[spoon-discuss] Re: spoon-discuss: Time travel?

[bd <bdonlan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday 10 June 2002 12:06 am, Glotmorf wrote:
> On 6/9/02 at 7:06 AM Dan Waldron wrote:
> >If we were to set the clock back to nweek 2 then presumably the rules as
> >of nweek 2 would be in effect.  Am I right in assuming that only players
> >who had not voted in the first nweek 2 would be allowed to vote?  Would
> >all of our attributes be set back to their nweek 2 values or would we have
> >to specify that somewhere else if we wanted it.  Would players who had
> >joined since nweek 2 be booted, since, presumably a demonstration of
> >intent to be a player has no effect before it is submitted?  And then when
> >we get to nweek 3 would all the real changes we made in nweek 2 be
> >automatically be made or would we have to propose them all over again?
>
> If you really wanted to accomplish this, you'd have to say something like,
> "change the gamestate to what it was as of nweek 2."  I daresay I'd vote
> against that, since it'd wipe out me and everything I'd done.

But the proposal to change the gamestate never happened, so the gamestate 
dosen't change, so it does change, so *bzzt*

Oww! My Brains!

> >I am tempted to propose something like a weakened form of the relativity
> >proposal.  Time could move at different rates for different players,
> >probably done by changing the number of ndays in the nweek.  The Admin
> >wouldn't have to work ahead though.  Basically if a player got to the next
> >nweek before the Admin, the Admin wouldn't be able to recognize eir
> >actions until e know if they are legal under the new rules.  This time lag
> >might be some sort of handicap for players who write too much--a little
> >like Entropy is now.
>
> If you changed the number of ndays per nweek for different players, but
> still confined everyone within nweeks, you'd make some players wait for
> other players.  That'd get kind of old, wouldn't it?

What'd be the difference, more importantly?

> >That said, i'm not actually a big fan of entropy and given the choice I
> >would probably prefer to squish it and not worry about syllables..
>
> Have I mentioned my fondness for taxing the rich and powerful, or for
> making the game more "interesting" for the more successful? :)

You have now.