Nationstates Olympic Games Discussion Thread

[CoraSpia]

My understanding is the new sports in Tokyo 2020 wouldn't become mandatory until 2020, just as rugby sevens and golf weren't added to the NS Olympics until this year. And then they'd be un-mandatory in 2024 unless whoever the host that year IRL is decides to do them as well. At least under the current constitution.

I share CH's preference for the changes to that part.

I'd actually support the host being able to add (not remove) any new sports he/she is capable of scorenating. Would this pose a problem?

[Vilita and Turori]

probably not, host has enough to do already without adding superfluous exhibition games so if smart wont add much or any. lets pretend the issue is settled and move on this incessant arguing is draining, re open the can only if required when its time to in a future bid thread. all problems dont need solving today

[CoraSpia]

probably not, host has enough to do already without adding superfluous exhibition games so if smart wont add much or any. lets pretend the issue is settled and move on this incessant arguing is draining, re open the can only if required when its time to in a future bid thread. all problems dont need solving today

This discussion was sort of brought up by CH.

I obviously don't mean that hosts would be forced to do things against their will. I mean if they want to include, for example, chessboxing, would it be a problem to let them go ahead?

[Taeshan]

My understanding is the new sports in Tokyo 2020 wouldn't become mandatory until 2020, just as rugby sevens and golf weren't added to the NS Olympics until this year. And then they'd be un-mandatory in 2024 unless whoever the host that year IRL is decides to do them as well. At least under the current constitution.

I share CH's preference for the changes to that part.

I'd actually support the host being able to add (not remove) any new sports he/she is capable of scorenating. Would this pose a problem?

The rule is made so that a host nation could put forth up to 5 olympic sports (that are just not part of the program, there is a list here on wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_s ... r_Olympics scroll up a tad) that would add local flair to the olympics. For Tokyo they have Baseball, Wushu and Karate and two others. This allows the olympics to add flair in each olympiad, while also allowing lesser known olympic sports, that are no longer or have never been an official event at the olympics. It is a move that hopes to expand the olympics, a lot of sports like Basketball were not original olympic sports, but were first held as demonstration events then eventually were put in the official list. The thing is recently they have decided to keep the amount of sports the same, while not allowing newer sports in, which has meant to allow a sport like Rugby sevens back in they almost had to force out Wrestling, which is one of like three original olympic sports from the old Greek days to survive.

The olympics in real life tends to be about money more than anything, Wrestling is not a high brow, highly endowed sport. Something like Modern Pentathlon, or Equestrian events have often been suggested to leave the olympics, as they have grown out of favor due to less competitors in the events, or the thought that Equestrian events tend to only be half because of an athlete. That said the Equestrian events are a call back to chariot races in the original olympics. Anyways Wrestling was voted out to make room for Golf and Sevens, but of course was voted back in. This is much the way Baseball/softball got voted out. Basically they were voted out because it was felt not enough of the world was competing, but also that the USA baseball team, and various other teams did not have their best during the baseball season, and that USA Softball was too good, ironically not getting gold in the last olympics it was held in 08.

Anyways it is a local flair thing, where cities/countries can push to have an event they compete in go into the olympics, to drum up local support, and to give lesser known sports, or lesser known athletes a chance.

[Northern Sunrise Islands]

My understanding is the new sports in Tokyo 2020 wouldn't become mandatory until 2020, just as rugby sevens and golf weren't added to the NS Olympics until this year. And then they'd be un-mandatory in 2024 unless whoever the host that year IRL is decides to do them as well. At least under the current constitution.

Well, if you guys are having skateboarding next time, do tell. Love the sport and sort of worked out a little domestic thingie (like always).

[Electrum]

Eh, I'm not really a fan of any amendments brought forward so far, the Charter has done well enough to go the situations so far, and most of the amendments cover pretty extraordinary circumstances which I would expect not to be the norm in future Olympics.

The one change I would support (though CH hasn't written up a formal proposal yet) would be an amendment regarding this:

Third, I want to return to the discussion which Gregoryisgodistan began in the Games of the XI Olympiad OOC thread regarding the IOC’s decision to allow sports to be added to the program for a specific edition of the Olympic Games. I’m sure there are lots of different opinions on this, so I’m not going to make a formal proposal at this point, but my preference would be:

• All events in the sports which are established as part of the RL Olympic program—i.e., those sports which are listed in the Bye-law to Rule 45 of the RL Olympic Charter and whose international federations are members of the ASOIF or AIOWF—must be included as medal events.
• Additional sports may be proposed in a host bid as medal events. Each such sport must be individually approved by a vote of the Olympic Council, which will take place at the same time as the host vote. A host bid may not be made contingent on the inclusion of any additional sport.
• During the year of the RL Games of the Olympiad, additional sports which are being contested at those RL Games may be included without a vote of the Olympic Council.

I would add on some kind of a limit -- perhaps 20 additional events total, similar to the ones proposed in Tokyo/allowed by the IOC? Also if any sports are rejected, there ought to be a provision allowing the host to propose other events.

Another suggestion (and I'm neutral on the issue) is to automatically allow sports on SportAccord, and other sports (I'm thinking NS created sports like Liventia's winter pentathlon format or sevenball for instance) to be required to be voting in. Or we could also say only disciplines on SportAccord can be medal events. Lots of ways we could do this.

[CoraSpia]

I'd actually support the host being able to add (not remove) any new sports he/she is capable of scorenating. Would this pose a problem?

The rule is made so that a host nation could put forth up to 5 olympic sports (that are just not part of the program, there is a list here on wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_s ... r_Olympics scroll up a tad) that would add local flair to the olympics. For Tokyo they have Baseball, Wushu and Karate and two others. This allows the olympics to add flair in each olympiad, while also allowing lesser known olympic sports, that are no longer or have never been an official event at the olympics. It is a move that hopes to expand the olympics, a lot of sports like Basketball were not original olympic sports, but were first held as demonstration events then eventually were put in the official list. The thing is recently they have decided to keep the amount of sports the same, while not allowing newer sports in, which has meant to allow a sport like Rugby sevens back in they almost had to force out Wrestling, which is one of like three original olympic sports from the old Greek days to survive.

The olympics in real life tends to be about money more than anything, Wrestling is not a high brow, highly endowed sport. Something like Modern Pentathlon, or Equestrian events have often been suggested to leave the olympics, as they have grown out of favor due to less competitors in the events, or the thought that Equestrian events tend to only be half because of an athlete. That said the Equestrian events are a call back to chariot races in the original olympics. Anyways Wrestling was voted out to make room for Golf and Sevens, but of course was voted back in. This is much the way Baseball/softball got voted out. Basically they were voted out because it was felt not enough of the world was competing, but also that the USA baseball team, and various other teams did not have their best during the baseball season, and that USA Softball was too good, ironically not getting gold in the last olympics it was held in 08.

Anyways it is a local flair thing, where cities/countries can push to have an event they compete in go into the olympics, to drum up local support, and to give lesser known sports, or lesser known athletes a chance.

What I'm not understanding though is why adding new sports (that would be medal sports) should require a vote of the IOC.
For example, I like American football. I can rp American football if I wanted to, not a problem. In some future world where I actually have hosting experience and have the time and inclination to host the Olympics, and people have stopped hating me for being quite as awkward as I know I am, why would me deciding that my edition of the Olympics should contain American football? Surely it should only really become an issue if it was thought that a host was adding in far, far too many sports which would make scorenation a problem?

[Drawkland]

The one change I would support (though CH hasn't written up a formal proposal yet) would be an amendment regarding this:

Third, I want to return to the discussion which Gregoryisgodistan began in the Games of the XI Olympiad OOC thread regarding the IOC’s decision to allow sports to be added to the program for a specific edition of the Olympic Games. I’m sure there are lots of different opinions on this, so I’m not going to make a formal proposal at this point, but my preference would be:

• All events in the sports which are established as part of the RL Olympic program—i.e., those sports which are listed in the Bye-law to Rule 45 of the RL Olympic Charter and whose international federations are members of the ASOIF or AIOWF—must be included as medal events.
• Additional sports may be proposed in a host bid as medal events. Each such sport must be individually approved by a vote of the Olympic Council, which will take place at the same time as the host vote. A host bid may not be made contingent on the inclusion of any additional sport.
• During the year of the RL Games of the Olympiad, additional sports which are being contested at those RL Games may be included without a vote of the Olympic Council.

I would add on some kind of a limit -- perhaps 20 additional events total, similar to the ones proposed in Tokyo/allowed by the IOC? Also if any sports are rejected, there ought to be a provision allowing the host to propose other events.

Another suggestion (and I'm neutral on the issue) is to automatically allow sports on SportAccord, and other sports (I'm thinking NS created sports like Liventia's winter pentathlon format or sevenball for instance) to be required to be voting in. Or we could also say only disciplines on SportAccord can be medal events. Lots of ways we could do this.

So if I'm interpreting correctly, this amendment basically would allow hosts to propose new events to count as medal events rather than only demonstration events, and instead of being lumped in with the bid, they'd be voted on individually? If so, I'm a fan of that.

So what would happen to declined events? Would they be completely removed? Would they be "relegated" to being only Demo events? Would there even be demonstration events? If there are, would there be a system of voting on a proposed event as "Medal, Demo, Excluded"?

If my initial interpretation is wrong feel free to disregard these questions.

[CoraSpia]

The one change I would support (though CH hasn't written up a formal proposal yet) would be an amendment regarding this:



I would add on some kind of a limit -- perhaps 20 additional events total, similar to the ones proposed in Tokyo/allowed by the IOC? Also if any sports are rejected, there ought to be a provision allowing the host to propose other events.

Another suggestion (and I'm neutral on the issue) is to automatically allow sports on SportAccord, and other sports (I'm thinking NS created sports like Liventia's winter pentathlon format or sevenball for instance) to be required to be voting in. Or we could also say only disciplines on SportAccord can be medal events. Lots of ways we could do this.

So if I'm interpreting correctly, this amendment basically would allow hosts to propose new events to count as medal events rather than only demonstration events, and instead of being lumped in with the bid, they'd be voted on individually? If so, I'm a fan of that.

So what would happen to declined events? Would they be completely removed? Would they be "relegated" to being only Demo events? Would there even be demonstration events? If there are, would there be a system of voting on a proposed event as "Medal, Demo, Excluded"?

If my initial interpretation is wrong feel free to disregard these questions.

Perhaps we could get rid of the voting, and do it based on signups? Esentially so that a host can't create a random sport out of thin air which only they know anything about, enter it, and only really face competition from teams with low skill modifiers, since it's nobody's priority and therefore no one really cares about it?
It would make sense to allow all proposed new sports into the Olympics (which would stop a large amount of people not getting a say because they didn't realise how it worked etc), and if fewer than half of all entries that enter over a certain number (100?) of competetors enter the new sport it gets downgraded to a demo event. If less than 10 people enter it it gets gotten rid of altogether.

[Vilita and Turori]

Coraspia: If you like American Football and can RP it all day long, join the World Bowl

Coraspia: If you want to host the olympics, host some other tournaments first. Then, when the time comes (Which most definitely is not now - not because you have no experience, but because this is not an open bidding period for the olympic games) - submit your host bid, declare which events you are adding above and beyond the standard set, and move on. I bet once you understand what hosting the standard set of games you won't be so inclined to enter into a hypothetical universe where you add 20 superfluous events. You are thinking way too much into everything - which is awesome and all that you care but don't burn yourself out using all your energy to carve out corner cases of hypothesy.


Electrum: My vote is five


Everyone else regarding the constitution: As has been mentioned by Electrum, the constitution seems to be doing just fine. I don't think we need to invoke specific rules retroactively to justify what happened in this cup. Thats why the olympics has a council just like the World Cup and other events have emergency councils. Sometimes shit hits the fan and a quick decision has to be made by those experienced users who have previously been already voted upon in the past as the leaders of the competition itself. Very rare in the history of NS Sports has a charter failed to address the needs of the event. When something occurs that is not clearly spelled out in said events constitution it is handled by that events emergency committee. thats why such committees exist.


And to those who complained about results: We're here for the journey. Remember that in the beginning, this was all just random numbers. Not this event specifically, but NS Sports. Literally. Dice were rolled to see who won an event. We've come a long way from there to the point where people get rewarded for how much they participate and how worthwhile, in the eyes of the host, their contributions are. But in the end, the dice still get rolled. When you join these competitions, you sign up to this fact. You agree to enter your nation or competitor into an event where the results will be determined by a formula with a random component. Its up to you to tell the story from there. Whining in the discussion thread about your luck may help you blow off steam, but i assure you, it will not increase the odds of your next result being better. Mathematically, the only way to do that is to spend the energy working on a new RP. Tell us why the guy you rated as a 95 lost to the person who was a 15. Yes, in reality, the reason is random numbers didn't work out in your favor. Simple Maths. Make up a better story. Spend your energy doing that. It might help. It might not.

Why argue about a constitution in an OOC discussion thread when you can be writing an RP for the In-Character thread about a blogger in your nation who is speculating what sports might be added for the next olympiad?

Don't lose sight of what we're all here to do. Tell stories about fake characters in fantasy world's we ourselves have created, as a community, based on results provided in masse by a designated host using a formula based on random numbers mixed in with a weee bit of other inputs.

[CoraSpia]

Coraspia: If you like American Football and can RP it all day long, join the World Bowl

Coraspia: If you want to host the olympics, host some other tournaments first. Then, when the time comes (Which most definitely is not now - not because you have no experience, but because this is not an open bidding period for the olympic games) - submit your host bid, declare which events you are adding above and beyond the standard set, and move on. I bet once you understand what hosting the standard set of games you won't be so inclined to enter into a hypothetical universe where you add 20 superfluous events. You are thinking way too much into everything - which is awesome and all that you care but don't burn yourself out using all your energy to carve out corner cases of hypothesy.


Electrum: My vote is five


Everyone else regarding the constitution: As has been mentioned by Electrum, the constitution seems to be doing just fine. I don't think we need to invoke specific rules retroactively to justify what happened in this cup. Thats why the olympics has a council just like the World Cup and other events have emergency councils. Sometimes shit hits the fan and a quick decision has to be made by those experienced users who have previously been already voted upon in the past as the leaders of the competition itself. Very rare in the history of NS Sports has a charter failed to address the needs of the event. When something occurs that is not clearly spelled out in said events constitution it is handled by that events emergency committee. thats why such committees exist.


And to those who complained about results: We're here for the journey. Remember that in the beginning, this was all just random numbers. Not this event specifically, but NS Sports. Literally. Dice were rolled to see who won an event. We've come a long way from there to the point where people get rewarded for how much they participate and how worthwhile, in the eyes of the host, their contributions are. But in the end, the dice still get rolled. When you join these competitions, you sign up to this fact. You agree to enter your nation or competitor into an event where the results will be determined by a formula with a random component. Its up to you to tell the story from there. Whining in the discussion thread about your luck may help you blow off steam, but i assure you, it will not increase the odds of your next result being better. Mathematically, the only way to do that is to spend the energy working on a new RP. Tell us why the guy you rated as a 95 lost to the person who was a 15. Yes, in reality, the reason is random numbers didn't work out in your favor. Simple Maths. Make up a better story. Spend your energy doing that. It might help. It might not.

