Re: [Spoon-business] NWEEK 26 BALLOT

["Glotmorf" <glotmorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Proposal 1185/0: Number Guessing (Athena)

No.  It had its chance.  It burned so brightly.  Time to die.

>Proposal 1187/0: Only When You're There (Wonko)

Yes.  I still think Luigi should collect interest in the same nweek as the loan, but I don't believe that strongly enough to interfere with this.

>Proposal 1188/0: Rewiring the Justice System (Wonko)

Yes.  I woulda said the past two nweeks, but this will do.

>Proposal 1189/1: Society fixes (Orc In a Spacesuit)

No.  Neither of the items in this proposal require a proposal to fix them.

>Proposal 1190/0: If it ain't broke...Well, it's broke now... (Unauthored)

Yes.  Because sometimes saying "I told you so" just isn't enough.

>Proposal 1191/0: You wanna lurk? Here ya go. (Orc In a Spacesuit)

No.  Unnecessarily complicated; it would be simpler to let players declare the length of their On Leave period when they go On Leave.  Possibly illegal; players can take no action while they are On Leave, though if this section is added after the existing text it takes priority for the time being.  Self-contradictory; it sets a player as both On Leave and On Forced Leave, when On Forced Leave is, as stated earlier in the rule, identical to being On Leave.

>Proposal 1192/0: Giving Societies Their Dues (Glotmorf)

Yes.  Under the current rule, societies can only possess things they have properties associated with; therefore, this doesn't allow any automated transfers that would not be permitted as manual transfers.  And it doesn't permit automated transfers at all unless the members consent to their charter containing a provision for it, so there's no exploitation.

>Proposal 1193/0: You know you want to (Wonko)

No.  I like seeing how inventive Wonko gets in his expletives when r293 broadsides em.

>Proposal 1194/2: Yeah, I F---ed Up (The Administrator)

Yes.  So tell us about this Christine...

>Proposal 1195/1: Unit fixing (Wonko)

Shelve.  No point-mining, please.

>Proposal 1196/0: Gnomes and Gremlins -> Throwable (Wonko)

Shelve.  I don't understand the "instead of 1d4" part, and it's not specified how to decide whether points go to the thrower or the gremlin fund.

>Proposal 1197/2: The Bigger They Are, The Mucher They Cost (Glotmorf)

Yes.  Very complex changes should take more effort.  Extremely complex changes should get some grass-roots support before they even come to light.

>Proposal 1198/1: More Raw Materials (Orc In a Spacesuit)

No.  I'd rather see a simple, generic raw material system, such as exists now, made workable first, and proven useful or not, before making it more complex.  It's been three nweeks since raw materials were implemented, and, due to various delaying factors, we still haven't seen them actually used.

>Proposal 1199/0: Automation (Orc In a Spacesuit)

Shelve.  This closely resembles what I originally called a "pseudocode action," which is at the moment on the LOGAS.

>Proposal 1200/0: Miscellaneous Fixes (Wonko)

Shelve.  After seeing the "lurking" proposal above, it occurs to me that if we're going to change the On Leave period, we really should make it settable by the player.

>Proposal 1201/0: No Price Control (Orc In a Spacesuit)

Yes.  I would rather have no exchanges than point mining.

>Proposal 1202/1: Get Rid of 'em Already! (Wonko)

Abstain.

>Proposal 1203/2: Patching Up Societies (Wonko)

Yes.  It's better than what's currently in existence.

>Proposal 1204/0: Sanity is bad. (bd)

No.  A player loses all eir points and other possessions and dimensions when e forfeits.  This could be cataclysmic.

						Glotmorf

-----
The Ivory Mini-Tower: a cyber-anthropologist's blog
http://ix1.1sound.com/ivoryminitower

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