Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Screw it.

[Wonko <dplepage@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoth Glotmorf,

> Should it be acceptable that any group of players can form a Club they choose,
> with whatever rules they choose, without having to go through the proposal
> process, as long as said Club has no external effect on the gamestate?
> There'd be little in the way of inherent barrier for such a thing -- there's
> nothing that stops players from making clubs on their own outside of the
> rules; forming a Club as per the rules would only add a smidge of
> Administrator enforcibility.  But would people want Clubs that have
> restrictions without real benefits?

What would be the point? If it has no external effect on the gamestate,
don't make it part of the game. If all of Team Turquoise wants to get
together and play their own mini-game of Nomic, that's fine, but there's no
reason to use B Nomic to do it.

> If Clubs as described above should be permitted without the proposal process
> being invoked, can the same be said for a Club that includes mechanisms for
> submitting Club Props?  A Club-Prop-making Club bestowes certain advantages on
> its members; should the main body of players have the chance to prevent its
> coming into existence?

The Club-Prop thing could be dealt with easily simply by creating a method
of 'borrowing' bandwidth from other players - there's no need to establish
complicated Club rules to do this. But it ought to be possible simply to
loan people bandwidth, without any need for Club-Prop-making Clubs,
extraneous documents, or extra Ballot issues.

> If a Club is to form without the proposal process, should it be possible to
> form it with a single member, similar to a shell corporation?  Or should it be
> required that at least two players, who will become the Club's initial
> members, state their intent to form the Club on the public forum?

It should require at least two, if not three players. Otherwise, what's the
point? Except that we get to give ourselves bonuses for doing nothing...

> Should it be possible to create a Club that explicitly either affects the
> gamestate or carries with membership certain benefits that affect the
> gamestate?  Under what circumstances should such a Club be allowed to be
> created?  Standard majority procedure, or higher majority?  And should the
> number of members in it be limited to a certain amount, to keep it from being,
> "Let's all vote ourselves a raise!", or should there be a smallest number of
> members requirement, to make the Club somewhat closer to fair?

It should be possible to create Clubs that affect the Gamestate; such Clubs
ought to be created in the same manner as other Gamestate changes -
Proposals. Standard majority makes sense, as it will always be possible to
find a way around a highmaj requirement by clever writing normal proposals.
Such Clubs should always be required to have at least two or three members;
however, imposing an upper limit will, for most clubs, be ineffective - we
can make "Let's all vote ourselves a raise!" anyway, just by saying "The
following players each gain some points: <list of names>".

> I think all of these questions should be considered and discussed; however,
> I'd suggest not trying to address more than one of these paragraphs in a
> single proposal.

Why not? ;) 

-- 
Wonko