[spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] Nweek 63 BALLOT

[Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On May 27, 2004, at 2.24 PM, SkArcher wrote:

> I vote SHELVE on all props. If my Philosophy is such that I can do so 
> more than once, I vote Shelve as many times as is practical.

According to the Roster, your philosophy is Selective Lobbyist, which 
does not grant you any extra shelving votes.

Selective Lobbyist Mandate:

 A Selective Lobbyist does not necessarily care about everything that 
goes on in the game, but feels very strongly one way or another about 
the things e does care about.

 A Selective Lobbyist may cast N extra YES or NO votes on one any 
proposal that e did not make, where N is equal to the number of 
proposals e ABSTAINS on that ballot, with a limit of 2.

> I strongly urge all players to recognise an SoE.

When last I checked, Dave didn't really like SOEs... I don't think I'm 
going to recognize one, because I see no need.
	Somebody remarked that going into a SOE makes rule changes easier... I 
don't think that's true at all. With normal props, everybody can 
propose changes, and any number of proposals can be passed every nweek. 
In a SOE, we still need 10 days to do everything, but we only get one 
passed prop out of it; if the same prop is made as a normal prop, we 
can vote for it while still proposing other things.



By the way, I'm also not too thrilled by the "open source government" 
movement. Although I agree that piling all of the work on Dave is a bad 
idea, and that so far few ministries have been claimed by players, I 
don't think the right solution is to jump straight to the other end of 
the spectrum and make everybody responsible for everything, since I 
expect a lot of confusion and redundancy ("I added the points I got to 
the roster." "Wait, I already added those!" "No, *I* added those. For 
everbody." "How come I didn't get any?" "You did, but you lost points 
from the other thing." "But I'd already subtracted the points form the 
other thing!" "Wait, I subtracted those points too!" etc.).

A better solution would be to improve the current system. We could make 
ministries smaller and easier to do: being a "minister of all things 
proposalish" responsible for maintaining a website of all props, 
counting votes, and changing the ruleset would be a lot of work, 
whereas being a minister who simply had to periodically post all 
pending proposals to a notification forum would be easy. Right now, all 
the worst ministries are very daunting, and so get left to Dave; that's 
why e has too much work to do.
	We could also provide more incentives to be a minister: higher 
salaries, extra respect/bandwidth, maybe even a clause like "All 
players who have not held a ministry in the past five nweeks cannot be 
awarded Wins."
	Finally, we should increase the ministerial turnover rate - rather 
than having an election once an nyear for a few small ministries, we 
could have three-nweek terms for *all* ministries, with some incentive 
for old ministers to turn the job over to new ones. This will also 
force us to develop a good system for switching control of a ministry 
from one player to another easily, which will make us able to instate a 
new minister very quickly should a minister disappear.

--
Wonko

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