Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] More on scams

["Baron von Skippy" <bvs@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>> I alter the proposal __Scams__ to read:
>>
>> {{
>> __Scams__
>>
>> A. Definition
>> A Scam is any attempt by a player to achieve an instant win in any 
>> online game of Nomic by circumventing the spirit, but not the wording, 
>> of one or more rules, utilizing a loophole in one or more rules, or 
>> utilizing an unforseen interaction between two or more rules. The 
>> player(s) who perform a scam is (are) the Scammer(s) of that Scam.
>
>I disagree with this definition - the Stock Scam and the Overlord Scams 
>were both definitely scams, I would say to a rather higher degree than 
>anything any of us have done this nweek ('cause they both worked 
>(although I did find the right counterargument to the Overlord Scam, 
>but not until the statute had lapsed for a month or so), and 'cause 
>(especially in the case of the Stock Scam) it was agreed upon by 
>everyone that they did what the scammer claimed); but under your 
>definition, since neither was an attempt at instant victory, neither 
>would qualify as a Scam.

-Mmm, whether the Overlord Scam was an attempt at instant victory is debatable... also, find me a definition that includes those two but not any of a hundred lesser idiocies perpetrated by the players of this game (changing "Jesus" to "Jeebus" springs to mind - it was a loophole, but not a scam), and I'll use it. Until then, we'll just have to unofficially declare Scams that aren't victory-related.-
>
>Also, something like my Infinite Style Scam - it would have gotten me a 
>Win in two nweeks if I'd just found a way to prolong it... you claimin' 
>that my infinite gain of points wasn't a scam just 'cause the Win would 
>have been delayed if I'd pulled it off?
-You suggest problems but no solutions. Again, phrasing. What I mean by "instant" is "faster than 3d6 points per proposal plus extras, five proposals per nweek." Now, how can I put that? "An attempt to quickly win" might include an aggressive proposal campaign, or a Nomvivor victory, or chugging PGGBs as fast as the rules will allow, but these are not scams. And I can't say "non-methodical" (which would eliminate those three), because then the Gnome, Infinite Style, and Ballot Scams are all de-scammified.-
>
>> D. Guerrila Warfare
>> B Nomic players are encouraged to perform Scams in other games of 
>> Nomic. If a player shows proof of a Scam they performed in another 
>> game, that player recieves 15 Style plus 10 Style for each Win they 
>> were awarded as a result of the Scam, and the title "Lord of the XXXX 
>> YYYY Scam," with "XXXX" replaced with the whole name of the other 
>> Nomic [[B Nomic, Nomicron, The Curvature Of The Earth Is Overwhelmed 
>> By Local Noise Nomic]], and with "YYYY" replaced with the name the 
>> Scammer has given to the Scam.
>
>Oboy. Don't we have enough PR issues when we're just *joking* about 
>doing unpleasant things to other Nomics? This actually encourages 
>people to focus on Scamming other games over scamming our own, because 
>they get more Style.
-Please tell me you're joking... there wouldn't be a point to proposing this, were it not for this last section. The rest is making concrete what we've been doing all along, which makes it a little unweildy. The idea is to encourage outside scams. Not to do unpleasant things, but to go debug their rulesets. Really, for someone who perpetrates so many scams, you should know that they aren't /that/ damaging.-

>Plus you've got another infinite style engine - 
>ever heard of Solitaire Nomic? I could create objects called 'Wins' in 
>a Solitaire game, then make a deliberate loophole that results in my 
>gaining an infinite number of them, and... well, nothing would change 
>for me, because I still have infinite Style, but if anyone else did 
>this, Style would become meaningless, because everyone would have 
>infinite quantities of it.
-Yes, but you forget: "If a player shows proof of a Scam they performed in another game," they get the Style. Now, maybe I should reword that to be more clear, but it looks to me like you'd have a hard time convincing us that you deserve Style points for scamming in a game you made up. Now, you could get Style points for calling that a scam in /our/ game, but that only works once.-

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