Daniel Lepage on Thu, 27 May 2004 13:56:56 -0500 (CDT)


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

[spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] Nweek 63 BALLOT



On May 27, 2004, at 2.24 PM, SkArcher wrote:

I vote SHELVE on all props. If my Philosophy is such that I can do so more than once, I vote Shelve as many times as is practical.

According to the Roster, your philosophy is Selective Lobbyist, which does not grant you any extra shelving votes.

Selective Lobbyist Mandate:

A Selective Lobbyist does not necessarily care about everything that goes on in the game, but feels very strongly one way or another about the things e does care about.

A Selective Lobbyist may cast N extra YES or NO votes on one any proposal that e did not make, where N is equal to the number of proposals e ABSTAINS on that ballot, with a limit of 2.

I strongly urge all players to recognise an SoE.

When last I checked, Dave didn't really like SOEs... I don't think I'm going to recognize one, because I see no need. Somebody remarked that going into a SOE makes rule changes easier... I don't think that's true at all. With normal props, everybody can propose changes, and any number of proposals can be passed every nweek. In a SOE, we still need 10 days to do everything, but we only get one passed prop out of it; if the same prop is made as a normal prop, we can vote for it while still proposing other things.



By the way, I'm also not too thrilled by the "open source government" movement. Although I agree that piling all of the work on Dave is a bad idea, and that so far few ministries have been claimed by players, I don't think the right solution is to jump straight to the other end of the spectrum and make everybody responsible for everything, since I expect a lot of confusion and redundancy ("I added the points I got to the roster." "Wait, I already added those!" "No, *I* added those. For everbody." "How come I didn't get any?" "You did, but you lost points from the other thing." "But I'd already subtracted the points form the other thing!" "Wait, I subtracted those points too!" etc.).

A better solution would be to improve the current system. We could make ministries smaller and easier to do: being a "minister of all things proposalish" responsible for maintaining a website of all props, counting votes, and changing the ruleset would be a lot of work, whereas being a minister who simply had to periodically post all pending proposals to a notification forum would be easy. Right now, all the worst ministries are very daunting, and so get left to Dave; that's why e has too much work to do. We could also provide more incentives to be a minister: higher salaries, extra respect/bandwidth, maybe even a clause like "All players who have not held a ministry in the past five nweeks cannot be awarded Wins." Finally, we should increase the ministerial turnover rate - rather than having an election once an nyear for a few small ministries, we could have three-nweek terms for *all* ministries, with some incentive for old ministers to turn the job over to new ones. This will also force us to develop a good system for switching control of a ministry from one player to another easily, which will make us able to instate a new minister very quickly should a minister disappear.

--
Wonko

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