[spoon-discuss] Comments

[Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I've read through the list archives; things are still to busy for me to 
be coming back (I have no weekends from now until mid-april), but I 
would like to make a few comments on things:

First, I'd like to apologize for inadvertently removing the bit where 
proposals are revisable. You could probably get away with claiming that 
r5 implies this (it lists Proposals as objects requiring serial 
numbers, after declaring that only revisable objects have to have 
serial numbers), which would at least keep them revisable until 
somebody can fix it. It's a bit of a stretch, but the rules only mean 
what we want them to mean anyway, so it would work.

Secondly, I don't understand the opposition to The Voting Game. I 
wasn't trying to break the rules or pull any sort of strange scam, I 
just thought it would be interesting to see what would happen. I didn't 
violate the wording of __No Kickbacks__, and I don't think I violated 
the spirit of it either - the rule exists to stop people from trying to 
force rule changes through by paying people off to vote for them. My 
props didn't change anything about the gamestate except to do things 
with points, and they weren't designed to all pass. They were designed 
to provide players with an interesting dilemma, which they failed to do 
because I didn't do the math out right. Oh well.
But I think that no matter what you put in the rules, there will always 
be a way to get around them, unless you give Dave the power to deny the 
existence of any proposal. For example, I could propose a rule that 
just in general paid people in weird ways for voting on any props 
authored by Wonko. If you ban things like that, then you also have to 
ban things like __Contrary Votes__, which also gives people points 
based on how they voted.

On automated proposals:
	Let's define a proposal language for changing the rules. Then the only 
thing Dave would have to do manually would be to implement 
non-rule-change gamestate changes.

For example,
\create{{<rule description>}} creates a rule,
\repeal{{<rule number>}} repeals a rule,
\replace{{<rule number>}}{{<rule description>}} completely replaces the 
text of a rule, and
\amend{{<rule number>}}{{oldtext}}{{newtext}} replaces all occurrences 
of one block of text in a rule with another block.

That right there would cover half the proposals we make.

On Balefire:
	I'd greatly prefer to see a list of what it *can* target than what it 
can't. Then if somebody forgets to put something on the list, it just 
means that the fire isn't as powerful; if somebody forgets to put 
something on the list at the moment, it could easily break the game.

On Quotes:
	I'll update the page later today.

Now, back to work.

--
Wonko

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