Re: [spoon-discuss] draft: Less is More: Voting

["David E. Smith" <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, Glotmorf wrote:

> >Only Players may vote. No other game entity may vote.
>
> This is a consolidation of rule 294, recently modified by Wonko.  Knew I
> missed something...This is gonna interfere with House Grem.

How so? House Grem only seems to specify that it creates proposals (at
least the version I'm looking at right now), and doesn't say anything
about voting. Gremlins shouldn't be voting anyway.

Two reasons:

1. Anything that votes, other than a player, I'm probably accountable for.
2. There needs to be *some* benefit to being an actual human player. If
NPCs can make proposals and vote, that takes out a lot of the uniqueness.

> If my ballot proposal passes, the above will lack its provision that the
> clock stops if the ballot isn't ready.

And I'll add it back in at some point. There's a reason I asked for
comments. :)

> >To cast a vote, a Player must submit eir vote either privately to the
> >Administrator, or to a public forum. Votes cast privately shall not be
> >disclosed publicly until the end of the voting period, at which point they
> >must be disclosed.

Given the recent proliferation of things that depend on votes other than
proposals (the IOB, Dan's poetic "contrary votes" proposal, and there's
probably more) I'm tempted to specify that votes must be cast privately.
That will avoid ugliness where it starts to look like a given proposal
will pass, and so people start changing their votes to one end or the
other (depending on whether they want to try for a few points, or the
IOB), and changing votes back and forth a lot.

(I did finally write a Web interface for changing votes in my
administrative section, but that doesn't mean I want to use it that much.
:)

[[ rule definition of abstention ]]

> This text is necessary so that abstention votes aren't counted when
> determining if a veto fails, especially since you're repealing r32.
> Definite showstopper.

That wasn't quite my intention...

> The phrasing of this doesn't really allow for club props.  Though I
> suppose it can be solved with chutzpah...

I'm not a fan of Club Props anyway. :-)

I think we're working at different purposes here. I'm trying to find a
good balance between "fair" and "possible for me to manage in my spare
time since it seems unlikely that you people will start paying me to do
this". You're more interested in that whole "fair" thing. ;)

...dave

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss