[s-d] Re: [s-b] [auto] EugeneMeidinger amends p33

[Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Apr 29, 2005, at 11.59 PM, automailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> EugeneMeidinger has amended p33.
>
> ---------------------------------
> Proposal 33/1: Rise to vote, sir.
> A Standard Proposal by EugeneMeidinger
> Last modified on nweek 86, nday 10
>
> [[Changed eveything wonko mentioned pretty much and did some other 
> things. Thanks wonko...so mean.  Also got rid of the I in nomiburg 
> didn't sound well. Should I change the name of the subgame?]]

Sorry to be so mean; I suppose I have strong ideas about the style and 
arrangement of the rules, and I hate seeing them broken. Some of the 
older players can probably vouch for my tendency to rewrite large 
chunks of the Ruleset whenever I get irritated trying to find 
something.

I also believe that it's much better to get long lists of complaints 
about a prop than to have people vote it down inexplicably. Both have 
happened to my props, and I definitely prefer the former.

> [[Also Rise to vote sir is a palindrome which also forms the word rots 
> I'll be taking my genechips and amplitude please.]]

I'm afraid I don't see where the word "rots" comes from. The only 
Acronym I see is RTVS. Although if you changed "sir" to "sirs" you'd 
get "rots" from a bizarre shifting acronym - first letter of the first 
word, second of the second, third of the third, and fourth of the 
fourth. That would be a cool thing to award points for.

> [[Also I'm considering intergrating gardens into this. Is this a bad 
> idea? Should the past be left at that?]]

It'd be fun to have Gardens, but I'd advise against doing it all in one 
proposal, if only because it gets hard to keep track of all the rules 
when they change too much per nweek.

I'm definitely in favor of referencing and reusing the past; the only 
thing I don't like is bringing things back in exactly the same form 
they once were in.

> Replace the information pertaining to gambly in rule 4-4 with the 
> following:
> {{
> The Ministry of Gambling
>
> The Ministry of Gambling is a Ministry; its Minister may be called The 
> Gaming
> Commission or Gambly. E takes care of the list of legal casino
> games. The Gaming Commission may not play in a Casino, own a Casino, 
> or accept
> bribes. }}

My earlier comment about Gambly governing "fairness" wasn't intended to 
be a sarcastic criticism of the role; I'm honestly curious as to what 
sort of games might require that sort of arbitration. In the past we've 
usually stuck to fairly objective subgames, so that there would never 
be a need for that sort of thing, but it could be interesting to have 
fuzzier game definitions and questions of "fairness".

> [[Should I change the name of gambly to something else?]]

I think so, but that might just be me. I also think you shouldn't do it 
in this prop, because then it'll be voted against both by those who 
don't like the subgame and those who like the name Gambly. If you do it 
in two separate props then they're both more likely to pass, which 
means you get more points (which, in the true spirit of B Nomic, is the 
important part ;-D ).

I don't know what a better name would be, though, nor am I sure exactly 
what bothers me about "Gambly". I guess it sounds too... cute for my 
liking.

> == Nomburg government==
> Nomburg intitally has 8 small houses with a District of limbo.
> Nomburg's main currency is the Genechip.
> }}

Just to make sure I understand: Those houses are closed and for sale, 
any player may buy them and place them on any open plot, and after 
they're all placed we propose to add more?

> [[ This makes the Library you get to use as a prize for playing the 
> tiles game]]
>
> Create a building called The Library according to the following:
> The Library is fixed, tax-exempt, open and has a value of 50. The 
> Library has a zoning of urban. If The Library is created and a,0 of 
> Nomburg is not occupied by a building then a,0 is The Library's 
> location and Nomburg is its District otherwise it has a location and 
> district of limbo but is owned by Nomburg. The last person to have a 
> zone they control to be zapped in the subgame of tiles owns The 
> Library. If noone has had a zone zapped then The Library is owned by 
> Nomburg and placed on the list of buildings not for sale.

Is there an advantage to owning the Library, or is it just for the 
bragging rights?

--
Wonko

"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that 
you end up being governed by your inferiors."
     -Plato


"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that 
you end up being governed by your inferiors."
     -Plato 

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