[s-b] [auto] Peter votes

[automailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Peter's votes:
Proposal 10/1: PUNCHAMIME                               : Against
I like the idea of playing with the words in the game itself, but I'm not sure what happens if an acronym has two words in it (since 0 and 1 are both the nearest integer to 0.5, and differing conventions for "nearest integer" exist). Also, I'm not sure about how to count words that overlap within the acronym. And its second paragraph may apply recursively to itself indefinitely or something.

Proposal 11/3: Desecration is Fun!                      : For
I love this metagame subgame stuff. This could be very interesting...

Proposal 12/0: The return of the Vat                    : For
Proposal 13/0: Add Blank Tiles                          : For
Proposal 14/1: Bonus rack size for 1st place            : Against
I'm now also convinced that this is probably a bad idea.

Proposal 15/0: scoring                                  : Against
Proposal 16/2: alliances                                : Against
I think this needs to be thought through a little more and be a little better defined...

Proposal 17/0: Knightmares                              : Against
I don't quite get the "roughly" conversion rate thing... This seems like it could be a neat idea, but ought to be better defined.

Proposal 18/0: Little Fixes #2                          : For
Proposal 19/0: Size matters not                         : For
I'm not quite sure what happens if both this and p8 pass, as they're both trying to change the same rule...

Proposal 20/2: I want a Casino                          : For
Proposal 21/1: New kind of money.                       : Against
All titles form acronyms.
And I don't want to need to check each of these conditions on every proposal to decide whether to give out Genechips.

Proposal 22/4: Gene-sino                                : Against
As others mentioned, "betting limit" isn't defined... And this isn't a very interesting game.

Proposal 23/1: Speak Softly and Carry a Magic Stick     : For
I love the paying Souls to do things. Amplitude Amplifier seems like a good way to make a scam, and I'm not clear on the difference between "because of objects other than Talismans" and "voluntarily paid to other sources". But I'll still vote for it.

Proposal 24/0: Broken power safegaurds.                 : Against
Too vague and tough to judge. And if more than half want such things to happen, why should we stop them?

Proposal 25/2: Bounty hunter.                           : Against
Proposal 26/0: Not Just for Emergencies Anymore         : For
We may want slightly less than 7 days for Executive Tidiness type changes, although I'm not quite sure how to distinguish those from We Really Need To Fix The Game Now tweaks. And we might want something to ensure that we can still use Tweaks even if things get Really Hosed.

Proposal 27/0: Another Box To Climb Into                : Against
A blank section is not very useful.

Proposal 5/0: The "N" is for "Very" : For
Although I still think that making all words in the Ruleset into Nomic Words could be fun.

Proposal 6/2: A Board for Tiles                        : For
The last part of the definitions probably ought to say that it gets removed from the Bag when drawn... I'm not sure they do under the current proposal wording.

Proposal 7/2: Tidy Rules                               : Against
I don't see a need for this to be in the rules... Just add cross-references in comments.

Proposal 8/1: Scoring Increased                        : For
Proposal 9/0: Allow ministers to quit                  : For

This Message was sent automatically by the Wiki.
 Please do not reply to the sender of this message, as your replies will be ignored. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business