Re: [spoon-discuss] Prop 1711 -- Legislosity

["Glotmorf" <dwhytock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 27 Nov 2003 at 21:31, Baron von Skippy wrote:

> >- If the former, what stops players from conspiring to generate a
> >shitload of bugs and tweaks to make themselves rich?
> 
> -Well, nothing, other than the Moderator noticing and deciding not to
> recognize the bugs and tweaks any more. I suppose that's not a very
> strong check. I'm not seeing any easy fix here, except to impose a
> limit on bugs/tweaks per checkpoint, and a way to /lose/ LPs... ah,
> there we go. Each LP has to come from someone. If you left a hole, you
> lose an LP (minimum of zero). That way there's not really any easy way
> (esp. combined with a limit on tweaks per checkpoint) to make an
> assload of points with someone else. Okay, I'll fix that later
> tonight.-

Let me rephrase, with an example:

Purpose: Create a method by which cinquains can be generated from a fixed set of 
words, possibly derived from a particular literary work.

Text: Foos can be barred.

One might suggest that the text has bugs, with relation to the purpose, in that it's 
possible to, say, bar a foo and yet still fail to achieve the purpose.

One might therefore propose a fix to this, such as "Foos can be barred, and bars can 
be fooed."  It could be argued that this takes the text further toward accomplishing 
the purpose...but it still has room for improvement.

In fact, you can do a zillion things to the text, claim each one as an improvement, and 
still be no closer to accomplishing the purpose.

I find this a bug. :)

						Glotmorf

-----
The Ivory Mini-Tower: a blog study in Social Technology.
http://ix.1sound.com/ivoryminitower

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