Re: [s-d] Re: [auto] Peter votes

[Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Feb 10, 2005, at 9.41 PM, Peter Cooper Jr. wrote:

> Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > That takes two nweeks (one to call a Vote of No Confidence, one to
> > elect a new Minister), and also isn't always the solution.
>
> Yeah, I guess that a vote of no confidence isn't quite enough, but I
> still have a few objections to the proposal as worded.
>
> - It seems like it'll be too easy to take a full nweek's salary from
>   someone, since you get 5 points for each change to the game state.

The intent was to reward you only each time you did the Duty; if twenty 
gamestate changes were unrecognized, you'd have to recognize all of 
them to get the Perk, and it would only be five points total.

> - Working on any "change that should be presented in a Public Display"
>   seems a little vague, since the rules aren't specific how changes
>   relate to Public Displays and what "recognizing changes" means
>   (although I suppose we all know what it's supposed to mean, I can
>   foresee disputes about it since the rules aren't clear).

"recognizing" is defined by over three years of game precedent as 
"notifying the public forum that the action has been taken care of".

Would "The Backup Duty becomes active whenever there exists a Ministry 
the duties of which have not been fulfilled in three ndays" be clearer?

> - I'm also not sure it works right with r1583.A.4 (specifically, that
>   you can't do a duty more than once an nweek and that the player must
>   be able to perform the updating-a-public-display Action already).

I'll add explicit empowerment.

> - It gives a player an incentive to not tell the Ministers if e
>   notices a mistake after a Public Display update, so that e can go
>   change it emself later and collect the perk.

Perhaps there shouldn't be a perk. The "perk" is being able to continue 
playing the game.

> - What happens when one starts doing the Backup Duty for a Society's
>   minister? For instance, a minister might not want to recognize an
>   Auto Action (which r578, last paragraph of part V allows), but then
>   someone else could recognize it for them... Or what if a Society
>   charter allows the Minister to make some choice in some other
>   way... Could someone else jump in and take that choice if the
>   original minister doesn't? This Duty might work just fine here, but
>   I'm not completely sure.

I think we'd be better off if it simply didn't apply to Society 
Ministers, since they're not required to do very much anyway.

--
Wonko

Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but the thing dies in the process 
and the innards are discouraging to any but the pure scientific mind.
     -E. B. White (1899 - 1985), Some Remarks on Humor, introduction

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