Re: [s-d] Re: [auto] Zarpint amends p1984

[Jeremy Cook <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 07:42:57PM -0500, Daniel Lepage wrote:
> 
> On Jan 20, 2005, at 7.18 PM, Jeremy Cook wrote:
> 
> > Have you ever tried to do anything after blacking out? And r14
> > states: "No restrictions may be placed on when a player may
> > forfeit; any player may forfeit the game at any time." r14 takes
> > precedence over this.
> 
> If no restrictions may be place on when a player may forfeit, then your 
> proposal cannot be implemented (r14 also takes precedence over the rule 
> asserting that the actions in your proposal happen).

Welcome back, Wonko!

No, creating the rule doesn't violate r14, as the prop's passing
does not prohibit players from forfeiting at any time. If the
rule claimed to take precedence over r14, then it couldn't be
implemented.

> 
> >>> Any Action done by any Player has a probability of X/10 of not taking
> >>> place, where X is that Player's BAC.
> >>
> >> Is the player doing the action responsible for throwing the dice? For
> >> something like making a move in a subgame, couldn't the player just
> >> try again (since the action didn't take place, they didn't make a move
> >> yet this checking period, and thus could try again)?
> >
> > No, whoever is supposed to recognize the Action is. And yes, they
> > could try again.
> 
> Then what good does this do? All I'd have to do is try over and over 
> again until it worked. This wouldn't affect gameplay at all, it would 
> just irritate the hell out of everyone.

Well, you can't take any other actions. There are actions besides
moves in subgames.

> 
> >>> When any Player Votes in a Ballot, the Chairman must do the following
> >>> X times, where X is that Player's BAC: choose one of the Polls in the
> >>> Ballot and randomly change the Player's vote to either Yes or No with
> >>> equal probability.
> >>
> >> This sounds like the Chair gets to choose which Poll to change
> >> randomly. While I like the sound of that as the current Chair, you
> >> might want to make the Poll choice random as well. And, it'd currently
> >> be possible for the Chair to choose the same Poll more than once, I'd
> >> think.
> >
> > Yes, that's the point.
> 
> That seems like an awful lot of power to give the Chair. Only two 
> people voted last nweek; even if we assume that I, Zarpint, and Iain 
> (the other three who have posted in the last few days) vote this nweek, 
> that still means that two slightly intoxicated people would be enough 
> for the Chairman to force an "award the Chairman a Win" prop through.

Depending on how the random numbers work out, maybe.

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