Daniel Lepage on 16 Jul 2003 00:21:01 -0000


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [spoon-discuss] Where do we go from here? 


On Tuesday, July 15, 2003, at 12:07  AM, Baron von Skippy wrote:


You place absolutely no limits on the power of the Source except what
the Ministers decide. You don't even require both of them to approve of 
a given use.

If I'm a Minister of the Source, what stops me from trying (and, of
course, declaring that it works) the 'dictatorship' weave, which alters 
the ruleset to give me dictatorial powers and remove anything that
might allow the other players to band together and boot me?

If you'd go and read your protoprop, you might notice that the answer
is: Nothing!
-Well, nothing, except for Dave having veto power over your little power trip, which I'm fairly certain I've mentioned at least once, if not necessarily in that one message.- 

Not in any message I've seen.


In what you've recently said, the idea of having the two ministers
check each other might help a bit; but two-person conspiracies have
been seen before, and I don't doubt that they'll be seen again.

And BTW, having one Minister handle half the people and one handle the
other doesn't solve the problem of one person going on Leave and the
whole system falling apart; if anything, it makes it worse because only 
half the game suffers, while the other half profits.

I suppose the biggest problem I have with this is the sheer
unrestrictedness of it. Nothing forbids using the Source to force a
player to forfeit, cause a proposal to pass, or even alter the ruleset; 
and it only takes two people to make such a change (note that it
doesn't have to be the two ministers; one boring guy to try to change
the rules, one minister to approve them, one rule change to bring them
all and in the darkness bind them).
-I know. That would indeed be half the point - we're /not/ limiting people from trying all sorts of things. If you're so worried about power trips, then get a Minister you trust, I'd say. Or we need more checks on power, although that could lead to a monumental bureaucracy which would make doing anything really hard. But don't write limits to power in just yet - the Force was, is, too weak because it's so limited, and the point of this whole exercise is to do something new, not just a new flavor of old.-
If we don't write limits into power now, then somebody's gonna take over the game before we can. Having Dave be able to veto things would be enough to fix that, though; but then we have to wait until Dave declares that e *won't* veto before we can implement the effects of such actions. (because otherwise, the action could change the rules to nullify Dave's veto before Dave got the chance to). 


This also will result in a whole lot of paperwork; something like the
Force can be largely automated because you know more or less what can
and can't happen, but this by its very nature requires that somebody do 
everything manually.
-I'd do it. It'll be a welcome change to have a ministry people give a rat's ass about.-
But what happens if you get sick, or go on vacation? Does everything just shut down? 


I guess I'd like to see this as one of the private worlds Glotmorf
describes. Then whoever had the gall to create such a thing would be
the DM, and have to track it, and those players who don't know WoT or
don't feel like relying on a single player to rule everything fairly
can stay out in their own subworlds, or in some communal grid.


-What I'd like to see... hmm, time for a warning.
WARNING: RANT BELOW. THOSE WITH WEAK HEARTS, BACK PROBLEMS, PREGNANCIES, INFLATED EGOS, TWISTED SCHMELTZEN RODS, OR AN APPRECIATION OF THE MUSIC OF THE BACKSTREET BOYS SHOULD NOT PROCEED. 

What about Backstreet Boys parodies?
This is not a bill in Congress. This is not a decree by the Department of Homeland Dictatorial Regimes. This is not a Glotmorf Rules! gamestate change. This is not even a proposal up for vote. If you have a problem with it, what if you said "gee, BvS, what if someone does this?" instead of "your idea offends me because you missed this obvious flaw."
I tried to point it out kindly, and you brushed my complaint aside and announced that I hadn't read the protoprop. I definitely *did* read the protoprop, and the rest of that message, and the messages you've sent since then, so don't accuse me of that.
Like the redesigned Internomic, this is a new idea that bears only passing resemblence to past ideas. This was the first example of said new idea - a ministry that deals in abstracts and judgement calls, where players are free to try new things and the Ministers think about it and attempt to make it all work.
If this proposal is too liberal for you, I can't change that without changing the nature of the proposal. If, on the other hand, this is an idea you see as being decent, but with flaws, then tell me the flaws and I'll try to fix them, if I also think they're flaws.
I think this is the sort of thing that could be fit perfectly into a subgame. Even something like an INH subgame, now that societies can force members to do things. That way we can be certain that the Source will only be used to affect things within a restricted sphere; no changing rules, deposing the admin, or anything nasty like that. (of course, you would be able to force people to vote to depose the admin or repeal the ruleset; but only those people who agreed to that risk by joining the game)
I guess what I'm trying to say is that there is a reason this was never sent to s-b. It's not done. It's not close to done. I spent a couple of hours on it, and it will probably require a couple more to hammer out all the glitches, but when it's done...
Also, read the stuff before the prop itself, especially when it's a proto-prop. There may be some important caveats hidden in there. Just so's you know. Okay, that's all I have for now.
I did read the stuff before the protoprop. And no, you haven't mentioned admin vetoes before. So please don't accuse me of not reading messages.
(of course, if I'm wrong, and there was a message that I just missed, then I just made myself look really, really stupid. But I suppose that's one way to find missed messages... if I overlooked something, somebody will almost certainly let everyone know where, now.) 

--
Wonko

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss