SkArcher on 17 Jan 2004 16:49:23 -0000


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] repeal-o-prop

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:34:11 -0500, Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I think that may be a card from after I stopped playing. Still, I have 2 Ancestral recalls :)
Damn, that's not right. I meant Phyrexian Purge. (2RB, Sorcery; Pay 3 life per target: destroy any number of target creatures). It's a Mirage card. 



Ahhh, I gave up before then, evidently




is one man one vote such a difficult concept?
No, but it's a boring one. I like the idea of a game where players fight for voting power.
But even if you want one man, one vote, you still don't need to scrap philosophies. There's no reason why all philosophies have to confer strange voting habits upon their members. You could have philosophies that affect card playing, justice, junkbots, etc. 



lets try getting the game workable _before_ breaking it again shall we?




1272
It's not used much, but I hope it will be once the Council is set up - Dave can deputize them to do his work, before we finally do away with the position of "administrator" and make them formally do his work.
I'd rather use the floating Duties system, as it won't get as broken as easily
Question: How does it reduce Dave's workload to do away with both Deputies and Ministries? 

Because for my next trick i'm going to do away with Dave :)
Seriously tho, I want to remove any and all necessity for "The Administrator" in the ruleset and to make everything work by floating recognition of Duties 




1639 [[We broke this in record time I think]]


How is it broken?
We figured out how to use unacknowledged alliances to completely own the game Wonko, remember?
That's not a bug, that's a feature. If you really think it's not meant to be like that, then we should try to come up with ways to encourage alliances; that is, we should fix the game rather than destroy it. 


alter rule 625 to read as follows

{{
__Quotes__

There exists a Game Document known as the Big Ol' Book of Quotes.
The Quotekeeper is responsible for updating the Big Ol' Book of Quotes in accordance with the rules defining that entity.
Each nweek The Quotekeeper shall be paid two points per quote added to the Big Ol' Book of Quotes. 

}}
Don't destroy MinGrems unless you destroy Gremlins too. Don't destroy MinEcon if you don't destroy BNS too. Don't destroy MinKeys - I still hope that someday Dave will let somebody edit keywords, and things will suddenly be logical.
As I note, MinGrems has nothing to actually do - the effects of the remaining gremlins happen at the instigation of players and aren't needing someone to watch them.
Nonetheless, it seems likely that more gremlins will be created, unless you repeal the rule.
As I plan on doing away with the Admin in the ruleset then all the subsequent Gremlins will have to work without either Dave or the Ministry 

Write better props, basically


}}
Now, from what I can see, the admins responsibilities are now only the following 

recognising props


And all other game actions.
the difference between recognition of their happening and posting them to the forums is pretty much automatic - and the the SoL can be modified to deal with that problem anyway
I hope you don't intend for the SoL to retroactively legalize any action a player says e takes.... we've had enough problems with that already.
No, I was more thinking of extending its influence so that any action taken by a player can be objected to by any player providing its done within a specific amount of time. 



publishing ballots
counting votes
publishing results
amending typos & other things according to r257
the first 4 of these can be done by duties - i'll write up on how tomorrow.
The first one can't be done by a duty - it requires somebody with access to the database. Besides which, many of these are largely automated already - all we need is a Ministry of Votes to input them into Dave's scripts, and the publishing, counting, and publishing again are all taken care of.
the last can be made a special form of proposal, possibly an unauthored prop. 

I'd planned on making it a Council petition.


*shrugs* I don't like councils, i prefer democracy
An elected council is fairly democratic. I believe that there will always be some aspects of the game that are better handled by a small group of people or by a single person; it is for this reason that I prefer Ministries to Duties. Some things can be highly automated, if a Minister with enough programming skill is put in charge of them; to highly automate a Duty, some player would have to write an interface that not only handled the Duty, but was publicly available, had some system to prevent out-of-game meddlers from screwing up the data, and was simple enough to be usable by all players. That's harder and takes longer, which means that if everything becomes a Duty, there's not a lot of incentive for anyone to write code to do things.
except the desire for a better game. I prefer the idea of using the concept of a true democracy, seeing as the Nomic is small enough for direct democracy on the athenian model, rather then any model of representitive democracy 

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