ihope on Fri, 1 Feb 2008 14:23:24 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-b] [MoC] Ballot for nweek 138

On 31/01/2008, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 338: Dog Days (Ivan Hope)
> > http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0338
> > Vote on 338: {{ SHELVE }}
> [[I think it's overpowered. Plus, say I win the auction this nweek and act
> as lucky dog. If I read this right I am still lucky dog next nweek if no one
> wins that auction. Also, really, nothing says I ever stop being lucky dog.
> Do we ever get a situation where 4-5 players are all lucky dogs and everyone
> ends up with 1.5 vote power?]]

I did say "the Lucky Dog", with the intention of there being only one.
I also said "if there was no winner, there becomes no Lucky Dog."

> > 339: Contracts (Ivan Hope)
> > http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0339
> > Vote on 339: {{ AGAINST }}
> [[Sounds way too easy to abuse. My contract declares causing me to win the
> game to be a contract/game action. My contract takes that action. w00t.]]

That very issue was brought up, and I amended my Proposal to fix that.
Apparently, the wiki didn't get updated.

I Stab the current Minister of Change with my Rapier.

> > 341: Three (Ivan Hope)
> > http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Proposals/0341
> > Vote on 341: {{ FOR }}
> [[I think the rule is ludicrous, but just to see what it will do...]]

Well, it does allow people to declare Attributes with a Scope of 3,
which would seem to be the only permanent Game Object.

--Ivan Hope CXXVII
spoon-business mailing list