Mike McGann on Wed, 5 Mar 2008 05:23:23 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Emergencies are annoying

On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 12:54 AM, Jamie Dallaire
<bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  My intent is to allow for us to reserve the use of emergencies
>  (looooooong) for cases where the rules are broken. Uncertain
>  gamestates can be handled in a quicker fashion.

A problem is the whole multiple state issues that can arise. For
example, there is something ambiguous in the rules and it is unclear
if a Player can do X or not. So, a player performs X anyway, a
consultation gets submitted about performing X and there are two
states floating around until the consultation is resolved. This is
confusing. I have a hard enough time juggling around one state in my

I think we just need to get rid of this whole multiple state thing
completely. Wooble mentioned something along these lines some time
ago--the minister in charge of the state picks what he or she thinks
is correct (or the most correct). That is what the state is. If a
player has an issue with it, they can first bring it up with the
minister in charge and if there is still disagreement, a consultation
can be submitted to resolve the dispute. I think we need to now get
away from the "I perform X. I submit the following consultation: "Can
I do X?"" pattern. We tend to overuse Consultations and they should be
reserved for when there is an actual dispute between two players.

I once thought having something that approves that display is a good
idea, now I don't. I now think the displays should always be "correct"
(at the time it was last updated). Let it be the responsibility of the
players to point out errors instead of the other way around which is
to continually assert its correctness.

Another example. Let's say I have 151 points, but the MoS makes a
clerical error and leaves of the first 1 and it listed as 51 points.
If I find that error (or anyone else), I should be able to simply say,
"btw, I should have 151 and not 51". The minister should be able to
quickly correct it. If the display gets approved with the 51 points
and the error is discovered later, I'm assuming the display would have
to be approved again or resolved through a Consultation. Too difficult
and slow.

- Hose
spoon-discuss mailing list