Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Proposal: This ruleset isn't big enough for the both of us!

[Dan <wald7330@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The point of the opposed system is to allow a player to conveniently offer
two choices of what route of change to take with the ruleset.  This could
have been used by Uncle Psychosis when e had two different overhauls of
the justice system.  

If proposals that would conflict horribly are made opposed then they will
not both affect the ruleset and break the game with their conflict.  It
does this in an equitable way which does not unduly hinder the adoption of
either proposal, and enacts the more popular one.

The opposed system is something which cannot be written into proposals
because of its reflexivity.  Opposed proposals can be written by different
players at different times in the nweek, and only the second proposal
need be made opposed.  Since declined proposals are not failed, the
proposer of the less popular proposal is not penalized if their proposal
is defeated.



> 
> If a is opposed to b and c, but b and c are not mutually opposed, and
> a and b both pass and c doesn't but b gets more affirmative votes than
> a, does that mean c automatically passes because a fails because of b?
> 
> This starts to get seriously complicated with sufficiently convoluted
> opposition structures.  How about something along the lines of, "An
> affirmative vote by a given player on a given proposal counts as a
> negative vote on any higher-numbered proposals the proposal in
> question opposes.  This overrides any votes the player may have cast
> on those opposed higher-numbered proposals."  That gives you a
> ripple-down effect that resolves conflicts on the way.

No proposal is automatically passed.  Proposals which fail normal voting
are not affected by the system outlined in my proposal.  It does not
create convoluted opposition structures because each proposal can be
resolved independantly based on the voting results of it and the proposals
opposed to it.  Note that proposals that are not enacted because of
the opposition rule do not fail, they are made inactive.  The opposition
result of one proposal does not affect the opposition result of any other
proposal.

Every proposal is evaluated independantly in-between voting and enactment
by the following system:

did the proposal pass -> no -> thrown out.
	||
        \/
	yes
	||
	\/
was the proposal opposed to any proposal that passed -> no -> enact it
	||
	\/
	yes
	||
	\/
did any passed proposal opposed to this one recieve more affirmitave votes
	||		||
	\/		\/
	yes		no
	||		||
	\/		\/
not enacted		enacted


This still needs a bit to resolve ties.  I plan on resolving ties first by
negative votes and if the negative votes are also tied resolving by
rendering inactive the one with the higher proposal number.

Dan