Why argue about a constitution in an OOC discussion thread when you can be writing an RP for the In-Character thread about a blogger in your nation who is speculating what sports might be added for the next olympiad?

Don't lose sight of what we're all here to do. Tell stories about fake characters in fantasy world's we ourselves have created, as a community, based on results provided in masse by a designated host using a formula based on random numbers mixed in with a weee bit of other inputs.

I believe you misread my post. I was discussing a proposed constitutional change: the fact I said myself in relation to a hypothetical means nothing, as I was just talking about a cenario in order to illustrate my point. If I'd mentioned you or CH or my nextdoor neighbour it would still have meant the same thing.

[Vilita and Turori]

Don't quote things you aren't responding to

[CoraSpia]

Don't quote things you aren't responding to

What are you talking about? I was responding to your last post.

[Vilita and Turori]

My last post addressed multiple issues, many that had nothing to do with you, so I don't know

A) Why you quoted it at all, if you were simple addressing the post above your own

B) Why you quoted everything, since much of it had nothing to do with you


If you are quoting something, specifically if you are objecting to it, just quote the piece you wish to address. Otherwise how will the discussion ever proceed.


Wait. It shouldn't. The will of any outsider to contribute to this discussion is beyond drained.. Your continuous contributions make it very difficult for anyone new to come in and follow what is going on. This isn't a chat room, take some time, let other people contribute their thoughts, come back and post tomorrow.


Which is what I'm going to do at this point, so have fun.

[CoraSpia]

My last post addressed multiple issues, many that had nothing to do with you, so I don't know

A) Why you quoted it at all, if you were simple addressing the post above your own

B) Why you quoted everything, since much of it had nothing to do with you


If you are quoting something, specifically if you are objecting to it, just quote the piece you wish to address. Otherwise how will the discussion ever proceed.


Wait. It shouldn't. The will of any outsider to contribute to this discussion is beyond drained.. Your continuous contributions make it very difficult for anyone new to come in and follow what is going on. This isn't a chat room, take some time, let other people contribute their thoughts, come back and post tomorrow.


Which is what I'm going to do at this point, so have fun.

I find it extremely difficult to quote small bits of posts. Largely because the screen reading software I use has a tendency to go mental when deleting large swaths of text.

[Kelssek]

Why would that ever be a problem for you? I'm really not seing why NS sports has special protections that are not afforded to other subforums.

Well, there is a level of organization and institutionalization of the events here which I do not think happens, or is necessary for RP continuity, in other subforums.

If that principle is not upheld in this sub-forum, what exactly is stopping future World Cup hosts from springing a controversial qualifying format (such as Casaran or two-tier) on the NSWC in contradiction to a host bid?

There is no link between the governance of the Olympic Games and the governance of the World Cup. Whatever hypothetical Horrible Things might happen in either one will not necessarily create a precedent in the other.

No individual may scorinate a medal event on behalf of the host unless specified in the host bid.

If this had been in force during the 9th Summer Olympics, it would likely have been abandoned, or have exacerbated a health issue which the host encountered during the scorination. I cannot support this amendment.

In the same sense, what exactly is stopping an Olympic host from proposing a bunch of popular demonstration events to win a contested vote then cancelling all of those events?

I may be speaking for myself but in the rare event that there's more than one bid to vote for, demonstration events are irrelevant next to the question of whether the host is up to the task.

According to my notes, I think I might have been the presidential appointee after the Sixth Winter Olympics (when Kelssek was president, looks like?)

I reckon you're right - I was thinking on the same lines as CH has in appointing Todd McCloud now. Can't remember exactly when, for a 2-year period it was only me, CH and Cafundeu who had previously hosted. It's buried somewhere in the pages of this thread.

[Commerce Heights]

My understanding is the new sports in Tokyo 2020 wouldn't become mandatory until 2020, just as rugby sevens and golf weren't added to the NS Olympics until this year. And then they'd be un-mandatory in 2024 unless whoever the host that year IRL is decides to do them as well. At least under the current constitution.

