Re: [s-d] Are we playing?

[Eugene Meidinger <eugman@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Maybe we need to have a non linear schedule. Things happen when the
initiating player makes them happen and the person who causes them does
the brunt of the work. I'll post a list of rules today and hopefully
someone can legalize them for me.


On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 20:09 -0400, Daniel Lepage wrote:
> Two players have taken game actions in the past month, and with one  
> of them the only action was Forfeiture. This begs the question, is  
> the game still going? Is anyone still interested in doing this?
> 
> I submit that in order to keep the game going, we need people, and we  
> need a way to keep the game running.
> 
> If we have at least four players actively playing, then the game can  
> go on. If we have at least that many who want to play, but can't play  
> right now, then I propose that we pick a date when we think we can  
> start again and explicitly shut the game off until then. If we simply  
> don't have that many, then maybe it's time to pack up and go home.
> 
> If we are continuing now, we need to make the game easily trackable.  
> This means some combination of the following:
>   * Finding someone who can currently be administrator.
>   * Stripping the ruleset of all but the most fundamental components.
>   * Proposing a structure whereby we can all play the game without a  
> central administrator.
>   * Storing the game in some form that's easy to update.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 

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