2082 history: Enacted as Power=2.01 Rule 2082 by Proposal 4641 (root), 6 March 2005 text: The game state hereby becomes what it would be if proposal 4623, "Vote Cards", had not been deprived of effect by Rule 1561, "Illegality of Bonus Clauses". One second after this Rule is created, it is repealed. history: Repealed as Power=2.01 Rule 2082 by Rule 2082, 6 March 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2083 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2083 by Proposal 4644 (root), 12 March 2005 text: As soon as possible after any gambler's hand becomes frozen, the Deckmastor shall perform the following actions in order: 1) Calculate and publicly announce the Card Tax for each frozen gambler. The Card Tax for a frozen gambler is equal to the hand size of that gambler less the minimum hand size. The Card Tax shall be calculated as of the moment the gambler's hand became frozen. 2) From every frozen gambler in turn, transfer cards selected at random from that gambler's hand to the Deck until eir hand size has been reduced by an amount not less than eir Card Tax or e has no cards remaining. 3) If the hands were frozen because of a win, deal cards to the winner until eir hand size has been increased by the maximum hand size less the minimum hand size, calculated as of the moment the winner's hand became frozen. 4) Publicly announce that the table is open for business. Upon publication of an announcement as in 4), the Flux of every gambler shall become free. If the Deckmastor makes a public announcement as in 4) when one or more gamblers are frozen but steps 1), 2), and 3) have not been completed, then the announcement is still valid, but the Deckmastor must complete steps 1), 2), and 3) as soon as possible. If the Deckmastor's error is not made in good faith, then e commits the Class 4 Crime of Stacking the Deck. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4846 (Goethe), 1 January 2006 text: The Rules may declare that a nonsite Gambler's hand is subject to a Hand Reduction. A particular hand reduction must have a maximum hand size associated with it; if none is defined, the Maximum Hand Size in the Deckmastor's budget is used. As soon as possible after a requirement for a reduction arises, the Deckmastor shall: (i) Satisfy all satisfiable pending draws for that gambler and announce a pending hand reduction; (ii) Wait at least four days, during which e may not satisfy pending draws for that gambler; (iii) Discard cards at random from that Gambler's hand until eir hand size is equal to or less than maximum associated with the reduction. (iv) If a gambler loses no cards during a reduction, and has not played, transferred or discarded a card since the last reduction, the Deckmastor shall discard one card at random from the gambler's hand (if it has any cards). If a dispute on the gambler's hand size or pending draws is raised and not resolved prior to (iii), above, the Deckmastor shall not perform (iii) for that hand until the dispute is resolved. If no dispute is raised prior to (iii) being performed, then the reduction shall stand regardless of subsequent disputes. However, a Judge in such a dispute may Order the Deckmastor to perform further card transfers to resolve such disputes. If the Deckmastor knowingly reduces a hand incorrectly, e commits the Class 4 Crime of Card Thievery. If more than one hand reduction is pending for the same hand, then the Deckmastor need only perform the reduction for the reduction with the lowest associated maximum; this shall satisfy all pending reductions. At the beginning of each month, each Player's hand becomes subject to a Hand Reduction to the maximum hand size in the Deckmastor's Budget plus the number of Offices (including the Speakership) that e holds. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4851 (Murphy), 18 March 2006 text: The Rules may declare that a nonsite Gambler's hand is subject to a Hand Reduction. A particular hand reduction must have a maximum hand size associated with it; if none is defined, the Maximum Hand Size in the Deckmastor's budget is used. As soon as possible after a requirement for a reduction arises, the Deckmastor shall: (i) Satisfy all requirements to deal cards to that gambler for cashed-in chips and announce a pending hand reduction; (ii) Wait at least four days, during which the gambler may not cash in any chips; (iii) Discard cards at random from that Gambler's hand until eir hand size is equal to or less than maximum associated with the reduction. (iv) If a gambler loses no cards during a reduction, and has not played, transferred or discarded a card since the last reduction, the Deckmastor shall discard one card at random from the gambler's hand (if it has any cards). If a dispute on the gambler's hand size or pending draws is raised and not resolved prior to (iii), above, the Deckmastor shall not perform (iii) for that hand until the dispute is resolved. If no dispute is raised prior to (iii) being performed, then the reduction shall stand regardless of subsequent disputes. However, a Judge in such a dispute may Order the Deckmastor to perform further card transfers to resolve such disputes. If the Deckmastor knowingly reduces a hand incorrectly, e commits the Class 4 Crime of Card Thievery. If more than one hand reduction is pending for the same hand, then the Deckmastor need only perform the reduction for the reduction with the lowest associated maximum; this shall satisfy all pending reductions. At the beginning of each month, each Player's hand becomes subject to a Hand Reduction to the maximum hand size in the Deckmastor's Budget plus the number of Offices (including the Speakership) that e holds. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4858 (Goethe), 22 May 2006 text: The Rules may declare that a nonsite Gambler's hand is subject to a Hand Reduction. A particular hand reduction must have a maximum hand size associated with it; if none is defined, the Maximum Hand Size in the Deckmastor's budget is used. As soon as possible after a requirement for a reduction arises, the Deckmastor shall: (i) Announce the pending hand reduction; (ii) Wait at least four days after the announcement; (iii) Discard cards at random from that Gambler's hand until eir hand size is equal to or less than maximum associated with the reduction. (iv) If a gambler loses no cards during a reduction, and has neither played nor transferred a card since the last reduction, the Deckmastor shall discard one card at random from the gambler's hand (if it has any cards). If a dispute on the gambler's hand size or pending draws is raised and not resolved prior to (iii), above, the Deckmastor shall not perform (iii) for that hand until the dispute is resolved. If no dispute is raised prior to (iii) being performed, then the reduction shall stand regardless of subsequent disputes. However, a Judge in such a dispute may Order the Deckmastor to perform further card transfers to resolve such disputes. If the Deckmastor knowingly reduces a hand incorrectly, e commits the Class 4 Crime of Card Thievery. If more than one hand reduction is pending for the same hand, then the Deckmastor need only perform the reduction for the reduction with the lowest associated maximum; this shall satisfy all pending reductions. At the beginning of each Quarter, every Player's hand becomes subject to a hand reduction to the maximum hand size in the Deckmastor's Budget plus the number of Offices (including the Speakership) that e holds. If at any time there are more unsatisfied pending draws then cards in the Deck and Discard Pile put together, the Deckmastor may announce a Shortage, with subjects every Player's hand to such a hand reduction. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2083 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2084 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2084 by Proposal 4647 (Quazie), 22 March 2005 text: * Caption: Greedy Bastard Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Gain one Kudo, but also gain the Albatross of Greed. * Caption: Charity Brings Happiness Elements: Budgeted Exploit: For a fee of one Kudo you may indicate any other player to gain one Kudo, as long as they have fewer Kudos than you do and is not yourself. Upon doing this you gain the boon of Charity. * Caption: Thieves in the Night Element: Grafty, Delayed[5] Exploit: Provided that fewer than half of all gamblers, besides the deck, have a 'Thieves in the Night' card in their hand, and the player you indicate does not have a 'Thieves in the Night' card in their hand, That player losses one Kudo and you gain one Kudo. For each of the aforementioned stipulations that is false upon the playing of this card, you gain the Albatross of Thief. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4705 (Sherlock), 18 April 2005 text: * Caption: Greedy Bastard Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Gain one Kudo, but also gain the Albatross of Greed. * Caption: Charity Brings Happiness Elements: Budgeted Exploit: For a fee of one Kudo you may indicate any other player to gain one Kudo, as long as they have fewer Kudos than you do and is not yourself. Upon doing this you gain the boon of Charity. * Caption: Thieves in the Night Element: Grafty, Delayed[5] Exploit: Provided that fewer than half of all Players have a Thieves in the Night card in their hand, and the player you indicate does not have a Thieves in the Night card in their hand, that player losses one Kudo and you gain one Kudo. For each of the aforementioned stipulations that is false upon the playing of this card, you gain the Albatross of Thief. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4711 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: * Caption: Greedy Bastard Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Gain one Kudo, but also gain the Albatross of Greed. * Caption: Charity Brings Happiness Elements: Budgeted Exploit: For a fee of one Kudo you may indicate any other player to gain one Kudo, as long as they have fewer Kudos than you do and is not yourself. Upon doing this you gain the boon of Charity. * Caption: Thieves in the Night Element: Grafty, Delayed[5] Exploit: Provided that fewer than half of all Players have a Thieves in the Night card in their hand, and the player you indicate does not have a Thieves in the Night card in their hand, that player losses one Kudo and you gain one Kudo. For each of the aforementioned stipulations that is false upon the playing of this card, you gain the Albatross of Thief. * Caption: Instant Gratification Elements: Restricted [Players with at least one Boon], Budgeted Exploit: Indicate one of your own Boons. You instantly lose that Boon and gain 1 Kudo. * Caption: Instant Punishment Elements: Restricted [Players with at least one Albatross], Budgeted Exploit: Indicate one of your own Albatrosses. You instantly lose that Albatross and Lose 1 Kudo. * Caption: Instant Millionaire Quota: 1 Exploit: Lose all of your Boons, but gain twice that number of Kudos. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4714 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: The following classes of cards are defined: * Caption: Greedy Bastard Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Gain one Kudo, but also gain the Albatross of Greed. * Caption: Charity Brings Happiness Elements: Budgeted Exploit: For a fee of one Kudo you may indicate any other player to gain one Kudo, as long as they have fewer Kudos than you do and is not yourself. Upon doing this you gain the boon of Charity. * Caption: Thieves in the Night Element: Grafty, Delayed[5] Exploit: Provided that fewer than half of all Players have a Thieves in the Night card in their hand, and the player you indicate does not have a Thieves in the Night card in their hand, that player losses one Kudo and you gain one Kudo. For each of the aforementioned stipulations that is false upon the playing of this card, you gain the Albatross of Thief. * Caption: Instant Gratification Elements: Restricted [Players with at least one Boon], Budgeted Exploit: Indicate one of your own Boons. You instantly lose that Boon and gain 1 Kudo. * Caption: Instant Punishment Elements: Restricted [Players with at least one Albatross], Budgeted Exploit: Indicate one of your own Albatrosses. You instantly lose that Albatross and Lose 1 Kudo. * Caption: Instant Millionaire Quota: 1 Exploit: Lose all of your Boons, but gain twice that number of Kudos. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2084 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2085 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2085 by Proposal 4649 (Quazie), 22 March 2005 text: A Legislator who is Mute may, with two support, submit a body of text with Mute Exemption. This text becomes a Proposal if it meets all rule requirements for a Proposal other than the Proposer not being Mute. As soon as possible after a Proposal with Mute Exemption passes, the Assessor shall expunge a number of Blots from the Proposer equal to the Adoption Index of the Proposal. The Proposer shall receive no Boons that may have awarded by other rules for the passing of the Proposal. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4704 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: A Legislator who is Mute may, with two support, submit a body of text with Mute Exemption. This text becomes a Proposal if it meets all rule requirements for a Proposal other than the Proposer not being Mute. As soon as possible after a Proposal with Mute Exemption passes, the Assessor shall expunge a number of Blots from the Proposer equal to the Adoption Index of the Proposal. The Proposer shall receive no Boons that may have awarded by other rules for the passing of the Proposal. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4797 (Maud), 6 June 2005 text: A Legislator who is Mute may, with two support, submit a body of text with Mute Exemption. This text becomes a Proposal if it meets all rule requirements for a Proposal other than the Proposer not being Mute. As soon as possible after a Proposal with Mute Exemption passes, the Assessor shall expunge a number of Blots from the Proposer equal to the Adoption Index of the Proposal. The Proposer shall receive no Boons that may have been awarded by other rules for the passing of the Proposal. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2085 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2086 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2086 by Proposal 4657 (Sherlock), 29 March 2005 text: The University is an Entity. As President of the University, the Speaker is the sole Executor of the University, but may take no action on behalf of The University except as explicitly permitted by the Rules. Education is a stuck Player switch with values Student and Faculty Member. The Herald shall flip the Education switch to Faculty Member for a Player as soon as possible after that Player is awarded a Degree. The Herald is the recordkeepor of Education. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4669 (Quazie), 9 April 2005 text: The University is an Entity. As President of the University, the Speaker is the sole Executor of the University, but may take no action on behalf of The University except as explicitly permitted by the Rules. Education is a stuck Player switch with values Student and Faculty Member. The SotU shall flip the Education switch to Faculty Member for a Player as soon as possible after that Player is awarded a Degree. The SotU is the recordkeepor of Education. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4728 (Murphy), 25 April 2005 text: The University is an Entity. The Speaker is President and Limited Executor of the University. Education is a stuck Player switch with values Student and Faculty Member. The SotU shall flip the Education switch to Faculty Member for a Player as soon as possible after that Player is awarded a Degree. The SotU is the recordkeepor of Education. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4834 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: The University, also known as the Library, is a site. The Speaker is the president of and a limited executor of the University. Education is a stuck player switch with values Student and Faculty Member. The Secretary of the University (SotU) is the recordkeepor of education. As soon as possible after a player is awarded a degree, the SotU shall flip the education of that player to Faculty Member. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4852 (root), 18 March 2006 text: Education is a stuck player switch with values Student and Faculty Member. The Herald is the recordkeepor of education. As soon as possible after a player is awarded a degree, the Herald shall flip the education of that player to Faculty Member. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2086 by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2087 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2087 by Proposal 4657 (Sherlock), 29 March 2005 text: The University offers Research Grants for projects that improve the intellectual, cultural and social life of Agora. The Speaker may announce a Research Grant by publicly describing a task to be performed and stating a number between one and five. If another Player completes this task to the Speaker's satisfaction within the next month, the Speaker shall award to that Player an equal number of Boons of Achievement, without two objections. No more than one Player may receive this award. If more than one Player undertakes the task, the Speaker shall choose only one Player to receive the award. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2087 by Proposal 4852 (root), 18 March 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2088 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2088 by Proposal 4657 (Sherlock), 29 March 2005 text: The University sponsors a monthly Book Club. During the first week of each month the first Player who publically specifies a rule as that month's Book Club Selection becomes the Moderator for the University Book Club. The Assessor shall award one Boon of Refinement apiece to the Moderator and Proposer for the first passed proposal within the next thirty days that either amends or repeals this Selection. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2088 by Proposal 4852 (root), 18 March 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2089 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2089 by Proposal 4657 (Sherlock), 29 March 2005 text: The University (hereafter the Library) is a Gambler. Whenever the Library has fewer than five Cards, the Deckmastor shall as soon as possible deal randomly chosen Cards to the Library until it has five cards. A Player (hereafter the Borrower) may check out a specified Card from the Library by paying a Fee for the Library's upkeep. The fee is 2 Kudos for Students and 1 Kudo for Faculty Members. The Card is considered reserved and may not be checked out by any Player until it is dealt to the Library again by the Deckmastor. As soon as possible after a Card is checked out from the Library and it is within the Speaker's ability to do so, the Speaker shall transfer the Card from the Library to the Borrower. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4706 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: The University (hereafter the Library) is a Gambler. Whenever the Library has fewer than five Cards, the Deckmastor shall as soon as possible deal randomly chosen Cards to the Library until it has five cards. A Player (hereafter the Borrower) may check out a specified Card from the Library by paying a Fee for the Library's upkeep. The fee is 2 Kudos for Students and 1 Kudo for Faculty Members. The Card is considered reserved and may not be checked out by any Player until it is dealt to the Library again by the Deckmastor. Immediately after a Card is checked out from the Library it is transfered from the Library to the Borrower. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4715 (Goethe), 25 April 2005 text: The University (hereafter the Library) is a Gambler. Whenever the Library has fewer than five Cards, the Deckmastor shall as soon as possible deal randomly chosen Cards to the Library until it has five cards. A Player (hereafter the Borrower) may check out a specified Card from the Library by paying a Fee for the Library's upkeep, provided that card has been in the Library's possession for 24 hours or more. The fee is 2 Kudos for Students and 1 Kudo for Faculty Members. The Card is considered reserved and may not be checked out by any Player until it is dealt to the Library again by the Deckmastor. Immediately after a Card is checked out from the Library it is transfered from the Library to the Borrower. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4726 (root), 25 April 2005 text: The University (hereafter the Library) is a Gambler. Whenever the Library has fewer than five Cards, the Deckmastor shall as soon as possible deal randomly chosen Cards to the Library until it has five cards. A Player (hereafter the Borrower) may check out a specified Card from the Library by paying a Fee for the Library's upkeep, provided that card has been in the Library's possession for 24 hours or more. The fee is 2 Kudos for Students and 1 Kudo for Faculty Members. The Card is considered reserved and may not be checked out by any Player until it is dealt to the Library again by the Deckmastor. Immediately after a Card is checked out from the Library it is transfered from the Library to the Borrower. The President of the University may discard any card in the possession of the Library without two objections. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4728 (Murphy), 25 April 2005 text: "The Library" is a synonym for "The University". The Library is a Gambler. Whenever the Library has fewer than five Cards, the Deckmastor shall as soon as possible deal randomly chosen Cards to the Library until it has five cards. A Player (hereafter the Borrower) may check out a specified Card from the Library by paying a Fee for the Library's upkeep, provided that card has been in the Library's possession for 24 hours or more. The fee is 2 Kudos for Students and 1 Kudo for Faculty Members. The Card is considered reserved and may not be checked out by any Player until it is dealt to the Library again by the Deckmastor. Immediately after a Card is checked out from the Library it is transfered from the Library to the Borrower. The President of the University may discard any card in the possession of the Library without two objections. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4834 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: Whenever the Library's hand size is less than five, it gains a pending draw. A player (hereafter the Borrower) may check out a specified card from the Library by paying a Fee for the Library's upkeep. The fee is 2 Kudos for Students and 1 Kudo for Faculty Members. The card is reserved and may not be checked out by any player until it is dealt to the Library again by the Deckmastor. Whenever a card is checked out from the Library, it is transferred to the Borrower. The President of the University may discard any card in the possession of the Library without two objections. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: Whenever the Library's hand size is less than five, it gains a pending draw. A player (hereafter the Borrower) may check out a specified card from the Library by announcement, which must satisfy a number of satisfiable pending draws that e, in fact, possesses. The number is 2 pending draws for Students and 1 pending draw for Faculty Members. The card is reserved and may not be checked out by any player until it is dealt to the Library again by the Deckmastor. Whenever a card is checked out from the Library, it is transferred to the Borrower. The President of the University may discard any card in the possession of the Library without two objections. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 4851 (Murphy), 18 March 2006 text: Whenever the Library's hand size plus number of chips is less than five, it receives a red chip. A player (the Borrower) may check out a specified card currently in the Library's hand for a fee (2 for Students, 1 for Faculty Members), upon which the card is transferred to the Borrower. The President of the University may discard any card in the possession of the Library without two objections. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 4852 (root), 18 March 2006 text: The Library is a site. The Deckmastor is a limited executor of the Library. As soon as possible after the beginning of each quarter, the Deckmastor shall discard all cards in the possession of the Library. The Library then gains five pending draws. A player (hereafter the Borrower) may check out a specified card from the Library by paying a fee. The amount of the fee is 2 for Students and 1 for Faculty Members. Whenever a card is checked out from the Library, it is transferred to the Borrower. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2089 by Proposal 4865 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2090 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2090 by Proposal 4660 (root), 29 March 2005 text: Upon the creation of this rule, all unsatisfied requirements to discard one or more cards that arose from from Rule 2075/1 or Rule 2083/0 prior to March 19, 2005 are hereby voided and are deemed to have never existed. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2090 by Proposal 4660 (root), 29 March 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2091 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2091 by Proposal 4669 (Quazie), 9 April 2005 text: The Secretary of the University (SotU) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for the University. The SotU's Weekly Report shall include: (a) A list of all active Research Grants; (b) A list of all active Book club selections; (c) Each players Education. (d) A list of who has checked out cards from the library. (e) The running history of all of the preceding. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4796 (Maud), 6 June 2005 text: The Secretary of the University (SotU) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for the University. The SotU's Weekly Report shall include: (a) A list of all active Research Grants; (b) A list of all active Book club selections; (c) Each player's Education. (d) A list of who has checked out cards from the library. (e) The running history of all of the preceding. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4834 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: The Secretary of the University (SotU) is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for the University. The SotU's Weekly Report shall include: (a) A list of all active Research Grants. (b) A list of all active Book Club Selections. (c) Each player's Education. (d) A list of who has checked out cards from the library. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2091 by Proposal 4852 (root), 18 March 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2092 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2092 by Proposal 4688 (root), 18 April 2005 text: A degree may be awarded by the operation of an adopted Proposal whose Power is at least two to any person who is not registered as a Player and who does not already bear that degree. The Proposal must specify both the recipient of the degree and the degree to be awarded. For a degree to be awarded in this manner, the recipient need not complete a Thesis, but all other requirements specific to the degree in question must be satisfied. Degrees awarded as described in this rule shall be marked as honorary degrees in the Herald's report. A person bearing an honorary degree may still be awarded the same degree by other rule-defined mechanisms. When this occurs, the person shall cease to bear the honorary degree and shall bear the new degree in its place. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2092 by Proposal 5033 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2093 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2093 by Proposal 4692 (root), 18 April 2005 text: The following class of cards is defined: * Caption: Raffle Ticket Elements: Grafty As soon as possible after the 13th day of the third month of each quarter, the Deckmastor shall randomly select a copy of a Raffle Ticket in the possession of a Player and announce eir selection, unless no such copy exists. Upon this announcement, the Player in possession gains three instances of the ephemeral Patent Title "Fortune's Fool", and each Raffle Ticket in the possession of a Player is automatically discarded. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2093 by Proposal 4818 (Goethe), 10 July 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2094 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2094 by Proposal 4693 (Maud), 18 April 2005 text: A collective of two or more persons (a Hive) none of whom is currently registered as a player may jointly register as a single player. A Hive is subject to a Grace Period only if each of its members would have been subject to a Grace Period had e registered as an individual at the time the Hive registered. This rule takes precedence over rule 869. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2094 by Proposal 4802 (Maud), 15 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2095 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2095 by Proposal 4696 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: * If a Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then the Assessor shall award the Proposor the Boon of Prodigy. * If an Interested Democratic Proposal passes, and no Votes were cast AGAINST it, then the Assessor shall award the Proposor the Boon of Zeitgeist. * If a proposal submitted on Guy Fawkes Day is adopted then the Assessor shall award the proposer the boon of a penny. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4761 (root), 15 May 2005 text: * If a Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then the Assessor shall award the Proposor the Boon of Prodigy, unless the Proposor has already received five or more such awards. * If an Interested Democratic Proposal passes, and no Votes were cast AGAINST it, then the Assessor shall award the Proposor the Boon of Zeitgeist. * If a proposal submitted on Guy Fawkes Day is adopted then the Assessor shall award the proposer the boon of a penny. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4787 (Sherlock), 6 June 2005 text: * If a Proposal passes, and that Proposal was submitted by a Player within that Player's Grace Period, then the Assessor shall award the Proposor the Boon of Prodigy, unless the Proposor has already received five or more such awards. * If a Democratic Proposal passes, and no Votes were cast AGAINST it, then the Assessor shall award the Proposor the Boon of Zeitgeist. * If a proposal submitted on Guy Fawkes Day is adopted then the Assessor shall award the proposer the boon of a penny. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: If a proposal is submitted and adopted during that player's Grace Period, then the Assessor shall award that player the boon of Prodigy. If a proposal is adopted, and nobody voted AGAINST it, then the Assessor shall award its proposer the boon of Zeitgeist. If a proposal submitted on Guy Fawkes Day is adopted, then the Assessor shall award its proposer the boon of A Penny. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2095 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2096 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2096 by Proposal 4696 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: If an Ephemeral Patent Title is earned between one week before the designated end of the last Quarter and one week before the end of the current Quarter then it must be awarded before the turning of a new parchment. For every one of these Ephemeral Patent Titles that has not been awarded by the end of the turning whomever is responsible for awarding the Ephemeral Patent Title commits the Class .1 Infraction of Ephemeral Nondisclosure which in the case of Boons is reportable by whomever did not receive eir Boon, or for Albatrosses any player. The announcement that a proposal does not earn the proposer the Boon of Tapecutter must also follow these time restrictions. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 text: A Contract may be made into a Card-Carrying Contract by its Notary acting with two support and without two objections. A player may only be Notary of one Card-Carrying Contract at a time. A Card-Carrying Contract is a gambler, and may perform the following actions only as explicitly permitted by its regulations: 1. As long as the Contract has at least three Members and its hand size is less than the maximum hand size, it may draw a number of cards each month equal to its number of Members at the beginning of the month divided by two and rounded up. 2. Transfer or discard cards. A Card-Carrying Contract may not play cards. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: If an ephemeral patent title is earned between one week before the end of the previous quarter and one week before the end of the current quarter, then it must be awarded before the turning of a new parchment. The announcement that a proposal does not earn the proposer the boon of tapecutter must also follow these time restrictions. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2096 by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2097 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2097 by Proposal 4700 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: A contest may be made into a Card-Carrying Contest by its contestmaster acting with two support and without two objections. A player may only be contestmaster of one card-carrying contest at a time. A Card-Carrying Contest is a gambler, and may perform the following actions only as explicitly permitted by its regulations: 1. As long as the contest has at least three members and its hand size is less than the maximum hand size, it may draw a number of cards each month equal to its number of members at the beginning of the month divided by two and rounded up. 2. Transfer or discard cards. A Card-Carrying Contest may not play cards. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: A Contract may be made into a Card-Carrying Contract by its Notary acting with two support and without two objections. A player may only be Notary of one Card-Carrying Contract at a time. A Card-Carrying Contract is a gambler, and may perform the following actions only as explicitly permitted by its regulations: 1. As long as the Contract has at least three Members and its hand size is less than the maximum hand size, it may draw a number of cards each month equal to its number of Members at the beginning of the month divided by two and rounded up. 2. Transfer or discard cards. A Card-Carrying Contract may not play cards. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2097 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2098 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2098 by Proposal 4701 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: A Worker is any player who is not an Officer. On the First of May, any worker may remove any officer from an office by public declaration. The declaring worker becomes the holder although not electee of that office, providing e is otherwise eligible to hold the Office. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2098 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2099 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2099 by Proposal 4701 (Goethe), 18 April 2005 text: The Caller of any Call for Judgement made on March 21 is eligible to judge that same CFJ, even if other Rules would make em ineligible. The Clerk of the Courts must choose the Caller to be the Trial Judge of that CFJ. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2099 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2100 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2100 by Proposal 4710 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: The Promotor may make all proposals in the Proposal Pool distributable without 4 objections and then paying a fee of three Kudos. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2100 by Proposal 4798 (Maud, Goethe), 6 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2101 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2101 by Proposal 4712 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: * Caption: Library Renewal Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Upon playing this card you may indicate a number 1 through 5. ASAP after you do this the speaker must randomly discard that many cards from the Library's hand that are not reserved. If the Speaker has discarded all non reserved cards then e does not need to discard any more. * Caption: Library Card Elements: Budgeted, Limited [Faculty Members][1] Exploit: Check a card out from the Library for no fee. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4714 (Quazie), 18 April 2005 text: The following classes of cards are defined: * Caption: Library Renewal Elements: Budgeted Exploit: Upon playing this card you may indicate a number 1 through 5. ASAP after you do this the speaker must randomly discard that many cards from the Library's hand that are not reserved. If the Speaker has discarded all non reserved cards then e does not need to discard any more. * Caption: Library Card Elements: Budgeted, Limited [Faculty Members][1] Exploit: Check a card out from the Library for no fee. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4744 (Quazie, root), 5 May 2005 text: The following classes of cards are defined: * Caption: Library Renewal Elements: Budgeted Exploit: You may indicate a number 1 through 5. As soon as possible after you do this the Speaker must randomly discard that many cards from the Library's hand. If there are fewer cards in the Library's hand then the number you indicate the Speaker must discard them all. * Caption: Library Card Elements: Budgeted, Limited [Faculty Members][1] Exploit: Check a card out from the Library for no fee. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2101 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2102 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2102 by Proposal 4717 (Murphy), 25 April 2005 text: When an ordinary proposal becomes extraordinary, it is immediately aborted, and the copy of it that is added to the proposal pool due to the abortion becomes democratic and distributable. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2102 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2103 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2103 by Proposal 4725 (root), 25 April 2005 text: When a non-Sane Proposal in the Pool is Sanitized, it becomes Democratic and Sane. When a non-Sane Proposal whose Voting Period has begun but has not yet ended is Sanitized, it is Aborted as described elsewhere, and the copy resulting from the Abortion remains Distributable but becomes Democratic and Sane. A Proposal may only be Sanitized by the operation of an Instrument whose Power is at least 2. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2103 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2104 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2104 by Proposal 4734 (Sherlock), 5 May 2005 text: The University encourages Card experimentation. A Player may publish a piece of text and note that it is a Card Blueprint. If this text contains a Caption, a copy of that Card is created in the possession of the Library. The Card Blueprint may also specify Elements and Exploits, as defined by other rules, and these are included on the Card in the same way they would be if they were included on a rules-defined Card. Cards created by this method have a Quota of 1 and are considered to be in eir Trial Run. A Card in its Trial Run may not be checked out of the Library until seven days have passed since its creation. Any player may destroy a Card in its Trial Run by announcing e does so. A Card in its Trial Run is transferred to the Library after it is played. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: The University encourages Card experimentation. There is a cardbook called the Blueprints Cardbook, which may be changed by Proposal, or as specified in this Rule. Any Player may, with support, add a Blueprint to the Blueprints cardbook. A Blueprint must be a valid card definition. Any card added in this manner shall have a quota of 0. Any Player may, with support, remove a Blueprint with a quota of 0 from the Blueprints cardbook. If a Blueprint has been in the Blueprints Cardbook for over four days, any Player may change the quota of that Blueprint from 0 to 1 (if the card is unique) or from 0 to a number not greater than the number of active Players (if the card is rare or common), without three Objections. If the quota of a card is changed in this manner, the Deckmastor shall create one of the copies of that card in The Library rather than in the Deck. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4838 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: The University encourages Card experimentation. There is a cardbook called the Blueprints Cardbook, which may be changed by Proposal, or as specified in this Rule. Any Player may, with support, add a Blueprint to the Blueprints cardbook. A Blueprint must be a valid card definition. Any card added in this manner shall have a quota of 0. Any Player may, with support, remove a Blueprint with a quota of 0 from the Blueprints cardbook. If a Blueprint has been in the Blueprints Cardbook for over four days, any Player may change the quota of that Blueprint from 0 to 1 (if the card is unique) or from 0 to a number not greater than the number of active Players (if the card is rare or common), without three Objections. If the quota of a card is changed in this manner, the Deckmastor shall create one of the copies of that card in The Library rather than in the Deck. Any Player may add, delete, or amend a Scoring Instruction in the Blueprints Cardbook, with M support and without N Objections, where M is greater than or equal to N at the time the change is performed, and N is at least 1. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4852 (root), 18 March 2006 text: There is a cardbook called the Blueprints Cardbook, which may be changed by Proposal, or as specified in this Rule. Any Player may, with support, add a Blueprint to the Blueprints cardbook. A Blueprint must be a valid card definition. Any card added in this manner shall have a quota of 0. Any Player may, with support, remove a Blueprint with a quota of 0 from the Blueprints cardbook. If a Blueprint has been in the Blueprints Cardbook for over four days, any Player may change the quota of that Blueprint from 0 to 1 (if the card is unique) or from 0 to a number not greater than the number of active Players (if the card is rare or common), without three Objections. If the quota of a card is changed in this manner, the Deckmastor shall create one of the copies of that card in The Library rather than in the Deck. Any Player may add, delete, or amend a Scoring Instruction in the Blueprints Cardbook, with M support and without N Objections, where M is greater than or equal to N at the time the change is performed, and N is at least 1. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4853 (Goethe), 18 March 2006 text: There is a cardbook called the Blueprints Cardbook, which may be changed by Proposal, or as specified in this Rule. Any Player may, with support, add a Blueprint to the Blueprints cardbook. A Blueprint must be a valid card definition. Any card added in this manner shall have a quota of 0. Any Player may, with support, remove a Blueprint with a quota of 0 from the Blueprints cardbook. If a Blueprint has been in the Blueprints Cardbook for over four days, any Player may change the quota of that Blueprint from 0 to 1 (if the card is unique) or from 0 to a number not greater than the number of active Players (if the card is rare or common), without three Objections. If the quota of a card is changed in this manner, the Deckmastor shall create one of the copies of that card in The Library rather than in the Deck. Any Player may add, delete, or amend a Scoring Instruction in the Blueprints Cardbook, with Agoran Consent. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2104 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2105 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2105 by Proposal 4735 (Maud), 5 May 2005 text: ____ _ /| DARWIN -> \_ |/ | / \ __/ / | | <- DSV / / | \ _ \ \_ | \ MORNINGTON CRESCENT -> / | <- GREAT BARRIER REEF _ _/ | \_/\_/ \ / \\ <- SHARK BAY | | / | | \ <- TOWNSVILLE ___/ | | \_ __/ | | | / | | \ / O <- L. DISAPPOINTMENT |/\ | | | |_ | | | EMERALD -> \ \ |__________=_____, \ / | | | <- BRISBANE \ O <- LT. ANNE MOORE | __ _\ \ | |_______/ \/ | | __/\ <- TARCOOLA / LORD HOWE -> \ __/ \_ / / PERTH -> | _ __/ | /| IVANHOE -> | <- WOLLONGONG / _/ \/ \ / / | / |_ / <- ESPERANTO v /__ |_ / <- CANBERRA \_/ \ | \_ _| | | \__/ \___=_ ___| MELBOURNE -> \/ /\__ | | | / \_/ <- HOBART history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4807 (Sherlock), 15 June 2005 text: ____ _ /| DARWIN -> \_ |/ | / \ __/ / | | <- DSV / / | \ _ \ \_ | \ MORNINGTON CRESCENT -> / | <- GOETHE BARRIER REEF _ _/ | \_/\_/ \ / \\ <- SHARK BAY | | / | | \ <- TOWNSVILLE ___/ | | \_ __/ | | | / | | \ / O <- SHERLOCK NESS | |/\ | | | |_ | | | EMERALD -> \ \ |__________=_____, \ / | | | <- BRISBANE \ O <- LT. ANNE MOORE | __ _\ \ | |_______/ \/ | | __/\ <- TARCOOLA / LORD HOWE -> \ __/ \_ / / PERTH -> | _ __/ | /| IVANHOE -> | <- WOLLONGONG / _/ \/ \ / / | / |_ / <- ESPERANTO v /__ |_ / <- CANBERRA \_/ \ | \_ _| __ __ | | \__/ __ \ / __ \___=_ ___| / \ | / \ MANUBOURNE -> \/ \|/ _,.---v---._ /\__ /\__/\ / \ | | \_ _/ / \ | / \ \_| @ __| \_/ <- HOBART \ \_ \ ,__/ / ~~~`~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/~~~~ history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: ____ _ /| DARWIN -> \_ |/ | / \ __/ / | | <- DSV / / | \ _ \ \_ | \ MORNINGTON CRESCENT -> / | <- GOETHE BARRIER REEF _ _/ | \_/\_/ \ / \\ <- SHARK BAY | | / | | \ <- TOWNSVILLE ___/ | | \_ __/ | | .___o ) | / | | ~~vv ===~~~ <-OSCAR'S MIRE / O <- SHERLOCK NESS | |/\ | | | |_ | | | EMERALD -> \ \ |__________=_____, \ / | | | <- BRISBANE \ O <- LT. ANNE MOORE | __ _\ \ | |_______/ \/ | | __/\ <- TARCOOLA / LORD HOWE -> \ __/ \_ / / PERTH -> | _ __/ | /| IVANHOE -> | <- WOLLONGONG / _/ \/ \ / / | / |_ / <- ESPERANTO v /__ |_ / <- CANBERRA \_/ \ | \_ _| __ __ | | \__/ __ \ / __ \___=_ ___| / \ | / \ MANUBOURNE -> \/ \|/ _,.---v---._ /\__ /\__/\ / \ | | \_ _/ / \ | / \ \_| @ __| \_/ <- HOBART \ \_ \ ,__/ / ~~~`~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/~~~~ history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4946 (Zefram), 3 May 2007 text: ____ _ /| DARWIN -> \_ |/ | / \ __/ / | | <- DSV / / | \ _ \ \_ | \ MORNINGTON CRESCENT -> / | <- GOETHE BARRIER _ _/ | \_/\_/ \ REEF / \\ <- SHARK BAY | | / | | \ <- TOWNSVILLE ___/ | | \_ __/ | | .___o ) | / | | ~~vv ===~~~ <-OSCAR'S MIRE / O <- SHERLOCK NESS | |/\ | | | |_ | | | EMERALD -> \ \ |__________=_____, \ BRISBANE / | | | <-' \ O <- LT. ANNE MOORE | __ _\ \ | |_______/ \/ | LORD | __/\ <- TARCOOLA / HOWE -> \ PERTH __/ \_ / / | <-' _ __/ | /| IVANHOE -> | <-. / _/ \/ \ / / | / WOLLONGONG |_ / <- ESPERANTO v /__ |_ / <- CANBERRA \_/ \ | \_ _| __ __ | | \__/ __ \ / __ \___=_ ___| / \ | / \ MANUBOURNE -> \/ \|/ _,.---v---._ /\__ /\__/\ / \ | | \_ _/ / \ | / \ \_| @ __| \_/ <- HOBART \ \_ \ ,__/ / ~~~`~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/~~~~ history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2106 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2106 by Proposal 4738 (Manu), 5 May 2005 text: All fees associated with Card Actions, Elements and Exploits must be paid as soon as possible by the Gambler incurring the fee. For every Kudo not paid on time, the Gambler commits the Class 1 Infraction of Debt Overdue, which may be reported by any Player. This rule takes precedence over all rules pertaining to Cards fees. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4834 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: A gambler plays a card with an Exploit by announcement, specifying the card to be played, indicating any entities or values mentioned in an Indication of the card's Exploit, and noting any fees required to play the card. A card without an Exploit cannot be played. When a gambler plays a card, the following events automatically occur in order: (a) The card is transferred to the table. (b) One at a time in the order listed on the card, the gambler places any Impositions listed in the Exploit on the appropriate gamblers and performs each Feat listed in the Exploit. (c) If the card is still on the table, it is discarded. If the card has any Fuses, then the first time the stated condition for a Fuse occurs, the gambler places the Imposition or performs the Feat associated with that Fuse as appropriate. The Elements or Exploit of a card may modify any of the above events. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2106 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2107 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2107 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 text: There exists a type of agreement known as a Contract. A Contract is an Entity. The content of a Contract is called its Regulations. The first Player to announce the creation of a Contract is its Executor and is known as the Notary of that Contract. Any other Player may decide to become part of a Contract by notifying that Contract's Notary. Players party to a Contract, including the Notary, are the Members of this Contract. A Member may leave a Contract at any time by notifying the Notary. A Contract may contain any number of Regulations. Regulations have the power to constrain the actions of Players in the same manner as the Rules. However, Regulations have power over only those Players that are Members of that Contract. All Members are required to abide by the Regulations, unless doing so would violate the Rules. Violation of this requirement is the Class 1 Crime of Insubordination. A Contract may include in its Regulations ways for Players to leave the Contract. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no Player shall ever involuntarily become a Member of a Contract. If the Notary of a Contract becomes Silent, all Members of this Contract cease to be Members of this Contract and the Contract ceases to exist. Only Members of a Contract may CFJ that a Member has violated that Contract. All Members of a Contract are automatically ineligible to Judge a CFJ that a Member has violated that Contract. All Rules regulating agreements that are inconsistent with this Rule are superseded to the extent of such inconsistency. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4820 (Goethe), 10 July 2005 text: There exists a type of agreement known as a Contract. A Contract is an Entity. The content of a Contract is called its Regulations. The first Player to announce the creation of a Contract is its Executor and is known as the Notary of that Contract. Any other Player may decide to become part of a Contract by notifying that Contract's Notary. Players party to a Contract, including the Notary, are the Members of this Contract. A Member may leave a Contract at any time by notifying the Notary. A Contract may contain any number of Regulations. Regulations have the power to constrain the actions of Players in the same manner as the Rules. However, Regulations have power over only those Players that are Members of that Contract. All Members are required to abide by the Regulations, unless doing so would violate the Rules. Violation of this requirement is the Class 1 Crime of Insubordination. A Contract may include in its Regulations ways for Players to leave the Contract. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no Player shall ever involuntarily become a Member of a Contract. If the Notary of a Contract is deregistered, all Members of this Contract cease to be Members of this Contract and the Contract ceases to exist. Only Members of a Contract may CFJ that a Member has violated that Contract. All Members of a Contract are automatically ineligible to Judge a CFJ that a Member has violated that Contract. All Rules regulating agreements that are inconsistent with this Rule are superseded to the extent of such inconsistency. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2107 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2108 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2108 by Proposal 4743 (Manu), 5 May 2005 text: The Notary of a given Contract must provide a copy of its Regulations to any other Player who requests it, as soon as possible after the request is made. The Notary of a Contract must also provide an updated copy of the Regulations to all Members as soon as possible after the Regulations change for any reason. Regulations can not be changed except in accordance with the Rules. Regulations are permitted to define their own mechanisms for changing their own content, and any change to Regulations adopted in accordance with their own mechanisms is legal. The Notary may, without objection, change the Regulations provided e sends a copy of the new Regulations to all Members as soon as possible. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2108 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2109 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2109 by Proposal 4755 (Manu), 5 May 2005 text: There exists a type of Contract known as Agoran Contract. An Agoran Contract is a Contract between any two entities. An Agoran Contract may only be created or amended by a Proposal and becomes effective when the Proposal takes effect. Unless otherwise specified in the Rules or Regulations, All Players are automatically Members of Agoran Contracts and no Player may leave an Agoran Contract. All Rules regulating Contracts that are inconsistent with this Rule are superseded to the extent of such inconsistency. The ADoP is required to keep track of all Agoran Contracts. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: There exists a type of binding agreement known as Agoran Contract. An Agoran Contract may only be created or amended by a Proposal and becomes effective when the Proposal takes effect. Unless otherwise specified in the Rules, all Players are bound by Agoran Contracts and no Player may leave an Agoran Contract while remaining a Player. The Proposal process shall, prima facie, be considered to be protective of a Player's rights and privileges with respect to agreements. All Rules regulating Contracts that are inconsistent with this Rule are superseded to the extent of such inconsistency. The CotC is required to keep track of all Agoran Contracts. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5016 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 text: There exists a type of binding agreement known as Agoran Contract. An Agoran Contract may only be created or amended by a Proposal and becomes effective when the Proposal takes effect. Unless otherwise specified in the Rules, all Players are bound by Agoran Contracts and no Player may leave an Agoran Contract while remaining a Player. The Proposal process shall, prima facie, be considered to be protective of a Player's rights and privileges with respect to agreements. All Rules regulating Contracts that are inconsistent with this Rule are superseded to the extent of such inconsistency. The CotC's monthly report includes all Agoran Contracts. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2109 by Proposal 5024 (BobTHJ), 25 June 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2110 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2110 by Proposal 4781 (Sherlock), 3 June 2005 text: If the legality of an action cannot be determined with finality, or if by a Judge's best reasoning, not appealed within a week of eir Judgement, an action appears equally legal and illegal, then the Speaker shall award the Patent Title of Champion to the first Player to publicly note that condition. The Herald shall record that this Title was achieved "by paradox" in eir report. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4891 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: If the legality of an action cannot be determined with finality, or if by a Judge's best reasoning, not appealed within a week of eir Judgement, an action appears equally legal and illegal, then the first player to announce this fact wins the game. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5195 (Zefram), 6 September 2007 text: If an inquiry case on the possibility of a rule-defined action or the permissibility of an action results in a judgement of UNDECIDABLE, and that judgement is not appealed within a week, then the initiator of the inquiry case wins the game if e is a player. This can only occur once per inquiry case. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5297 (Murphy), 22 November 2007 text: If an inquiry case on the possibility of a prior or hypothetical rule-defined action, or the permissibility of a prior or hypothetical action, results in a judgement of UNDECIDABLE, and the judgement is not appealed within a week (or is upheld via an appeal decision of AFFIRM), then the initiator of the inquiry case wins the game by paradox if e is a player. This can only occur once per inquiry case. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5394 (Murphy, Goddess Eris, OscarMeyr, Zefram), 16 January 2008 text: Upon a judicial finding that the possibility or legality of a rule-defined action (actual or hypothetical, but not arising from that case itself, and not occurring after the initiation of that case) is UNDECIDABLE, the initiator satisfies the Winning Condition of Paradox. Cleanup procedure: Each winner satisfying this Winning Condition SHALL, as soon as possible, make a reasonable attempt to resolve the paradox. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5451 (root, Murphy, Zefram), 1 March 2008 text: A tortoise is an inquiry case on the possibility or legality of a rule-defined action (actual or hypothetical, but not arising from that case itself, and not occurring after the initiation of that case) for which the question of veracity is UNDECIDABLE. Upon a win announcement that a tortoise has continuously been a tortoise for no greater than four and no less than two weeks, the initiator satisfies the Winning Condition of Paradox. Cleanup procedure: Each winner satisfying this Winning Condition SHALL, as soon as possible, make a reasonable attempt to resolve the paradox. The same person can not satisfy this Winning Condition again for the same tortoise or for any other tortoise that was linked to it in assignment. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2111 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2111 by Proposal 4795 (Sherlock), 6 June 2005 text: If there are 300 or more Rules, and a Proposal is adopted that would increase the total number of Rules, the Proposer commits the Class 2 Infraction of Improper Rules Fattening, reportable by anyone. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4812 (Sherlock), 20 June 2005 text: If there are 275 or more Rules, and a Proposal is adopted that would increase the total number of Rules, the Proposer commits the Class 2 Infraction of Improper Rules Fattening, reportable by anyone. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4813 (Sherlock), 20 June 2005 text: If there are 250 or more Rules, and a Proposal is adopted that would increase the total number of Rules, the Proposer commits the Class 2 Infraction of Improper Rules Fattening, reportable by anyone. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4814 (Sherlock), 20 June 2005 text: If there are 225 or more Rules, and a Proposal is adopted that would increase the total number of Rules, the Proposer commits the Class 2 Infraction of Improper Rules Fattening, reportable by anyone. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4815 (Sherlock), 20 June 2005 text: If there are 200 or more Rules, and a Proposal is adopted that would increase the total number of Rules, the Proposer commits the Class 2 Infraction of Improper Rules Fattening, reportable by anyone. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2111 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2112 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2112 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: The Deckmastor shall have a budget containing values for each of the following: (a) the Maximum Hand Size and the Minimum Hand Size, each of which is a positive integer between 2 and 10, with the Minimum being less than the Maximum. In the absence of a budget, the Maximum Hand Size shall be 5 and the Minimum Hand Size shall be 2. (b) the Maximum Deck Size, which shall be no less than the number of players in the game times the maximum hand size. (c) the Maximum Deck Diversity, which shall be no less than twice the number of players in the game. If the Budget does not specify values for (a-c) above, or specifies a value violating these limits, the value shall be the smallest value that does not violate these limits. The Deckmastor's Budget shall also contain a Quota, which is a non-negative integer, for each defined class of Card. If the quota for a particular class of card is not specified in the Budget, that card shall have a quota of 0. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2112 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2113 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2113 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: The following maxima exist for card frequencies: (a) For a card with a unique frequency, one. (b) For card with a rare frequency, the number of active players. If the current quota for a card class exceeds the maximum for its defined frequency, then any Player may, with 2 support, amend the Deckmastor's budget to set the card's quota to its maximum. When a card's frequency is defined or changed, and the mechanism changing it does not specify a new quota, its quota is set to the maximum for that frequency. If at any time the sum of all quotas for all cards is greater than the Maximum Deck Size, the Deckmastor may, with 2 support, amend the budget by reducing quotas so that the resulting sum is equal to this maximum. If at any time the number of card classes with positive quotas is greater than the Maximum Deck Diversity, the Deckmastor may, with 2 support, amend the budget by setting quotas to 0 so that the resulting number of card classes with positive quotas is equal to this maximum. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2113 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2114 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2114 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: A Cardbook is a document, maintained by the Deckmastor, that is specifically defined in the Rules as being a Cardbook. The Deckmastor must publish each cardbook as soon as possible after its contents change, and at least once a month. The contents of a cardbook may only be changed as explicitly permitted by the Rules. The Deckmastor may change non-substantial properties of any Cardbook, specifically layout, whitespace, and the order of definitions, as e sees fit. A class of card is considered defined if and only if a valid definition for that card class exists in a cardbook. A valid card definition defines a Class of Card by specifying a Caption, a Frequency, zero or more Elements, and zero or more Exploits. (a) The Caption shall be the name of a particular Class of Cards. No two Classes of Cards shall have the same Caption. (b) The Frequency, which may have one of the following values: Common, Rare, Unique. If any other value is specified, the frequency shall be considered to be Unique. (c) A cardbook may define Elements for Cards. Each Element shall have a name and a description. Any Card possessing the Element of that name shall behave according to the description associated with that Element. An Element not defined in a cardbook has no effect. (d) An Exploit is an action that the Holder of that Card (and only the Holder of that Card) may take if and only if e clearly indicates the card whose Exploit e is performing and e meets the requirements and/or pays the costs outlined in that Exploit. Any reference to "you," "your" or a similar pronoun in the text of an Exploit refers to the Holder of that Card. Taking an action described in an Exploit is known as Playing the Card. Unless a Rule or card definition says otherwise, a Card is automatically transferred to the Discard Pile immediately after being Played. All Cards of the same Class shall be identical and fungible. Each individual instance of a Card shall be considered to be a Copy of that Class of Card. If there are conflicts between a card or element definition in a cardbook and the Rules, then the conflict shall be resolved as if the definition were contained in the text of the Rule that defines the particular cardbook. This Rule has precedence over any Rule describing the definition or interpretation of card classes and card elements. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4834 (Maud), 6 August 2005 text: A document is a cardbook if so designated by the rules. The Deckmastor is the recordkeepor of cardbooks; eir monthly report shall include each cardbook. As soon as possible after a cardbook changes, the Deckmastor shall publish that cardbook. A cardbook may only be changed as explicitly permitted by the rules. The Deckmastor may change non-substantial properties of any cardbook, specifically layout, whitespace, and the order of definitions, as e sees fit. A cardbook can define a class of cards by specifying its Caption, Frequency, zero or one Exploits, and optionally its Elements, and can define an Element by specifying its name and description. Neither classes of cards nor Elements may be otherwise defined. (a) The Caption is a string of text, unique to a particular class of cards. (b) The Frequency of a card is exactly one of the values Unique, Rare, or Common, defaulting to Unique if unspecified or incorrectly specified. (c) A card with a particular Element behaves according to the description of that Element. (d) An Exploit of a card may contain one or more Indications, Impositions, and Feats. (1) An Indication is a requirement for the gambler playing the card to select some entity or value. (2) An Imposition is a requirement the gambler may impose upon another gambler by playing the card. (3) A Feat is an action the gambler may perform by playing the card. (4) A Fuse is an Imposition or Feat that is not imposed or performed immediately, but rather when a stated condition occurs. A reference to "you" or "your" in any text on a card refers to the gambler holding the card unless it is on the table, and then refers to the gambler who played the card. The cards of a given class are fungible. Each individual instance of a card shall be considered to be a copy of that class of card. If there are conflicts between a card or element definition in a cardbook and the rules, then the conflict shall be resolved as if the definition were contained in the text of the rule that defines the particular cardbook. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would require a different method of resolving such conflicts. This rule takes precedence over any rule describing the definition or interpretation of card classes and card elements. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4838 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: A document is a cardbook if so designated by the rules. The Deckmastor is the recordkeepor of cardbooks; eir monthly report shall include each cardbook. As soon as possible after a cardbook changes, the Deckmastor shall publish that cardbook. A cardbook may only be changed as explicitly permitted by the rules. The Deckmastor may change non-substantial properties of any cardbook, specifically layout, whitespace, and the order of definitions, as e sees fit. A cardbook can define a class of cards by specifying its Caption, Frequency, zero or one Exploits, and optionally its Elements, and can define an Element or Scoring Instruction by specifying its name and description. Neither classes of cards Elements, nor Scoring Instructions may be otherwise defined. (a) The Caption is a string of text, unique to a particular class of cards. (b) The Frequency of a card is exactly one of the values Unique, Rare, or Common, defaulting to Unique if unspecified or incorrectly specified. (c) A card with a particular Element behaves according to the description of that Element. (d) An Exploit of a card may contain one or more Indications, Impositions, and Feats. (1) An Indication is a requirement for the gambler playing the card to select some entity or value. (2) An Imposition is a requirement the gambler may impose upon another gambler by playing the card. (3) A Feat is an action the gambler may perform by playing the card. (4) A Fuse is an Imposition or Feat that is not imposed or performed immediately, but rather when a stated condition occurs. A reference to "you" or "your" in any text on a card refers to the gambler holding the card unless it is on the table, and then refers to the gambler who played the card. The cards of a given class are fungible. Each individual instance of a card shall be considered to be a copy of that class of card. If there are conflicts between a card or element definition in a cardbook and the rules, then the conflict shall be resolved as if the definition were contained in the text of the rule that defines the particular cardbook. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would require a different method of resolving such conflicts. This rule takes precedence over any rule describing the definition or interpretation of card classes and card elements. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2114 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2115 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2115 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: There is a cardbook called the Twopower Cardbook, which may only be changed by a Proposal with a power of 2 or greater. If the definitions contained within the Twopower Cardbook would set, under certain conditions, the power of a copy of a card defined in it, then this Rule is considered to be the entity that sets the power of that card copy. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2115 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2116 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2116 by Proposal 4805 (Goethe, Manu), 20 June 2005 text: There is a cardbook called the Onepower Cardbook, which may only be changed by Proposal. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2116 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2117 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2117 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: If the rules indicate that an office is to be responsible for collecting votes on a particular Agoran decision, then the holder of that office is the default vote collector for that decision. The vote collector for a particular Agoran decision is tardy if and only if the voting collector has continuously held that role for at least seven days following the end of the voting period and the decision has not yet been resolved. If a vote collector is tardy, then the first player to announce that e takes up the role of vote collector becomes the vote collector for that decision. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would allow the vote collector for an Agoran decision to be changed. history: Repealed as Power=3 Rule 2117 by Proposal 5113 (Murphy, Maud), 2 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2118 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2118 by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: A person is a nominator and a prospective in an election only if e is an active player. The rules may further restrict validity of nominators and prospectives. A nominator nominates a prospective in a specified election by announcement. That nominator may publicly retract eir nomination of that prospective. A prospective may publicly decline eir nomination; if e does so, e may not be further nominated in that election. A nominee in an election is a prospective who has been nominated and whose nomination has not been retracted or declined. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2118 by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2119 history: Enacted by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 text: A proposal can, as part of its effect, repeal a rule with power no greater than its own. When a rule is repealed, it ceases to be a rule, and the Rulekeepor need no longer maintain a record of it. This rule provides the only mechanism by which rules can be repealed. history: Repealed by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2120 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2120 by Proposal 4837 (Goethe), 2 October 2005 text: When a gambler draws a card as specified by the Rules, e gains a Pending Draw. Encumbrance is a stuck switch for pending draws, with values Free and Heavy. Drawing a [Encumbrance value] card is a synonym for gaining a pending draw with the indicated encumbrance. As soon as possible after a gambler draws a card, the Deckmastor shall satisfy the draw by dealing a card to the gambler with the pending draw, but only if the draw is Satisfiable. A draw is satisfiable unless defined otherwise. A heavy pending draw is not satisfiable as long as the gambler with the draw has a hand size equal to or greater than eir defined maximum hand size. If a gambler has both heavy and free pending draws, the Deckmastor must satisfy all satisfiable heavy draws before satisfying any free draws for that gambler. If the Rules state that a gambler loses a pending draw, than that draw is considered satisfied without the dealing of a card, whether or not it is satisfiable. E shall first lose all free draws before losing any heavy draws. If e has no draws, the Deckmastor shall discard a random card from that gambler's hand. If e has no cards, then the deckmastor shall satisfy the next pending draw e gains without dealing a card. A satisfied draw is no longer pending. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4846 (Goethe), 1 January 2006 text: When a gambler draws a card as specified by the Rules, e gains a Pending Draw. As soon as possible after a gambler draws a card, the Deckmastor shall satisfy the draw by dealing a card to the gambler with the pending draw, but only if the draw is Satisfiable. A draw is satisfiable unless defined otherwise. If the Rules state that a gambler loses a pending draw, than that draw is considered satisfied without the dealing of a card, whether or not it is satisfiable. If e has no draws, the Deckmastor shall discard a random card from that gambler's hand. If e has no cards, then the deckmastor shall satisfy the next pending draw e gains without dealing a card. A satisfied draw is no longer pending. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4851 (Murphy), 18 March 2006 text: The Pot is a site. A player may cash in one or more of eir chips by transferring them to the Pot. As soon as possible after e does so, the Deckmastor shall deal em a card for each non-forfeited chip. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4859 (root), 22 May 2006 text: The Pot is a site. Cashing in one or more chips is synonymous with transferring them to the Pot. A player may cash in one or more of eir chips by announcement. As soon as possible after e does so, the Deckmastor shall deal em a card for each non-forfeited chip cashed in. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2120 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2121 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2121 by Proposal 4843 (Murphy), 9 November 2005 text: When a class of cards ceases to exist, each non-site gambler gains a pending draw for each instance of that class that e possessed immediately before it ceased to exist. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2121 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2122 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2122 by Proposal 4851 (Murphy), 18 March 2006 text: If the rules say that a player gains a chip, it is created in eir possession. Rumor and superstition have it that these chips come from a mystical place referred to in legend as The House, which is to be greatly feared by all gamblers. If the rules say that a player loses a chip, without specifying which chip e loses: (a) If e has at least one red chip, then one of eir red chips is forfeited to the Pot. (b) Otherwise, if e has at least one white chip, then one of eir white chips is forfeited to the Pot. (c) Otherwise, if e has at least one card, then the Deckmastor shall discard one of that player's cards at random. (d) Otherwise, the next chip e gains is immediately forfeited to the Pot. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2122 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2123 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2123 by Proposal 4851 (Murphy), 18 March 2006 text: A player plays a fee of X by cashing in X chips. These chips are forfeited. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4859 (root), 22 May 2006 text: A player plays a fee of X by cashing in X chips and indicating the fee to be paid. These chips are forfeited. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2123 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2124 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2124 by Proposal 4853 (Goethe), 18 March 2006 text: If the Rules specify that an entity may perform an action with Agoran Consent, then the entity may perform the action with M supporters and without N objections, as long as M is greater than N. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: If the Rules specify that an entity may perform an action with Agoran Consent, then the entity may perform the action by announcement if all of the following are true: (a) e has published eir intent to perform the action, unambiguously describing the action to be performed, at least four days and no more than fourteen days before attempting to perform the action; (b) at least one other player has announced (and not withdrawn) support for the intended action since intent was published; and (c) more players have announced (and not withdrawn) support than have announced (and not withdrawn) objections to the action since the intent was published. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: An entity that may perform an action with Agoran Consent can do so by announcement if all of the following are true: (a) e has published eir intent to perform the action, unambiguously describing the action to be performed, at least four days and no more than fourteen days before attempting to perform the action; (b) at least one other player has announced (and not withdrawn) support for the intended action since intent was published; and (c) more players have announced (and not withdrawn) support than have announced (and not withdrawn) objections to the action since the intent was published. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4978 (Murphy), 31 May 2007 text: An entity that may perform an action with Agoran Consent can do so by announcement if all of the following are true: (a) e has published eir intent to perform the action, unambiguously describing the action to be performed, at least four days and no more than fourteen days before attempting to perform the action; (b) at least one other player has announced (and not withdrawn) support for the intended action since intent was published; and (c) more other players have announced (and not withdrawn) support than have announced (and not withdrawn) objections to the action since the intent was published. history: Retitled by Proposal 5113 (Murphy, Maud), 2 August 2007 history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5113 (Murphy, Maud), 2 August 2007 text: The following methods of dependent actions are defined: (a) With N Supporters. For this method, the support index is N. "With Support" is synonymous with "With 1 Supporter". (b) Without N Objections. For this method, the objection index is N. "Without Objection" is synonymous with "Without 1 Objection". (c) With N Agoran Consent. For this method, the majority index is N. "With Agoran Consent" is synonymous with "With 1/2 Agoran Consent". history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5370 (Zefram), 20 December 2007 text: The following methods of dependent actions are defined: (a) With N Supporters. For this method, the support index is N+1. "With Support" is synonymous with "With 1 Supporter". (b) Without N Objections. For this method, the objection index is N. "Without Objection" is synonymous with "Without 1 Objection". (c) With N Agoran Consent. For this method, the majority index is N. "With Agoran Consent" is synonymous with "With 1/2 Agoran Consent". history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 5445 (Goethe, Murphy), 21 February 2008 history: Retitled by Proposal 5445 (Goethe, Murphy), 21 February 2008 history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5445 (Goethe, Murphy), 21 February 2008 text: A Supporter of a dependent action is a first-class player who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) support for an announcement of intent to perform the action. An Objector to a dependent action is a first-class player who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) an objection to the announcement of intent to perform the action. The Executor of such an announcement of intent CANNOT support nor object to it. A rule authorizing the performance of a dependent action may further restrict the eligibility of players to support or object to that specific action. Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action if and only if: (1) the action is to be performed Without N Objections, and it has fewer than N objectors; (2) the action is to be performed With N supporters, and it has N or more supporters; or (3) the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and the ratio of supporters to objectors is greater than N, or the action has at least one supporter and no objectors. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5504 (Murphy), 10 May 2008 text: A Supporter of a dependent action is a first-class player who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) support for an announcement of intent to perform the action. An Objector to a dependent action is a first-class player (or other person explicitly allowed to object to that action by the rule allowing that action to be performed dependently) who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) an objection to the announcement of intent to perform the action. The Executor of such an announcement of intent CANNOT support nor object to it. A rule authorizing the performance of a dependent action may further restrict the eligibility of players to support or object to that specific action. Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action if and only if: (1) the action is to be performed Without N Objections, and it has fewer than N objectors; (2) the action is to be performed With N supporters, and it has N or more supporters; or (3) the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and the ratio of supporters to objectors is greater than N, or the action has at least one supporter and no objectors. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2125 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2125 by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 text: An action is regulated if: (a) the action is prohibited; (b) the rules indicate that if certain conditions are satisfied, then some player is permitted to perform the action; (c) the action would, as part of its effect, modify information for which some player is required to be a recordkeepor; (d) the action would, as part of its effect, make it impossible to make arbitrary modifications to the rules by any combinations of actions by players; or (e) the courts have held that the action is regulated, and this finding has not been overturned. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5235 (Goddess Eris), 3 October 2007 text: An action is regulated if: (a) the action is prohibited; (b) the rules indicate that if certain conditions are satisfied, then some player is permitted to perform the action; (c) the action would, as part of its effect, modify information for which some player is required to be a recordkeepor; or (d) the action would, as part of its effect, make it impossible to make arbitrary modifications to the rules by any combinations of actions by players. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5536 (Murphy), 7 June 2008 text: An action is regulated if: a) It is IMPOSSIBLE. b) It is ILLEGAL. c) The rules explicitly state that it CAN be performed while certain conditions are satisfied. Such an action CANNOT be performed except as allowed by the rules. d) The rules explicitly state that it MAY be performed while certain conditions are satisfied. Such an action MAY NOT be performed except as allowed by the rules. e) It would, as part of its effect, modify information for which some player is required to be a recordkeepor. Such an action CANNOT modify that information except as allowed by the rules. f) A judicial finding has determined that it is regulated, and has not been superseded by subsequent legislation. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2126 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2126 by Proposal 4872 (OscarMeyr), 26 October 2006 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. The Promotor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero. When a proposal is adopted, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. The Promotor may accept reasonable synonyms for "expend" (such as "pay" or "use") as valid actions under this rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4884 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. The Promotor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero. When a proposal is adopted, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. At the end of each quarter, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that quarter gains one VC. A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one VC. A player whose judgement is overturned loses one VC, if e has any. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. The Promotor may accept reasonable synonyms for "expend" (such as "pay" or "use") as valid actions under this rule. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4914 (OscarMeyr), 21 March 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. The Promotor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero. When a proposal is adopted, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. At the end of each quarter, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that quarter gains one VC. A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one VC. A player whose judgement is overturned loses one VC, if e has any. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4914 (OscarMeyr), 21 March 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. The Promotor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero. When a proposal is adopted, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. At the end of each quarter, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that quarter gains one VC. A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one VC. A player whose judgement is overturned loses one VC, if e has any. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. Changes to voting limits under this rule take effect at the beginning of the next week. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4943 (Goethe), 3 May 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. The Promotor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero. When a proposal is adopted, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces that the officer has performed poorly in eir duties. A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one VC. A player whose judgement is overturned, or who is recused for failing to judge within eir Deliberation Period, loses one VC, if e has any. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. Changes to voting limits under this rule take effect at the beginning of the next week. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 4950 (Zefram), 7 May 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. The Promotor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero and eir voting limit on ordinary proposals is set to one. When a proposal is adopted, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces that the officer has performed poorly in eir duties. A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one VC. A player whose judgement is overturned, or who is recused for failing to judge within eir Deliberation Period, loses one VC, if e has any. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. Changes to voting limits under this rule take effect at the beginning of the next week. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 4961 (Zefram), 3 June 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. The Promotor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero and eir voting limit on ordinary proposals is set to one. When an Ordinary proposal is adopted, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of twice the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces that the officer has performed poorly in eir duties. A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one VC. A player whose judgement is overturned, or who is recused for failing to judge within eir Deliberation Period, loses one VC, if e has any. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. Changes to voting limits under this rule take effect at the beginning of the next week. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5031 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero and eir voting limit on ordinary proposals is set to one. When an Ordinary proposal is adopted, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of twice the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces that the officer has performed poorly in eir duties. A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one VC. A player whose judgement is overturned, or who is recused for failing to judge within eir Deliberation Period, loses one VC, if e has any. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. Changes to voting limits under this rule take effect at the beginning of the next week. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5052 (Zefram), 5 July 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero and eir voting limit on ordinary proposals is set to one. When an Ordinary proposal is adopted and its proposer is not the proposer of any Ordinary proposal previously adopted in the same week, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of twice the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces that the officer has performed poorly in eir duties. A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one VC. A player whose judgement is overturned, or who is recused for failing to judge within eir Deliberation Period, loses one VC, if e has any. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. Changes to voting limits under this rule take effect at the beginning of the next week. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5056 (Murphy), 5 July 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero and eir voting limit on ordinary proposals is set to one. When an Ordinary Interested proposal is adopted and its proposer is not the proposer of any Ordinary proposal previously adopted in the same week, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of twice the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces that the officer has performed poorly in eir duties. A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one VC. A player whose judgement is overturned, or who is recused for failing to judge within eir Deliberation Period, loses one VC, if e has any. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. Changes to voting limits under this rule take effect at the beginning of the next week. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5058 (Zefram), 5 July 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. A player's VC is at all times a non-negative integer. VCs are not any form of property and cannot be traded. VCs can be affected only as described in this rule. When one or more players win the game, all players' voting limits on ordinary proposals are reset to one, subject to modification by other rules. When a player joins Agora, eir VCs are set to zero and eir voting limit on ordinary proposals is set to one. When an Ordinary Interested proposal is adopted and its proposer is not the proposer of any Ordinary Interested proposal previously adopted in the same week, its proposer gains VCs equal to the integer portion of twice the proposal's adoption index, and each co-author of the proposal gains one VC. At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces that the officer has performed poorly in eir duties. A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one VC. A player whose judgement is overturned, or who is recused for failing to judge within eir Deliberation Period, loses one VC, if e has any. A player may expend two VCs to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend one VC to increase any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. A player may expend two VCs to decrease any other player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one, down to a minimum voting limit of zero. Attempts to decrease a player's voting limit on ordinary proposals below this minimum fail. If a player attempts to expend more VCs than e currently has, the action fails, and the VCs are not expended. Changes to voting limits under this rule take effect at the beginning of the next week. history: Power changed from 3 to 2 by Proposal 5076 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5076 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except as described in this rule. When a player registers or deregisters, e loses all eir VCs. When one or more players win the game, each player's voting limit on ordinary proposals is reset to its default value. Each VC has a color (Gray if not otherwise specified). If a player loses a color of VC that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an ordinary interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week), and each co-author of the proposal gains one Red VC (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week). b) At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces within a week after the end of the month that the officer performed eir duties poorly or not at all. c) A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) When an officer forfeits eir salary due to announcement by the Speaker, e loses one Green VC. c) A player whose judgement is overturned, or who is recused for failing to judge within eir Deliberation Period, loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified). All changes to voting limits are applied at the end of the week, in the order the VCs were spent, after which any fractional voting limits are rounded to the nearest integer (nearest odd integer if the fractional part is 0.5). a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own voting limit on ordinary proposals by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's voting limit on ordinary proposals by ten percent. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 5078 (Zefram), 18 July 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except as described in this rule. When a player registers or deregisters, e loses all eir VCs. The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. Each VC has a color (Gray if not otherwise specified). If a player loses a color of VC that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an ordinary interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week), and each co-author of the proposal gains one Red VC (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week). b) At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces within a week after the end of the month that the officer performed eir duties poorly or not at all. c) A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) When an officer forfeits eir salary due to announcement by the Speaker, e loses one Green VC. c) A player whose judgement is overturned, or who is recused for failing to judge within eir Deliberation Period, loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 5097 (Zefram), 25 July 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except as described in this rule. When a player registers or deregisters, e loses all eir VCs. The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. Each VC has a color (Gray if not otherwise specified). If a player loses a color of VC that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an ordinary interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week), and each co-author of the proposal gains one Red VC (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week). b) At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces within a week after the end of the month that the officer performed eir duties poorly or not at all. c) A player who submits a judgement during eir Deliberation Period gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) When an officer forfeits eir salary due to announcement by the Speaker, e loses one Green VC. c) A player whose judgement is overturned, or who is recused for failing to judge within eir Deliberation Period, loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except as described in this rule. When a player registers or deregisters, e loses all eir VCs. The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. Each VC has a color (Gray if not otherwise specified). If a player loses a color of VC that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an ordinary interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week), and each co-author of the proposal gains one Red VC (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week). b) At the end of each month, for each office, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs, unless the Speaker publicly announces within a week after the end of the month that the officer performed eir duties poorly or not at all. c) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) When an officer forfeits eir salary due to announcement by the Speaker, e loses one Green VC. c) A player who is recused from a judicial case because a judicial question has remained applicable, open, and unjudged loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5112 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except as described in this rule. When a player registers or deregisters, e loses all eir VCs. The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. Each VC has a color (Gray if not otherwise specified). If a player loses a color of VC that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an ordinary interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week), and each co-author of the proposal gains one Red VC (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week). b) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless the Speaker announces within a week after the end of that month that that player performed that office's duties poorly or not at all. c) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) When an officer forfeits eir salary due to announcement by the Speaker, e loses one Green VC. c) A player who is recused from a judicial case because a judicial question has remained applicable, open, and unjudged loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 5114 (Zefram), 2 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except as described by this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an ordinary interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week), and each co-author of the proposal gains one Red VC (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week). b) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless the Speaker announces within a week after the end of that month that that player performed that office's duties poorly or not at all. c) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) When an officer forfeits eir salary due to announcement by the Speaker, e loses one Green VC. c) A player who is recused from a judicial case because a judicial question has remained applicable, open, and unjudged loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5126 (Zefram), 13 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except as described by this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an ordinary interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week), and each co-author of the proposal gains one Red VC (unless e gained VCs in this way earlier in the same week). b) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. c) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. c) A player who is recused from a judicial case because a judicial question has remained applicable, open, and unjudged loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5128 (Zefram, Murphy), 13 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except as described by this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. b) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. c) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. c) A player who is recused from a judicial case because a judicial question has remained applicable, open, and unjudged loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5151 (root), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except as described by this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. b) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. c) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. c) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5161 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. b) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. c) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. c) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(21) by Proposal 5163 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs may be gained as follows: a) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. b) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. c) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. VCs may be lost as follows: a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. b) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. c) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(22) by Proposal 5164 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+B) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(23) by Proposal 5165 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+B) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(24) by Proposal 5166 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) A player who assigns a judgement to a judicial question within the time limit when first obliged to gains one Blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(25) by Proposal 5167 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(26) by Proposal 5168 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(27) by Proposal 5169 (Zefram, OscarMeyr, Pavitra), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(28) by Proposal 5170 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the integer portion of the proposal's adoption index, minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(29) by Proposal 5176 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by one. b) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by one. c) A player may spend two VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by one (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend three VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by ten percent. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(30) by Proposal 5197 (Zefram), 6 September 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. VCs CANNOT be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs are lost or never gained. Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color possessed by each player. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(31) by Proposal 5202 (Murphy; disi.), 8 September 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has a color. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(32) by Proposal 5205 (Zefram), 8 September 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has a color. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(33) by Proposal 5213 (Murphy), 8 September 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(34) by Proposal 5220 (Zefram), 13 September 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(35) by Proposal 5256 (AFO), 27 October 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(36) by Proposal 5255 (AFO), 27 October 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be affected except by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(37) by Proposal 5276 (Murphy, Pavitra, Zefram), 7 November 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(38) by Proposal 5288 (Murphy), 14 November 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(39) by Proposal 5289 (Murphy), 14 November 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR, and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(40) by Proposal 5322 (Murphy), 5 December 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR (other than possibly from its author), and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for 100 days and has never been a player before that period, e gains one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(41) by Proposal 5325 (Murphy), 5 December 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor named in the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR (other than possibly from its author), and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months and has never been a player before that period, and names another player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), e and that player each gain one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(42) by Proposal 5334 (Murphy), 5 December 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor of the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR (other than possibly from its author), and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months and has never been a player before that period, and names another player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), e and that player each gain one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. history: Amended(43) by Proposal 5336 (Murphy), 8 December 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor of the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR (other than possibly from its author), and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months and has never been a player before that period, and names another player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), e and that player each gain one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs of different colors to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs of different colors to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. VC awards and penalties SHALL be announced, as soon as possible after they occur, by the following officers: Assessor - Red, Orange IADoP - Green, Cyan CotC - Blue, Black Registrar - White Herald - Violet, Indigo Scorekeepor - Yellow Accountor - all others history: Amended(44) by Proposal 5340 (BobTHJ; disi.), 8 December 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor of the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR (other than possibly from its author), and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months and has never been a player before that period, and names another player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), e and that player each gain one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player wins the game, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a game win occurs, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. VC awards and penalties SHALL be announced, as soon as possible after they occur, by the following officers: Assessor - Red, Orange IADoP - Green, Cyan CotC - Blue, Black Registrar - White Herald - Violet, Indigo Scorekeepor - Yellow Accountor - all others history: Amended(45) by Proposal 5341 (Goethe), 8 December 2007 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor of the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR (other than possibly from its author), and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months and has never been a player before that period, and names another player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), e and that player each gain one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. VC awards and penalties SHALL be announced, as soon as possible after they occur, by the following officers: Assessor - Red, Orange IADoP - Green, Cyan CotC - Blue, Black Registrar - White Herald - Violet, Indigo Scorekeepor - Yellow Accountor - all others history: Amended(46) by Proposal 5378 (root), 1 January 2008 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor of the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR (other than possibly from its author), and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months and has never been a player before that period, and names another first-class player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), e and that player each gain one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to decrease another player's VVLOP by N (to a minimum of zero). d) A player may spend N+2 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. VC awards and penalties SHALL be announced, as soon as possible after they occur, by the following officers: Assessor - Red, Orange IADoP - Green, Cyan CotC - Blue, Black Registrar - White Herald - Violet, Indigo Scorekeepor - Yellow Accountor - all others history: Amended(47) by Proposal 5379 (root; disi.), 1 January 2008 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor of the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR (other than possibly from its author), and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months and has never been a player before that period, and names another first-class player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), e and that player each gain one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to decrease another player's VVLOP by N, to a minimum of zero, where N >= 1. d) A player may spend N+2 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. VC awards and penalties SHALL be announced, as soon as possible after they occur, by the following officers: Assessor - Red, Orange IADoP - Green, Cyan CotC - Blue, Black Registrar - White Herald - Violet, Indigo Scorekeepor - Yellow Accountor - all others history: Amended(48) by Proposal 5385 (Murphy; disi.), 1 January 2008 text: Voting Credits (VCs) are a class of fixed assets that can be used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. Changes to VC holdings are secured. Ownership of VCs is restricted to players. Each VC has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of VC is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip). The Accountor is the recordkeepor of VCs. VCs are gained and lost as follows: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted, its proposer gains a number of Red VCs equal to the proposal's adoption index times its interest index (rounded down to the nearest integer), minus the number of Red VCs that e has gained in this way earlier in the same week (down to a minimum of zero), and each coauthor of the proposal gains one Red VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-R) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its adoption index, its proposer loses one Red VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains one orange VC unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (-O) When an interested proposal is rejected by voting with no valid votes FOR (other than possibly from its author), and having met quorum, its proposer loses one orange VC, unless e lost a VC in this way earlier in the same week. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office with a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains two Green VCs (if the office has a weekly report) or one Green VC (if it has only a monthly report), unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month. (-G) At the end of each month, for each office, for each player who has held that office during that month, if another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month then that player loses one Green VC. (+C) When a player deputises for an office e gains one cyan VC, unless someone previously gained a VC in this manner for the same office in the same month. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one blue VC. (-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is assigned to the question on disposition loses one Blue VC. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, and has not violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit, e gains one black VC. (-K) In a criminal case, when a sentence becomes active for the first time the defendant loses one black VC. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player and has never been a player before, e gains one white VC. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months and has never been a player before that period, and names another first-class player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), e and that player each gain one white VC. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains one magenta VC, unless e previously gained a VC in this manner during the same birthday. (+U) When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, e gains two ultraviolet VCs. (+V) When a person is awarded a patent title, e gains one violet VC, unless e gained a VC in this way earlier in the same month. (-V) When a person has a patent title revoked from em, and the instrument that authorises the revocation does not describe the revocation as administrative, e loses one violet VC. (+I) When a person is awarded a patent title that is a degree, e gains a number of indigo VCs. The number depends on the rank of the degree: it is two for the lowest rank, four for the next, and so on increasing by two per rank, up to a maximum of twelve for the sixth and higher ranks. If the rank of the degree is not adequately defined to apply this rule then the number is two. (-*) One second before the end of each month, each entity loses 1/5 of eir holdings of each color of VC, rounded down to the nearest integer. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains one Yellow VC. VCs may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend N+1 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to increase another player's VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. b) A player may spend N+2 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to increase eir own VVLOP by N, where N >= 1. c) A player may spend N+1 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to decrease another player's VVLOP by N, to a minimum of zero, where N >= 1. d) A player may spend N+2 VCs, each of a color distinct from the rest, to multiply another player's VVLOP by (10-N)/10, where 1 <= N <= 10. e) A player may spend two VCs of the same color to make another player gain one VC of that color. z) If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for VCs, a player may spend one VC of each such color to win the game. When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. VC awards and penalties SHALL be announced, as soon as possible after they occur, by the following officers: Assessor - Red, Orange IADoP - Green, Cyan CotC - Blue, Black Registrar - White Herald - Violet, Indigo Scorekeepor - Yellow Accountor - all others history: Retitled by Proposal 5404 (Murphy, pikhq, root), 16 January 2008 history: Amended(49) by Proposal 5404 (Murphy, pikhq, root), 16 January 2008 text: Ribbons are a class of fixed assets. Changes to Ribbon holdings are secured. Ownership of Ribbons is restricted to players. Each Ribbon has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of Ribbon is a currency. The Tailor is a low-priority office, and the recordkeepor of Ribbons. Ribbons are gained as follows, unless the player already possesses the color of Ribbon to be gained: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted and changes at least one rule with Power >= 3, its proposer gains a Red Ribbon. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains an Orange Ribbon. (+G) At the end of each month, each player who held at least one office continuously during that month gains a Green Ribbon, unless e violated a requirement to submit a report within a time limit. (+C) When a player deputises for an office, e gains a Cyan Ribbon. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, e gains a Blue Ribbon, unless e violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, e gains a Black Ribbon, unless e violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player for the first time, e gains a White Ribbon. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months, was never a player before that period, and names another first-class player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), that player gains a White Ribbon. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains a Magenta Ribbon. (+U) When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, e gains an Ultraviolet Ribbon. (+V) When a player is awarded a Patent Title, e gains a Violet Ribbon, unless e gains a different Ribbon for the award. (+I) When a player is awarded a degree, e gains an Indigo Ribbon. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains a Yellow Ribbon. If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for Ribbons, then a player CAN destroy one Ribbon of each such color in eir possession to satisfy the Winning Condition of Renaissance. history: Retitled by Proposal 5424 (Zefram; disi.), 6 February 2008 history: Amended(50) by Proposal 5424 (Zefram; disi.), 6 February 2008 text: Notes are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of Notes is restricted to players. Changes to Note holdings are secured. Each Note has exactly one pitch from the chromatic scale (ignoring octaves, and treating enharmonics as equivalent). Each pitch of Note is a currency. The Conductor is an office, and the recordkeepor of Notes. Notes are gained as follows: (1) At the end of each week, for each player, let X be the number of eir interested proposals that were adopted during that week, and let Y be the number of eir interested quorate proposals that were rejected during that week with VI >= AI/2: (F) If X > Y > 0, then e gains an F Note. (F#) If X > Y = 0, then e gains an F# Note. (G) If X = Y > 0, then e gains a G Note. (Ab) If Y > X = 0, then e gains an Ab Note. (A) If Y > X > 0, then e gains an A Note. (2) (E) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one weekly report during that week gains an E Note. (Eb) At the end of each month, each player who published at least one monthly report during that month gains an Eb Note. (3) (D) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one on-time judgement during that week gains a D Note. (4) (C) At the end of each week, each player who gained at least one Point during that week gains a C Note. (C#) At the end of each week, each contestmaster who awarded at least one Point during that week gains a C# Note. Notes CAN be spent (destroyed) as follows: (1) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a major chord to increase another player's VVLOP by 1. (2) A player CAN spend five Notes forming the start of a major scale to increase eir own VVLOP by 1. (3) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a minor chord to decrease another player's VVLOP by 1. (4) A player CAN spend two Notes of the same pitch to make another player gain one Note of that pitch. (5) During Agora's Birthday, a player CAN spend Notes forming the melody "Happy Birthday" (GGAGCB GGAGDC GGGECBA FFECDC or a translation thereof) to satisfy the Winning Condition of Musicianship, unless another player has already done so during that Birthday. history: Amended(51) by Proposal 5485 (root), 9 April 2008 text: Notes are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of Notes is restricted to players. Changes to Note holdings are secured. Each Note has exactly one pitch from the chromatic scale (ignoring octaves, and treating enharmonics as equivalent). Each pitch of Note is a currency. The Conductor is an office, and the recordkeepor of Notes. Notes are gained as follows: (1) At the end of each week, for each player, let X be the number of eir interested proposals that were adopted during that week, and let Y be the number of eir interested quorate proposals that were rejected during that week with VI >= AI/2: (F) If X > Y > 0, then e gains an F Note. (F#) If X > Y = 0, then e gains an F# Note. (G) If X = Y > 0, then e gains a G Note. (Ab) If Y > X = 0, then e gains an Ab Note. (A) If Y > X > 0, then e gains an A Note. (2) (E) At the end of each week, each player who completed the non-empty set of weekly duties of at least one office during that week gains an E Note. (Eb) At the end of each month, each player who completed the non-empty set of monthly duties of at least one office during that month gains an Eb Note. (3) (D) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one on-time judgement during that week gains a D Note. (4) (C) At the end of each week, each player who gained at least one Point during that week gains a C Note. (C#) At the end of each week, each contestmaster who awarded at least one Point during that week gains a C# Note. Notes CAN be spent (destroyed) as follows: (1) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a major chord to increase another player's VVLOP by 1. (2) A player CAN spend five Notes forming the start of a major scale to increase eir own VVLOP by 1. (3) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a minor chord to decrease another player's VVLOP by 1. (4) A player CAN spend two Notes of the same pitch to make another player gain one Note of that pitch. (5) During Agora's Birthday, a player CAN spend Notes forming the melody "Happy Birthday" (GGAGCB GGAGDC GGGECBA FFECDC or a translation thereof) to satisfy the Winning Condition of Musicianship, unless another player has already done so during that Birthday. history: Amended(52) by Proposal 5510 (Murphy, Zefram), 28 May 2008 text: Notes are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of Notes is restricted to players. Changes to Note holdings are secured. Each Note has exactly one pitch from the chromatic scale (ignoring octaves, and treating enharmonics as equivalent). Each pitch of Note is a currency. The Conductor is an office, and the recordkeepor of Notes. Notes are gained as follows: (1) At the end of each week, for each player, let X be the number of eir interested proposals that were adopted during that week, and let Y be the number of eir interested quorate proposals that were rejected during that week with VI >= AI/2: (F) If X > Y > 0, then e gains an F Note. (F#) If X > Y = 0, then e gains an F# Note. (G) If X = Y > 0, then e gains a G Note. (Ab) If Y > X = 0, then e gains an Ab Note. (A) If Y > X > 0, then e gains an A Note. (2) (E) At the end of each week, each player who completed the non-empty set of weekly duties of at least one office during that week gains an E Note. (Eb) At the end of each month, each player who completed the non-empty set of monthly duties of at least one office during that month gains an Eb Note. (3) (D) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one on-time judgement during that week gains a D Note. (4) (C) At the end of each week, each player who gained at least one Point during that week gains a C Note. (C#) At the end of each week, each contestmaster who awarded at least one Point during that week gains a C# Note. Notes CAN be spent (destroyed) as follows: (1) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a major chord to increase another player's VVLOP by 1. (2) A player CAN spend five Notes forming the start of a major scale to increase eir own VVLOP by 1. (3) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a minor chord to decrease another player's VVLOP by 1. (4) A player CAN spend two Notes of the same pitch to make another player gain one Note of that pitch. (5) During Agora's Birthday, a player CAN spend Notes forming the melody "Happy Birthday" (GGAGCB GGAGDC GGGECBA FFECDC or a translation thereof) to satisfy the Winning Condition of Musicianship, unless another player has already done so during that Birthday. (6) A player CAN spend one Note to increase another player's voting limit on an ordinary proposal whose voting period is in progress by 1. (7) A player CAN spend two Notes to increase eir voting limit on an ordinary proposal whose voting period is in progress by 1. (8) A player CAN spend three Notes to gain a Note whose pitch is as many semitones distant from one of the Notes spent as the distance between the other two Notes spent. history: Amended(53) by Proposal 5547 (ais523), 21 June 2008 text: Notes are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of Notes is restricted to players. Changes to Note holdings are secured. Each Note has exactly one pitch from the chromatic scale (ignoring octaves, and treating enharmonics as equivalent). Each pitch of Note is a currency. The Conductor is an office, and the recordkeepor of Notes. Notes are gained as follows: (1) At the end of each week, for each player, let X be the number of eir interested proposals that were adopted during that week, and let Y be the number of eir interested quorate proposals that were rejected during that week with VI >= AI/2: (F) If X > Y > 0, then e gains an F Note. (F#) If X > Y = 0, then e gains an F# Note. (G) If X = Y > 0, then e gains a G Note. (Ab) If Y > X = 0, then e gains an Ab Note. (A) If Y > X > 0, then e gains an A Note. (2) (E) At the end of each week, each player who completed the non-empty set of weekly duties of at least one office during that week gains an E Note. (Eb) At the end of each month, each player who completed the non-empty set of monthly duties of at least one office during that month gains an Eb Note. (3) (D) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one on-time judgement during that week gains a D Note. (4) (C) At the end of each week, each player who gained at least one Point during that week gains a C Note. (C#) At the end of each week, each contestmaster who awarded at least one Point during that week gains a C# Note. Notes CAN be spent (destroyed) as follows: (1) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a major chord to increase another player's VVLOD by 1. (2) A player CAN spend five Notes forming the start of a major scale to increase eir own VVLOD by 1. (3) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a minor chord to decrease another player's VVLOD by 1. (4) A player CAN spend two Notes of the same pitch to make another player gain one Note of that pitch. (5) During Agora's Birthday, a player CAN spend Notes forming the melody "Happy Birthday" (GGAGCB GGAGDC GGGECBA FFECDC or a translation thereof) to satisfy the Winning Condition of Musicianship, unless another player has already done so during that Birthday. (6) A player CAN spend one Note to increase another player's voting limit on an ordinary proposal whose voting period is in progress by 1. (7) A player CAN spend two Notes to increase eir voting limit on an ordinary proposal whose voting period is in progress by 1. (8) A player CAN spend three Notes to gain a Note whose pitch is as many semitones distant from one of the Notes spent as the distance between the other two Notes spent. history: Amended(54) by Proposal 5549 (Wooble), 21 June 2008 text: Notes are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of Notes is restricted to players. Changes to Note holdings are secured. Each Note has exactly one pitch from the chromatic scale (ignoring octaves, and treating enharmonics as equivalent). Each pitch of Note is a currency. The Conductor is an office, and the recordkeepor of Notes. Notes are gained as follows: (1) At the end of each week, for each player, let X be the number of eir interested proposals that were adopted during that week, and let Y be the number of eir interested quorate proposals that were rejected during that week with VI >= AI/2: (F) If X > Y > 0, then e gains an F Note. (F#) If X > Y = 0, then e gains an F# Note. (G) If X = Y > 0, then e gains a G Note. (Ab) If Y > X = 0, then e gains an Ab Note. (A) If Y > X > 0, then e gains an A Note. (2) (E) At the end of each week, each player who completed the non-empty set of weekly duties of at least one office during that week gains an E Note. (Eb) At the end of each month, each player who completed the non-empty set of monthly duties of at least one office during that month gains an Eb Note. (3) (D) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one on-time judgement during that week gains a D Note. (4) (C) At the end of each week, each player who gained at least one Point during that week gains a C Note. (C#) At the end of each week, each contestmaster who awarded at least one Point during that week gains a C# Note. (5) (B) At the end of each week, each player who authored at least one proposal with an Interest Index of 2 that passed during that week gains a B note. (Bb) At the end of each week, each player who authored at least one proposal with an Interest Index of 3 that passed during that week gains a Bb note. Notes CAN be spent (destroyed) as follows: (1) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a major chord to increase another player's VVLOD by 1. (2) A player CAN spend five Notes forming the start of a major scale to increase eir own VVLOD by 1. (3) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a minor chord to decrease another player's VVLOD by 1. (4) A player CAN spend two Notes of the same pitch to make another player gain one Note of that pitch. (5) During Agora's Birthday, a player CAN spend Notes forming the melody "Happy Birthday" (GGAGCB GGAGDC GGGECBA FFECDC or a translation thereof) to satisfy the Winning Condition of Musicianship, unless another player has already done so during that Birthday. (6) A player CAN spend one Note to increase another player's voting limit on an ordinary proposal whose voting period is in progress by 1. (7) A player CAN spend two Notes to increase eir voting limit on an ordinary proposal whose voting period is in progress by 1. (8) A player CAN spend three Notes to gain a Note whose pitch is as many semitones distant from one of the Notes spent as the distance between the other two Notes spent. history: Amended(55) by Proposal 5553 (Murphy), 21 June 2008 text: Notes are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of Notes is restricted to players. Changes to Note holdings are secured. Each Note has exactly one pitch from the chromatic scale (ignoring octaves, and treating enharmonics as equivalent). Each pitch of Note is a currency. The Conductor is an office, and the recordkeepor of Notes. Key is a player switch, tracked by the Conductor, with values equal to the pitches that Notes can have, defaulting to C. A player CAN change eir Key to any value by announcement, unless e has already done so during the current month. Notes are gained as follows, except that the pitch actually gained is as many semitones higher than the pitch listed below as the player's Key is higher than C at the time of the gain: (1) At the end of each week, for each player, let X be the number of eir interested proposals that were adopted during that week, and let Y be the number of eir interested quorate proposals that were rejected during that week with VI >= AI/2: (F) If X > Y > 0, then e gains an F Note. (F#) If X > Y = 0, then e gains an F# Note. (G) If X = Y > 0, then e gains a G Note. (Ab) If Y > X = 0, then e gains an Ab Note. (A) If Y > X > 0, then e gains an A Note. (2) (E) At the end of each week, each player who completed the non-empty set of weekly duties of at least one office during that week gains an E Note. (Eb) At the end of each month, each player who completed the non-empty set of monthly duties of at least one office during that month gains an Eb Note. (3) (D) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one on-time judgement during that week gains a D Note. (4) (C) At the end of each week, each player who gained at least one Point during that week gains a C Note. (C#) At the end of each week, each contestmaster who awarded at least one Point during that week gains a C# Note. (5) (B) At the end of each week, each player who authored at least one proposal with an Interest Index of 2 that passed during that week gains a B note. (Bb) At the end of each week, each player who authored at least one proposal with an Interest Index of 3 that passed during that week gains a Bb note. Notes CAN be spent (destroyed) as follows: (1) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a major chord to increase another player's VVLOD by 1. (2) A player CAN spend five Notes forming the start of a major scale to increase eir own VVLOD by 1. (3) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a minor chord to decrease another player's VVLOD by 1. (4) A player CAN spend two Notes of the same pitch to make another player gain one Note of that pitch. (5) During Agora's Birthday, a player CAN spend Notes forming the melody "Happy Birthday" (GGAGCB GGAGDC GGGECBA FFECDC or a translation thereof) to satisfy the Winning Condition of Musicianship, unless another player has already done so during that Birthday. (6) A player CAN spend one Note to increase another player's voting limit on an ordinary proposal whose voting period is in progress by 1. (7) A player CAN spend two Notes to increase eir voting limit on an ordinary proposal whose voting period is in progress by 1. (8) A player CAN spend three Notes to gain a Note whose pitch is as many semitones distant from one of the Notes spent as the distance between the other two Notes spent. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2127 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2127 by Proposal 4875 (Goethe), 1 December 2006 text: A ballot option (vote) on an Agoran decision may be submitted conditionally, and the truth or falsity of the condition and thus the selected option will be determined as it exists at the end of the voting period. The option selected shall be considered to be clearly identified if and only if the truth or falsity of the specified condition(s) can be reasonably determined, without circularity or paradox, from information published within the voting period. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5427 (Murphy), 9 February 2008 text: A ballot option (vote) on an Agoran decision may be submitted conditionally, and the truth or falsity of the condition and thus the selected option will be determined as it exists at the end of the voting period. The option selected shall be considered to be clearly identified if and only if the truth or falsity of the specified condition(s) can be reasonably determined, without circularity or paradox, from information published within the voting period. Casting a vote endorsing another voter is equivalent to conditionally casting a vote whose value is the same as the most common value (if any) among that voter's valid votes on that decision. Casting a vote denouncing another voter is equivalent to conditionally casting a vote whose value is opposite to the most common value (if any) among that voter's valid votes on that decision. FOR and AGAINST are opposites; SUPPORT and OBJECT are opposites; PRESENT is its own opposite. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5506 (Murphy; disi.), 10 May 2008 text: A ballot option (vote) on an Agoran decision may be submitted conditionally, and the truth or falsity of the condition and thus the selected option will be determined as it exists at the end of the voting period. The option selected shall be considered to be clearly identified if and only if the truth or falsity of the specified condition(s) can be reasonably determined, without circularity or paradox, from information published within the voting period. Casting a vote endorsing another voter is equivalent to conditionally casting a vote whose value is the same as the most common value (if any) among that voter's valid votes on that decision. Casting a vote denouncing another voter is equivalent to conditionally casting a vote whose value is opposite to the most common value (if any) among that voter's valid votes on that decision. FOR and AGAINST are opposites; PRESENT is its own opposite. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2128 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2128 by Proposal 4878 (Goethe), 22 January 2007 text: The current Speaker may, with two supporters, invite players to enter into a specified agreement (hereafter a Contest) to determine who wins the game. The contest must be open to all players. Winners determined by the procedures of the contest do in fact win the game. When the initiating Speaker ceases to be Speaker, the contest loses the legal authority to determine winners. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2128 by Proposal 5060 (Zefram; disi.), 9 July 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2129 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2129 by Proposal 4879 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 text: When the Herald is ordered to place someone in the Chokey, e shall publically award em the patent title "In the Chokey". This title shall be automatically revoked after a length of time indicated by the sentencing order, and the Herald shall announce the revokation. If a sentencing order is executed against a defendant who already holds this title, the length of time of the new sentencing order shall be added to the time left on any previous ones. A person is considered to be In Disgrace while in the Chokey, between the execution and satisfaction of any sentencing orders binding em, or if deregistered for lawlessness. A person who leaves the game in disgrace shall be awarded the Patent Title Fugitive by the Herald. A Player may revoke the title Fugitive from emself as long as e is no longer in Disgrace. A non-player may have this title revoked by Agoran Consent. The rules may further specify actions prohibited to persons in particular types of disgrace. The Herald is encouraged to publish lists of those in disgrace separate from patent titles of honor, to indicate the disgrace. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5027 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: When the Herald is ordered to place someone in the Chokey, e shall publically award em the patent title "In the Chokey". This title shall be automatically revoked after a length of time indicated by the sentencing order, and the Herald shall announce the revocation. If a sentencing order is executed against a defendant who already holds this title, the length of time of the new sentencing order shall be added to the time left on any previous ones. A person is considered to be In Disgrace while in the Chokey, between the execution and satisfaction of any sentencing orders binding em, or if deregistered for lawlessness. A person who leaves the game in disgrace shall be awarded the Patent Title Fugitive by the Herald. A Player may revoke the title Fugitive from emself as long as e is no longer in Disgrace. A non-player may have this title revoked by Agoran Consent. The rules may further specify actions prohibited to persons in particular types of disgrace. The Herald is encouraged to publish lists of those in disgrace separate from patent titles of honor, to indicate the disgrace. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2129 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2130 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2130 by Proposal 4893 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 text: A player may become active or inactive by announcement. A player may, without objection, make another player inactive. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4966 (Zefram), 3 June 2007 text: A player may become active or inactive by announcement. A player may, without objection, make another player inactive. Registration as a player causes the new player to become active. All non-players are inactive. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 4967 (Zefram), 3 June 2007 text: A player may become active or inactive by announcement. A player may, without objection, make another player inactive. Registration as a player causes the new player to become active. All non-players are inactive. The Registrar's report shall indicate, for each player, whether the player is active or inactive, and the date on which this status last changed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 4985 (Zefram), 6 June 2007 text: A player may become active or inactive by announcement. A player may, without objection, make another player inactive. Registration as a player causes the new player to become active. All non-players are inactive. The Registrar's report shall indicate, for each player, whether the player is active or inactive, and the date on which this status last changed. Registration as a player causes the new player to become active. All non-players are inactive. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 4986 (Zefram), 6 June 2007 text: A player may become active or inactive by announcement. A player may, without objection, make another player inactive. Registration as a player causes the new player to become active. All non-players are inactive. The Registrar's report shall indicate, for each player, whether the player is active or inactive, and the date on which this status last changed. Registration as a player causes the new player to become active. All non-players are inactive. The Registrar's report shall indicate, for each player, whether the player is active or inactive, and the date on which this status last changed. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5004 (Zefram), 13 June 2007 text: A player may become active or inactive by announcement. A player may, without objection, make another player inactive. Registration as a player causes the new player to become active. All non-players are inactive. The Registrar's report shall indicate, for each player, whether the player is active or inactive, and the date on which this status last changed. history: Retitled by Proposal 5111 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5111 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: Activity is a player switch with values Active (default) and Inactive, tracked by the Registrar. A player may flip eir activity by announcement. "To go on hold" is to become Inactive; "to come off hold" is to become Active. A player may flip another player's activity to Inactive without objection. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5116 (Zefram; disi.), 8 August 2007 text: Activity is a player switch with values Active (default) and Inactive, tracked by the Registrar. The Registrar's report includes the date on which each player's activity last changed. A player may flip eir activity by announcement. "To go on hold" is to become Inactive; "to come off hold" is to become Active. A player may flip another player's activity to Inactive without objection. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5258 (AFO), 18 October 2007 text: Activity is a player switch with values Active (default) and Inactive, tracked by the Registrar. The Registrar's report includes the date on which each player's activity last changed. A player CAN flip eir activity by announcement. "To go on hold" is to become Inactive; "to come off hold" is to become Active. A player CAN flip another player's activity to Inactive without objection. A player who has been continuously Inactive for at least three months CAN be deregistered by any other player without objection. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5271 (Murphy), 7 November 2007 text: Activity is a player switch with values Active (default) and Inactive, tracked by the Registrar. The Registrar's report includes the date on which each non-Active player's activity last changed. A player CAN flip eir activity by announcement. "To go on hold" is to become Inactive; "to come off hold" is to become Active. A player CAN flip another player's activity to Inactive without objection. A player who has been continuously Inactive for at least three months CAN be deregistered by any other player without objection. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2132 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2132 by Proposal 4912 (Murphy), 21 March 2007 text: A CFJ made by a person who has previously made five or more CFJs during the same Agoran Week as that CFJ is an Excess CFJ. The Clerk of the Courts may dismiss an Excess CFJ by announcement. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4933 (Zefram), 29 April 2007 text: A CFJ submitted by a person who has previously submitted five or more CFJs during the same Agoran Week as that CFJ is an Excess CFJ. The Clerk of the Courts can, by announcement, Refuse an Excess CFJ that has not had any judge assigned to it. Refusal of an Excess CFJ causes it to cease to be a CFJ. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2132 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2133 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2133 by Proposal 4912 (Murphy), 21 March 2007 text: If the Clerk of the Courts errs in good faith by assigning an ineligible judge, then the selection stands. However, if the player has not yet delivered judgement, then the Clerk of the Courts may point out eir error and recuse the player. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2133 by Proposal 5069 (Zefram), 11 July 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2134 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2134 by Proposal 4930 (Goethe), 29 April 2007 text: If a single player has a voting power on ordinary proposals equal to or greater than the total voting power on ordinary proposals of all other players combined, that player wins the game upon any player announcing the fact. history: Retitled by Proposal 5222 (root; disi.), 30 September 2007 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5222 (root; disi.), 30 September 2007 text: If a single player has a voting limit on ordinary proposals equal to or greater than the total voting limit on ordinary proposals of all other players combined, that player wins the game upon any player announcing the fact. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5343 (Murphy), 8 December 2007 text: Upon a correct announcement that a single player's EVLOP is greater than the combined EVLOP of all other players, that player wins the game. history: Retitled by Proposal 5394 (Murphy, Goddess Eris, OscarMeyr, Zefram), 16 January 2008 history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 5394 (Murphy, Goddess Eris, OscarMeyr, Zefram), 16 January 2008 history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5394 (Murphy, Goddess Eris, OscarMeyr, Zefram), 16 January 2008 text: Upon a win announcement that a specified player's voting limit on an ordinary proposal distributed at that time would exceed the combined voting limits of all other players on that proposal, the specified player satisfies the Winning Condition of Clout. Cleanup procedure: Each player's VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP, and no player satisfies this Winning Condition again (the remainder of this rule notwithstanding) until after the next time that each player's EVLOP is set based on eir VVLOP. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 text: Upon a win announcement that a specified player's voting limit on an ordinary decision initiated at that time would exceed the combined voting limits of all other players on that decision, the specified player satisfies the Winning Condition of Clout. Cleanup procedure: Each player's VVLOD is set to eir BVLOD, and no player satisfies this Winning Condition again (the remainder of this rule notwithstanding) until after the next time that each player's EVLOD is set based on eir VVLOD. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2135 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2135 by Proposal 4931 (Zefram), 29 April 2007 text: Every month the Herald shall update the page about Agora on the NomicWiki at nomic.net, provided that that wiki is operational. This page, when updated, is to include a list of the current players. In updating the page the Herald shall ensure that information that is currently incorrect is either corrected or removed, and that all links on the page point to extant pages that are correctly described. The Herald may add new correct information to the page at eir discretion. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5035 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: Every month the Herald shall update the page about Agora on the NomicWiki at nomic.net, provided that that wiki is operational. This page, when updated, is to include a list of the current players. In updating the page the Herald shall ensure that information that is currently incorrect is either corrected or removed, and that all links on the page point to extant pages that are correctly described. The Herald may add new correct information to the page at eir discretion. The Herald is encouraged to also advertise Agora in other suitable locations. history: Retitled by Proposal 5122 (Zefram), 13 August 2007 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5122 (Zefram), 13 August 2007 text: Every month the ambassador shall update the page about Agora on the NomicWiki at nomic.net, provided that that wiki is operational. This page, when updated, is to include a list of the current players. In updating the page the ambassador shall ensure that information that is currently incorrect is either corrected or removed, and that all links on the page point to extant pages that are correctly described. The ambassador may add new correct information to the page at eir discretion. The ambassador is encouraged to also advertise Agora in other suitable locations. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2136 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2136 by Proposal 4935 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: A contest is a contract that identifies itself as such, and identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other parties are its contestants. Points are a measure of a player's contentiousness. The number of points possessed by a player is eir score. When a player registers, eir score is set to zero. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per month to one or more contestants, unless e was contestmaster of a different contest for at least 15 days of the previous month. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4960 (OscarMeyr), 3 June 2007 text: A contest is a contract that identifies itself as such, and identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other parties are its contestants. Points are a measure of a player's contentiousness. The number of points possessed by a player is eir score. When a player registers, eir score is set to zero. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per month to one or more contestants, unless e was contestmaster of a different contest for at least 15 days of the previous month. A player with 100 or more points may announce this fact. If this announcement is correct, then the following events happen: 1. The announcing player wins the game. 2. Each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5062 (Zefram; disi.), 11 July 2007 text: A contest is a contract that identifies itself as such, and identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other parties are its contestants. Points are a measure of a player's contentiousness. The number of points possessed by a player is eir score, which is always a real number, and scores are not categorically prevented from being any particular real number. When a player registers, eir score is set to zero. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per month to one or more contestants, unless e was contestmaster of a different contest for at least 15 days of the previous month. A player with 100 or more points may announce this fact. If this announcement is correct, then the following events happen: 1. The announcing player wins the game. 2. Each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5063 (Zefram; disi.), 11 July 2007 text: A contest is a contract that identifies itself as such, and identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other parties are its contestants. Points are a measure of a player's contentiousness. The number of points possessed by a player is eir score, which is always an algebraic real number, and scores are not categorically prevented from being any particular algebraic real number. When a player registers, eir score is set to zero. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per month to one or more contestants, unless e was contestmaster of a different contest for at least 15 days of the previous month. A player with 100 or more points may announce this fact. If this announcement is correct, then the following events happen: 1. The announcing player wins the game. 2. Each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5064 (Zefram; disi.), 11 July 2007 text: A contest is a contract that identifies itself as such, and identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other parties are its contestants. Points are a measure of a player's contentiousness. The number of points possessed by a player is eir score, which is always a rational number, and scores are not categorically prevented from being any particular rational number. When a player registers, eir score is set to zero. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per month to one or more contestants, unless e was contestmaster of a different contest for at least 15 days of the previous month. A player with 100 or more points may announce this fact. If this announcement is correct, then the following events happen: 1. The announcing player wins the game. 2. Each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5065 (Zefram; disi.), 11 July 2007 text: A contest is a contract that identifies itself as such, and identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other parties are its contestants. Points are a measure of a player's contentiousness. The number of points possessed by a player is eir score, which is always an integer. When a player registers, eir score is set to zero. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per month to one or more contestants, unless e was contestmaster of a different contest for at least 15 days of the previous month. A player with 100 or more points may announce this fact. If this announcement is correct, then the following events happen: 1. The announcing player wins the game. 2. Each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5076 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 text: Points are a measure of a player's contentiousness. The number of points possessed by a player is eir score. When a player registers or deregisters, eir score becomes zero. A contest is an agreement that identifies itself as such, and identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other parties are its contestants. The Scorekeepor is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of scores and contests. The Scorekeepor's report includes each player's score. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per week to one or more contestants as permitted by the contest, unless e was contestmaster of a different contest for at least 3 days of the previous week. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5076 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 text: Points are a measure of a player's contentiousness. The number of points possessed by a player is eir score. Each player's score is an integer. Points can only be awarded in integer amounts. When a player registers or deregisters, eir score becomes zero. A contest is an agreement that identifies itself as such, and identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other parties are its contestants. The Scorekeepor is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of scores and contests. The Scorekeepor's report includes each player's score. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per week to one or more contestants as permitted by the contest, unless e was contestmaster of a different contest for at least 3 days of the previous week. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5173 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 text: Points are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of points is restricted to players. Points are a currency. The number of points owned by a player is eir score. A contest is an agreement that identifies itself as such, and identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other parties are its contestants. The Scorekeepor is an office, and the recordkeepor of points. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per week to one or more contestants as permitted by the contest, unless e was contestmaster of a different contest for at least 3 days of the previous week. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5192 (root), 6 September 2007 text: Points are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of points is restricted to players. Points are a currency. The number of points owned by a player is eir score. A contest is an agreement that identifies itself as such, and identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other parties are its contestants. The Scorekeepor is an office, and the recordkeepor of points. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per week to one or more contestants as permitted by the contest, unless e is contestmaster of a different contest simultaneously or has been at any time during the preceding span of seven days. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5234 (Levi, Zefram), 3 October 2007 text: Points are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of points is restricted to players. Points are a currency. The number of points owned by a player is eir score. A contest is an agreement that (a) identifies itself as a contest, (b) identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster, (c) allows any First-class player to become a party, (d) is published before any contestants become a party to it, and (e) is fair to all contestants. All parties to the agreement who are not the contestmaster are its contestants. The Scorekeepor is an office, and the recordkeepor of points. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per week to one or more contestants as permitted by the contest, unless e is contestmaster of a different contest simultaneously or has been at any time during the preceding span of seven days. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5293 (Goethe), 22 November 2007 text: Points are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of points is restricted to players. Points are a currency. The number of points owned by a player is eir score. A contest is an agreement that (a) identifies itself as a contest, (b) identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster, (c) allows any First-class player to become a party, (d) is public, and is published before any contestants become a party to it, and (e) is fair to all contestants. All parties to the agreement who are not the contestmaster are its contestants. The Scorekeepor is an office, and the recordkeepor of points. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per week to one or more contestants as permitted by the contest, unless e is contestmaster of a different contest simultaneously or has been at any time during the preceding span of seven days. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(12) by Proposal 5304 (root; disi.), 24 November 2007 text: Points are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of points is restricted to players. Points are a currency. The number of points owned by a player is eir score. A contest is an contract that (a) identifies itself as a contest, (b) identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster, (c) allows any First-class player to become a party, (d) is public, and is published before any contestants become a party to it, and (e) is fair to all contestants. All parties to the contract who are not the contestmaster are its contestants. The Scorekeepor is an office, and the recordkeepor of points. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per week to one or more contestants as permitted by the contest, unless e is contestmaster of a different contest simultaneously or has been at any time during the preceding span of seven days. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(13) by Proposal 5305 (comex, Goethe), 24 November 2007 text: Points are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of points is restricted to players. Points are a currency. The number of points owned by a player is eir score. A contest is an contract that (a) identifies itself as a contest, (b) identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster, (c) allows any First-class player to become a party, (d) is public, and is published before any contestants become a party to it, and (e) is a dependent contract. All parties to the contract who are not the contestmaster are its contestants. The Scorekeepor is an office, and the recordkeepor of points. A contestmaster may award a total of up to 10 points per week to one or more contestants as permitted by the contest, unless e is contestmaster of a different contest simultaneously or has been at any time during the preceding span of seven days. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(14) by Proposal 5302 (Zefram), 28 November 2007 text: Points are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of points is restricted to players. Points are a currency. The number of points owned by a player is eir score. A contest is an contract that (a) identifies itself as a contest, (b) identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster, (c) allows any First-class player to become a party, (d) is public, and is published before any contestants become a party to it, and (e) is a dependent contract. All parties to the contract who are not the contestmaster are its contestants. The Scorekeepor is an office, and the recordkeepor of points. For each contest which has been a contest for at least a week, and has as its contestmaster a first-class person who has been contestmaster of that contest for the entire past week and has not been the contestmaster of any other contest during the past week, the contestmaster CAN award a total of up to 10 points per week to one or more contestants as permitted by the contest. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(15) by Proposal 5328 (Goethe), 5 December 2007 text: A first-class player who is a member of an existing public contract CAN make the contract into a Contest, with emself as the sole contestmaster, without 3 objections, provided e is not the contestmaster of another contest. Another first-class player who is a member may replace the current contestmaster as the sole contestmaster without 3 objections, but only as explicitly described in the contest regulations and provided e is not the contestmaster of another contest. Any player may make a contest cease to be a contest without 3 objections. Players SHOULD decide on whether a contract deserves to be a contest based on its fairness or interest to players as a whole. The total number of points a Contest MAY award in a given week is equal to 5 times the number of its members that are first- class players. Points up to this total CAN be awarded by the contestmaster to other members by public announcement, and MUST be awarded as explicitly described in the contract. history: Amended(16) by Proposal 5362 (root), 20 December 2007 text: A first-class player who is a member of an existing public contract CAN make the contract into a Contest, with emself as the sole contestmaster, without 3 objections, provided e is not the contestmaster of another contest. Another first-class player who is a member may replace the current contestmaster as the sole contestmaster without 3 objections, but only as explicitly described in the contest regulations and provided e is not the contestmaster of another contest. The minimum number of parties for a contest is one. Any player may make a contest cease to be a contest without 3 objections. Players SHOULD decide on whether a contract deserves to be a contest based on its fairness or interest to players as a whole. The total number of points a Contest MAY award in a given week is equal to 5 times the number of its members that are first- class players. Points up to this total CAN be awarded by the contestmaster to other members by public announcement, and MUST be awarded as explicitly described in the contract. history: Amended(17) by Proposal 5397 (Murphy), 16 January 2008 text: A first-class player who is a member of an existing public contract CAN make the contract into a Contest, with emself as the sole contestmaster, without 3 objections, provided e is not the contestmaster of another contest. Another first-class player who is a member may replace the current contestmaster as the sole contestmaster without 3 objections, but only as explicitly described in the contest regulations and provided e is not the contestmaster of another contest. The minimum number of parties for a contest is one. Any player may make a contest cease to be a contest without 3 objections. Players SHOULD decide on whether a contract deserves to be a contest based on its fairness or interest to players as a whole. The total number of points a Contest MAY award in a given week is equal to 5 times the number of its members that are first- class players. Points up to this total CAN be awarded by the contestmaster to other members by public announcement, and MUST be awarded as explicitly described in the contract. The total number of points a Contest MAY revoke in a given week is equal to 2 times the number of its members that are first- class players. Points up to this total CAN be revoked by the contestmaster from other members by public announcement, and MUST be revoked as explicitly described in the contract. history: Amended(18) by Proposal 5423 (woggle; disi.), 6 February 2008 text: A first-class player who is a member of an existing public contract CAN make the contract into a Contest, with emself as the sole contestmaster, without 3 objections, provided e is not the contestmaster of another contest. Another first-class player who is a member may replace the current contestmaster as the sole contestmaster without 3 objections, but only as explicitly described in the contest regulations and provided e is not the contestmaster of another contest. A contest requires at least one party. Any player may make a contest cease to be a contest without 3 objections. Players SHOULD decide on whether a contract deserves to be a contest based on its fairness or interest to players as a whole. The total number of points a Contest MAY award in a given week is equal to 5 times the number of its members that are first- class players. Points up to this total CAN be awarded by the contestmaster to other members by public announcement, and MUST be awarded as explicitly described in the contract. The total number of points a Contest MAY revoke in a given week is equal to 2 times the number of its members that are first- class players. Points up to this total CAN be revoked by the contestmaster from other members by public announcement, and MUST be revoked as explicitly described in the contract. history: Amended(19) by Proposal 5511 (Goethe), 28 May 2008 text: A first-class player who is a member of an existing public contract CAN make the contract into a Contest, with emself as the sole contestmaster, without 3 objections, provided e is not the contestmaster of another contest. Another first-class player who is a member may replace the current contestmaster as the sole contestmaster without 3 objections, but only as explicitly described in the contest regulations and provided e is not the contestmaster of another contest. A contest requires at least one party. Any player may make a contest cease to be a contest without 3 objections. Players SHOULD decide on whether a contract deserves to be a contest based on its fairness or interest to players as a whole. The total number of points a Contest MAY award in a given week is equal to 5 times the number of its members that are first- class players. Points up to this total CAN be awarded by the contestmaster to other members by public announcement, and MUST be awarded as explicitly described in the contract. The total number of points a Contest MAY revoke in a given week is equal to 2 times the number of its members that are first- class players. Points up to this total CAN be revoked by the contestmaster from other members by public announcement, and MUST be revoked as explicitly described in the contract. For each contest, ASAP after the beginning of each month, the Scorekeepor CAN and SHALL by announcement award a number of points, equal to the number of Players who were Contestants in that Contest at any time during the previous month, to the Player (if any) who was its Contestmaster for 16 or more days during the previous month, provided that the Contestmaster performed Contest-related duties in a timely manner during that time. history: Amended(20) by Proposal 5566 (ais523, root), 29 June 2008 text: Contestmaster is a public contract switch, tracked by the Notary, with a default value of 'none', and a set of possible values which consists of all first-class players and 'none'. A public contract is a contest if and only if it has a contestmaster other than 'none'. The Scorekeepor's report contains the contestmaster of each contest. Any player CAN flip the contestmaster of a public contract without 3 objections, except if doing so would cause a player to be contestmaster of more than one contest, or it would flip the contestmaster of a contract to a player who has not explicitly consented to be contestmaster of that contest. (If a player intends to flip the contestmaster of a contract to emself, this is considered explicit consent to be contestmaster of that contract.) Notwithstanding the rest of this rule, it is IMPOSSIBLE to flip the contestmaster of a contract to a player who is not party to that contract; and if a contract's contestmaster ceases to be party to that contract, that contract's contestmaster is flipped to 'none'. The total number of points a Contest MAY award in a given week is equal to 5 times the number of its members that are first- class players. Points up to this total CAN be awarded by the contestmaster to other members by public announcement, and MUST be awarded as explicitly described in the contract. The total number of points a Contest MAY revoke in a given week is equal to 2 times the number of its members that are first- class players. Points up to this total CAN be revoked by the contestmaster from other members by public announcement, and MUST be revoked as explicitly described in the contract. For each contest, ASAP after the beginning of each month, the Scorekeepor CAN and SHALL by announcement award a number of points, equal to the number of Players who were Contestants in that Contest at any time during the previous month, to the Player (if any) who was its Contestmaster for 16 or more days during the previous month, provided that the Contestmaster performed Contest-related duties in a timely manner during that time. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2137 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2137 by Proposal 4939 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: The Assessor is an office; its holder is responsible for collecting votes and keeping track of related properties. The Assessor is the default vote collector for all Agoran decisions that do not specify a different vote collector. The Assessor's report shall include the following: a) Each player's voting limit on ordinary proposals. b) Each player's voting credits. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5078 (Zefram), 18 July 2007 text: The Assessor is an office; its holder is responsible for collecting votes and keeping track of related properties. The Assessor is the default vote collector for all Agoran decisions that do not specify a different vote collector. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5453 (Murphy), 1 March 2008 text: The Assessor is an office; its holder is responsible for collecting votes and keeping track of related properties. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2138 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2138 by Proposal 4939 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: The International Associate Director of Personnel is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of officers and reports. The Director of Personnel's report shall include the following: a) The holder of each office. b) The date on which each holder last came to hold that office. c) The date of the most recent attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of that office. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 4956 (Murphy), 7 May 2007 text: The International Associate Director of Personnel is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of officers and reports. The IADoP's report shall include the following: a) The holder of each office. b) The date on which each holder last came to hold that office. c) The date of the most recent attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of that office. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5237 (AFO; disi.), 3 October 2007 text: The International Associate Director of Personnel is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of officers and reports. The IADoP's report includes the following: a) The holder of each office. b) The date on which each holder last came to hold that office. c) The date of the most recent attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of that office. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5367 (Levi; disi.), 20 December 2007 text: The International Associate Director of Personnel is an low-priority office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of officers and reports. The IADoP's report includes the following: a) The holder of each office. b) The date on which each holder last came to hold that office. c) The date of the most recent attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of that office. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5517 (Wooble; disi.), 28 May 2008 text: The International Associate Director of Personnel is an low-priority office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of officers and reports. The IADoP's report includes the following: a) The holder of each office. b) The date on which each holder last came to hold that office. c) The date when the most recent nomination period for that office began. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2139 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2139 by Proposal 4939 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 text: The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of players. The Registrar's report shall include the following: a) Each player's nickname (if any) and listed e-mail address (es). b) The date on which each player most recently registered. c) A list of all public or discussion fora, with sufficient data regarding each forum to players to receive messages there. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5172 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 text: The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of players. The Registrar's report includes, for each player: a) Information sufficient to identify and contact em. b) The date on which e most recently became a player. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2140 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2140 by Proposal 4940 (Zefram), 29 April 2007 text: No entity with power below the power of this rule can (a) cause an entity to have power greater than its own. (b) adjust the power of an instrument with power greater than its own. (c) modify any other substantive aspect of an instrument with power greater than its own. A "substantive" aspect of an instrument is any aspect that affects the instrument's operation. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2141 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2141 by Proposal 4940 (Zefram), 29 April 2007 text: A rule is a type of instrument with the capacity to govern the game generally. A rule's content takes the form of a text, and is unlimited in scope. In particular, a rule may define in-game entities and regulate their behaviour, make instantaneous changes to the state of in-game entities, prescribe or proscribe certain player behaviour, modify the rules or the application thereof, or do any of these things in a conditional manner. Every rule has power between one and four inclusive. It is not possible for a rule to have a power outside this range. Every rule shall have a number for identification. If a rule ever does not have an identifying number, the Rulekeepor shall assign a number to it by announcement as soon as possible. The number assigned must be a natural number greater than any number previously assigned to a rule. Once properly assigned, a rule's number cannot be changed. Every rule shall have a title to aid in identification. If a rule ever does not have a title, the Rulekeepor shall assign a title to it by announcement as soon as possible. For the purposes of rules governing modification of instruments, the text, power, number, and title of a rule are all substantive aspects of the rule. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: A rule is a type of instrument with the capacity to govern the game generally. A rule's content takes the form of a text, and is unlimited in scope. In particular, a rule may define in-game entities and regulate their behaviour, make instantaneous changes to the state of in-game entities, prescribe or proscribe certain player behaviour, modify the rules or the application thereof, or do any of these things in a conditional manner. Every rule has power between one and four inclusive. It is not possible for a rule to have a power outside this range. Rules have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Rulekeepor. Every rule shall have a title to aid in identification. If a rule ever does not have a title, the Rulekeepor shall assign a title to it by announcement as soon as possible. For the purposes of rules governing modification of instruments, the text, power, ID number, and title of a rule are all substantive aspects of the rule. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2142 history: Enacted as Power=1.1 Rule 2142 by Proposal 4955 (Zefram), 7 May 2007 text: Any player may change an Ordinary proposal's Adoption Index to 1.1 during its voting period With 3 Supporters. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5043 (root), 1 July 2007 text: Any player may change an Ordinary proposal's Adoption Index to 1.1 during its voting period With 2 Supporters. history: Power changed from 1.1 to 2 by Proposal 5044 (root), 1 July 2007 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5044 (root), 1 July 2007 text: Any player may change an Ordinary proposal's Adoption Index to 2 during its voting period With 2 Supporters. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5210 (Murphy), 8 September 2007 text: A player CAN, with 2 support, flip a proposal's chamber from ordinary to democratic. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 text: A player CAN, with 2 support, change an ordinary decision to be democratic. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2143 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2143 by Proposal 4970 (Zefram), 23 May 2007 text: For each office, the rules may designate certain information to be part of the corresponding officer's weekly report or monthly report. Any information designated to be part of the officer's report without specifying which report shall be part of the weekly report. If no information is designated to be part of the weekly (or monthly) report, then that office has no weekly (or, respectively, monthly) report. Each officer's report is an official report. The holder of an office for which there is an officer's report is obliged to maintain all information in the report. E is obliged to publish the weekly report, if there is one, at least once each week, and the monthly report, if there is one, at least once each month. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5239 (AFO), 3 October 2007 text: For each office: a) If any information is defined by the rules as part of that office's weekly report, then the holder of that office SHALL maintain all such information, and SHALL publish it at least once each week. Otherwise, that office has no weekly report. b) If any information is defined by the rules as part of that office's monthly report, then the holder of that office SHALL maintain all such information, and SHALL publish it at least once each month. Otherwise, that office has no monthly report. Any information defined by the rules as part of an office's report, without specifying which one, is part of its weekly report (unless the office is defined by the rules as low-priority, in which case it is part of its monthly report). history: Retitled by Proposal 5485 (root), 9 April 2008 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5485 (root), 9 April 2008 text: For each office: a) If any task is defined by the rules as part of that office's weekly duties, then the holder of that office SHALL perform it at least once each week. If any information is defined by the rules as part of that office's weekly report, then the holder of that office SHALL maintain all such information, and the publication of all such information is part of that office's weekly duties. b) If any task is defined by the rules as part of that office's monthly duties, then the holder of that office SHALL perform it at least once each month. If any information is defined by the rules as part of that office's monthly report, then the holder of that office SHALL maintain all such information, and the publication of all such information is part of that office's monthly duties. Any information defined by the rules as part of an office's report, without specifying which one, is part of its weekly report (unless the office is defined by the rules as low-priority, in which case it is part of its monthly report). history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2144 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2144 by Proposal 4971 (Human Point Two), 23 May 2007 text: If a partnership contains exactly the same members as another registered partnership, then it is prohibited from registering. If a registered partnership's membership changes such that it contains exactly the same members as another registered partnership, then it is deregistered. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5022 (Murphy), 25 June 2007 text: A partnership's basis is the set containing its natural-person members, plus each member of the basis of each of its non-natural-person members. A partnership is prohibited from registering if its basis is the same as that of another registered partnership. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5039 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 text: A partnership's basis is the set containing its natural-person members, plus each member of the basis of each of its non-natural-person members. A partnership is prohibited from registering if its basis is the same as that of another registered partnership. If a registered partnership has the same basis as another registered partnership, it can be deregistered by any player by announcement. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5045 (BobTHJ), 1 July 2007 text: A partnership's basis is the set containing its natural-person members, plus each member of the basis of each of its non-natural-person members. A partnership is prohibited from registering if its basis is the same as that of another registered partnership. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5045 (BobTHJ), 1 July 2007 text: A partnership's basis is the set containing its natural-person members, plus each member of the basis of each of its non-natural-person members. A partnership is prohibited from registering if its basis is the same as that of another registered partnership. If a registered partnership has the same basis as another registered partnership, it can be deregistered by any player with Agoran Consent. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5061 (Zefram), 9 July 2007 text: A partnership is prohibited from registering if its basis is the same as that of another registered partnership. If a registered partnership has the same basis as another registered partnership, it can be deregistered by any player with Agoran Consent. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5375 (root), 1 January 2008 text: A partnership SHALL NOT register if its basis is the same as that of any player. Whenever a judgement of GUILTY is assigned in a criminal case alleging that a partnership has violated this rule, the judge SHOULD assign an EXILE judgement to the question on sentencing in that case. If a registered partnership has the same basis as another player, any player CAN deregister it with Agoran Consent. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5380 (Goethe), 1 January 2008 text: A partnership SHALL NOT register if its basis is the same as that of any player. Whenever a judgement of GUILTY is assigned in a criminal case alleging that a partnership has violated this rule, the judge SHOULD assign an EXILE judgement to the question on sentencing in that case. If a registered partnership has the same basis as another player, any player CAN deregister it with Agoran Consent. If a registered partnership is not a public contract, it can be degregistered with Support. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5400 (woggle; disi.), 16 January 2008 text: A partnership SHALL NOT register if its basis is the same as that of any player. Whenever a judgement of GUILTY is assigned in a criminal case alleging that a partnership has violated this rule, the judge SHOULD assign an EXILE judgement to the question on sentencing in that case. If a registered partnership has the same basis as another player, any player CAN deregister it with Agoran Consent. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2145 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2145 by Proposal 4977 (BobTHJ), 31 May 2007 text: A non-natural person that is created by an Agreement between two or more persons is known as a Partnership. A Partnership comes into existence with the initiation of the Agreement that creates it, and it ceases to exist when that Agreement is terminated. The persons who are party to the Agreement may change during the course of that Agreement (if the Agreement allows for it) without disrupting the existence of the Partnership as a person as long as that Agreement remains in effect. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5041 (BobTHJ), 28 June 2007 text: A non-natural person that is created by an Agreement between two or more persons is known as a Partnership. A Partnership comes into existence with the initiation of the Agreement that creates it, and it ceases to exist when that Agreement is terminated. The persons who are party to the Agreement may change during the course of that Agreement (if the Agreement allows for it) without disrupting the existence of the Partnership as a person as long as that Agreement remains in effect. Agora recognizes an agreement that implicitly or explicitly assigns its rights, obligations, and responsibilities onto the parties of that agreement to be a non-natural person. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 5061 (Zefram), 9 July 2007 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5061 (Zefram), 9 July 2007 text: A binding agreement governed by the rules which devolves its legal obligations onto a subset of its parties, numbering at least two, collectively, is a partnership. The members of a partnership are those parties onto whom the partnership's legal obligations are collectively devolved. A partnership's identity and partnershiphood are not disrupted by changes to its membership provided that it continues to meet the definition of a partnership. A partnership's basis is the set consisting of the union of the set of its non-partnership members with the bases of each of its partnership members. Where circularity occurs in this definition, it is resolved by using the minimum basis sets that provide consistency. A partnership whose basis contains at least two persons is a person. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5303 (root), 24 November 2007 text: A binding agreement governed by the rules which devolves its legal obligations onto a subset of its parties, numbering at least two, collectively, is a partnership. The members of a partnership are those parties onto whom the partnership's legal obligations are collectively devolved. A partnership's identity and partnershiphood are not disrupted by changes to its membership provided that it continues to meet the definition of a partnership. A partnership's basis is the set consisting of the union of the the bases of each of its members. Where circularity occurs in this definition, it is resolved by using the minimum basis sets that provide consistency. A partnership whose basis contains at least two persons is a person. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5381 (Goethe), 1 January 2008 text: A binding agreement governed by the rules which devolves its legal obligations onto a subset of its parties, numbering at least two, collectively, is a partnership. The members of a partnership are those parties onto whom the partnership's legal obligations are collectively devolved. A partnership's identity and partnershiphood are not disrupted by changes to its membership provided that it continues to meet the definition of a partnership. A partnership's basis is the set consisting of the union of the the bases of each of its members. Where circularity occurs in this definition, it is resolved by using the minimum basis sets that provide consistency. A partnership that is a public contract and whose basis contains at least two persons is a person. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2146 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2146 by Proposal 4979 (Zefram, Maud), 31 May 2007 text: Indices are elements of the extended real numbers, which is a total order consisting of the real numbers plus a minimum element, called negative infinity, and a maximum element, called positive infinity or unanimity. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5113 (Murphy, Maud), 2 August 2007 text: Indices are elements of the extended real numbers, which is a total order consisting of the real numbers plus a minimum element, called negative infinity, and a maximum element, called positive infinity or unanimity. The ratio of a positive index to zero is positive infinity. The ratio of a negative index to zero is negative infinity. The ratio of zero to any index is zero. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2147 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2147 by Proposal 4988 (BobTHJ), 6 June 2007 text: Whereas Agora, being the superpower of nomics, has an inherent responsibility to lead the nomic world; and whereas Agora desires to encourage growth and promotion of the nomic community, be it hereby known that Agora shall serve as benevolent protector to any nomic which requests such status (hereafter referred to as the Protectorate). In order to become a Protectorate, a nomic must specify in its ruleset that it submits to Agora as its benevolent protector. It also must allow Agora unrestricted access to make changes to its ruleset. A player of said nomic may then cause that nomic to become a Protectorate by announcement to the public forum. A nomic that no longer meets these requirements ceases to be a Protectorate. Agora shall treat a Protectorate in a benevolent fashion, making changes to that nomic's ruleset only for the purpose of assisting that nomic in its growth and enabling its longevity. Agora may only make changes to a Protectorate's ruleset through a Proposal with an Adoption Index of 2 or more, although this does not prohibit changes made to a Protectorate nomic by one or more of its players (or closest equivalent) according to the rules of that Protectorate. