[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