RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: One more sausage to cram into the can...

["Jonathan Van Matre" <JVanMatre@xxxxxxxx>]

If 2 players are conspiring to pass the scarf back and forth to each other, it only takes a majority vote on 1 proposals to forcibly remove it from their possession, or even ban them from receiving it in the future.  I think that's enough deterrent for a crime we haven't even had a problem with thus far.  With the exception of Rob, no one has even had it more than once, and e only got points for it the sceond time.

Still, if you're concerned about that, why not remove the Izing instantly as suggested previously, but also change the Scarf rule to forbid a player from awarding the scarf to the player who awarded it to em.

Even that is a bit of a limit on the Scarf, since some players may be Stylish in streaks, and deserve the Scarf more than once in rapid succession before receding back to a more natural level of style mediocrity.  The idea was to recognize specific cool acts when they happen, but a 100% or even 80% spread-it-around approach limits our ability to recognize them.  

Then you get the Susan Lucci effect -- if you give her an Emmy now, when she did her best work years ago, you're rewarding her for inferior work.  What one should have done, of course, if give her an Emmy back when she was at her peak and clearly deserved it.

Likewise, as the list of available recipients shrinks, we may find ourselves overlooking really cool stuff to reward someone whose only proposal that nweek might have been "Phat Dawg wins B Nomic.  Neener neener."

--Scoff!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Donald Whytock [mailto:dwhytock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 1:19 PM
> To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: One more 
> sausage to cram
> into the can...
> 
> 
> On 3/6/02 at 8:45 AM Jonathan Van Matre wrote:
> 
> >The Scarf shouldn't have an Izing -- it completely defeats 
> the purpose of
> >the Scarf.  The Scarf / Style Police is a way for us to 
> reward each other
> >for particularly clever or thoughtful participation in the 
> game.  If it
> >becomes obligatory for everyone to receive the award before it can be
> >given to the same person again, that makes the award essentially
> >meaningless.
> >
> >One might argue that Respect is there to take its place, but I think
> >Respect has a lot of problems:
> >
> >- We have to wait at least a full nweek (plus however many 
> ndays prior to
> >the proposal the action happened) for the Respect proposal 
> to be adopted.
> >- Rewards the author (at least presently) with Charm and 
> affirmative votes.
> >- Doesn't confer anything especially fun along with the 
> Respect Points. 
> >With the Scarf you get the ability to add Style Attributes 
> and several fun
> >optional gender-based behaviors to play around with.
> >
> >If you're going to put an Izing on the Scarf, then I suggest 
> you add a mod
> >to the Scarf rule that instantly removes the Izing from a 
> player when e
> >awards the Scarf to another player.
> >
> >--Scoff!
> 
> The key words in the above statement, I feel, are in the 
> second sentence: "reward each other".  While awarding Respect 
> occurs as a result of the majority opinion of the Players, 
> the awarding of the Scarf is a result of a single Player's 
> act.  It is therefore possible for two Players to agree to 
> award each other the Scarf time after time, thus ensuring a 
> steady flow of score points.
> 
> If you feel that there may be people to whom the Scarf should 
> never be given, perhaps the proposed rule can be changed to 
> remove Izings after, say, 80% of the Players have received them.
> 
> 						Glotmorf
> 
> 
> 
>