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5091 (Zefram), 25 July 2007 text: Whereas Agora, being the superpower of nomics, has an inherent responsibility to lead the nomic world; and whereas Agora desires to encourage growth and promotion of the nomic community, be it hereby known that Agora shall serve as benevolent protector to any nomic which requests such status (hereafter referred to as the protectorate). In order to become a protectorate, a nomic must specify in its ruleset that it submits to Agora as its benevolent protector. It must also have rules or other gamestate arranged such that any protective decree proclaimed by the ambassador will take full effect upon proclamation. For this purpose, the nomic may specify the forum in which proclamation is to be made, provided that it is reasonably possible for the ambassador to use the specified forum. Any restriction whatsoever on the content of a protective decree disqualifies the nomic from being a protectorate. If the criteria specified in the preceding paragraph are met, the ambassador may make the nomic a protectorate with Agoran Consent. If a protectorate ever does not meet these criteria, it ceases to be a protectorate. The ambassador shall check every month whether each protectorate continues to meet the criteria, and shall announce whenever a protectorate has ceased to be a protectorate. The ambassador's report shall include a list of all protectorates, with contact details for each, and for each the forum in which it is most appropriate to proclaim protective decrees that target that protectorate. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5127 (Zefram; disi.), 13 August 2007 text: Whereas Agora, being the superpower of nomics, has an inherent responsibility to lead the nomic world; and whereas Agora desires to encourage growth and promotion of the nomic community, be it hereby known that Agora shall serve as benevolent protector to any nomic which requests such status (hereafter referred to as the protectorate). In order to become a protectorate, a nomic must specify in its ruleset that it submits to Agora as its benevolent protector. It must also have rules or other gamestate arranged such that any protective decree proclaimed by the ambassador will take full effect upon proclamation. For this purpose, the nomic may specify the forum in which proclamation is to be made, provided that it is reasonably possible for the ambassador to use the specified forum. Any restriction whatsoever on the content of a protective decree disqualifies the nomic from being a protectorate. If the criteria specified in the preceding paragraph are met, the ambassador may make the nomic a protectorate with Agoran Consent. If a protectorate ever does not meet these criteria, it ceases to be a protectorate. The ambassador shall check every month whether each protectorate continues to meet the criteria, and shall announce whenever a protectorate has ceased to be a protectorate. The ambassador's monthly report shall include a list of all protectorates, with contact details for each, and for each the forum in which it is most appropriate to proclaim protective decrees that target that protectorate. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5237 (AFO; disi.), 3 October 2007 text: Whereas Agora, being the superpower of nomics, has an inherent responsibility to lead the nomic world; and whereas Agora desires to encourage growth and promotion of the nomic community, be it hereby known that Agora shall serve as benevolent protector to any nomic which requests such status (hereafter referred to as the protectorate). In order to become a protectorate, a nomic must specify in its ruleset that it submits to Agora as its benevolent protector. It must also have rules or other gamestate arranged such that any protective decree proclaimed by the ambassador will take full effect upon proclamation. For this purpose, the nomic may specify the forum in which proclamation is to be made, provided that it is reasonably possible for the ambassador to use the specified forum. Any restriction whatsoever on the content of a protective decree disqualifies the nomic from being a protectorate. If the criteria specified in the preceding paragraph are met, the ambassador may make the nomic a protectorate with Agoran Consent. If a protectorate ever does not meet these criteria, it ceases to be a protectorate. The ambassador shall check every month whether each protectorate continues to meet the criteria, and shall announce whenever a protectorate has ceased to be a protectorate. The ambassador's monthly report includes a list of all protectorates, with contact details for each, and for each the forum in which it is most appropriate to proclaim protective decrees that target that protectorate. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5239 (AFO), 3 October 2007 text: Whereas Agora, being the superpower of nomics, has an inherent responsibility to lead the nomic world; and whereas Agora desires to encourage growth and promotion of the nomic community, be it hereby known that Agora shall serve as benevolent protector to any nomic which requests such status (hereafter referred to as the protectorate). In order to become a protectorate, a nomic must specify in its ruleset that it submits to Agora as its benevolent protector. It must also have rules or other gamestate arranged such that any protective decree proclaimed by the ambassador will take full effect upon proclamation. For this purpose, the nomic may specify the forum in which proclamation is to be made, provided that it is reasonably possible for the ambassador to use the specified forum. Any restriction whatsoever on the content of a protective decree disqualifies the nomic from being a protectorate. If the criteria specified in the preceding paragraph are met, the ambassador may make the nomic a protectorate with Agoran Consent. If a protectorate ever does not meet these criteria, it ceases to be a protectorate. The ambassador shall check every month whether each protectorate continues to meet the criteria, and shall announce whenever a protectorate has ceased to be a protectorate. The ambassador's report includes a list of all protectorates, with contact details for each, and for each the forum in which it is most appropriate to proclaim protective decrees that target that protectorate. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5391 (Murphy; disi.), 16 January 2008 text: Whereas Agora, being the superpower of nomics, has an inherent responsibility to lead the nomic world; and whereas Agora desires to encourage growth and promotion of the nomic community, be it hereby known that Agora shall serve as benevolent protector to any nomic which requests such status (hereafter referred to as the protectorate). In order to become a protectorate, a nomic must specify in its ruleset that it submits to Agora as its benevolent protector. It must also have rules or other gamestate arranged such that any protective decree proclaimed by the ambassador will take full effect upon proclamation. Any restriction whatsoever on the content of a protective decree disqualifies the nomic from being a protectorate. If the criteria specified in the preceding paragraph are met, the ambassador may make the nomic a protectorate with Agoran Consent. If a protectorate ever does not meet these criteria, it ceases to be a protectorate. The ambassador shall check every month whether each protectorate continues to meet the criteria, and shall announce whenever a protectorate has ceased to be a protectorate. The ambassador's report includes a list of all protectorates, with contact details for each, and for each the forum in which it is most appropriate to proclaim protective decrees that target that protectorate. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2148 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2148 by Proposal 4988 (BobTHJ), 6 June 2007 text: The Ambassador is an office; Its holder is Agora's liaison to its Protectorates. The Ambassador's report shall include a listing of Protectorates as well as a list of recent events related to those Protectorates. On a minimum of a monthly basis, the Ambassador shall review each Protectorate to ensure it meets the requirements of a Protectorate. The Ambassador may act on behalf of Agora for an action that is permitted of Agora in the Protectorate's ruleset, with the exception of direct changes to that Protectorate's ruleset as described above. Any Player may, with Agoran consent, require that the Ambassador act or not act in a specified fashion in relation to a Protectorate. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5091 (Zefram), 25 July 2007 text: The ambassador is an office, responsible for relations with foreign nomics. A foreign nomic may grant certain powers and privileges to Agora's ambassador. If so, the ambassador shall generally exercise such powers in such manner as e sees fit, subject to other rules and orders. All players are prohibited from falsely claiming, to any nomic, to be the ambassador. history: Retitled by Proposal 5112 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5239 (AFO), 3 October 2007 text: The ambassador is a low-priority office, responsible for relations with foreign nomics. A foreign nomic may grant certain powers and privileges to Agora's ambassador. If so, the ambassador shall generally exercise such powers in such manner as e sees fit, subject to other rules and orders. All players are prohibited from falsely claiming, to any nomic, to be the ambassador. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2149 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2149 by Proposal 4990 (Zefram), 6 June 2007 text: Players are prohibited from deliberately or recklessly making false statements in any public message. Merely quoting a false statement does not constitute making it for the purposes of this rule. Any disclaimer, conditional clause, or other qualifier attached to a statement constitutes part of the statement for the purposes of this rule; the truth or falsity of the whole is what is significant. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5075 (Zefram), 18 July 2007 text: Players SHALL NOT deliberately or recklessly make false statements in any public message. Merely quoting a false statement does not constitute making it for the purposes of this rule. Any disclaimer, conditional clause, or other qualifier attached to a statement constitutes part of the statement for the purposes of this rule; the truth or falsity of the whole is what is significant. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5129 (Zefram; disi.), 13 August 2007 text: A player SHALL NOT make a false statement in any public message while knowing that the statement is false or being reckless as to its veracity. Merely quoting a false statement does not constitute making it for the purposes of this rule. Any disclaimer, conditional clause, or other qualifier attached to a statement constitutes part of the statement for the purposes of this rule; the truth or falsity of the whole is what is significant. history: Retitled by Proposal 5140 (Murphy), 19 August 2007 history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5140 (Murphy), 19 August 2007 text: Truthiness is a player switch with values Knight (default) and Knave, tracked by the Speaker. A knight SHALL NOT publish statements that e believes are false. A knave SHOULD NOT publish statements that e believes are true. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5147 (comex), 29 August 2007 text: Truthiness is a player switch, tracked by the Speaker, with the following possible values: KNIGHT - the player is a knight (default) KNAVE - the player is a knave SPY - the player is neither a knight nor a knave FOOL - the player is both a knight and a knave A knight SHALL NOT publish statements that e believes are false. A knave SHALL NOT publish statements that e believes are true. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5179 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Truthiness is a player switch, tracked by the Speaker, with the following possible values: KNIGHT - the player is a knight (default) KNAVE - the player is a knave SPY - the player is neither a knight nor a knave FOOL - the player is both a knight and a knave A knight SHALL NOT publish statements that e believes are false. A knave SHALL NOT publish statements that e believes are true. Merely quoting a statement does not constitute publishing it for the purposes of this rule. Any disclaimer, conditional clause, or other qualifier attached to a statement constitutes part of the statement for the purposes of this rule; the truth or falsity of the whole is what is significant. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5180 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 text: Truthiness is a player switch, tracked by the Speaker, with the following possible values: KNIGHT - the player is a knight (default) KNAVE - the player is a knave SPY - the player is neither a knight nor a knave FOOL - the player is both a knight and a knave A knight SHALL NOT publish statements that e believes are false or which e is reckless regarding the veracity of. A knave SHALL NOT publish statements that e believes are true or which e is reckless regarding the veracity of. Merely quoting a statement does not constitute publishing it for the purposes of this rule. Any disclaimer, conditional clause, or other qualifier attached to a statement constitutes part of the statement for the purposes of this rule; the truth or falsity of the whole is what is significant. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5257 (AFO), 27 October 2007 text: Truthiness is a player switch, tracked by the Registrar, with the following possible values: KNIGHT - the player is a knight (default) KNAVE - the player is a knave SPY - the player is neither a knight nor a knave FOOL - the player is both a knight and a knave A knight SHALL NOT publish statements that e believes are false or which e is reckless regarding the veracity of. A knave SHALL NOT publish statements that e believes are true or which e is reckless regarding the veracity of. Merely quoting a statement does not constitute publishing it for the purposes of this rule. Any disclaimer, conditional clause, or other qualifier attached to a statement constitutes part of the statement for the purposes of this rule; the truth or falsity of the whole is what is significant. history: Retitled by Proposal 5280 (Zefram, Murphy), 7 November 2007 history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5280 (Zefram, Murphy), 7 November 2007 text: A person SHALL NOT make a public statement unless e believes that in doing so e is telling the truth. Merely quoting a false statement does not constitute making it for the purposes of this rule. Any disclaimer, conditional clause, or other qualifier attached to a statement constitutes part of the statement for the purposes of this rule; the truth or falsity of the whole is what is significant. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2150 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2150 by Proposal 5007 (Zefram), 18 June 2007 text: "First-class person" means a person of a biological nature. "First-class player" means a player who is a first-class person. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5061 (Zefram), 9 July 2007 text: A person is an entity that has the general capacity to be the subject of rights and obligations under the rules. An entity is a person if and only if it is defined to be so by rules with power 2 or greater. Any biological organism that is capable of communicating by email in English is a person. "First-class person" means a person of a biological nature. "First-class player" means a player who is a first-class person. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5303 (root), 24 November 2007 text: A person is an entity that has the general capacity to be the subject of rights and obligations under the rules. An entity is a person if and only if it is defined to be so by rules with power 2 or greater. Any biological organism that is capable of communicating by email in English is a person. "First-class person" means a person of a biological nature. "First-class player" means a player who is a first-class person. The basis of a a first-class person is the singleton set consisting of that person. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5476 (Murphy; disi.), 27 March 2008 text: A person is an entity that has the general capacity to be the subject of rights and obligations under the rules. An entity is a person if and only if it is defined to be so by rules with power 2 or greater. Any biological organism that is capable of communicating by email in English is a person. "First-class person" means a person of a biological nature. "First-class player" means a player who is a first-class person. The basis of a first-class person is the singleton set consisting of that person. history: Power changed from 2 to 3 by Proposal 5509 (root; disi.), 28 May 2008 history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2151 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2151 by Proposal 5037 (Zefram, GreyKnight), 28 June 2007 text: The escutcheon of Agora is defined by the following blazon: Tierced palewise sable, argent, and sable, charged with a quill and an axe in saltire, proper, and in the chief a capital letter A, gules. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5285 (Goethe), 7 November 2007 text: The escutcheon of Agora is defined by the following blazon: Tierced palewise sable, argent, and sable, charged with a quill and an axe in saltire, proper, and in the chief a capital letter A, gules. Agora's adopted motto is "Agora n'est pas une fontaine." history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2152 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2152 by Proposal 5053 (Murphy), 5 July 2007 text: The following terms are defined. These definitions are used when a rule includes a term in all caps, and SHOULD be used when a rule includes a term otherwise. Earlier definitions take precedence over later ones. If a rule specifies one or more players in connection with a term, then the term applies only to the specified player(s). 1. CANNOT, IMPOSSIBLE, INEFFECTIVE, INVALID: Attempts to perform the described action are unsuccessful. 2. MUST NOT, MAY NOT, SHALL NOT, ILLEGAL, PROHIBITED: Performing the described action violates the rule in question. 3. SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED: Before performing the described action, the full implications of performing it should be understood and carefully weighed. 4. CAN X ONLY IF Y: Equivalent to "CANNOT X unless Y". Similar for (MUST, MAY, SHALL, SHOULD) X ONLY IF Y. 5. MUST, SHALL, REQUIRED, MANDATORY: Failing to perform the described action violates the rule in question. 6. SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, RECOMMENDED: Before failing to perform the described action, the full implications of failing to perform it should be understood and carefully weighed. history: Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 5054 (Murphy), 5 July 2007 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5189 (Levi), 3 September 2007 text: The following terms are defined. These definitions are used when a rule includes a term in all caps, and SHOULD be used when a rule includes a term otherwise. Earlier definitions take precedence over later ones. If a rule specifies one or more players in connection with a term, then the term applies only to the specified player(s). 1. CANNOT, IMPOSSIBLE, INEFFECTIVE, INVALID: Attempts to perform the described action are unsuccessful. 2. MUST NOT, MAY NOT, SHALL NOT, ILLEGAL, PROHIBITED: Performing the described action violates the rule in question. 3. SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED: Before performing the described action, the full implications of performing it should be understood and carefully weighed. 4. CAN: Attempts to perform the described action are successful. 5. MAY: Performing the described action is permitted. 5. MUST, SHALL, REQUIRED, MANDATORY: Failing to perform the described action violates the rule in question. 6. SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, RECOMMENDED: Before failing to perform the described action, the full implications of failing to perform it should be understood and carefully weighed. history: Power changed from 2 to 3 by Proposal 5247 (AFO), 14 October 2007 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5353 (Murphy; disi.), 16 December 2007 text: The following terms are defined. These definitions are used when a rule includes a term in all caps, and SHOULD be used when a rule includes a term otherwise. Earlier definitions take precedence over later ones. If a rule specifies one or more players in connection with a term, then the term applies only to the specified player(s). 1. CANNOT, IMPOSSIBLE, INEFFECTIVE, INVALID: Attempts to perform the described action are unsuccessful. 2. MUST NOT, MAY NOT, SHALL NOT, ILLEGAL, PROHIBITED: Performing the described action violates the rule in question. 3. SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED: Before performing the described action, the full implications of performing it should be understood and carefully weighed. 4. CAN: Attempts to perform the described action are successful. 5. MAY: Performing the described action is permitted. 6. MUST, SHALL, REQUIRED, MANDATORY: Failing to perform the described action violates the rule in question. 7. SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, RECOMMENDED: Before failing to perform the described action, the full implications of failing to perform it should be understood and carefully weighed. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5354 (Murphy), 16 December 2007 text: The following terms are defined. These definitions are used when a rule includes a term in all caps, and SHOULD be used when a rule includes a term otherwise. Earlier definitions take precedence over later ones. If a rule specifies one or more players in connection with a term, then the term applies only to the specified player(s). 1. CANNOT, IMPOSSIBLE, INEFFECTIVE, INVALID: Attempts to perform the described action are unsuccessful. 2. MUST NOT, MAY NOT, SHALL NOT, ILLEGAL, PROHIBITED: Performing the described action violates the rule in question. 3. SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED: Before performing the described action, the full implications of performing it should be understood and carefully weighed. 4. CAN: Attempts to perform the described action are successful. 5. MAY: Performing the described action does not violate the rule in question. 6. MUST, SHALL, REQUIRED, MANDATORY: Failing to perform the described action violates the rule in question. 7. SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, RECOMMENDED: Before failing to perform the described action, the full implications of failing to perform it should be understood and carefully weighed. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5535 (Murphy), 7 June 2008 text: The following terms are defined. These definitions are used when a rule includes a term in all caps, and SHOULD be used when a rule includes a term otherwise. Earlier definitions take precedence over later ones. If a rule specifies one or more persons in connection with a term, then the term applies only to the specified person(s). 1. CANNOT, IMPOSSIBLE, INEFFECTIVE, INVALID: Attempts to perform the described action are unsuccessful. 2. MUST NOT, MAY NOT, SHALL NOT, ILLEGAL, PROHIBITED: Performing the described action violates the rule in question. 3. SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED: Before performing the described action, the full implications of performing it should be understood and carefully weighed. 4. CAN: Attempts to perform the described action are successful. 5. MAY: Performing the described action does not violate the rule in question. 6. MUST, SHALL, REQUIRED, MANDATORY: Failing to perform the described action violates the rule in question. 7. SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, RECOMMENDED: Before failing to perform the described action, the full implications of failing to perform it should be understood and carefully weighed. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2153 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2153 by Proposal 5056 (Murphy), 5 July 2007 text: A proposal is disinterested if it is labeled as such by its author at the time of submission. A proposal should be disinterested if and only if its effects are limited to correcting errors and/or ambiguities. The author and co-author(s) of a disinterested proposal do not receive any rewards for its adoption, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. history: Retitled by Proposal 5176 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5176 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 text: The interest index of a proposal is an integer from 0 to 3. It CAN be set by the proposer at the time of submission, or otherwise defaults to 1. A proposal's interest index SHOULD be proportional to its complexity. "Disinterested" is a synonym for "interest index 0". A proposal SHOULD be disinterested if and only if its effects are limited to correcting errors and/or ambiguities. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2154 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2154 by Proposal 5059 (Zefram, Goethe), 9 July 2007 text: Any Player may make an active Player (hereafter the nominee) the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided: (a) that office has not changed hands with this method in the previous 30 days, and (b) the potential officer consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If intent to achieve consent for a nominee is announced as above, then any other active player may be nominated for the position with eir own consent by announcement, during the minimum waiting period between intent and action defined for Agoran Consent. If, at the end of this period, there is more than one consenting nominee, then the attempt to achieve Agoran Consent fails, and the IADoP shall initiate an Agoran Decision to determine the new office holder, meanwhile no further attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for the change shall be valid. The valid options for the decision are the nominees, quorum is a minimum of three and the number of active players, eligible voters are the active players, and the vote collector is the IADoP. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select one nominee from the set of nominees which each received the largest number of votes; this chosen nominee becomes the officeholder upon the posting of the valid notice. If no attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of a particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the IADoP shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is achieved. This requirement is waived if another player changes the officeholder in this way during the following quarter. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5096 (Murphy; disi.), 25 July 2007 text: Any Player may make an active Player (hereafter the nominee) the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided: (a) that office has not changed hands with this method in the previous 30 days, and (b) the potential officer consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If intent to achieve consent for a nominee is announced as above, then any other active player may be nominated for the position with eir own consent by announcement, during the minimum waiting period between intent and action defined for Agoran Consent. If, at the end of this period, there is more than one consenting nominee, then the attempt to achieve Agoran Consent fails, and the IADoP shall initiate an Agoran Decision to determine the new office holder, meanwhile no further attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for the change shall be valid. The valid options for the decision are the nominees, quorum is a minimum of three and the number of active players (rules to the contrary notwithstanding), eligible voters are the active players, and the vote collector is the IADoP. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select one nominee from the set of nominees which each received the largest number of votes; this chosen nominee becomes the officeholder upon the posting of the valid notice. If no attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of a particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the IADoP shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is achieved. This requirement is waived if another player changes the officeholder in this way during the following quarter. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5108 (Zefram; disi.), 2 August 2007 text: Any Player may make an active Player (hereafter the nominee) the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided: (a) that office has not changed hands with this method in the previous 30 days, and (b) the potential officer consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If intent to achieve consent for a nominee is announced as above, then any other active player may be nominated for the position with eir own consent by announcement, during the minimum waiting period between intent and action defined for Agoran Consent. If, at the end of this period, there is more than one consenting nominee, then officeholding cannot be changed by means of this Agoran consent (even if consent was achieved), and the IADoP SHALL as soon as possible initiate an Agoran decision to determine the new officeholder. Until this Agoran decision is resolved, the office cannot change hands by the mechanism of this rule. In the Agoran decision to determine a new officeholder, the valid options are the nominees, quorum is the lesser of three and the number of active players (other rules on quorum notwithstanding), the eligible voters are the active players, and the vote collector is the IADoP. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select one nominee from the set of nominees which each received the largest number of votes; this chosen nominee becomes the officeholder upon the posting of the valid notice. If no attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of a particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the IADoP shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is achieved. This requirement is waived if another player changes the officeholder in this way during the following quarter. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5133 (Zefram), 13 August 2007 text: Any player CAN make an active player (hereafter the nominee) the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided that the nominee consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If intent to achieve consent for a nominee is announced as above, then any other active player may be nominated for the position with eir own consent by announcement, during the minimum waiting period between intent and action defined for Agoran Consent. If, at the end of this period, there is more than one consenting nominee, then officeholding cannot be changed by means of this Agoran consent (even if consent was achieved), and the IADoP SHALL as soon as possible initiate an Agoran decision to determine the new officeholder. Until this Agoran decision is resolved, the office cannot change hands by the mechanism of this rule. In the Agoran decision to determine a new officeholder, the valid options are the nominees, quorum is the lesser of three and the number of active players (other rules on quorum notwithstanding), the eligible voters are the active players, and the vote collector is the IADoP. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select one nominee from the set of nominees which each received the largest number of votes; this chosen nominee becomes the officeholder upon the posting of the valid notice. If no attempt to achieve Agoran Consent for changing the holder of a particular office is announced in a given quarter, then the IADoP shall make at least one such attempt to change the officeholder in the following quarter, and make the change if consent is achieved. This requirement is waived if another player changes the officeholder in this way during the following quarter. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5224 (Murphy), 23 September 2007 text: Any player CAN make an active player (hereafter the nominee) the holder of an office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided that the nominee consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If intent to achieve consent for a nominee is announced as above, then any other active player may be nominated for the position with eir own consent by announcement, during the minimum waiting period between intent and action defined for Agoran Consent. If, at the end of this period, there is more than one consenting nominee, then officeholding cannot be changed by means of this Agoran consent (even if consent was achieved), and the IADoP SHALL as soon as possible initiate an Agoran decision to determine the new officeholder. Until this Agoran decision is resolved, the office cannot change hands by the mechanism of this rule. In the Agoran decision to determine a new officeholder, the valid options are the nominees, quorum is the lesser of three and the number of active players (other rules on quorum notwithstanding), the eligible voters are the active players, and the vote collector is the IADoP. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select one nominee from the set of nominees which each received the largest number of votes; this chosen nominee becomes the officeholder upon the posting of the valid notice. Stability is an office switch, tracked by the IADoP, with values Temporal (default) and Perpetual. Any player CAN flip an office's stability without 2 objections. A Perpetual office becomes Temporal when its holder leaves office. If an office is Temporal at the end of a quarter, and no attempt to change the holder of that office with Agoran consent was made during that quarter, then the IADoP SHALL make at least one such attempt in the following quarter, and SHALL make the change if consent is achieved. These requirements are waived if another player makes such a change during the following quarter. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5407 (root), 22 January 2008 text: Any player CAN make an active player (hereafter the nominee) the holder of an elected office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent, provided that the nominee consents to hold the office after the announcement of intent is made. If intent to achieve consent for a nominee is announced as above, then any other active player may be nominated for the position with eir own consent by announcement, during the minimum waiting period between intent and action defined for Agoran Consent. If, at the end of this period, there is more than one consenting nominee, then officeholding cannot be changed by means of this Agoran consent (even if consent was achieved), and the IADoP SHALL as soon as possible initiate an Agoran decision to determine the new officeholder. Until this Agoran decision is resolved, the office cannot change hands by the mechanism of this rule. In the Agoran decision to determine a new officeholder, the valid options are the nominees, quorum is the lesser of three and the number of active players (other rules on quorum notwithstanding), the eligible voters are the active players, and the vote collector is the IADoP. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select one nominee from the set of nominees which each received the largest number of votes; this chosen nominee becomes the officeholder upon the posting of the valid notice. Stability is an elected office switch, tracked by the IADoP, with values Temporal (default) and Perpetual. Any player CAN flip an office's stability without 2 objections. A Perpetual office becomes Temporal when its holder leaves office. If an office is Temporal at the end of a quarter, and no attempt to change the holder of that office with Agoran consent was made during that quarter, then the IADoP SHALL make at least one such attempt in the following quarter, and SHALL make the change if consent is achieved. These requirements are waived if another player makes such a change during the following quarter. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5452 (Murphy), 1 March 2008 text: Any player CAN make an active player (hereafter the nominee) the holder of an elected office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent and the nominee's consent; this process is known as installation. If, during the minimum waiting period between intent and action defined for Agoran Consent, another active player is nominated in this way and consents, then the IADoP SHALL as soon as possible initiate an Agoran decision to determine the new officeholder; this process is known as election. Until the election is resolved, the office CANNOT change hands via installation, the remainder of this rule notwithstanding. In an election, the valid options are the consenting nominees (hereafter the candidates), quorum is the lesser of three and the number of active players (other rules on quorum notwithstanding), the eligible voters are the active players, and the vote collector is the IADoP. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select a candidate that received at least as many votes as any other candidate; this candidate thereby becomes the officeholder. Stability is an elected office switch, tracked by the IADoP, with values Temporal (default) and Perpetual. Any player CAN flip an office's stability without 2 objections. A Perpetual office becomes Temporal when its holder leaves office. If an office is Temporal at the end of a quarter, and no attempt to install a player into that office was made during that quarter, then the IADoP SHALL make at least one such attempt during the following quarter, and SHALL make the change if possible; however, these requirements are waived if another player makes such a change during the following quarter. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5453 (Murphy), 1 March 2008 text: Any player CAN make an active player (hereafter the nominee) the holder of an elected office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent and the nominee's consent; this process is known as installation. If, during the minimum waiting period between intent and action defined for Agoran Consent, another active player is nominated in this way and consents, then the IADoP SHALL as soon as possible initiate an Agoran decision to determine the new officeholder; this process is known as election. Until the election is resolved, the office CANNOT change hands via installation, the remainder of this rule notwithstanding. In an election, the valid options are the consenting nominees (hereafter the candidates), quorum is the lesser of three and the number of active players (other rules on quorum notwithstanding), the eligible voters are the active players. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select a candidate that received at least as many votes as any other candidate; this candidate thereby becomes the officeholder. Stability is an elected office switch, tracked by the IADoP, with values Temporal (default) and Perpetual. Any player CAN flip an office's stability without 2 objections. A Perpetual office becomes Temporal when its holder leaves office. If an office is Temporal at the end of a quarter, and no attempt to install a player into that office was made during that quarter, then the IADoP SHALL make at least one such attempt during the following quarter, and SHALL make the change if possible; however, these requirements are waived if another player makes such a change during the following quarter. history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5491 (Murphy), 23 April 2008 text: Any player CAN make an active player (hereafter the nominee) the holder of an elected office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent and the nominee's consent; this process is known as installation. If, during the minimum waiting period between intent and action defined for Agoran Consent, another active player is nominated in this way and consents, then the IADoP SHALL as soon as possible initiate an Agoran decision to determine the new officeholder; this process is known as election. Until the election is resolved, the office CANNOT change hands via installation, the remainder of this rule notwithstanding. In an election, the valid options are the consenting nominees (hereafter the candidates), quorum is the lesser of three and the number of active players (other rules on quorum notwithstanding), the eligible voters are the active players. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select a candidate that received at least as many votes as any other candidate; this candidate thereby becomes the officeholder. Stability is an elected office switch, tracked by the IADoP, with values Temporal (default) and Perpetual. Any player CAN flip an office's stability without 2 objections. A Perpetual office becomes Temporal when its holder leaves office. The IADoP SHALL make at least one attempt to install a player into an office, and SHALL make the change if possible, under the following circumstances: a) During a quarter, if the office was Temporal at the start of that quarter and no such attempt was made during the previous quarter. This requirement is waived if another player makes such a change during the current quarter. b) Within a week (or month, if the office is low-priority) after the office ceases to have an active holder. This requirement is waived if the office comes to have an active holder during that week (month). history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5497 (Murphy; disi.), 23 April 2008 text: Any player CAN make an active player (hereafter the nominee) the holder of an elected office, thus removing any previous holder from the office, with Agoran Consent and the nominee's consent; this process is known as installation. If, during the minimum waiting period between intent and action defined for Agoran Consent, at least two active players are nominated in this way and consent, then the IADoP SHALL as soon as possible initiate an Agoran decision to determine the new officeholder; this process is known as election. Until the election is resolved, the office CANNOT change hands via installation, the remainder of this rule notwithstanding. In an election, the valid options are the consenting nominees (hereafter the candidates), quorum is the lesser of three and the number of active players (other rules on quorum notwithstanding), the eligible voters are the active players. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select a candidate that received at least as many votes as any other candidate; this candidate thereby becomes the officeholder. Stability is an elected office switch, tracked by the IADoP, with values Temporal (default) and Perpetual. Any player CAN flip an office's stability without 2 objections. A Perpetual office becomes Temporal when its holder leaves office. The IADoP SHALL make at least one attempt to install a player into an office, and SHALL make the change if possible, under the following circumstances: a) During a quarter, if the office was Temporal at the start of that quarter and no such attempt was made during the previous quarter. This requirement is waived if another player makes such a change during the current quarter. b) Within a week (or month, if the office is low-priority) after the office ceases to have an active holder. This requirement is waived if the office comes to have an active holder during that week (month). history: Amended(10) by Proposal 5499 (Goethe), 23 April 2008 text: Any player CAN by announcement nominate one or more active players to be candidate(s) for an Office, this begins a nomination period for that office, during which other candidates may be so nominated. The nomination period lasts for four days. Once a nomination period begins, a new one CANNOT begin for the same office until the nomination or resulting election is resolved. A player who has not refused eir nomination is a consenting candidate. As soon as possible after the nomination period ends, then: (a) if there is only one consenting candidate, the IADoP SHALL install em in the Office by announcement; (b) if there are two or more consenting candidates, then the IADoP SHALL initiate an Agoran decision to determine the new officeholder; this process is known as an election. In an election, the valid options are the consenting nominees (hereafter the candidates), quorum is the lesser of three and the number of active players (other rules on quorum notwithstanding), the eligible voters are the active players. If a player refuses eir nomination during the election, e ceases to be a valid option. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select a candidate that received at least as many votes as any other candidate (if any); this candidate thereby becomes the officeholder. Stability is an elected office switch, tracked by the IADoP, with values Temporal (default) and Perpetual. Any player CAN flip an office's stability without 2 objections. A Perpetual office becomes Temporal when its holder leaves office. If an office is Temporal at the end of a quarter, and no nomination period began for that office during that quarter, then the IADoP SHALL make at least one nomination for the office during the following quarter. These requirements are waived if another player so makes a nomination. history: Amended(11) by Proposal 5503 (root), 1 May 2008 text: Any player CAN by announcement nominate one or more active players to be candidate(s) for an elected Office. This begins a nomination period for that office, during which other candidates may be so nominated. The nomination period lasts for four days. Once a nomination period begins, a new one CANNOT begin for the same office until the nomination or resulting election is resolved. A player who has not refused eir nomination is a consenting candidate. As soon as possible after the nomination period ends, then: (a) if there is only one consenting candidate, the IADoP SHALL install em in the Office by announcement; (b) if there are two or more consenting candidates, then the IADoP SHALL initiate an Agoran decision to determine the new officeholder; this process is known as an election. In an election, the valid options are the consenting nominees (hereafter the candidates), quorum is the lesser of three and the number of active players (other rules on quorum notwithstanding), the eligible voters are the active players. If a player refuses eir nomination during the election, e ceases to be a valid option. In the notice resolving the decision, the IADoP will select a candidate that received at least as many votes as any other candidate (if any); this candidate thereby becomes the officeholder. Stability is an elected office switch, tracked by the IADoP, with values Temporal (default) and Perpetual. Any player CAN flip an office's stability without 2 objections. A Perpetual office becomes Temporal when its holder leaves office. If an office is Temporal at the end of a quarter, and no nomination period began for that office during that quarter, then the IADoP SHALL make at least one nomination for the office during the following quarter. These requirements are waived if another player so makes a nomination. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2155 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2155 by Proposal 5076 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 text: Each player's Party is the color of VC that e possesses the most of. Ties are broken in favor of the color that comes first in alphabetical order. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5215 (Murphy), 13 September 2007 text: Each player's Party is the color of VC that e possesses the most of, or Gray if e possesses none. Ties are lost by the color(s) that e gained most recently; ties not resolved by this method are won by the color that comes first in alphabetical order. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2155 by Proposal 5404 (Murphy, pikhq, root), 16 January 2008 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2156 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2156 by Proposal 5078 (Zefram), 18 July 2007 text: Each player has a parameter known as eir base voting limit on ordinary proposals (BVLOP). The BVLOP of a first-class player is one, and the BVLOP of any other player is zero. BVLOP cannot be modified. Each player has a parameter known as eir volatile voting limit on ordinary proposals (VVLOP). Whenever a player is registered, eir VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. VVLOP can be modified by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule, but not by any other means. Each player has a parameter known as eir effective voting limit on ordinary proposals (EVLOP). Whenever a player is registered, eir EVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. At the end of each week, each player's EVLOP is set to eir VVLOP, rounded to an integer, breaking ties towards odd integers, and eir VVLOP is set to the same rounded value. EVLOP cannot be modified by any other means. The assessor's report includes each player's EVLOP. The eligible voters on an ordinary proposal are those entities that were active players at the start of its voting period. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an ordinary proposal is eir EVLOP at the start of its voting period. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5082 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: Each player has a parameter known as eir base voting limit on ordinary proposals (BVLOP). The BVLOP of a first-class player is four, and the BVLOP of any other player is zero. BVLOP cannot be modified. Each player has a parameter known as eir volatile voting limit on ordinary proposals (VVLOP). Whenever a player is registered, eir VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. VVLOP can be modified by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule, but not by any other means. Each player has a parameter known as eir effective voting limit on ordinary proposals (EVLOP). Whenever a player is registered, eir EVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. At the end of each week, each player's EVLOP is set to eir VVLOP, rounded to an integer, breaking ties towards odd integers, and eir VVLOP is set to the same rounded value. EVLOP cannot be modified by any other means. The assessor's report includes each player's EVLOP. The eligible voters on an ordinary proposal are those entities that were active players at the start of its voting period. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an ordinary proposal is eir EVLOP at the start of its voting period. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5141 (Zefram), 19 August 2007 text: Each player has a parameter known as eir base voting limit on ordinary proposals (BVLOP). The BVLOP of a first-class player is four, and the BVLOP of any other player is zero. BVLOP cannot be modified. Each player has a parameter known as eir volatile voting limit on ordinary proposals (VVLOP). Whenever a player is registered, eir VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. VVLOP can be modified by the action of an instrument with power greater than or equal to the power of this rule, but not by any other means. Each player has a parameter known as eir effective voting limit on ordinary proposals (EVLOP). Whenever a player is registered, eir EVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. At the end of each week, each player's EVLOP is set to eir VVLOP, rounded to an integer, breaking ties towards odd integers, and eir VVLOP is set to the same rounded value. EVLOP cannot be modified by any other means. The assessor's report includes each player's EVLOP. The eligible voters on an ordinary proposal are those entities that were active players at the start of its voting period. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an ordinary proposal is eir EVLOP at the start of its voting period, or half that (rounded up) if the voter is in the chokey at the start of the voting period. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5276 (Murphy, Pavitra, Zefram), 7 November 2007 text: Each player has a parameter known as eir base voting limit on ordinary proposals (BVLOP). The BVLOP of a first-class player is four, and the BVLOP of any other player is zero. BVLOP cannot be modified. Each player has a parameter known as eir volatile voting limit on ordinary proposals (VVLOP). Whenever a player is registered, eir VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. Changes to VVLOP are secured Each player has a parameter known as eir effective voting limit on ordinary proposals (EVLOP). Whenever a player is registered, eir EVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. At the end of each week, each player's EVLOP is set to eir VVLOP, rounded to an integer, breaking ties towards odd integers, and eir VVLOP is set to the same rounded value. EVLOP cannot be modified by any other means. The assessor's report includes each player's EVLOP. The eligible voters on an ordinary proposal are those entities that were active players at the start of its voting period. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an ordinary proposal is eir EVLOP at the start of its voting period, or half that (rounded up) if the voter is in the chokey at the start of the voting period. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5358 (Murphy), 20 December 2007 text: Each player has an associated number known as eir base voting limit on ordinary proposals (BVLOP). The BVLOP of a first-class player is four, and the BVLOP of any other player is zero. BVLOP cannot be modified. Each player has an associated number known as eir volatile voting limit on ordinary proposals (VVLOP). Whenever a player is registered, eir VVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. Changes to VVLOP are secured Each player has an associated number known as eir effective voting limit on ordinary proposals (EVLOP). Whenever a player is registered, eir EVLOP is set to eir BVLOP. At the end of each week, each player's EVLOP is set to eir VVLOP, rounded to an integer, breaking ties towards odd integers, and eir VVLOP is set to the same rounded value. EVLOP cannot be modified by any other means. The assessor's report includes each player's EVLOP. The eligible voters on an ordinary proposal are those entities that were active players at the start of its voting period. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an ordinary proposal is eir EVLOP at the start of its voting period, or half that (rounded up) if the voter is in the chokey at the start of the voting period. history: Retitled by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 text: Each player has an associated number known as eir base voting limit on ordinary decisions (BVLOD). The BVLOD of a first-class player is four, and the BVLOD of any other player is zero. BVLOD cannot be modified. Each player has an associated number known as eir volatile voting limit on ordinary decisions (VVLOD). Whenever a player is registered, eir VVLOD is set to eir BVLOD. Changes to VVLOD are secured Each player has an associated number known as eir effective voting limit on ordinary decisions (EVLOD). Whenever a player is registered, eir EVLOD is set to eir BVLOD. At the end of each week, each player's EVLOD is set to eir VVLOD, rounded to an integer, breaking ties towards odd integers, and eir VVLOD is set to the same rounded value. EVLOD cannot be modified by any other means. The assessor's report includes each player's EVLOD. The eligible voters on an ordinary decision are those entities that were active players at the start of its voting period. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an ordinary decision is eir EVLOD at the start of its voting period, or half that (rounded up) if the voter is in the chokey at the start of the voting period. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5447 (Pavitra), 24 February 2008 text: Each player has an associated number known as eir base voting limit on ordinary decisions (BVLOD). The BVLOD of a first-class player is four, the BVLOD of a province is four, and the BVLOD of any other player is zero. BVLOD cannot be modified. Each player has an associated number known as eir volatile voting limit on ordinary decisions (VVLOD). Whenever a player is registered, eir VVLOD is set to eir BVLOD. Changes to VVLOD are secured Each player has an associated number known as eir effective voting limit on ordinary decisions (EVLOD). Whenever a player is registered, eir EVLOD is set to eir BVLOD. At the end of each week, each player's EVLOD is set to eir VVLOD, rounded to an integer, breaking ties towards odd integers, and eir VVLOD is set to the same rounded value. EVLOD cannot be modified by any other means. The assessor's report includes each player's EVLOD. The eligible voters on an ordinary decision are those entities that were active players at the start of its voting period. The voting limit of an eligible voter on an ordinary decision is eir EVLOD at the start of its voting period, or half that (rounded up) if the voter is in the chokey at the start of the voting period. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2157 history: Enacted as Power=1.7 Rule 2157 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: A judicial panel is a structure whereby a group of two or more persons (its members) act together for the purpose of judging judicial cases. A judicial panel's membership cannot change, and if two panels have the same membership then they are the same panel. Judicial panels exist implicitly, without any specific act of formation. A judicial panel CAN send messages by means of any of its members sending a message identified as being from the panel, with the unanimous agreement of the panel's members. By this mechanism a judicial panel can act, in situations where the rules state that an action is performed by sending a message. A judicial panel can incur obligations. The members of a panel SHALL act collectively to ensure that the panel satisfies all of its obligations. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5134 (root), 17 August 2007 text: A judicial panel is a structure whereby a group of two or more persons (its members) act together for the purpose of judging judicial cases. A judicial panel's membership cannot change, and if two panels have the same membership then they are the same panel. Judicial panels exist implicitly, without any specific act of formation. A judicial panel CAN send messages by means of any of its members sending a message identified as being from the panel, with the unanimous agreement of the panel's members, or with the majority agreement of the members and the consent of the CotC. By this mechanism a judicial panel can act, in situations where the rules state that an action is performed by sending a message. A judicial panel can incur obligations. The members of a panel SHALL act collectively to ensure that the panel satisfies all of its obligations. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5361 (Goethe), 20 December 2007 text: A judicial panel is a structure whereby a group of two or more persons (its members) act together for the purpose of judging judicial cases. A judicial panel's membership cannot change, and if two panels have the same membership then they are the same panel. Judicial panels exist implicitly, without any specific act of formation. A judicial panel CAN send messages by means of any of its members sending a message identified as being from the panel, with the unanimous agreement of the panel's members, or with the majority agreement of the members and the consent of the CotC. The CotC SHOULD consent to a majority action if the panel has made a reasonable effort to achieve consensus. By this mechanism a judicial panel can act, in situations where the rules state that an action is performed by sending a message. A judicial panel can incur obligations. The members of a panel SHALL act collectively to ensure that the panel satisfies all of its obligations. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5439 (Murphy), 13 February 2008 text: A judicial panel is a structure whereby a group of two or more persons (its members) act together for the purpose of judging judicial cases. A judicial panel's membership cannot change, and if two panels have the same membership then they are the same panel. Judicial panels exist implicitly, without any specific act of formation. A judicial panel CAN send messages by means of any of its members sending a message identified as being from the panel, with the unanimous agreement of the panel's members, or (if the CotC is not a member) with the majority agreement of the members and the consent of the CotC. The CotC SHOULD consent to a majority action if the panel has made a reasonable effort to achieve consensus. By this mechanism a judicial panel can act, in situations where the rules state that an action is performed by sending a message. A judicial panel can incur obligations. The members of a panel SHALL act collectively to ensure that the panel satisfies all of its obligations. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5498 (Goethe), 23 April 2008 text: A judicial panel is a structure whereby a group of two or more persons (its members) act together for the purpose of judging judicial cases. A judicial panel's membership cannot change, and if two panels have the same membership then they are the same panel. Judicial panels exist implicitly, without any specific act of formation. A judicial panel CAN send messages by means of any of its members sending a message identified as being from the panel, with the unanimous Support of the panel's other members, or (if the CotC is not a member) with the Support of at least half the other members and the Support of the CotC. The CotC SHOULD so Support a majority action if the panel has made a reasonable effort to achieve consensus. By this mechanism a judicial panel can act, in situations where the rules state that an action is performed by sending a message. A judicial panel can incur obligations. The members of a panel SHALL act collectively to ensure that the panel satisfies all of its obligations. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5552 (Murphy, root), 21 June 2008 text: A judicial panel is a structure whereby a group of two or more persons (its members) act together for the purpose of judging judicial cases. A judicial panel's membership cannot change, and if two panels have the same membership then they are the same panel. Judicial panels exist implicitly, without any specific act of formation. A judicial panel CAN send messages by means of any of its members sending a message identified as being from the panel, with the unanimous Support of the panel's other members, or (unless the CotC is a member of the panel, the prior judge, or unqualified to be assigned as judge of the prior case) with the Support of at least half the other members and the Support of the CotC. The CotC SHOULD so Support a majority action if the panel has made a reasonable effort to achieve consensus. By this mechanism a judicial panel can act, in situations where the rules state that an action is performed by sending a message. A judicial panel can incur obligations. The members of a panel SHALL act collectively to ensure that the panel satisfies all of its obligations. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2158 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2158 by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: Within a judicial case, one or more judicial questions may arise. Each judicial question is either inapplicable (default) or applicable; this is not a persistent status but is evaluated instantaneously. Each judicial question either is open (default), suspended, or has a particular judgement; this is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. The possible types of judgement for a judicial question vary according to the type of question. When a judicial case has an applicable open judicial question, it requires a judge, and its judge CAN assign a valid judgement to that question by announcement. Whenever there is a judge assigned to a judicial case with an applicable open question, the judge SHALL assign such a judgement to the question as soon as possible. Whenever a judicial case has a judicial question that has remained applicable and open, while the same judge has been assigned to the case, continuously for the past week, the CotC CAN recuse that judge by announcement. Whenever a judicial case has a judicial question that has remained applicable and open, while the same judge has been assigned to the case, continuously for the past two weeks, the CotC SHALL so recuse the judge as soon as possible. Among the possible judgements of a judicial question, some subset of them are appropriate. Judgements are appropriate only where so defined by the rules. A judge SHALL NOT assign an inappropriate judgement. Where more than one appropriate judgement is available, the choice between them is at the judge's discretion. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5151 (root), 29 August 2007 text: Within a judicial case, one or more judicial questions may arise. Each judicial question is either inapplicable (default) or applicable; this is not a persistent status but is evaluated instantaneously. Each judicial question either is open (default), suspended, or has a particular judgement; this is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. The possible types of judgement for a judicial question vary according to the type of question. When a judicial case has an applicable open judicial question, it requires a judge, and its judge CAN assign a valid judgement to that question by announcement. Whenever there is a judge assigned to a judicial case with an applicable open question, the judge SHALL assign such a judgement to the question as soon as possible. Whenever a judicial case has a judicial question that has remained applicable and open, while the same judge has been assigned to the case, continuously for the past week, the CotC CAN recuse that judge with cause by announcement. Whenever a judicial case has a judicial question that has remained applicable and open, while the same judge has been assigned to the case, continuously for the past two weeks, the CotC SHALL so recuse the judge as soon as possible. Among the possible judgements of a judicial question, some subset of them are appropriate. Judgements are appropriate only where so defined by the rules. A judge SHALL NOT assign an inappropriate judgement. Where more than one appropriate judgement is available, the choice between them is at the judge's discretion. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5317 (Murphy), 28 November 2007 text: A judicial question is a question that arises within a judicial case. Judicial questions arise only as defined by the rules. At any time, each judicial question is either inapplicable (default) or applicable. This is not a persistent status, but is evaluated instantaneously. At any time, each judicial question is either open (default), suspended, or has exactly one judgement. This is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. The possible types of judgement for a judicial question depend on the type of question. When a judicial question is applicable and open, its case requires a judge. When a judicial question is applicable and open, and its case has a judge assigned to it, the judge CAN assign a valid judgement to it by announcement, and SHALL assign an appropriate judgement to it as soon as possible. A judgement is valid and/or appropriate only as defined by the rules. If more than one judgement is valid and appropriate, then the choice between them is left to the judge's discretion. When a judicial question is applicable and open, and its case has the same judge assigned to it, continuously for one week, the Clerk of the Courts CAN recuse that judge with cause by announcement. When these conditions have all held continuously for two weeks, the Clerk of the Courts SHALL so recuse that judge as soon as possible. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5429 (Zefram), 9 February 2008 text: A judicial question is a question that arises within a judicial case. Judicial questions arise only as defined by the rules. At any time, each judicial question is either inapplicable (default) or applicable. This is not a persistent status, but is evaluated instantaneously. At any time, each judicial question is either open (default), suspended, or has exactly one judgement. This is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. The possible types of judgement for a judicial question depend on the type of question. When a judicial question is applicable and open, its case requires a judge. When a judicial question is applicable and open, and its case has a judge assigned to it, the judge CAN assign a valid judgement to it by announcement, and SHALL do so as soon as possible. A judge SHALL NOT assign an inappropriate judgement to any judicial question. A judgement is valid and/or appropriate only as defined by the rules. If more than one judgement is valid and appropriate, then the choice between them is left to the judge's discretion. When a judicial question is applicable and open, and its case has the same judge assigned to it, continuously for one week, the Clerk of the Courts CAN recuse that judge with cause by announcement. When these conditions have all held continuously for two weeks, the Clerk of the Courts SHALL so recuse that judge as soon as possible. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5464 (Murphy), 13 March 2008 text: A judicial question is a question that arises within a judicial case. Judicial questions arise only as defined by the rules. Defining a judicial question is secured, with a power threshold of 1.7. At any time, each judicial question is either inapplicable (default) or applicable. This is not a persistent status, but is evaluated instantaneously. At any time, each judicial question is either open (default), suspended, or has exactly one judgement. This is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. The possible types of judgement for a judicial question depend on the type of question. When a judicial question is applicable and open, its case requires a judge. When a judicial question is applicable and open, and its case has a judge assigned to it, the judge CAN assign a valid judgement to it by announcement, and SHALL do so as soon as possible. A judge SHALL NOT assign an inappropriate judgement to any judicial question. A judgement is valid and/or appropriate only as defined by the rules. Defining these things is secured, with a power threshold of 1.7. If more than one judgement is valid and appropriate, then the choice between them is left to the judge's discretion. When a judicial question is applicable and open, and its case has the same judge assigned to it, continuously for one week, the Clerk of the Courts CAN recuse that judge with cause by announcement. When these conditions have all held continuously for two weeks, the Clerk of the Courts SHALL so recuse that judge as soon as possible. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5474 (Murphy), 24 March 2008 text: A judicial question is a question that arises within a judicial case. Judicial questions arise only as defined by the rules. Defining a judicial question is secured, with a power threshold of 1.7. At any time, each judicial question is either inapplicable (default) or applicable. This is not a persistent status, but is evaluated instantaneously. At any time, each judicial question is either open (default), suspended, or has exactly one judgement. This is a persistent status that changes only according to the rules. The possible types of judgement for a judicial question depend on the type of question. When a judicial question is applicable and open, its case requires a judge. When a judicial question is applicable and open, and its case has a judge assigned to it, the judge CAN assign a valid judgement to it by announcement, and SHALL do so as soon as possible. A judge SHALL NOT assign an inappropriate judgement to any judicial question. A judgement is valid and/or appropriate only as defined by the rules. Defining these things is secured, with a power threshold of 1.7. If more than one judgement is valid and appropriate, then the choice between them is left to the judge's discretion. When a judicial question is applicable and open, and its judge has violated a time limit to assign a judgement to it, the Clerk of the Courts SHALL recuse that judge with cause by announcement as soon as possible; however, this requirement is waived if the judge assigns a judgement to it first. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2159 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2159 by Proposal 5091 (Zefram), 25 July 2007 text: A protective decree is an act of Agora the intended effect of which is to make explicit changes to the state of a protectorate nomic. The changes may include enacting, repealing, or amending rules of the protectorate, changing the set of players of the protectorate, or any other instantaneous changes to the protectorate's gamestate. Where permitted by other rules, an instrument with power 2 or greater generally can, as part of its effect, initiate a protective decree. The initiating instrument must specify the target protectorate and the changes to be made to it. Any ambiguity in the specification of a protective decree causes it to be void and without effect. This is the only mechanism by which a protective decree can be initiated. As soon as possible after a protective decree has been initiated, the ambassador shall proclaim it to the target nomic, in whatever forum is most suitable for this purpose. The decree takes effect upon this proclamation. Protective decrees should be initiated only for the purpose of assisting the protectorate in its growth and enabling its longevity. Protective decrees should always be benevolent. All players are prohibited from falsely claiming, to any nomic, that a document is a protective decree. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5276 (Murphy, Pavitra, Zefram), 7 November 2007 text: A protective decree is an act of Agora the intended effect of which is to make explicit changes to the state of a protectorate nomic. The changes may include enacting, repealing, or amending rules of the protectorate, changing the set of players of the protectorate, or any other instantaneous changes to the protectorate's gamestate. The initiation of a protective decree is a secured change. The initiating instrument must specify the target protectorate and the changes to be made to it. Any ambiguity in the specification of a protective decree causes it to be void and without effect. This is the only mechanism by which a protective decree can be initiated. As soon as possible after a protective decree has been initiated, the ambassador shall proclaim it to the target nomic, in whatever forum is most suitable for this purpose. The decree takes effect upon this proclamation. Protective decrees should be initiated only for the purpose of assisting the protectorate in its growth and enabling its longevity. Protective decrees should always be benevolent. All players are prohibited from falsely claiming, to any nomic, that a document is a protective decree. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5391 (Murphy; disi.), 16 January 2008 text: A protective decree is an act of Agora the intended effect of which is to make explicit changes to the state of a protectorate nomic. The changes may include enacting, repealing, or amending rules of the protectorate, changing the set of players of the protectorate, or any other instantaneous changes to the protectorate's gamestate. The initiation of a protective decree is a secured change. The initiating instrument must specify the target protectorate and the changes to be made to it. Any ambiguity in the specification of a protective decree causes it to be void and without effect. This is the only mechanism by which a protective decree can be initiated. As soon as possible after a protective decree has been initiated, the ambassador SHALL proclaim it to the target nomic. The decree takes effect upon this proclamation. Protective decrees should be initiated only for the purpose of assisting the protectorate in its growth and enabling its longevity. Protective decrees should always be benevolent. All players are prohibited from falsely claiming, to any nomic, that a document is a protective decree. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2160 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2160 by Proposal 5103 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 text: Any player (a deputy) CAN perform an action as if e held a particular office (deputise for that office) if: (a) the rules require the holder of that office, by virtue of holding that office, to perform the action (or, if the office is vacant, would so require if the office were filled); and (b) a time limit by which the rules require the action to be performed has expired; and (c) the deputy announced at least two days earlier that e intended to deputise for that office for the purposes of the particular action; and (d) it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action, other than by deputisation, if e held the office. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5200 (Zefram; disi.), 8 September 2007 text: Any player (a deputy) CAN perform an action as if e held a particular office (deputise for that office) if: (a) the rules require the holder of that office, by virtue of holding that office, to perform the action (or, if the office is vacant, would so require if the office were filled); and (b) a time limit by which the rules require the action to be performed has expired; and (c) the deputy announced between two and fourteen days earlier that e intended to deputise for that office for the purposes of the particular action; and (d) it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action, other than by deputisation, if e held the office. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5414 (Murphy), 26 January 2008 text: Any player (a deputy) CAN perform an action as if e held a particular position (deputise for that position) if: (a) the rules require the holder of that position, by virtue of holding that position, to perform the action (or, if the position is vacant, would so require if the position were filled); and (b) a time limit by which the rules require the action to be performed has expired; and (c) the deputy announced between two and fourteen days earlier that e intended to deputise for that position for the purposes of the particular action; and (d) it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action, other than by deputisation, if e held the position. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5454 (Murphy), 9 March 2008 text: Any player (a deputy) CAN perform an action as if e held a particular office (deputise for that office) if: (a) the rules require the holder of that office, by virtue of holding that office, to perform the action (or, if the office is vacant, would so require if the office were filled); and (b) a time limit by which the rules require the action to be performed has expired; and (c) the deputy announced between two and fourteen days earlier that e intended to deputise for that office for the purposes of the particular action; and (d) it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action, other than by deputisation, if e held the office. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2161 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2161 by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: If a rule defines a type of entity as having ID numbers, then: (a) Whenever an instance of that type does not have an ID number, the player held responsible by that rule (or, if there is no such player, the Speaker) SHALL assign an ID number to it by announcement as soon as possible. (b) Such an assignment is INVALID unless the number is a natural number (expressed as a decimal literal with at most 14 digits) distinct from any ID number, and greater than any orderly ID number, previously assigned to an entity of that type. The player SHALL select the smallest number possible, unless e reasonably believes that selecting any smaller number might be invalid or confusing. (c) Each ID number is either orderly (default) or chaotic. Upon a judicial finding that the assignment of an ID number was ILLEGAL, the ID number becomes chaotic. (d) Once assigned, an ID number cannot be changed. (e) If an office is responsible for assigning ID numbers, then that officer's report SHALL include the greatest orderly ID number, and a list of all chaotic ID numbers, previously assigned to the type of entity. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5133 (Zefram), 13 August 2007 text: If a rule defines a type of entity as having ID numbers, then: (a) Whenever an instance of that type does not have an ID number, the player held responsible by that rule SHALL assign an ID number to it by announcement as soon as possible. (b) Such an assignment is INVALID unless the number is a natural number (expressed as a decimal literal with at most 14 digits) distinct from any ID number, and greater than any orderly ID number, previously assigned to an entity of that type. The player SHALL select the smallest number possible, unless e reasonably believes that selecting any smaller number might be invalid or confusing. (c) Each ID number is either orderly (default) or chaotic. Upon a judicial finding that the assignment of an ID number was ILLEGAL, the ID number becomes chaotic. (d) Once assigned, an ID number cannot be changed. (e) If an office is responsible for assigning ID numbers, then that officer's report SHALL include the greatest orderly ID number, and a list of all chaotic ID numbers, previously assigned to the type of entity. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5237 (AFO; disi.), 3 October 2007 text: If a rule defines a type of entity as having ID numbers, then: (a) Whenever an instance of that type does not have an ID number, the player held responsible by that rule SHALL assign an ID number to it by announcement as soon as possible. (b) Such an assignment is INVALID unless the number is a natural number (expressed as a decimal literal with at most 14 digits) distinct from any ID number, and greater than any orderly ID number, previously assigned to an entity of that type. The player SHALL select the smallest number possible, unless e reasonably believes that selecting any smaller number might be invalid or confusing. (c) Each ID number is either orderly (default) or chaotic. Upon a judicial finding that the assignment of an ID number was ILLEGAL, the ID number becomes chaotic. (d) Once assigned, an ID number cannot be changed. (e) If an office is responsible for assigning ID numbers, then that officer's report includes the greatest orderly ID number, and a list of all chaotic ID numbers, previously assigned to the type of entity. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2162 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2162 by Proposal 5111 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 text: A type of switch is a property that the rules define as a switch, and specify the following: a) The type(s) of entity possessing an instance of that switch. No other entity possesses an instance of that switch. b) One or more possible values for instances of that switch, exactly one of which is designated as the default. No other values are possible for instances of that switch. c) Exactly one officer who tracks instances of that switch. That officer's report includes the value of each instance of that switch whose value is not Null. At any given time, each instance of a switch has exactly one possible value for that type of switch. If an instance of a switch comes to have a value, it ceases to have any other value. If an instance of a switch would otherwise fail to have a possible value, it comes to have its default value. "To flip an instance of a switch" is to make it come to have a given value. "To become X" (where X is a possible value of exactly one of the subject's switches) is to flip that switch to X. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5271 (Murphy), 7 November 2007 text: A type of switch is a property that the rules define as a switch, and specify the following: a) The type(s) of entity possessing an instance of that switch. No other entity possesses an instance of that switch. b) One or more possible values for instances of that switch, exactly one of which is designated as the default. No other values are possible for instances of that switch. c) Exactly one officer who tracks instances of that switch. That officer's report includes the value of each instance of that switch whose value is not its default value. At any given time, each instance of a switch has exactly one possible value for that type of switch. If an instance of a switch comes to have a value, it ceases to have any other value. If an instance of a switch would otherwise fail to have a possible value, it comes to have its default value. "To flip an instance of a switch" is to make it come to have a given value. "To become X" (where X is a possible value of exactly one of the subject's switches) is to flip that switch to X. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2163 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2163 by Proposal 5125 (Murphy), 13 August 2007 text: One second after the creation of this rule, each of these players loses all eir Gray VCs, and gains an equal number of VCs of the specified colors (in order, repeating until the correct total gain is achieved): bd_ Blue BobTHJ Green, Red, Green Eris Red Murphy Red, Blue, Green, Red, Blue OscarMeyr Green Quazie Blue, Red root Red, Blue Wooble Blue Zefram Red, Red, Green, Red, Blue, Red, Red Two seconds after the creation of this rule, this rule is repealed. This rule takes precedence over all other rules pertaining to VCs. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2163 by Rule 2163, 13 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2164 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2164 by Proposal 5131 (Zefram), 13 August 2007 text: The judge of a judicial case CAN recuse emself from it at any time by announcement. Judicial cases can generally be transferred between judges by this procedure: an entity (the transferee) CAN assign emself as the judge of a judicial case by announcement if: (a) the case has a judge assigned (the transferor); and (b) the transferor and the transferee are different entities; and (c) the transferor has previously publicly consented to the transfer and not publicly withdrawn that consent; and (d) the transferee is qualified to be assigned as judge of the case; and (e) the transferee immediately (in the same announcement) assigns a judgement to a judicial question in the case. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5151 (root), 29 August 2007 text: The judge of a judicial case CAN recuse emself from it at any time by announcement. If e has been assigned to the case for at least four days, such a recusal is with cause. Judicial cases can generally be transferred between judges by this procedure: an entity (the transferee) CAN assign emself as the judge of a judicial case by announcement if: (a) the case has a judge assigned (the transferor); and (b) the transferor and the transferee are different entities; and (c) the transferor has previously publicly consented to the transfer and not publicly withdrawn that consent; and (d) the transferee is qualified to be assigned as judge of the case; and (e) the transferee immediately (in the same announcement) assigns a judgement to a judicial question in the case. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5465 (Murphy), 13 March 2008 text: The judge of a judicial case CAN recuse emself from it at any time by announcement. If e has been assigned to the case for at least four days, such a recusal is with cause. An entity (the transferee) CAN, with consent from the current judge of a judicial case (the transferor), assign emself as the new judge of that case, provided that e is qualified to be assigned as judge of that case, and e immediately (in the same announcement) assigns a judgement to a judicial question in that case. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2165 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2165 by Proposal 5139 (Murphy), 19 August 2007 text: One second after the creation of this rule, each of these players loses all eir Gray VCs, and gains an equal number of VCs of the specified colors (in order, repeating until the correct total gain is achieved): Human Point Two Green, Blue, Green Pineapple Partnership Blue Two seconds after the creation of this rule, this rule is repealed. This rule takes precedence over all other rules pertaining to VCs. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2165 by Rule 2165, 19 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2166 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2166 by Proposal 5173 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 text: An asset is an entity defined as such by an instrument (hereafter its backing document). Each asset has exactly one owner. If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by the Bank. A currency is a class of asset defined as such by its backing document. Instances of a currency with the same owner are fungible. A fixed asset is one defined as such by its backing document. Any other asset is liquid. The owner of a liquid asset generally CAN transfer it to another entity by announcement. The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity defined as such by its backing document. That entity's report includes a list of all instances of that class and their owners. If this portion of that entity's report is not challenged within a week after its publication, then it becomes correct, even if it would otherwise be incorrect. If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity outside that class, and is destroyed if it is owned by an entity outside that class. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5216 (Murphy), 13 September 2007 text: An asset is an entity defined as such by an instrument or contract (hereafter its backing document). Each asset has exactly one owner. If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by the Bank. If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity outside that class, and is destroyed if it is owned by an entity outside that class. The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity defined as such by its backing document. That entity's report includes a list of all instances of that class and their owners. This portion of that entity's report is self-ratifying. An asset generally CAN be created by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "gain" an asset is to have it created in one's possession; to "award" an asset to an entity is to create it in that entity's possession. An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by announcement, and an asset owned by the Bank generally CAN be destroyed by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "lose" an asset is to have it destroyed from one's possession; to "revoke" an asset from an entity is to destroy it from that entity's possession. A asset generally CAN be transferred by its owner to another entity by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. A fixed asset is one defined as such by its backing document, and CANNOT be transferred; any other asset is liquid. A currency is a class of asset defined as such by its backing document. Instances of a currency with the same owner are fungible. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5388 (Murphy), 1 January 2008 text: An asset is an entity defined as such by an instrument or contract (hereafter its backing document). Each asset has exactly one owner. If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by the Bank. If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity outside that class, and is destroyed if it is owned by an entity outside that class. The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity defined as such by its backing document. That entity's report includes a list of all instances of that class and their owners. This portion of that entity's report is self-ratifying. An asset whose backing document is not a rule generally CAN be created by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "gain" an asset is to have it created in one's possession; to "award" an asset to an entity is to create it in that entity's possession. An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by announcement, and an asset owned by the Bank generally CAN be destroyed by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "lose" an asset is to have it destroyed from one's possession; to "revoke" an asset from an entity is to destroy it from that entity's possession. A asset generally CAN be transferred by its owner to another entity by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. A fixed asset is one defined as such by its backing document, and CANNOT be transferred; any other asset is liquid. A currency is a class of asset defined as such by its backing document. Instances of a currency with the same owner are fungible. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5475 (Murphy), 24 March 2008 text: An asset is an entity defined as such by an instrument or contract (hereafter its backing document), and existing solely because its backing document defines its existence. Each asset has exactly one owner. If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by the Bank. If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity outside that class, and is destroyed if it is owned by an entity outside that class. The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity defined as such by its backing document. That entity's report includes a list of all instances of that class and their owners. This portion of that entity's report is self-ratifying. An asset whose backing document is not a rule generally CAN be created by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "gain" an asset is to have it created in one's possession; to "award" an asset to an entity is to create it in that entity's possession. An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by announcement, and an asset owned by the Bank generally CAN be destroyed by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "lose" an asset is to have it destroyed from one's possession; to "revoke" an asset from an entity is to destroy it from that entity's possession. A asset generally CAN be transferred by its owner to another entity by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. A fixed asset is one defined as such by its backing document, and CANNOT be transferred; any other asset is liquid. A currency is a class of asset defined as such by its backing document. Instances of a currency with the same owner are fungible. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5476 (Murphy; disi.), 27 March 2008 text: An asset is an entity defined as such by an instrument or contract (hereafter its backing document), and existing solely because its backing document defines its existence. Each asset has exactly one owner. If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by the Bank. If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity outside that class, and is destroyed if it is owned by an entity outside that class. The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity defined as such by its backing document. That entity's report includes a list of all instances of that class and their owners. This portion of that entity's report is self-ratifying. An asset whose backing document is not a rule generally CAN be created by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "gain" an asset is to have it created in one's possession; to "award" an asset to an entity is to create it in that entity's possession. An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by announcement, and an asset owned by the Bank generally CAN be destroyed by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "lose" an asset is to have it destroyed from one's possession; to "revoke" an asset from an entity is to destroy it from that entity's possession. An asset generally CAN be transferred by its owner to another entity by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. A fixed asset is one defined as such by its backing document, and CANNOT be transferred; any other asset is liquid. A currency is a class of asset defined as such by its backing document. Instances of a currency with the same owner are fungible. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5496 (Murphy), 23 April 2008 text: An asset is an entity defined as such by an instrument or contract (hereafter its backing document), and existing solely because its backing document defines its existence. Each asset has exactly one owner. If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by the Lost and Found Department. If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity outside that class, and is destroyed if it is owned by an entity outside that class (except for the Lost and Found Department, in which case any player CAN transfer or destroy it without objection). The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity defined as such by its backing document. That entity's report includes a list of all instances of that class and their owners. This portion of that entity's report is self-ratifying. An asset whose backing document is not a rule generally CAN be created by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "gain" an asset is to have it created in one's possession; to "award" an asset to an entity is to create it in that entity's possession. An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by announcement, and an asset owned by the Lost and Found Department generally CAN be destroyed by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "lose" an asset is to have it destroyed from one's possession; to "revoke" an asset from an entity is to destroy it from that entity's possession. An asset generally CAN be transferred by its owner to another entity by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. A fixed asset is one defined as such by its backing document, and CANNOT be transferred; any other asset is liquid. A currency is a class of asset defined as such by its backing document. Instances of a currency with the same owner are fungible. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2167 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2167 by Proposal 5175 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 text: An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a non-appeal case, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by any player with 2 support. At midnight UTC on October 1, 2007, this rule repeals itself. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2167 by Rule 2167, 1 October 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2168 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2168 by Proposal 5191 (root), 6 September 2007 text: Whenever the voting period of an Agoran decision would end, and the result would be FAILED QUORUM, the length of the voting period for that decision will immediately be doubled, provided this has not already happened for the decision in question. Upon such an occurrence, the vote collector for the decision SHOULD issue a humiliating public reminder to the slackers who have not yet cast any votes on it despite being eligible. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2169 history: Enacted as Power=1.7 Rule 2169 by Proposal 5194 (Zefram), 6 September 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an equity case. An equity case's purpose is to correct a potential injustice in the operation of a particular contract. An equity case CAN be initiated by any party to the contract, by announcement which clearly identifies the contract, the set of parties to the contract, and a state of affairs whereby events have not proceeded as envisioned by the contract (such as, but not limited to, a party acting in contravention of eir contractual obligations). The initiation of an equity case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform all the contracting parties of the case and invite them to submit arguments regarding the equitability of the situation. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the parties have been so informed, or immediately when all parties have announced that they wish to terminate the pre-trial phase. The parties to the contract are all unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. An equity case has a judicial question on equation, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are the possible agreements that the parties could make that would be governed by the rules. A judgement is appropriate if and only if it is a reasonably equitable resolution of the the situation at hand with respect to the matters raised in the initiation of the case and by the parties in the course of the case. When an applicable question on equation in an equity case has a judgement, and has had that judgement continuously for the past week, the judgement is in effect as a binding agreement between the parties. In this role it is subject to modification or termination by the usual processes governing binding agreements. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in an equity case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by any party to the contract in question by announcement. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5355 (Murphy; disi.), 16 December 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an equity case. An equity case's purpose is to correct a potential injustice in the operation of a particular contract. An equity case CAN be initiated by any party to the contract, by announcement which clearly identifies the contract, the set of parties to the contract, and a state of affairs whereby events have not proceeded as envisioned by the contract (such as, but not limited to, a party acting in contravention of eir contractual obligations). The initiation of an equity case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform all the contracting parties of the case and invite them to submit arguments regarding the equitability of the situation. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the parties have been so informed, or immediately when all parties have announced that they wish to terminate the pre-trial phase. The parties to the contract are all unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. An equity case has a judicial question on equation, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are the possible agreements that the parties could make that would be governed by the rules. A judgement is appropriate if and only if it is a reasonably equitable resolution of the situation at hand with respect to the matters raised in the initiation of the case and by the parties in the course of the case. When an applicable question on equation in an equity case has a judgement, and has had that judgement continuously for the past week, the judgement is in effect as a binding agreement between the parties. In this role it is subject to modification or termination by the usual processes governing binding agreements. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in an equity case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by any party to the contract in question by announcement. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5371 (Zefram), 20 December 2007 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an equity case. An equity case's purpose is to correct a potential injustice in the operation of a particular contract. An equity case CAN be initiated by any party to the contract, by announcement which clearly identifies the contract, the set of parties to the contract, and a state of affairs whereby events have not proceeded as envisioned by the contract (such as, but not limited to, a party acting in contravention of eir contractual obligations). The initiation of an equity case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform all the contracting parties of the case and invite them to submit arguments regarding the equitability of the situation. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the parties have been so informed, or immediately when all parties have announced that they wish to terminate the pre-trial phase. The members of the bases of the parties to the contract are all unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. An equity case has a judicial question on equation, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are the possible agreements that the parties could make that would be governed by the rules. A judgement is appropriate if and only if it is a reasonably equitable resolution of the situation at hand with respect to the matters raised in the initiation of the case and by the parties in the course of the case. When an applicable question on equation in an equity case has a judgement, and has had that judgement continuously for the past week, the judgement is in effect as a binding agreement between the parties. In this role it is subject to modification or termination by the usual processes governing binding agreements. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in an equity case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by any party to the contract in question by announcement. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5387 (Murphy), 1 January 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an equity case. An equity case's purpose is to correct a potential injustice in the operation of a particular contract. An equity case CAN be initiated by any party to the contract, by announcement which clearly identifies the contract, the set of parties to the contract, and a state of affairs whereby events have not proceeded as envisioned by the contract (such as, but not limited to, a party acting in contravention of eir contractual obligations). The initiation of an equity case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform all the contracting parties of the case and invite them to submit arguments regarding the equitability of the situation. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the parties have been so informed, or immediately when all parties have announced that they wish to terminate the pre-trial phase. The members of the bases of the parties to the contract are all unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. An equity case has a judicial question on equation, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are the possible agreements that the parties could make that would be governed by the rules. A judgement is appropriate if and only if it is a reasonably equitable resolution of the situation at hand with respect to the matters raised in the initiation of the case and by the parties in the course of the case. When an applicable question on equation in an equity case has a judgement, and has had that judgement continuously for the past week (or all parties to the contract have approved that judgement), the judgement is in effect as a binding agreement between the parties. In this role it is subject to modification or termination by the usual processes governing binding agreements. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in an equity case within the past week, other than an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal case, CAN be initiated by any party to the contract in question by announcement. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5436 (Murphy), 13 February 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an equity case. An equity case's purpose is to correct a potential injustice in the operation of a particular contract. An equity case CAN be initiated by any party to the contract, by announcement which clearly identifies the contract, the set of parties to the contract, and a state of affairs whereby events have not proceeded as envisioned by the contract (such as, but not limited to, a party acting in contravention of eir contractual obligations). The initiation of an equity case begins its pre-trial phase. During the pre-trial phase, the case requires a judge. In the pre-trial phase the judge SHALL as soon as possible inform all the contracting parties of the case and invite them to submit arguments regarding the equitability of the situation. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the parties have been so informed, or immediately when all parties have announced that they wish to terminate the pre-trial phase. The members of the bases of the parties to the contract are all unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. An equity case has a judicial question on equation, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are the possible agreements that the parties could make that would be governed by the rules. A judgement is appropriate if and only if it is a reasonably equitable resolution of the situation at hand with respect to the matters raised in the initiation of the case and by the parties in the course of the case. When an applicable question on equation in an equity case has a judgement, and has had that judgement continuously for the past week (or all parties to the contract have approved that judgement), the judgement is in effect as a binding agreement between the parties. In this role it is subject to modification or termination by the usual processes governing binding agreements. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in an equity case within the past week CAN be initiated by any party to the contract in question by announcement. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5507 (root), 10 May 2008 text: There is a subclass of judicial case known as an equity case. An equity case's purpose is to correct a potential injustice in the operation of a particular contract. An equity case CAN be initiated by any party to the contract, by announcement which clearly identifies the contract, the set of parties to the contract, and a state of affairs whereby events have not proceeded as envisioned by the contract (such as, but not limited to, a party acting in contravention of eir contractual obligations). The initiation of an equity case begins its pre-trial phase. In the pre-trial phase the CotC SHALL in a timely fashion inform all the contracting parties of the case and invite them to submit arguments regarding the equitability of the situation. The pre-trial phase ends one week after the parties have been so informed, or immediately when all parties have announced that they wish to terminate the pre-trial phase. The members of the bases of the parties to the contract are all unqualified to be assigned as judge of the case. An equity case has a judicial question on equation, which is applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase. The valid judgements for this question are the possible agreements that the parties could make that would be governed by the rules. A judgement is appropriate if and only if it is a reasonably equitable resolution of the situation at hand with respect to the matters raised in the initiation of the case and by the parties in the course of the case. When an applicable question on equation in an equity case has a judgement, and has had that judgement continuously for the past week (or all parties to the contract have approved that judgement), the judgement is in effect as a binding agreement between the parties. In this role it is subject to modification or termination by the usual processes governing binding agreements. An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in an equity case within the past week CAN be initiated by any party to the contract in question by announcement. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2170 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2170 by Proposal 5212 (Murphy), 8 September 2007 text: A public message's claim as to who published it is self-ratifying, unless the claim is self-contradictory, or a challenge of identity pertaining to the claimed publisher has been issued within one month before its publication. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5445 (Goethe, Murphy), 21 February 2008 text: A public message's claim as to who published it is self-ratifying, unless the claim is self-contradictory, or a challenge of identity pertaining to the claimed publisher has been issued within one month before its publication. The Executor of a public message is the first-class person who sends it, or who most directly and immediately causes it to be sent. The executor of an action performed by announcement is the executor of the announcement. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2171 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2171 by Proposal 5230 (comex), 3 October 2007 text: In general, the Rules shall be adjudicated as if the Rules were a binding agreement between all Players, entered into by every player as a part of becoming a Player. An actual or alleged Rule violation shall be treated as the violation of a binding agreement to be bound by the Rule or Rules in question. The proposal, fora, and registration processes shall, prima facie, be considered to be protective of a Player's rights and privileges with respect to making and changing the agreement to be bound by the rules. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2171 by Proposal 5469 (woggle), 24 March 2008 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2172 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2172 by Proposal 5246 (Levi), 14 October 2007 text: A player MAY perform an action on behalf of Agora with Agoran Consent. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2173 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2173 by Proposal 5254 (AFO), 18 October 2007 text: The Notary is a low-priority office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of contracts. The parties to a public contract SHALL keep the Notary informed of its text and set of parties. The Notary's report includes this information for each public contract. The parties to a private contract SHOULD keep the Notary informed of its text and set of parties. The Notary SHALL disclose this information (to the extent that e has been informed of it) to the judge of an equity case pertaining to that contract. The Notary SHALL NOT disclose it otherwise, except as explicitly allowed by the contract, or with the explicit consent of all parties. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5551 (BobTHJ), 21 June 2008 text: The Notary is a low-priority office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of contracts. The parties to a public contract SHALL keep the Notary informed of its text and set of parties. The Notary's report includes this information for each public contract. The parties to a private contract SHOULD keep the Notary informed of its text and set of parties. The Notary SHALL disclose this information (to the extent that e has been informed of it) to the judge of an equity case pertaining to that contract. The Notary SHALL NOT disclose it otherwise, except as explicitly allowed by the contract, or with the explicit consent of all parties. The Notary CAN terminate any contract without objection. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2174 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2174 by Proposal 5274 (Murphy), 7 November 2007 text: An alien is a non-player who is a member of the basis of one or more contracts (hereafter eir visas). A resident alien is an alien with one or more registered visas. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2175 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2175 by Proposal 5284 (root, pikhq), 7 November 2007 text: A judicial case initiated by a person who has previously initiated five or more cases during the same Agoran Week as that case is an Excess CFJ. The Clerk of the Courts CAN, by announcement, refuse an Excess CFJ that has not had any judge assigned to it. Refusal of an Excess CFJ causes it to cease to be a judicial case. history: Retitled by Proposal 5301 (Murphy), 28 November 2007 history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5301 (Murphy), 28 November 2007 text: If a judicial case has not had any judge assigned to it, then: a) Its initiator CAN retract it by announcement, thus causing it to cease to be a judicial case. b) If its initiator previously initiated five or more cases during the same Agoran week as that case, then the Clerk of the Courts CAN refuse it by announcement, thus causing it to cease to be a judicial case. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5384 (Murphy), 1 January 2008 text: If a judicial case has not had any judge assigned to it, then: a) Its initiator CAN retract it by announcement, thus causing it to cease to be a judicial case. b) If its initiator previously initiated five or more cases during the same Agoran week as that case, then it is an excess case, and the Clerk of the Courts CAN refuse it by announcement, thus causing it to cease to be a judicial case. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2176 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2176 by Proposal 5299 (Murphy), 22 November 2007 text: Marks are a class of assets. Ownership of Marks is restricted to persons. Each Mark has exactly one color. Each color of Mark is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a Mark of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a Mark of eir Party's color instead; if e has no Marks at all, then e loses a VC of the same color as the Mark e is meant to lose, gains 100 Marks of that color, and then loses the Mark. The Assessor is the recordkeepor of Marks. Marks are gained and lost as follows: (+R) At the end of a proposal's voting period, each player who voted on it gains one Red Mark. If at least one of eir votes is FOR or AGAINST, and the ratio of eir FOR to AGAINST votes does not equal the proposal's adoption index, then e gains another Red Mark. If the proposal is adopted, and e was the only player to vote AGAINST it, then e gains another ten Red Marks, and the author gains ten Red Marks. (-R) When a proposal's voting period is extended because it would fail quorum, each eligible voter who has not voted on it loses five Red Marks. When a proposal meets quorum but is rejected, and only one player (other than possibly the author) voted FOR it, then that player loses ten Red Marks, and the author loses ten Red Marks. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office without a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains one Green Mark, unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month, in which case the deputising player gains one Green Mark. (+B) When a person calls for judgement, e gains one Blue Mark, except as noted below. When a judgement that caused the loss of a Blue Mark as noted below is overturned, the caller gains one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel judges an appeal case, each member gains one Blue Mark. (-B) When a person calls for judgement, and has already done so at least five times in the same week, e loses two Blue Marks. When an inquiry case is judged IRRELEVANT, or a criminal case is judged OVERLOOKED, ALREADY TRIED, or UNIMPUGNED, the caller loses one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel is recused with cause, each member loses one Blue Mark. Only valid, unretracted votes count toward the conditions for gaining and losing Red Marks. Marks may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend 100 Marks of the same color to gain one VC of that color. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5321 (Murphy), 5 December 2007 text: Marks are a class of assets. Ownership of Marks is restricted to persons. Each Mark has exactly one color. Each color of Mark is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a Mark of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a Mark of eir Party's color instead; if e has no Marks at all, then e loses a VC of the same color as the Mark e is meant to lose, gains 100 Marks of that color, and then loses the Mark; however, if e has no VCs at all, either, then the Mark loss is waived (you still can't get blood from a turnip, not even a thimbleful at a time). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of Marks. Marks are gained and lost as follows: (+R) At the end of a proposal's voting period, each player who voted on it gains one Red Mark. If at least one of eir votes is FOR or AGAINST, and the ratio of eir FOR to AGAINST votes does not equal the proposal's adoption index, then e gains another Red Mark. If the proposal is adopted, and e was the only player to vote AGAINST it, then e gains another ten Red Marks, and the author gains ten Red Marks. (-R) When a proposal's voting period is extended because it would fail quorum, each eligible voter who has not voted on it loses five Red Marks. When a proposal meets quorum but is rejected, and only one player (other than possibly the author) voted FOR it, then that player loses ten Red Marks, and the author loses ten Red Marks. (+G) At the end of each month, for each office without a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains one Green Mark, unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month, in which case the deputising player gains one Green Mark. (+B) When a person calls for judgement, e gains one Blue Mark, except as noted below. When a judgement that caused the loss of a Blue Mark as noted below is overturned, the caller gains one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel judges an appeal case, each member gains one Blue Mark. (-B) When a person calls for judgement, and has already done so at least five times in the same week, e loses two Blue Marks. When an inquiry case is judged IRRELEVANT, or a criminal case is judged OVERLOOKED, ALREADY TRIED, or UNIMPUGNED, the caller loses one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel is recused with cause, each member loses one Blue Mark. Only valid, unretracted votes count toward the conditions for gaining and losing Red Marks. Marks may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend 100 Marks of the same color to gain one VC of that color. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5335 (Murphy), 8 December 2007 text: Marks are a class of assets. Ownership of Marks is restricted to persons. Each Mark has exactly one color. Each color of Mark is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a Mark of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a Mark of eir Party's color instead; if e has no Marks at all, then e loses a VC of the same color as the Mark e is meant to lose, gains 100 Marks of that color, and then loses the Mark; however, if e has no VCs at all, either, then the Mark loss is waived (you still can't get blood from a turnip, not even a thimbleful at a time). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of Marks. Marks are gained and lost as follows: (+r) When the Agoran decision of whether to adopt a proposal is resolved, each player who voted on it gains one Red Mark. If at least one of eir votes is FOR or AGAINST, and the ratio of eir FOR to AGAINST votes does not equal the proposal's adoption index, then e gains another Red Mark. If the proposal is adopted, and e was the only player to vote AGAINST it, then e gains another ten Red Marks, and the author gains ten Red Marks. (-r) When a proposal's voting period is extended because it would fail quorum, each eligible voter who has not voted on it loses five Red Marks. When a proposal meets quorum but is rejected, and only one player (other than possibly the author) voted FOR it, then that player loses ten Red Marks, and the author loses ten Red Marks. (+g) At the end of each month, for each office without a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains one Green Mark, unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month, in which case the deputising player gains one Green Mark. (+b) When a person calls for judgement, e gains one Blue Mark, except as noted below. When a judgement that caused the loss of a Blue Mark as noted below is overturned, the caller gains one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel judges an appeal case, each member gains one Blue Mark. (-b) When a person calls for judgement, and has already done so at least five times in the same week, e loses two Blue Marks. When an inquiry case is judged IRRELEVANT, or a criminal case is judged OVERLOOKED, ALREADY TRIED, or UNIMPUGNED, the caller loses one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel is recused with cause, each member loses one Blue Mark. Only valid, unretracted votes count toward the conditions for gaining and losing Red Marks. Marks may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend 100 Marks of the same color to gain one VC of that color. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5336 (Murphy), 8 December 2007 text: Marks are a class of assets. Ownership of Marks is restricted to persons. Each Mark has exactly one color. Each color of Mark is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a Mark of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a Mark of eir Party's color instead; if e has no Marks at all, then e loses a VC of the same color as the Mark e is meant to lose, gains 100 Marks of that color, and then loses the Mark; however, if e has no VCs at all, either, then the Mark loss is waived (you still can't get blood from a turnip, not even a thimbleful at a time). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of Marks. Marks are gained and lost as follows: (+r) When the Agoran decision of whether to adopt a proposal is resolved, each player who voted on it gains one Red Mark. If at least one of eir votes is FOR or AGAINST, and the ratio of eir FOR to AGAINST votes does not equal the proposal's adoption index, then e gains another Red Mark. If the proposal is adopted, and e was the only player to vote AGAINST it, then e gains another ten Red Marks, and the author gains ten Red Marks. (-r) When a proposal's voting period is extended because it would fail quorum, each eligible voter who has not voted on it loses five Red Marks. When a proposal meets quorum but is rejected, and only one player (other than possibly the author) voted FOR it, then that player loses ten Red Marks, and the author loses ten Red Marks. (+g) At the end of each month, for each office without a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains one Green Mark, unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month, in which case the deputising player gains one Green Mark. (+b) When a person calls for judgement, e gains one Blue Mark, except as noted below. When a judgement that caused the loss of a Blue Mark as noted below is overturned, the caller gains one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel judges an appeal case, each member gains one Blue Mark. (-b) When a person calls for judgement, and has already done so at least five times in the same week, e loses two Blue Marks. When an inquiry case is judged IRRELEVANT, or a criminal case is judged OVERLOOKED, ALREADY TRIED, or UNIMPUGNED, the caller loses one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel is recused with cause, each member loses one Blue Mark. Only valid, unretracted votes count toward the conditions for gaining and losing Red Marks. Marks may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend 100 Marks of the same color to gain one VC of that color. Mark awards and penalties SHALL be announced, as soon as possible after they occur, by the officer required to announce VC awards of the same color. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5359 (Murphy), 20 December 2007 text: Marks are a class of assets. Ownership of Marks is restricted to persons. Each Mark has exactly one color. Each color of Mark is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a Mark of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a Mark of eir Party's color instead; if e has no Marks at all, then e loses a VC of the same color as the Mark e is meant to lose, gains 100 Marks of that color, and then loses the Mark; however, if e has no VCs at all, either, then the Mark loss is waived (you still can't get blood from a turnip, not even a thimbleful at a time). The Assessor is the recordkeepor of Marks. Marks are gained and lost as follows: (+r) When the Agoran decision of whether to adopt a proposal is resolved, each player who voted on it gains one Red Mark. If at least one of eir votes is FOR or AGAINST, and the ratio of eir FOR to AGAINST votes does not equal the proposal's adoption index, then e gains another Red Mark. If the proposal is adopted, and e was the only player to vote AGAINST it, then e gains another ten Red Marks, and the author gains ten Red Marks. (-r) When a proposal's voting period is extended because it would fail quorum, each eligible voter who has not voted on it loses five Red Marks. When a proposal meets quorum but is rejected, and only one player (other than possibly the author) voted FOR it, then that player loses ten Red Marks, and the author loses ten Red Marks. (+g) At the end of each month, for each office without a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains one Green Mark, unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month, in which case the deputising player gains one Green Mark. (+b) When a person calls for judgement, e gains one Blue Mark, except as noted below. When a judgement that caused the loss of a Blue Mark as noted below is overturned, the caller gains one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel judges an appeal case, each member gains one Blue Mark. (-b) When a person calls for judgement, and has already done so at least five times in the same week, e loses two Blue Marks. When an inquiry case is judged IRRELEVANT, or a criminal case is judged OVERLOOKED, ALREADY TRIED, or UNIMPUGNED, the caller loses one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel is recused with cause, each member loses one Blue Mark. When a concurring opinion is published, the prior judge loses a number of Blue Marks equal to its error rating. Only valid, unretracted votes count toward the conditions for gaining and losing Red Marks. Marks may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend 100 Marks of the same color to gain one VC of that color. Mark awards and penalties SHALL be announced, as soon as possible after they occur, by the officer required to announce VC awards of the same color. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5363 (Murphy; disi.), 20 December 2007 text: Marks are a class of assets. Ownership of Marks is restricted to persons. Each Mark has exactly one color. Each color of Mark is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a Mark of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a Mark of eir Party's color instead; if e has no Marks at all, then e loses a VC of the same color as the Mark e is meant to lose, gains 100 Marks of that color, and then loses the Mark; however, if e has no VCs at all, either, then the Mark loss is waived (you still can't get blood from a turnip, not even a thimbleful at a time). The Accountor is the recordkeepor of Marks. Marks are gained and lost as follows: (+r) When the Agoran decision of whether to adopt a proposal is resolved, each player who voted on it gains one Red Mark. If at least one of eir votes is FOR or AGAINST, and the ratio of eir FOR to AGAINST votes does not equal the proposal's adoption index, then e gains another Red Mark. If the proposal is adopted, and e was the only player to vote AGAINST it, then e gains another ten Red Marks, and the author gains ten Red Marks. (-r) When a proposal's voting period is extended because it would fail quorum, each eligible voter who has not voted on it loses five Red Marks. When a proposal meets quorum but is rejected, and only one player (other than possibly the author) voted FOR it, then that player loses ten Red Marks, and the author loses ten Red Marks. (+g) At the end of each month, for each office without a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains one Green Mark, unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month, in which case the deputising player gains one Green Mark. (+b) When a person calls for judgement, e gains one Blue Mark, except as noted below. When a judgement that caused the loss of a Blue Mark as noted below is overturned, the caller gains one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel judges an appeal case, each member gains one Blue Mark. (-b) When a person calls for judgement, and has already done so at least five times in the same week, e loses two Blue Marks. When an inquiry case is judged IRRELEVANT, or a criminal case is judged OVERLOOKED, ALREADY TRIED, or UNIMPUGNED, the caller loses one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel is recused with cause, each member loses one Blue Mark. When a concurring opinion is published, the prior judge loses a number of Blue Marks equal to its error rating. Only valid, unretracted votes count toward the conditions for gaining and losing Red Marks. Marks may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend 100 Marks of the same color to gain one VC of that color. Mark awards and penalties SHALL be announced, as soon as possible after they occur, by the officer required to announce VC awards of the same color. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5364 (Murphy), 20 December 2007 text: Marks are a class of assets. Ownership of Marks is restricted to persons. Each Mark has exactly one color. Each color of Mark is a currency. If a player is meant to lose a Mark of a color that e does not possess, then e loses a Mark of eir Party's color instead; if e has no Marks at all, then e loses a VC of the same color as the Mark e is meant to lose, gains 100 Marks of that color, and then loses the Mark; however, if e has no VCs at all, either, then the Mark loss is waived (you still can't get blood from a turnip, not even a thimbleful at a time). The Accountor is the recordkeepor of Marks. Marks are gained and lost as follows: (+r) When the Agoran decision of whether to adopt a proposal is resolved, each player who voted on it gains one Red Mark. If at least one of eir votes is FOR or AGAINST, and the ratio of eir FOR to AGAINST votes does not equal the proposal's adoption index, then e gains another Red Mark. If the proposal is adopted, and e was the only player to vote AGAINST it, then e gains another ten Red Marks, and the author gains ten Red Marks. (-r) When a proposal's voting period is extended because it would fail quorum, each eligible voter who has not voted on it loses five Red Marks. When a proposal meets quorum but is rejected, and only one player (other than possibly the author) voted FOR it, then that player loses ten Red Marks, and the author loses ten Red Marks. (+g) At the end of each month, for each office without a report, the player (if any) who held that office for the majority of that month gains one Green Mark, unless another person deputised for that office while that player held that office during that month, in which case the deputising player gains one Green Mark. (+b) When a person calls for judgement, e gains one Blue Mark, except as noted below. When a judgement that caused the loss of a Blue Mark as noted below is overturned, the caller gains one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel judges an appeal case, each member gains one Blue Mark. (-b) When a person calls for judgement, and has already done so at least five times in the same week, e loses two Blue Marks. When an inquiry case is judged IRRELEVANT, or a criminal case is judged OVERLOOKED, ALREADY TRIED, or UNIMPUGNED, the caller loses one Blue Mark. When a judicial panel is recused with cause, each member loses one Blue Mark. When a concurring opinion is published, the prior judge loses a number of Blue Marks equal to its error rating. (+m) When, during the observance of Agora's unbirthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains 2N+1 magenta Marks (where N is Agora's age rounded down to the nearest integer), unless e previously gained Marks in this manner during the same unbirthday. Only valid, unretracted votes count toward the conditions for gaining and losing Red Marks. Marks may be spent as follows, by announcement (INVALID unless the color is specified): a) A player may spend 100 Marks of the same color to gain one VC of that color. Mark awards and penalties SHALL be announced, as soon as possible after they occur, by the officer required to announce VC awards of the same color. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2176 by Proposal 5376 (root), 1 January 2008 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2177 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2177 by Proposal 5309 (Goethe), 24 November 2007 text: A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for the immediately preceding sixty days. The collection of Senators is the Senate. A Senator CAN call an Emergency Session with 2 Senate supporters, provided no other emergency session existed at any time in the preceding 48 hours. An emergency session lasts for 21 days after being called. During emergency session, any Senator declare a filibuster on a proposal in its voting period, with 2 supporting Senators, provided no filibuster has been declared on that proposal in the past. During emergency session, any Senator may end a filibuster on a proposal with 4 supporting Senators. A proposal that ends its voting period in filibuster has a quorum of the number of eligible voters plus 1, rules to the contrary notwithstanding, and its voting period is not extended due to lack of quorum. When an emergency session begins, all non-Senators' postures become supine, and non-Senators CANNOT flip their posture while the session lasts. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5331 (root), 5 December 2007 text: A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for the immediately preceding sixty days. The collection of Senators is the Senate. The Registrar's report includes a list of all Senators. A Senator CAN call an Emergency Session with 2 Senate supporters, provided no other emergency session existed at any time in the preceding 48 hours. An emergency session lasts for 21 days after being called. The Assessor's report includes the most recent date on which an emergency session was called. During emergency session, any Senator declare a filibuster on a proposal in its voting period, with 2 supporting Senators, provided no filibuster has been declared on that proposal in the past. During emergency session, any Senator may end a filibuster on a proposal with 4 supporting Senators. A proposal that ends its voting period in filibuster has a quorum of the number of eligible voters plus 1, rules to the contrary notwithstanding, and its voting period is not extended due to lack of quorum. When an emergency session begins, all non-Senators' postures become supine, and non-Senators CANNOT flip their posture while the session lasts. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5332 (root), 5 December 2007 text: A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for the immediately preceding sixty days. The collection of Senators is the Senate. The Registrar's report includes a list of all Senators. A Senator CAN call an Emergency Session with 2 Senate supporters, provided no other emergency session existed at any time in the preceding 48 hours. An emergency session lasts for 21 days after being called. The Assessor's report includes the most recent date on which an emergency session was called. During emergency session, any Senator declare a filibuster on a proposal in its voting period, with 2 supporting Senators, provided no filibuster has been declared on that proposal in the past. Any Senator may end a filibuster on a proposal with 4 supporting Senators. A proposal that ends its voting period in filibuster has a quorum of the number of eligible voters plus 1, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. When an emergency session begins, all non-Senators' postures become supine, and non-Senators CANNOT flip their posture while the session lasts. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5333 (root), 5 December 2007 text: A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for the immediately preceding sixty days. The collection of Senators is the Senate. The Registrar's report includes a list of all Senators. A Senator CAN call an Emergency Session with 2 Senate supporters, provided no other emergency session existed at any time in the preceding 48 hours. An emergency session lasts for 21 days after being called. The Assessor's report includes the most recent date on which an emergency session was called. The roll call of an emergency session is the set of senators at the time the emergency session was called. During emergency session, the previous definition of senator does not apply; instead, any player who is a member of the roll call is a senator. During emergency session, any Senator declare a filibuster on a proposal in its voting period, with 2 supporting Senators, provided no filibuster has been declared on that proposal in the past. Any Senator may end a filibuster on a proposal with 4 supporting Senators. A proposal that ends its voting period in filibuster has a quorum of the number of eligible voters plus 1, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. When an emergency session begins, all non-Senators' postures become supine, and non-Senators CANNOT flip their posture while the session lasts. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5333 (root), 5 December 2007 text: A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for the immediately preceding sixty days. The collection of Senators is the Senate. The Registrar's report includes a list of all Senators. A Senator CAN call an Emergency Session with 2 Senate supporters, provided no other emergency session existed at any time in the preceding 48 hours. An emergency session lasts for 21 days after being called. The Assessor's report includes the most recent date on which an emergency session was called. The roll call of an emergency session is the set of senators at the time the emergency session was called. During emergency session, the previous definition of senator does not apply; instead, any player who is a member of the roll call is a senator. The Assessor's report includes the roll call of the most recent emergency session. During emergency session, any Senator declare a filibuster on a proposal in its voting period, with 2 supporting Senators, provided no filibuster has been declared on that proposal in the past. Any Senator may end a filibuster on a proposal with 4 supporting Senators. A proposal that ends its voting period in filibuster has a quorum of the number of eligible voters plus 1, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. When an emergency session begins, all non-Senators' postures become supine, and non-Senators CANNOT flip their posture while the session lasts. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5357 (root; disi.), 16 December 2007 text: A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for the immediately preceding sixty days. The collection of Senators is the Senate. The Registrar's report includes a list of all Senators. A Senator CAN call an Emergency Session with 2 Senate supporters, provided no other emergency session existed at any time in the preceding 48 hours. An emergency session lasts for 21 days after being called. The Assessor's report includes the most recent date on which an emergency session was called. The roll call of an emergency session is the set of senators at the time the emergency session was called. During emergency session, the previous definition of senator does not apply; instead, any player who is a member of the roll call is a senator. The Assessor's report includes the roll call of the most recent emergency session. During emergency session, any Senator CAN declare a filibuster on a proposal in its voting period, with 2 supporting Senators, provided no filibuster has been declared on that proposal in the past. Any Senator CAN end a filibuster on a proposal with 4 supporting Senators. A proposal that ends its voting period in filibuster has a quorum of the number of eligible voters plus 1, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. When an emergency session begins, all non-Senators' postures become supine, and non-Senators CANNOT flip their posture while the session lasts. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2178 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2178 by Proposal 5328 (Goethe), 5 December 2007 text: A member of a contract CAN identify the contract as a public contract by publishing its text with a notice of intent from the contract be a public contract. The notice of intent MUST consist of one or more of: (a) a clause in the contract identifying it as public; (b) a notice indicating unanimous consent of members that the contract be public; (c) a notice published without objection of its members, that the contract be public. If the text of a potential contract is published by a person with a clear indication that the contract will be public when it forms, then it becomes public immediately upon becoming a contract. Changes in the text of a public contract do not become effective until they are published. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5380 (Goethe), 1 January 2008 text: A member of a contract CAN identify the contract as a public contract by publishing its text with a notice of intent from the contract be a public contract. The notice of intent MUST consist of one or more of: (a) a clause in the contract identifying it as public; (b) a notice indicating unanimous consent of members that the contract be public; (c) a notice published without objection of its members, that the contract be public. If the text of a potential contract is published by a person with a clear indication that the contract will be public when it forms, then it becomes public immediately upon becoming a contract. Changes in the text or membership of a public contract do not become effective until they are published. history: Power changed from 1 to 1.5 by Proposal 5403 (Murphy, Goethe), 16 January 2008 history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5403 (Murphy, Goethe), 16 January 2008 text: A public contract is a contract that has been identified as such, as specified by this rule. Any other contract is private. A member of a contract CAN identify it as a public contract by publishing its text and membership, provided that at least one of the following is true: (a) The contract contains a clause identifying it as public. (b) The publication is accompanied by a notice, indicating unanimous consent of members, that the contract be public. (c) The publication is accompanied by a notice, published without objection of its members, that the contract be public. A partnership CAN identify its contract as a public contract by publishing its text and membership. If the text of a potential contract is published with a clear indication that the contract will be public when it forms, then it is identified as a public contract when it becomes a contract. Changes in the text or membership of a public contract do not become effective until they are published. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2179 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2179 by Proposal 5328 (Goethe), 5 December 2007 text: Points are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of points is restricted to players. Points are a currency. The number of points owned by a player is eir score. The Scorekeepor is a high-priority office, and the recordkeepor of points. A player with 100 or more points may win the game by announcing this fact. Upon such an announcement, each player's score is set to zero. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5394 (Murphy, Goddess Eris, OscarMeyr, Zefram), 16 January 2008 text: Points are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of points is restricted to players. Points are a currency. The number of points owned by a player is eir score. The Scorekeepor is a high-priority office, and the recordkeepor of points. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2180 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2180 by Proposal 5362 (root), 20 December 2007 text: A location is a public contract that describes itself as a location. A person who becomes a party to a location is said to move to that location. A person who is a party to a location is said to be in that location. A person who ceases to be a party to a location is said to leave that location. A person cannot be in more than a single location at one time. A person who moves to a location automatically leaves any location e is already in. Whenever a person's location does not permit em to leave it, e CANNOT move to any other location. The minimum number of parties for a location is zero. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5423 (woggle; disi.), 6 February 2008 text: A location is a public contract that describes itself as a location. A person who becomes a party to a location is said to move to that location. A person who is a party to a location is said to be in that location. A person who ceases to be a party to a location is said to leave that location. A person cannot be in more than a single location at one time. A person who moves to a location automatically leaves any location e is already in. Whenever a person's location does not permit em to leave it, e CANNOT move to any other location. A location requires at least zero parties. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2180 by Proposal 5495 (comex), 23 April 2008 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2181 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2181 by Proposal 5363 (Murphy; disi.), 20 December 2007 text: The Accountor is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of assets. The Accountor is the default recordkeepor for all assets that do not specify a different recordkeepor. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5482 (Murphy), 2 April 2008 text: The Accountor is a low-priority office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of miscellaneous assets. The Accountor is the default recordkeepor for all assets that do not specify a different recordkeepor. While there are no such assets, the Accountor has no report. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5508 (Murphy), 28 May 2008 text: The Accountor is a low-priority office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of miscellaneous assets. The Accountor's report includes a list of classes of assets and their backing documents and recordkeepors. The Accountor is the default recordkeepor for all assets whose backing document does not specify a different recordkeepor. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5527 (Murphy), 2 June 2008 text: The Accountor is a low-priority office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of miscellaneous assets. The Accountor is the default recordkeepor for all assets that do not specify a different recordkeepor. If any such assets exist, then the Accountor's report includes a list of their backing documents; otherwise, the Accountor has no report. The Accountor is the default recordkeepor for all assets whose backing document does not specify a different recordkeepor. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2182 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2182 by Proposal 5373 (Levi, Murphy), 22 December 2007 text: A Wager is an announcement specifying the following: (a) A statement that is, or will become, true or false, (b) The number and color of Marks being wagered, which MUST be less than or equal to the number of Marks possessed by that player, and (c) The outcome wagered on by the offering player. Any other player with Marks greater than or equal to the amount of the Wager CAN accept it by announcement, unless the Wager has already been accepted. E thereby wagers on the opposite outcome from that wagered on by the offering player. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2182 by Proposal 5401 (Levi), 16 January 2008 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2183 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2183 by Proposal 5373 (Levi, Murphy), 22 December 2007 text: A Wager MAY be resolved when the following conditions are met: (a) The Wager has been accepted, and (b) The statement that is the subject of the Wager is either true or false. An accepted Wager CAN be resolved by a correct announcement specifying the truth value of the statement, which must be exactly one of true or false. As soon as possible after a Wager is resolved the player who wagered on the incorrect outcome MUST transfer the agreed number and color of Marks to the player who wagered on the correct outcome. history: Repealed as Power=1 Rule 2183 by Proposal 5401 (Levi), 16 January 2008 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2184 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2184 by Proposal 5390 (Murphy), 16 January 2008 text: When the Ambassador informs a foreign nomic of an event, e SHALL use the forum (if any) specified by that nomic for announcing that type of event. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2185 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2185 by Proposal 5392 (Murphy), 16 January 2008 text: Recognition is a foreign nomic switch, tracked by the Ambassador, with values Unknown (default), Protected, Friendly, Neutral, Sanctioned, Hostile, and Abandoned. When a foreign nomic becomes a Protectorate, its Recognition becomes Protected. When a foreign nomic ceases to be a Protectorate, its Recognition becomes Unknown. A foreign nomic's Recognition CANNOT change to or from Protected in any other way. The Ambassador CAN, without objection, flip a foreign nomic's Recognition to any value (subject to the above restriction). E SHALL inform that nomic of the change as soon as possible. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2186 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2186 by Proposal 5394 (Murphy, Goddess Eris, OscarMeyr, Zefram), 16 January 2008 text: Winning Conditions and Losing Conditions exist only as defined by rules. Defining these things is secured. A win announcement is a correct announcement explicitly labeled as a win announcement. When one or more persons satisfy at least one Winning Condition and do not satisfy any Losing Conditions, all such persons win the game. This is the only way to win the game, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. Each Winning Condition should (if needed) specify a cleanup procedure to prevent an arbitrary number of wins arising from essentially the same conditions. When one or more persons win the game, for each Winning Condition satisfied by at least one of those persons, its cleanup procedure occurs. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2187 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2187 by Proposal 5394 (Murphy, Goddess Eris, OscarMeyr, Zefram), 16 January 2008 text: Upon a win announcement that one or more players have a score of at least 100 (specifying all such players), all those players satisfy the Winning Condition of High Score. Cleanup procedure: Each player's score is set to 0. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5525 (Murphy), 2 June 2008 text: Upon a win announcement that one or more players have a score of at least 100 (specifying all such players), all those players satisfy the Winning Condition of High Score. Cleanup procedure: All those players have eir scores set to 0. All other players have eir scores set to floor(N*S/10), where N is eir previous score and S is the Score Index. The Score Index is an integer from 0 to 5, and part of the Scorekeepor's report. The Scorekeepor CAN change the Score Index without objection. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5558 (root; disi.), 25 June 2008 text: Upon a win announcement that one or more players have a score of at least 100 (specifying all such players), all those players satisfy the Winning Condition of High Score. Cleanup procedure: All those players have eir scores set to 0. All other players have eir scores set to floor(N*S/10), where N is eir previous score and S is the Score Index. The Score Index is an integer from 0 to 5, and part of the Scorekeepor's report. The Scorekeepor CAN change the Score Index with Agoran consent. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2188 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2188 by Proposal 5394 (Murphy, Goddess Eris, OscarMeyr, Zefram), 16 January 2008 text: Upon the adoption of a proposal awarding a win to one or more persons, all those persons satisfy the Winning Condition of Legislation. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2189 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2189 by Proposal 5394 (Murphy, Goddess Eris, OscarMeyr, Zefram), 16 January 2008 text: Upon a player acting on behalf of Agora to award a win to one or more persons, all those persons satisfy the Winning Condition of Extortion. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2190 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2190 by Proposal 5394 (Murphy, Goddess Eris, OscarMeyr, Zefram), 16 January 2008 text: Being in exile is a Losing Condition. Being in the chokey is a Losing Condition. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2191 history: Enacted as Power=1.5 Rule 2191 by Proposal 5395 (Murphy), 16 January 2008 text: A pledge is a contract identifying itself as such. The minimum number of parties for a pledge is one. A pledge CAN be modified or terminated by any party without objection. An equity case regarding a pledge CAN be initiated by a non-party, provided that all other requirements for initiating an equity case are met. The initiator of such a case is considered to be a party to the pledge for the purpose of that case. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5423 (woggle; disi.), 6 February 2008 text: A pledge is a contract identifying itself as such. A pledge requires at least one party. A pledge CAN be modified or terminated by any party without objection. An equity case regarding a pledge CAN be initiated by a non-party, provided that all other requirements for initiating an equity case are met. The initiator of such a case is considered to be a party to the pledge for the purpose of that case. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5423 (woggle; disi.), 6 February 2008 text: A pledge is a contract identifying itself as such. A pledge requires at least one party. An equity case regarding a pledge CAN be initiated by a non-party, provided that all other requirements for initiating an equity case are met. The initiator of such a case is considered to be a party to the pledge for the purpose of that case. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2192 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2192 by Proposal 5396 (Murphy), 16 January 2008 text: The Mad Scientist is an office; its holder is responsible for building the Monster. At least once each week, the Mad Scientist SHALL: a) Randomly select exactly one rule. If the selected rule is either this rule or the rule "The Monster", then the villagers have shown up with torches and pitchforks; skip directly to proposal submission. b) Select one or more contiguous sentences from the selected rule. c) Select exactly one noun from the selected text, and replace each instance of that noun with "Monster" (including grammatical variations, e.g. replacing "'s" with "Monster's"). d) Submit a proposal, with adoption index equal to the Power of the selected rule, and interest index 0, to append the modified text to the rule "The Monster" (or, if the villagers have shown up with torches and pitchforks, to repeal both that rule and this one). history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5483 (Murphy), 2 April 2008 text: The Mad Scientist is an office; its holder is responsible for building the Monster. At least once each week, the Mad Scientist SHALL: a) Randomly select exactly one rule. If the selected rule is either this rule or the rule "The Monster", then the villagers have shown up with torches and pitchforks; skip directly to proposal submission. b) Select one or more contiguous sentences from the selected rule. c) Select exactly one noun from the selected text, and replace each instance of that noun with "Monster" (including grammatical variations, e.g. replacing "'s" with "Monster's"). d) Submit a proposal, with adoption index equal to the Power of the selected rule, and interest index 0, to append the modified text to the rule "The Monster" (or, if the villagers have shown up with torches and pitchforks, to repeal both that rule and this one). This proposal counts as the Mad Scientist's weekly report if/when it is adopted. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5485 (root), 9 April 2008 text: The Mad Scientist is an office; its holder is responsible for building the Monster. The Mad Scientist's weekly duties include the performance of the following tasks, in order: a) Randomly select exactly one rule. If the selected rule is either this rule or the rule "The Monster", then the villagers have shown up with torches and pitchforks; skip directly to proposal submission. b) Select one or more contiguous sentences from the selected rule. c) Select exactly one noun from the selected text, and replace each instance of that noun with "Monster" (including grammatical variations, e.g. replacing "'s" with "Monster's"). d) Submit a proposal, with adoption index equal to the Power of the selected rule, and interest index 0, to append the modified text to the rule "The Monster" (or, if the villagers have shown up with torches and pitchforks, to repeal both that rule and this one). This proposal counts as the Mad Scientist's weekly report if/when it is adopted. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5494 (OscarMeyr, Pavitra), 23 April 2008 text: The Mad Scientist is an office; its holder is responsible for building the Monster. The Mad Scientist CAN act on behalf of the Monster to take any action that the Monster may take, and SHALL act on behalf of the Monster to ensure that the Monster fulfills all of its duties. The Mad Scientist's weekly duties include the performance of the following tasks, in order: a) Randomly select exactly one rule. If the selected rule is either this rule or the rule "The Monster", then the villagers have shown up with torches and pitchforks; skip directly to proposal submission. b) Select one or more contiguous sentences from the selected rule. c) Select exactly one noun from the selected text, and replace each instance of that noun with "Monster" (including grammatical variations, e.g. replacing "'s" with "Monster's"). d) Submit a proposal, with adoption index equal to the Power of the selected rule, and interest index 0, to append the modified text to the rule "The Monster" (or, if the villagers have shown up with torches and pitchforks, to repeal both that rule and this one). This proposal counts as the Mad Scientist's weekly report if/when it is adopted. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2193 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2193 by Proposal 5396 (Murphy), 16 January 2008 text: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5435 (avpx; disi.), 13 February 2008 text: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! A public Monster purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. history: Amended(2) by Proposal 5444 (avpx; disi.), 21 February 2008 text: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! A public Monster purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. There is a format of the Monsterset known as the Short Logical Monsterset (SLM). In this format, each Monster is assigned to a category, and the Monsters are grouped according to their category. Monsters are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Monsterkeepor sees fit. history: Amended(3) by Proposal 5460 (avpx), 13 March 2008 text: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! A public Monster purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. There is a format of the Monsterset known as the Short Logical Monsterset (SLM). In this format, each Monster is assigned to a category, and the Monsters are grouped according to their category. Monsters are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Monsterkeepor sees fit. When the rules calls for an Agoran Monster to be made, the Monster-making process takes place in the following three stages, each described elsewhere: (a) Initiation of the Monster. (b) Voting of the people. (c) Resolution of the Monster. history: Amended(4) by Proposal 5501 (avpx; disi.), 26 April 2008 text: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! A public Monster purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. There is a format of the Monsterset known as the Short Logical Monsterset (SLM). In this format, each Monster is assigned to a category, and the Monsters are grouped according to their category. Monsters are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Monsterkeepor sees fit. When the rules calls for an Agoran Monster to be made, the Monster-making process takes place in the following three stages, each described elsewhere: (a) Initiation of the Monster. (b) Voting of the people. (c) Resolution of the Monster. Upon the adoption of a proposal awarding a win to one or more Monsters, all those Monsters satisfy the Winning Condition of Legislation. history: Amended(5) by Proposal 5514 (avpx; disi.), 28 May 2008 text: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! A public Monster purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. There is a format of the Monsterset known as the Short Logical Monsterset (SLM). In this format, each Monster is assigned to a category, and the Monsters are grouped according to their category. Monsters are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Monsterkeepor sees fit. When the rules calls for an Agoran Monster to be made, the Monster-making process takes place in the following three stages, each described elsewhere: (a) Initiation of the Monster. (b) Voting of the people. (c) Resolution of the Monster. Upon the adoption of a proposal awarding a win to one or more Monsters, all those Monsters satisfy the Winning Condition of Legislation. The CotC's report includes the status of all Monster-related cases that either require a Monster or have at least one applicable Monster-related question that has no judgement. history: Amended(6) by Proposal 5540 (ais523; disi.), 13 June 2008 text: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! A public Monster purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. There is a format of the Monsterset known as the Short Logical Monsterset (SLM). In this format, each Monster is assigned to a category, and the Monsters are grouped according to their category. Monsters are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Monsterkeepor sees fit. When the rules calls for an Agoran Monster to be made, the Monster-making process takes place in the following three stages, each described elsewhere: (a) Initiation of the Monster. (b) Voting of the people. (c) Resolution of the Monster. Upon the adoption of a proposal awarding a win to one or more Monsters, all those Monsters satisfy the Winning Condition of Legislation. The CotC's report includes the status of all Monster-related cases that either require a Monster or have at least one applicable Monster-related question that has no judgement. "First-class Monster" means a Monster of a biological nature. history: Amended(7) by Proposal 5541 (ais523; disi.), 16 June 2008 text: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! A public Monster purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. There is a format of the Monsterset known as the Short Logical Monsterset (SLM). In this format, each Monster is assigned to a category, and the Monsters are grouped according to their category. Monsters are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Monsterkeepor sees fit. When the rules calls for an Agoran Monster to be made, the Monster-making process takes place in the following three stages, each described elsewhere: (a) Initiation of the Monster. (b) Voting of the people. (c) Resolution of the Monster. Upon the adoption of a proposal awarding a win to one or more Monsters, all those Monsters satisfy the Winning Condition of Legislation. The CotC's report includes the status of all Monster-related cases that either require a Monster or have at least one applicable Monster-related question that has no judgement. "First-class Monster" means a Monster of a biological nature. The Monster's adopted motto is "Le monstre n'est pas une fontaine." history: Amended(8) by Proposal 5546 (ais523; disi.), 20 June 2008 text: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! A public Monster purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. There is a format of the Monsterset known as the Short Logical Monsterset (SLM). In this format, each Monster is assigned to a category, and the Monsters are grouped according to their category. Monsters are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Monsterkeepor sees fit. When the rules calls for an Agoran Monster to be made, the Monster-making process takes place in the following three stages, each described elsewhere: (a) Initiation of the Monster. (b) Voting of the people. (c) Resolution of the Monster. Upon the adoption of a proposal awarding a win to one or more Monsters, all those Monsters satisfy the Winning Condition of Legislation. The CotC's report includes the status of all Monster-related cases that either require a Monster or have at least one applicable Monster-related question that has no judgement. "First-class Monster" means a Monster of a biological nature. The Monster's adopted motto is "Le monstre n'est pas une fontaine." The initiation of a Monstrous decree is a secured change. The initiating instrument must specify the target Monster and the changes to be made to it. Any ambiguity in the specification of a Monstrous decree causes it to be void and without effect. This is the only mechanism by which a Monstrous decree can be initiated. history: Amended(9) by Proposal 5569 (ais523; disi.), 4 July 2008 text: Raaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! A public Monster purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is self-ratifying. There is a format of the Monsterset known as the Short Logical Monsterset (SLM). In this format, each Monster is assigned to a category, and the Monsters are grouped according to their category. Monsters are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Monsterkeepor sees fit. When the rules calls for an Agoran Monster to be made, the Monster-making process takes place in the following three stages, each described elsewhere: (a) Initiation of the Monster. (b) Voting of the people. (c) Resolution of the Monster. Upon the adoption of a proposal awarding a win to one or more Monsters, all those Monsters satisfy the Winning Condition of Legislation. The CotC's report includes the status of all Monster-related cases that either require a Monster or have at least one applicable Monster-related question that has no judgement. "First-class Monster" means a Monster of a biological nature. The Monster's adopted motto is "Le monstre n'est pas une fontaine." The initiation of a Monstrous decree is a secured change. The initiating instrument must specify the target Monster and the changes to be made to it. Any ambiguity in the specification of a Monstrous decree causes it to be void and without effect. This is the only mechanism by which a Monstrous decree can be initiated. If an instance of a switch comes to have a Monster, it ceases to have any other Monster. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2194 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2194 by Proposal 5404 (Murphy, pikhq, root), 16 January 2008 text: Notes are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of Notes is restricted to players. Changes to Note holdings are secured. Each Note has exactly one pitch from the chromatic scale (ignoring octaves, and treating enharmonics as equivalent). Each pitch of Note is a currency. The Conductor is an office, and the recordkeepor of Notes. Notes are gained as follows: (1) At the end of each week, for each player, let X be the number of eir proposals that were adopted during that week, and let Y be the number of eir interested quorate proposals that were rejected during that week with VI >= AI/2: (F) If X > Y > 0, then e gains an F Note. (F#) If X > Y = 0, then e gains an F# Note. (G) If X = Y > 0, then e gains a G Note. (Ab) If Y > X = 0, then e gains an Ab Note. (A) If Y > X > 0, then e gains an A Note. (2) (E) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one weekly report during that week gains an E Note. (Eb) At the end of each month, each player who published at least one monthly report during that month gains an Eb Note. (3) (D) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one on-time judgement during that week gains a D Note. (4) (C) At the end of each week, each player who gained at least one Point during that week gains a C Note. (C#) At the end of each week, each contestmaster who awarded at least one Point during that week gains a C# Note. Notes CAN be spent (destroyed) as follows: (1) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a major chord to increase another player's VVLOP by 1. (2) A player CAN spend five Notes forming the start of a major scale to increase eir own VVLOP by 1. (3) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a minor chord to decrease another player's VVLOP by 1. (4) A player CAN spend two Notes of the same pitch to make another player gain one Note of that pitch. (5) During Agora's Birthday, a player CAN spend Notes forming the melody "Happy Birthday" (GGAGCB GGAGDC GGGECBA FFECDC or a translation thereof) to satisfy the Winning Condition of Musicianship, unless another player has already done so during that Birthday. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5417 (Murphy; disi.), 30 January 2008 text: Notes are a class of fixed assets. Ownership of Notes is restricted to players. Changes to Note holdings are secured. Each Note has exactly one pitch from the chromatic scale (ignoring octaves, and treating enharmonics as equivalent). Each pitch of Note is a currency. The Conductor is an office, and the recordkeepor of Notes. Notes are gained as follows: (1) At the end of each week, for each player, let X be the number of eir interested proposals that were adopted during that week, and let Y be the number of eir interested quorate proposals that were rejected during that week with VI >= AI/2: (F) If X > Y > 0, then e gains an F Note. (F#) If X > Y = 0, then e gains an F# Note. (G) If X = Y > 0, then e gains a G Note. (Ab) If Y > X = 0, then e gains an Ab Note. (A) If Y > X > 0, then e gains an A Note. (2) (E) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one weekly report during that week gains an E Note. (Eb) At the end of each month, each player who published at least one monthly report during that month gains an Eb Note. (3) (D) At the end of each week, each player who published at least one on-time judgement during that week gains a D Note. (4) (C) At the end of each week, each player who gained at least one Point during that week gains a C Note. (C#) At the end of each week, each contestmaster who awarded at least one Point during that week gains a C# Note. Notes CAN be spent (destroyed) as follows: (1) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a major chord to increase another player's VVLOP by 1. (2) A player CAN spend five Notes forming the start of a major scale to increase eir own VVLOP by 1. (3) A player CAN spend three Notes forming a minor chord to decrease another player's VVLOP by 1. (4) A player CAN spend two Notes of the same pitch to make another player gain one Note of that pitch. (5) During Agora's Birthday, a player CAN spend Notes forming the melody "Happy Birthday" (GGAGCB GGAGDC GGGECBA FFECDC or a translation thereof) to satisfy the Winning Condition of Musicianship, unless another player has already done so during that Birthday. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2194 by Proposal 5424 (Zefram; disi.), 6 February 2008 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2195 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2195 by Proposal 5404 (Murphy, pikhq, root), 16 January 2008 text: Rests are a fixed currency. Ownership of Rests is restricted to players. Changes to Rest holdings are secured. The Conductor is the recordkeepor of Notes. Whenever a player possesses a Rest, the Conductor CAN destroy it and award a Note of random pitch to that player, and SHALL do so as soon as possible. Upon a correct announcement by the Conductor that no player possesses a Rest, this rule is repealed. history: Repealed as Power=2 Rule 2195 by Rule 2195, 22 January 2008 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2196 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2196 by Proposal 5418 (root), 2 February 2008 text: An Agoran decision with an adoption index is either ordinary or democratic. An Agoran decision with an adoption index greater than or equal to 2 is democratic. Any other Agoran decision with an adoption index is ordinary by default. If an Agoran decision has an adoption index, the message by which it is initiated MUST include the following information: a) Its adoption index. b) Whether it is ordinary or democratic. For any Agoran decision with an adoption index, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5455 (Murphy), 1 March 2008 text: An Agoran decision with an adoption index is either ordinary or democratic. An Agoran decision with an adoption index greater than or equal to 2 is democratic. Any other Agoran decision with an adoption index is ordinary by default. If an Agoran decision has an adoption index, then the following are essential parameters: a) Its adoption index. b) Whether it is ordinary or democratic. For any Agoran decision with an adoption index, the available options are FOR, AGAINST, and PRESENT. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2197 history: Enacted as Power=1.5 Rule 2197 by Proposal 5423 (woggle; disi.), 6 February 2008 text: A Contract Change can be one or more of any of the following: (a) a person who intends to be bound by a contract becoming a party to the contract; (b) a person ceasing to be a party to the contract; (c) amending a contract; and (d) terminating a contract If a Contract Change is ambiguous or the its permissability cannot be determined with certainty at the time it is attempted, then that change has no effect. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5502 (Pavitra; disi.), 26 April 2008 text: A Contract Change can be one or more of any of the following: (a) a person who intends to be bound by a contract becoming a party to the contract; (b) a person ceasing to be a party to the contract; (c) amending a contract; and (d) terminating a contract If a Contract Change is ambiguous or its permissibility cannot be determined with certainty at the time it is attempted, then that change has no effect. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2198 history: Enacted as Power=1.5 Rule 2198 by Proposal 5423 (woggle; disi.), 6 February 2008 text: If a contract specifies a mechanism by which Contract Changes to it can be performed, then such changes CAN be performed using that mechanism. If a contract does not purport to regulate becoming a party to it, than any person CAN become a party to it by announcement. If the minimum number of parties for a contract is at least two, then Contract Changes CAN be made to it by agreement between all the parties to the contract. Otherwise, any party to the contract CAN make Contract Changes to that contract without Objection if, before the dependant action is resolved, no party blocks the change by announcement. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5502 (Pavitra; disi.), 26 April 2008 text: If a contract specifies a mechanism by which Contract Changes to it can be performed, then such changes CAN be performed using that mechanism. If a contract does not purport to regulate becoming a party to it, than any person CAN become a party to it by announcement. If the minimum number of parties for a contract is at least two, then Contract Changes CAN be made to it by agreement between all the parties to the contract. Otherwise, any party to the contract CAN make Contract Changes to that contract without Objection if, before the dependent action is resolved, no party blocks the change by announcement. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2199 history: Enacted as Power=2 Rule 2199 by Proposal 5424 (Zefram; disi.), 6 February 2008 text: Ribbons are a class of fixed assets. Changes to Ribbon holdings are secured. Ownership of Ribbons is restricted to players. Each Ribbon has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of Ribbon is a currency. The Tailor is a low-priority office, and the recordkeepor of Ribbons. Ribbons are gained as follows, unless the player already possesses the color of Ribbon to be gained: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted and changes at least one rule with Power >= 3, its proposer gains a Red Ribbon. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains an Orange Ribbon. (+G) At the end of each month, each player who held at least one office continuously during that month gains a Green Ribbon, unless e violated a requirement to submit a report within a time limit. (+C) When a player deputises for an office, e gains a Cyan Ribbon. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, e gains a Blue Ribbon, unless e violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, e gains a Black Ribbon, unless e violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player for the first time, e gains a White Ribbon. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months, was never a player before that period, and names another first-class player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), that player gains a White Ribbon. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains a Magenta Ribbon. (+U) When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, e gains an Ultraviolet Ribbon. (+V) When a player is awarded a Patent Title, e gains a Violet Ribbon, unless e gains a different Ribbon for the award. (+I) When a player is awarded a degree, e gains an Indigo Ribbon. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains a Yellow Ribbon. If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for Ribbons, then a player CAN destroy one Ribbon of each such color in eir possession to satisfy the Winning Condition of Renaissance. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5485 (root), 9 April 2008 text: Ribbons are a class of fixed assets. Changes to Ribbon holdings are secured. Ownership of Ribbons is restricted to players. Each Ribbon has exactly one color. Colors with different names are distinct, regardless of spectral proximity. Each color of Ribbon is a currency. The Tailor is a low-priority office, and the recordkeepor of Ribbons. Ribbons are gained as follows, unless the player already possesses the color of Ribbon to be gained: (+R) When an interested proposal is adopted and changes at least one rule with Power >= 3, its proposer gains a Red Ribbon. (+O) When an interested proposal is adopted by voting with no valid votes AGAINST, its proposer gains an Orange Ribbon. (+G) At the end of each month, each player who held at least one office continuously during that month gains a Green Ribbon, unless e failed to perform an official duty within a time limit during that month. (+C) When a player deputises for an office, e gains a Cyan Ribbon. (+B) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question other than a question on sentencing, e gains a Blue Ribbon, unless e violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit. (+K) When a player assigns a judgement to a judicial question on sentencing, e gains a Black Ribbon, unless e violated a requirement to submit that judgement within a time limit. (+W) When a first-class person becomes a player for the first time, e gains a White Ribbon. When a first-class person has been a player continuously for at least three months, was never a player before that period, and names another first-class player as eir mentor (and has not named a mentor in this fashion before), that player gains a White Ribbon. (+M) When, during Agora's birthday, a player publicly acknowledges the occasion, e gains a Magenta Ribbon. (+U) When a player is awarded the Patent Title Champion, e gains an Ultraviolet Ribbon. (+V) When a player is awarded a Patent Title, e gains a Violet Ribbon, unless e gains a different Ribbon for the award. (+I) When a player is awarded a degree, e gains an Indigo Ribbon. (+Y) At the end of each month, for each contest that awarded points to at least three different contestants during that month, the contestmaster gains a Yellow Ribbon. If this rule mentions at least six different specific colors for Ribbons, then a player CAN destroy one Ribbon of each such color in eir possession to satisfy the Winning Condition of Renaissance. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2200 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2200 by Proposal 5446 (Pavitra, Zefram), 24 February 2008 text: A nomic ruleset is a set of explicit rules that provides means for itself to be altered arbitrarily, including changes to those rules that govern rule changes. Not all rule changes need be possible in one step; an arbitrarily complex combination of actions (possibly including intermediate rule changes) can be required, so long as any rule change is theoretically achievable in finite time. A nomic is the single entity defined by a nomic ruleset as a whole. Each nomic ruleset defines exactly one nomic, and each nomic is defined by exactly one nomic ruleset. A foreign nomic is a nomic that is not Agora. Adopting the name of "Agora" does not disqualify a nomic from being foreign; any nomic that is not the One True Agora is a foreign nomic. A province is a protectorate that is registered as a player. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5523 (Pavitra; disi.), 2 June 2008 text: A nomic ruleset is a set of explicit rules that provides means for itself to be altered arbitrarily, including changes to those rules that govern rule changes. Not all rule changes need be possible in one step; an arbitrarily complex combination of actions (possibly including intermediate rule changes) can be required, so long as any rule change is theoretically achievable in finite time. A nomic is the single entity defined by a nomic ruleset as a whole. Each nomic ruleset defines exactly one nomic, and each nomic is defined by exactly one nomic ruleset. A foreign nomic is a nomic that is not Agora. Adopting the name of "Agora" does not disqualify a nomic from being foreign; any nomic that is not the One True Agora is a foreign nomic. A province is a protectorate that is a player. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2201 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2201 by Proposal 5459 (Murphy), 9 March 2008 text: Any public document defined by the rules as self-ratifying is ratified one week after its publication, unless explicitly and publicly challenged during that period via one of the following methods, explaining the scope and nature of the perceived error: a) An inquiry case, appropriate for questions of legal interpretation. b) A claim of error, appropriate for matters of fact. The publisher of the original document SHALL respond to a claim of error as soon as possible, either publishing a revision or denying the claim. If e denies the claim, then the original document is ratified one week after the denial, unless it is challenged again (subject to the same requirements) during that period. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2202 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2202 by Proposal 5459 (Murphy), 9 March 2008 text: An official document is a public document purported to be part (possibly all) of an official report; this part is the document's scope. Any player CAN, without objection, ratify an official document, specifying its scope. The date of this ratification and the scope of the ratified document become part of the official report in question, until the same scope is ratified at a later date. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2203 history: Enacted as Power=1.5 Rule 2203 by Proposal 5468 (Murphy), 13 March 2008 text: Hawkishness is a player switch, tracked by the Clerk of the Courts, with the following values: * Hanging. Hanging players are unqualified to be assigned as judge of any inquiry case. * Hugging. Hugging players are unqualified to be assigned as judge of any criminal case, and poorly qualified to be assigned as judge of any equity case. * Hemming-and-Hawing (default). Changes to hawkishness are secured. A player CAN flip eir hawkishness by announcement. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2204 history: Enacted as Power=1.5 Rule 2204 by Proposal 5468 (Murphy), 13 March 2008 text: When the Clerk of the Courts assigns a player as judge of two or more judicial cases consecutively in the same announcement, that player only becomes sitting upon the last such assignment, rules to the contrary notwithstanding. The CotC SHOULD NOT do this unless those cases are closely related in their subject matter. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2205 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2205 by Proposal 5487 (Murphy), 9 April 2008 text: Each of the following participants in a judicial case SHOULD present such arguments and/or evidence (explicitly labeled) relevant to that case as e is reasonably able to collect: 1) The initiator, when initiating the case. 2) For a criminal case, the defendant, during the pre-trial phase. 3) For an equity case, the parties to the agreement in question, during the pre-trial phase. 4) The judge, when delivering judgement. history: Amended(1) by Proposal 5526 (Murphy), 2 June 2008 text: Each of the following participants in a judicial case SHOULD present such arguments and/or evidence (explicitly labeled) relevant to that case as e is reasonably able to collect: 1) The initiator, when initiating the case. 2) For a criminal case, the defendant, during the pre-trial phase. 3) For an equity case, the parties to the agreement in question, during the pre-trial phase. 4) The judge, when delivering judgement. Matters of legal interpretation SHOULD be classified as arguments; matters of fact SHOULD be classified as evidence. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2206 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2206 by Proposal 5537 (Murphy), 7 June 2008 text: A player CAN spend some of eir assets to export them to a foreign nomic; e SHALL inform that nomic of the export as soon as possible, preferably by simultaneously sending the announcement to an appropriate foreign forum. The Ambassador SHOULD encourage foreign nomics to adopt legislation recognizing Agoran exports by creating comparable foreign assets. Players are encouraged to adopt legislation recognizing foreign exports by creating comparable Agoran assets. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2207 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2207 by Proposal 5537 (Murphy), 7 June 2008 text: A player SHALL NOT export assets to a foreign nomic unless its Recognition is Protected, Friendly, or Neutral. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2208 history: Enacted as Power=3 Rule 2208 by Proposal 5555 (ais523), 21 June 2008 text: All attempts to perform an action by announcement fail if the action is not unambiguously specified. This rule takes precedence over all rules that allow performance of an action by announcement. history: ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RULE 2209 history: Enacted as Power=1 Rule 2209 by Proposal 5565 (cdm014, Zefram, avpx, Ivan Hope, root, Murphy), 29 June 2008 text: The Greeter is an imposed office. While a partnership named "Welcoming Committee" exists, and its obligations include all of the following: a) Greet all new players. b) Engage in contact with new players to assist them. c) Engage in contact with new players to ensure a positive experience. then this office is imposed upon that partnership. Otherwise, this office is vacant. history: ... ----------------------------------------------------------------------