URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       nomic
  HTML https://nomic.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Supreme Nomic Archives
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 502--------------------------------------------------
       Hearing: Illegal Decision by iqforu
       By: JamesSupreme Date: January 27, 2011, 1:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       This hearing is hereby in session.
       The ViceChairman sees that iqforu, our Chairman has made an
       illegal move by allowing an Executive Order.
       This is not listed as a power in the Supreme Nomic Rule Set and
       there fore should be deemed illegal and consequential action
       must take place.
       How do you, iqforu, plead?
       #Post#: 505--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hearing: Illegal Decision by iqforu
       By: iqforu Date: January 27, 2011, 1:18 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I firmly believe that I have acted in the best interests of our
       nomic in both of these Executive Actions.
       Executive Actions are really nothing punishable; I have not
       broken any rules.  I have done nothing not explicitly illegal as
       stated by the ruleset.
       I have only presented my interpretation of S4.4.a.  The Chairman
       does not have to acknowledge new rules.  Also, if the Chairman
       does not update the ruleset, it does not become rule.
       There is no solid charge you can make on me.
       #Post#: 507--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hearing: Illegal Decision by iqforu
       By: JamesSupreme Date: January 28, 2011, 8:35 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yes, but S6.1.b states that a rule break is "performing an
       action that is impossible, in accordance with the ruleset."
       Considering the Supreme Nomic ruleset does not say that the
       Chairman may have any Executive Orders, that makes it
       impossible.
       The rule set states that you may or may not acknowledge a passed
       rule bu does not state that a player may have a stated Executive
       Order.
       Also, it is not in the Chairman's powers to interpret the rules.
       That is the job of the ViceChairman-- a power not only held in
       interpretation of the ruleset(s) as by S3.b.i and ii but also
       but the inferred powers in S6, if a move is legal or not.
       This would make the Executive Order that you made in "Executive
       Action 1001: Denial of Passing of Proposal." This is not within
       your power to do and therefore makes the move illegal by
       interpretation of the ViceChairman.
       This makes you wrong on two counts: one, breaking a rule as
       based in S6.1.b and two, taking powers that are not rightfully
       of the Chairman.
       #Post#: 521--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hearing: Illegal Decision by iqforu
       By: iqforu Date: February 1, 2011, 3:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=JamesSupreme link=topic=104.msg507#msg507
       date=1296225344]
       Yes, but S6.1.b states that a rule break is "performing an
       action that is impossible, in accordance with the ruleset."
       Considering the Supreme Nomic ruleset does not say that the
       Chairman may have any Executive Action, that makes it
       impossible.[/quote]
       Just because the Supreme Nomic doesn't explicitly say something
       is possible doesn't make it impossible. The ruleset doesn't say
       we have the power to give State of the Nomic Addresses, but we
       do that anyways, don't we?  You could apply this logic to
       anything, and destroy this game.
       [quote]
       The rule set states that you may or may not acknowledge a passed
       rule bu does not state that a player may have a stated Executive
       Order.
       [/quote]
       The Executive Action is nothing concrete.  It is not an
       'action,' technically.  It is a declaration of intent; in this
       case, the declaration that I intend to use my power as Chairman
       to not acknowledge the passing of a proposal.
       [quote]
       Also, it is not in the Chairman's powers to interpret the rules.
       That is the job of the ViceChairman-- a power not only held in
       interpretation of the ruleset(s) as by S3.b.i and ii but also
       but the inferred powers in S6, if a move is legal or not.
       [/quote]
       #Post#: 542--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hearing: Illegal Decision by iqforu
       By: JamesSupreme Date: February 2, 2011, 3:35 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Nonetheless, as much as the Chairman has the power to ignore a
       passed rule for a moment, he does not have the power to deny a
       vote. The Initial Rule Set states that all players must vote and
       that a 3/4 vote must be achieved. This did happen but you denied
       a player a vote and therefore broke the rule.
       iqforu, I deem you guilty on the count of committing an illegal
       move of an Executive Action and also on discrimination against
       another player.
       I hereby declare you unable to post for two days but may send
       personal messages.
       Court is adjourned.
       #Post#: 549--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hearing: Illegal Decision by iqforu
       By: iqforu Date: February 2, 2011, 9:01 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I never denied a player a vote? It was 2-1 in both proposals
       that were denied...
       So technically a 3/4 vote wasn't achieved in either case.
       Therefore, we completely misinterpreted the rules and neither
       was supposed to have been passed anyway.
       #Post#: 550--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hearing: Illegal Decision by iqforu
       By: JamesSupreme Date: February 2, 2011, 9:33 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Um... Well, this seems to be a problem...
       #Post#: 551--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hearing: Illegal Decision by iqforu
       By: iqforu Date: February 2, 2011, 9:35 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       So... uhh... how about I rescind my EA's and you rescind this
       hearing and we forget about all this? I'll archive it in a nice
       place, store it tight, and we can forget this ever happened :D
       #Post#: 552--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hearing: Illegal Decision by iqforu
       By: JamesSupreme Date: February 2, 2011, 9:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Sounds good! hehehe................... >.<
       *****************************************************