Re: [s-d] [s-b] In Case of Emergency

[Mike McGann <mike.mcgann@xxxxxxxxx>]

Continuity isn't guaranteed yet. We have a spark, but not yet a fire.

I don't think this proposal guarantees continuity, and to be honest, I'm
not sure that is desired. Is this a continuation of the previously defunct
nomic or is it a new nomic that happens to have the same name? Does it
matter? And do we need a rule that tries to preserve continuity that may
not be relevant when the time comes? We are still here talking without this
rule in the previous nomic.

Anyway, it is fun debating these things again! I've missed the B.

// McG




On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 9:18 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Yes. (That said, I would argue this is actually a new nomic that happens to
> have the same name as the old one.) However, it took a long time for us to
> be ready to go with that; look at how the several different attempts in the
> wake of the end of B (last time around) went.
>
> On the other hand, Refresh Proposals have had the effect of gameplay just
> plain resuming as though everything was alright.
>
> The intent of this proposal is to capture the feeling of continuity that
> applies to a new BlogNomic Dynasty or an old-B refresh proto, but with the
> level of overhaul that goes with, well, this (or with a BlogNomic Dynasty
> for that matter!). Whether that's a feature anyone *wants* in Reset-B, I
> have no idea, but that's what this proposal is expected (by me) to do if
> passed.
>
> On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 9:11 PM Mike McGann <mike.mcgann@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure how this rule is effective. This Nomic appears to be back in
> > action because Peter took the step to make it so. This was not because of
> > rules that authorized this course of action. We have all agreed to do
> this
> > again and is more like a revolution.
> >
> > // McG
> >
> > On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > once proven platonically unplayable because of such a thing in its
> > > history), so, this time let's not let them do that.
> > >
> > > I submit the following proposal, entitled "The Reset Button"
> > >
> > > {{
> > > Create a rule numbered 0-0 with text
> > > {{
> > > The Reset Ruleset is a game document.
> > >
> > > Any person can Press the Reset Button by posting to the public forum a
> > > declaration that e is doing so. If any change to the rules has occurred
> > in
> > > the past 30 days, this has no effect [[save to mildly annoy everyone
> > > else]]. Otherwise, all game objects except the Reset Ruleset are
> > destroyed,
> > > the Reset Ruleset is adopted as the ruleset, and the person who Pressed
> > the
> > > Reset Button becomes a player and the Administrator.
> > >
> > > This rule takes precedence over all other rules.
> > > }}
> > >
> > > Set the Reset Ruleset to be a copy of the current ruleset.
> > > }}
> > >
> > >  - teucer
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > spoon-business mailing list
> > > spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
> > > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > spoon-discuss mailing list
> > spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
> >
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss