PPCG Nomic

Nathan Merrill

01:07

Ok, just so we are clear, this is the initial discussion, but I (and only I) will be deciding the initial ruleset

after that, its game as usual :)

Destructible Watermelon

ok, I say that we start with mostly the initial ruleset and figure the rest out later during the game

Qwerp-Derp

Hello

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

Some Spacewar-ish koth as the starting ruleset?

Nathan Merrill

0. All rules have a unique numbering. When two rules conflict, the lower numbered rule overrules

Any improvements you can think of?

Destructible Watermelon

no

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

01:11

very good rule, esp. last one

Destructible Watermelon

rule one is always this

101. 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 whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable).

Nathan Merrill

I'm not sold on immutable rules

Destructible Watermelon

or changing the exact numbers, but essentially the same

Nathan Merrill

especially because they can be made mutable

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

Don't use the terms immutable and mutable

Use "criminal" and "civil"

that way it sounds more fun :)

Qwerp-Derp

01:12

1: You must speak in reverse.

Destructible Watermelon

I think we should be discussing the rules DURING THE GAME

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

We need to figure out a voting system

Nathan Merrill

@DestructibleWatermelon you can't play a game with no rules

Destructible Watermelon

legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/nomic.htm#initial%20set

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

2. all rules will be codified

Nathan Merrill

01:13

Like I said, I don't want to inherit all of those rules

Qwerp-Derp

?esrever ni gnikaeps ew t'nera yhW

Destructible Watermelon

@Qwerp-Derp, these are the kind of rules made in game

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

@Qwerp-Derp stopppp

Qwerp-Derp

What I don't understand

Oh so we're making the rules about making rules?

Destructible Watermelon

which is what we're supposed to do in game

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

01:14

First to reach 1337 points wins.

Destructible Watermelon

If you don't like the rules

we can change them in the game

huh?

Qwerp-Derp

Ah

So what are the rules now

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

Idea: when rule application is disagreed upon, there shall be a war

Qwerp-Derp

1. You are not allowed to go rule numberings lower than any previously spoken rule.

Destructible Watermelon

Please stop proposing rules

Nathan Merrill

01:15

I'm really not sold on rule 101, because it tells people to follow the rules, which, if you weren't doing in the first place, doesn't do anything

Qwerp-Derp

Aren't we proposing rules now?

Nathan Merrill

proposing rules is totally fine

Destructible Watermelon

@NathanMerrill ontology

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

5. Hacking is allowed

Qwerp-Derp

@DestructibleWatermelon Exactly

Destructible Watermelon

01:16

you're supposed to that during the game

Qwerp-Derp

But we're proposing rules about proposing rules

Nathan Merrill

like, there isn't a law saying "follow the law"

Qwerp-Derp

Which is outside the game? I think?

Nathan Merrill

correct

Qwerp-Derp

2. You are allowed to propose rules outside the game about rule proposals in the game.

There, now it's a rule

Nathan Merrill

01:17

proposing a rule doesn't make it a rule -.-

Qwerp-Derp

But but but...

Crap I don't know

Destructible Watermelon

this is actually really bad right now

Steven H.

3. Voting shall be administered via the starboard

Nathan Merrill

@StevenH. the problem is that there aren't downvotes

also, anonymous stars

Qwerp-Derp

@NathanMerrill Can I propose a Meta-rule 1 on top of your original Rule 0?

Nathan Merrill

01:19

go on

Qwerp-Derp

(Which is the numbering rule, to improve things)

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

@NathanMerrill PPCG meta thread

Destructible Watermelon

the rules are supposed to be made during the game ...

Nathan Merrill

I don't like the "new rules have to be lower than previous rules"

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

2. golfing in PPCG scores points

Steven H.

01:20

3.5. In order to complete a vote, there must be one chat message designated as count votes in favor of a rule amendment or modification and one chat message designated to count votes against a rule amendment

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

@DestructibleWatermelon initial ruleset needs to be made

Destructible Watermelon

legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/nomic.htm#initial%20set

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

@StevenH. Meta question for voting

Nathan Merrill

@DestructibleWatermelon I'm not using that

Qwerp-Derp

@NathanMerrill New rules have to be higher, not lower (so 1 can't be after 2)

Destructible Watermelon

01:21

also, you seem to be making nonessential rules, that don't really make sense as an initial rule set

Qwerp-Derp

@DestructibleWatermelon Me?

Destructible Watermelon

mostly crazy dythou

Nathan Merrill

@Qwerp-Derp the problem with this, is that I want it to be possible to make a rule 1.5 that supersedes rule 2 (just in case). It gets more and more relevant as more and more rules get made

Qwerp-Derp

Ah

Destructible Watermelon

211. 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 to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs.

from original rules

Qwerp-Derp

01:23

@NathanMerrill What about "You are not allowed to override previously written rules."?

@DestructibleWatermelon So that's a mutable rule right?

OK We probably need a catalog of rules

Destructible Watermelon

it has the 2

@Qwerp-Derp legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/nomic.htm#initial%20set

Nathan Merrill

@Qwerp-Derp that sounds like a good inclusion for Rule 0

Qwerp-Derp

@DestructibleWatermelon We're going to make our own rules

Destructible Watermelon

exactly, that is what you do in the game

Qwerp-Derp

@NathanMerrill So is that only for Rule 0? Or is that for all the Meta-Rules or rules?

@DestructibleWatermelon I was referring to the meta-rules...

Nathan Merrill

01:25

0. All rules have a unique numbering. When two rules conflict, the lower numbered rule overrules. Overriding rules with a smaller number is not allowed.

Destructible Watermelon

all rules should be modifiable

Nathan Merrill

Destructible is right. There's no difference between meta rules and real rules

they are all rules

Qwerp-Derp

Wut

Destructible Watermelon

I'm going to type up a minimalistic version of the rules at the site I keep linking to

Qwerp-Derp

Ah

Destructible Watermelon

01:27

except that the rules there are mostly minimalistic

Qwerp-Derp

I thought we were just going to copy the rules

Steven H.

Addendum to rule 0: Overriding rules are allowed iff the fact that the rule is intended to override a previous rule is explicitly stated in the rule text.

Qwerp-Derp

What about fractional or decimal rules?

Nathan Merrill

@StevenH. I'm not sure I'm a fan of that

Destructible Watermelon

i still like rule 211 from original set

also how many rules do we want?

Nathan Merrill

01:28

@Qwerp-Derp I haven't explicitly disallowed it...

Steven H.

If it's explicitly stated, the override is voted upon as well

Destructible Watermelon

figuring out a nomic is usually done during the game itself

I'd rather start playing now. If we really don't like the rules, we can change them

Qwerp-Derp

@NathanMerrill So you're allowed to do "Rule 2" after "Rule 3", correct?

Nathan Merrill

@Qwerp-Derp yes

Qwerp-Derp

And that rule would override rule 3?

Nathan Merrill

01:30

0. All rules have a unique numbering. When two rules conflict, the lower numbered rule overrules. Overriding an lower-numbered rule is allowed, but only if it is explicitly stated in the rule.

Destructible Watermelon

rule 211 also states rules explicitly deferring to other rules, and also rules that also state they override another rule, while that rule also states they override

Qwerp-Derp

@NathanMerrill So once "Rule 3" is written, and "Rule 4" is written after, you're not allowed to override "Rule 3" unless "Rule 3" explicitly states you're allowed to override it?

Nathan Merrill

@Qwerp-Derp oh, that's unclear

Qwerp-Derp

@NathanMerrill What's unclear?

Hello?

Nathan Merrill

sorry, trying to figure out how to make it clear

Qwerp-Derp

01:35

Make what clear?

Destructible Watermelon

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 to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs.

Qwerp-Derp

@DestructibleWatermelon In the first sentence, can't you just do "If two or more rules conflict with one another"?

Rule-golfing!

Destructible Watermelon

I think that is incorrect

Immutable rules seem to always take precedence over mutable rules

Qwerp-Derp

Ah

Destructible Watermelon

110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not "conflict" with that immutable rule.

so, I see we have two main options for rules here

Nathan Merrill

01:39

what if I make it so that rules can't conflict?

Destructible Watermelon

We can A) take the rules I keep linking, or b) take a long amount of time debating the rules about a game where you are supposed to make the rules in game

Nathan Merrill

I like b

Destructible Watermelon

long > half an hour

honestly it'd probably be quicker to change the rules in game

Nathan Merrill

0. All rules have a unique numbering.
1. If two rules are found to be in conflict, the lower numbered rule overrules

2

Qwerp-Derp

So these are "Meta-Rules"

Destructible Watermelon

01:43

I actually wanted to play this...

;_;

Nathan Merrill

@DestructibleWatermelon come back tomorrow?

Qwerp-Derp

"2. You cannot create a rule that conflicts with itself."?

Destructible Watermelon

@Qwerp-Derp that rule conflicts with itself

Nathan Merrill

If a rule conflicts with itself, I doubt that it was intentional

Qwerp-Derp

What how does it conflict with itself

Destructible Watermelon

01:45

@Qwerp-Derp because it conflicts with itself

Qwerp-Derp

@DestructibleWatermelon ಠ_ಠ

@DestructibleWatermelon I think 211 and 110 looks good

But we should renumber them to fit

Destructible Watermelon

I'm going to casual chat chess

this is a mess

Qwerp-Derp

:(

Nathan Merrill

its fine :)

I'm trying to come up with a good system of voting

any ideas?

Qwerp-Derp

Yes/No votes?

If Yes>No, rule is in place

If No>=Yes, rule is abandoned

We need absolute majority

Nathan Merrill

01:51

so, if I immediately respond with "Yes", its in place?

is there a minimum amount of time?

also, can anybody propose rules?

Qwerp-Derp

We have a rule to let people propose rules?

And we have a rule for the minimum amount of time?

IDK

Nathan Merrill

no, a minimum amount of time before the proposed rule becomes a rule

Qwerp-Derp

Ummm

10 minutes?

If there are enough people

Nathan Merrill

hmmm...I'm thinking this is becoming less and less feasible

either the game moves super slowly

for voting

or it moves super fast, as people can get things done without the majority vote

Qwerp-Derp

Hmmm

Nathan Merrill

01:55

Also, voting is pretty hard to count.

Qwerp-Derp

True

When 1/2 of people online vote, the decision is made

Actually no

10 minutes should be fine

Nathan Merrill

1/2 of people is really tough, because membership in the game can quickly change

10 minutes is way too fast. What if me and another guy are changing rules in the middle of the night?

I mean, I don't check chat every 10 minutes even when I'm awake

Qwerp-Derp

1 hour?

That's too slow though

Nathan Merrill

1 hour is feasible for when I'm awake, but could still easily be missed during the dead hours, and like you said, its slow

I could do a net score of +3

Qwerp-Derp

Hmm yeah

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

20:46

@NathanMerrill Vote on GitHub. Rule changes are formatted as Pull Requests. Vote using the "emoji react" feature.

@NathanMerrill As for when to accept, let's do at least five votes, of any kind, up or down. This is to let enough people participate. (five can be changed) To prevent extremely slow games, let's create a system on representatives - like "when I'm not online, vote for me".

your opinion?

Transcript for