I share CH's preference for the changes to that part.

The Charter provides that the base lists are “the most recent confirmed lists of real-life Olympic events”, which should mean that once there is a confirmed list of exactly what all of the events at Tokyo 2020 will be, that would become the base list. In practice, it’s been implemented the way you described.

Another suggestion (and I'm neutral on the issue) is to automatically allow sports on SportAccord, and other sports (I'm thinking NS created sports like Liventia's winter pentathlon format or sevenball for instance) to be required to be voting in. Or we could also say only disciplines on SportAccord can be medal events. Lots of ways we could do this.

I don’t think it makes much sense to use SportAccord membership as a basis for this, because it includes tons of niche sports that I don’t think should be given a free pass to be made Olympic medal events, while also excluding a few RL sports that are somewhat popular (e.g., Australian football, mixed martial arts, and rugby league). If we want to have a list of additional sports that are accepted for inclusion as medal events, I think that list should be decided by our community.

Everyone else regarding the constitution: As has been mentioned by Electrum, the constitution seems to be doing just fine. I don't think we need to invoke specific rules retroactively to justify what happened in this cup. Thats why the olympics has a council just like the World Cup and other events have emergency councils. Sometimes shit hits the fan and a quick decision has to be made by those experienced users who have previously been already voted upon in the past as the leaders of the competition itself. Very rare in the history of NS Sports has a charter failed to address the needs of the event. When something occurs that is not clearly spelled out in said events constitution it is handled by that events emergency committee. thats why such committees exist.

Unlike the EWCC, the Executive Committee of the Olympic Council currently only has the authority to replace the host of an abandoned Games, or to resolve a tied host vote. It doesn’t have the authority to replace a host in any other situation, which is why I proposed an amendment to give it such authority. If you like, I could make it much simpler:

Section 1.2.2 of the Olympic Charter is amended to say,
“In addition to their rights as part of the Olympic Council, members of the Executive Committee are permitted to:

• “Vote to break a tie in a host selection vote.
• “Vote to resolve any matter regarding the Olympic Games not provided for in this Charter.”

Section 2.3.4 of the Olympic Charter is amended to say,
“The host or hosts will be required to provide signup data and scorinator input files to a member of the Executive Committee, as would be needed to allow a replacement host to complete the Games.

“The Executive Committee may vote to resolve any matter regarding the Olympic Games not provided for in this Charter, including any circumstance which requires the replacement of a host. If such a vote is tied, the President will choose how to proceed.”

The other amendment I proposed was to resolve a potential ambiguity regarding who the members of the Executive Committee are, which, if left unresolved, would make it difficult for the Executive Committee to handle anything.

[The Archregimancy]

It's pretty clear to any casual viewer that a 'youth Olympics' isn't an attempt to copy the ns Olympics, it's to provide a tournament much like the RL youth Olympics.

I guess it depends on how the creator went along with it. If they went along with the youth olympics, without claiming any sort of link, then I would guess it would be fine, but if there was any inkling of the idea that they are linking it to the Olympics on NS, then it probably would be struck down.

As it has indeed been struck down before, as per recent discussion in this post over a ruling in 2011:

viewtopic.php?p=29761677#p29761677

I still think there are some unresolved issues raised there that the NSOC could usefully discuss, but perhaps for now we should focus on CH's constitutional proposals as the priority, and then return to the relatively minor (I hope) grey areas regarding events using the title 'Olympics'.

[Gregoryisgodistan]

I tend to favor the 20 events total (or however many) over the five sports, since sports like karate could have ten different weight classes while baseball/softball (which is officially one sport) has two events - men's baseball and women's softball. I'm not sure 20 is the best number, but we can discuss that.

[CoraSpia]

I tend to favor the 20 events total (or however many) over the five sports, since sports like karate could have ten different weight classes while baseball/softball (which is officially one sport) has two events - men's baseball and women's softball. I'm not sure 20 is the best number, but we can discuss that.

However, if someone wanted to put up a few sports, an events total rather than a sports total would reduce how likely they would be to put up combat sports. However, if for some reason a host decided that that was wise, they could come up with 10 team sports which require rosters. Extreme cenario of course but not impossible.

[The Sarian]

Personally, I'm in favour of the host nation deciding any additional medal events they want to hold, as long as they make it clear in their host bid.

[Ilyseum]

Personally, I'm in favour of the host nation deciding any additional medal events they want to hold, as long as they make it clear in their host bid.

I'm in favor of the same thing, which used to be what the Charter said until CH's amendment a few years ago (which I voted against at the time) restricted medal events to the base list and extended list. Had the old language remained in the Charter, I would have put forward the demonstration events from my bid as medal events.

Any limit on the number of extra medal events or sports is inherently arbitrary and a vote on whether or not to include a sport as a medal event is the very definition of pointless bureaucracy. Can anybody imagine the majority of voters rejecting a medal event that a host wanted to hold? I didn't think so. Allowing the Council to add more sports to the base list that aren't contested in the RL Olympics would effectively allow the Council to make the Olympics even more difficult to host (even if they're allowed to remove RL events to compensate, they won't).

Regardless of what we decide to do about additional medal events though, I think we should all be able to agree that hosts shouldn't be allowed to cancel those events if they put them forward as part of their host bid, as they can under the current Charter and which the 2nd of my 3 amendment proposals is designed to prevent.

[The Archregimancy]

I offer here - purely for discussion rather than as a recommendation - the IOC's own language on allowing local committees to propose additional sports, as per the recent 2020 Agenda. Point 3 is the relevant point.

Recommendation 10
Move from a sport-based to an event-based programme

Move from a sport-based to an event-based programme:
1. Regular reviews of the programme to be based on events rather than sports, with the involvement of the International Federations, and with the following restrictions to be respected:
* For the Games of the Olympiad: approximately 10,500 athletes, 5,000 accredited coaches and athletes’ support personnel, and 310 events,
* For the Winter Games, approximately 2,900 athletes, 2,000 accredited coaches and athletes’ support personnel, and 100 events.

2. The IOC Session to decide on the inclusion of any sport (IF) in the programme.

3. The IOC to allow the OCOGs to make a proposal for the inclusion of one or more additional events on the Olympic programme for that edition of the Olympic Games.

[Vilita and Turori]

I think that any olympic games that is purposely scheduled to coincide with the real olympic games, such as this past one, one 2 years from now, and 2 years from that, etc, should be 'encouraged' to stick to the events of that years official games.

Any olympic games that do not loosely coincide with the real ones could include 1-5 events as additional medal events so long as they include it in their bid - but ONLY if that sport has previously been contested and completed as an official demonstration event in a prior games.

If a sport hasn't been demonstrated previously, then the host has the option of adding it as a demonstration event so it can be included by future hosts

[Commerce Heights]

Any limit on the number of extra medal events or sports is inherently arbitrary

I agree.

and a vote on whether or not to include a sport as a medal event is the very definition of pointless bureaucracy.

I must be using the wrong dictionary.

Can anybody imagine the majority of voters rejecting a medal event that a host wanted to hold?

Yes.

I didn't think so.

Well, now you’ve learned something.

Allowing the Council to add more sports to the base list that aren't contested in the RL Olympics would effectively allow the Council to make the Olympics even more difficult to host (even if they're allowed to remove RL events to compensate, they won't).

I don’t think anyone has proposed making the inclusion of any additional sports mandatory, but I would be opposed to such a proposal.

Regardless of what we decide to do about additional medal events though, I think we should all be able to agree that hosts shouldn't be allowed to cancel those events if they put them forward as part of their host bid, as they can under the current Charter and which the 2nd of my 3 amendment proposals is designed to prevent.

As I previously stated, this is already implicitly covered by the current language of the Charter and the ambiguous wording of your proposal would make the matter less clear.