== Rules Committee charter, 3rd draft ==
	by John Eure

* Notes *

I took Will's suggestion on rewording the "community assistance"  
paragraph, and added some more clarifications of my own.

I tried to clarify the first "interpretations" paragraph a bit, to help 
explain what they are.

I made a few other clarifications, such as "accordance with Quest's
purpose and character" and "rules changes proposals are reviewed and voted
on, either one at a time, or in small groups of proposals".

I tried to clear up the "secret vote" paragraph, following Angela's and 
Adam's suggestions.  I can't detect any real consensus besides the details 
of what to do with the current year's votes, so I'm sticking with my basic 
plan.  If anyone feels strongly that we should do something different, I 
encourage you to suggest an amendment.

I've added both of Sam's proposals as potential amendments for the Board
to vote on.  I'm probably going to make Sam's waiting period suggestion (6
weeks) the default, and mine (1 month) the amendment, though, since the 
only other person to comment was Angela, and she favored 6 weeks.  Anyone 
else have an opinion?

I added a definition of the term "Quest year" as an amendment.  I figure
that we can leave the final choice up to the Board, since if they ever
change the definition, it'll also be their job to hunt down all the
references.  ;)

Dawn, if you want to propose a different "Community Assistance" paragraph,
you're welcome to write one up, and I'll add it as another amendment.  
(Although if more people speak up in favor of yours than in favor of mine,
I'll make yours the default and mine the amendment.)

And finally, at the moment, this charter is primarily the work of myself,
Dawn, and Angela, with help from Hans, Jeff, Will, and Adam.  I'm forced
to assume that everyone else out there agrees with the majority opinion.  
If that's not the case, PLEASE PLEASE speak up.  (And speak up even if you
agree - as the Rules Chair, I want to know what everyone's thinking.  All
it takes is a quick email saying "looks good" or "ditto what 
said".  It's easy, and will brighten my day.  :)



* Charter, take 3 *

Proposal 1) Basic charter revision

-- Change the old Rules Committee charter:

The Rules Committee is responsible for maintaining consistency of rules
interpretation both during and between games, and will handle all rules
proposals except those which the Game World Committee is empowered to deal
with.  (Most Rules Committee business will be conducted over email).  
During games, members of the committee will act as Rules Marshals.

-- To this new charter:

The Rules Committee is responsible for maintaining and improving Quest's
rules set, in order to help Quest run events well.  The RC has five
primary duties:
	1) Individual members of the RC assist members of the Quest 
		community with rules-related issues.
	2) Individual members of the RC act as Rules Marshals during 
		events.
	3) The RC issues rules interpretations as needed.
	4) The RC reviews and votes on rules-related character proposals.
	5) The RC reviews and votes on rules change proposals.

The RC also handles other miscellaneous rules-related tasks, as they
arise.
	Unless otherwise specified, RC business is not secret, but does
not need to be publicly archived.  Anyone may keep personal archives if
they wish.  Vote margins must be announced with the results of votes.  
The current Rules Chair must archive the individual votes for the current
Quest year, and must provide them upon request.


Community Assistance:
	While RC members are not required to make proposals themselves,
they are encouraged to work with other members of the Quest community to
draft and co-sponsor proposals.  In addition, RC members should direct
rules-related feedback to the correct people, and should do their best to
answer rules-related questions.


Rules Marshalling:
	The duty of a Rules Marshal is to resolve rules disputes during
events, so that play proceeds smoothly and fairly.  The important factors
are consistency, speed, and on-the-spot fairness.
	Rulings should remain consistent within an event.  If necessary,
the problem should be addressed by an interpretation before the next
event.  Rules Marshal players may not adjudicate disputes to which they
are a party.


Rules Interpretations:
	Rules interpretations are issued by the RC as a whole, in between
events, to address ambiguities in the rules.  (Direct contradictions in
the rules are considered errata.)  Interpretations last until the rules in
question are changed.  The important factors are consistency, simplicity,
and game balance.
	Interpretations are normally decided through RC consensus.  If
they are sharply contested, they are decided by a formal majority vote.  
Interpretations are permitted to contradict the actual text of the rules
when necessary, and may always contradict a ruling made during a game by a
Rules Marshal.
	An RC member can request a vote on whether an interpretation would
actually be a rules change.  The Rules Chair will then call for a formal
two-thirds majority vote.  If two-thirds of the RC agrees that the
interpretation is actually a rules change, the interpretation will be
abandoned and another one will be developed.


Character Proposals:
	The RC reviews and votes on any character proposals that involve
rules-related questions.  (For example, Heroic Honor codes and racial
kits.)  This is in addition to any other requirements that the proposal
must meet (such as Game World Committee approval.)  The important factor
is game balance.
	Character proposals are decided by a formal two-thirds majority
vote.  They should be addressed as soon as possible.  While all proposals
must pass through a normal open discussion, character proposals may do so
anonymously.  Character proposals may also undergo an initial round of
closed discussion with only the RC, before the normal open discussion with
the full rules list.


Rules Change Proposals:
	The RC reviews and votes on all rules change proposals.  The
important factors are fun, accordance with Quest's purpose and character,
game balance, ease of use, and ease of transition from old rule to new
rule.
	Rules change proposals are decided by a formal two-thirds majority
vote.  Rules changes proposals are reviewed and voted on, either one at a
time, or in small groups of proposals.  Approved rules changes are
implemented in larger groups at the beginning of a future Quest year.  
The RC should carefully control the number and/or scope of the changes
being implemented in any given year, to help ensure an easy transition.
	Approved changes will be made available on the web, and announced
on Initium.  The Quest community will be given at least one month to
review and give feedback on an approved change.  The Rules Chair will
collect all such feedback, and near the end of the year will send it to
the RC for discussion.  If more than one-third of the RC feels that a
change should be reviewed, it will be removed from the list of approved
changes and re-proposed.


-- This charter will take effect immediately upon approval by the Board,
except for the "one month review period for changes" clause.  That will
take effect at the beginning of the next Quest year.


Proposal 2) Amendment:  6-week waiting period

-- Change "at least one month" to "at least six weeks".


Proposal 3) Amendment:  Board approval of rules changes

-- Add "All rules changes must additionally be approved by the Board
	before being implemented".


Proposal 4) Amendment:  explicitly define the term "Quest year"

-- Change the first reference to "Quest year" to "Quest year (defined 
	elsewhere as September 1 to September 1)".