Gavin Doig on 6 Feb 2002 19:31:25 -0000

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

spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Proposal: Judgement/Proposal overhaul

> When a judgement on a CFJ is approved the Plaintiff and the Judge each
> recieve 10 points.  When a judgement is declined the Plaintiff and the
> Judge each lose 5 points.
I don't like this whole idea, but this bit is just silly. We'll get: people voting against CFJs just to prevent others from getting points; people submitting trivial CFJs just for the points; people reluctant to CFJ things, in case they lose points.

And you still have the "force of law" nonsense in there. That's bad because it doesn't really mean anything, and it's bad because CFJs should be about determining which interpretation of the rules is right, not about arbitrarily changing the gamestate. Admittedly, that's less of a problem if we're voting on CFJs (because we won't be letting 2 players change the gamestate), but it's still not good. You're effectively making CFJs into watered-down, over-complex proosals, when they should be there just for clarification when we can't decide what the rules are saying.


Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at

Win a ski trip!