Re: [s-d] Re: [s-b] [auto] TheVoice submits p42

[The Voice <voiceofnomic@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 5/2/05, Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On May 2, 2005, at 3.47 PM, automailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> > TheVoice has submitted a new proposal, p42.
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Proposal 42/0: Let's make things interesting.
> > A Standard Proposal by TheVoice
> > Last modified on nweek 87, nday 4
> >
> > Amend the fifth paragraph of rule 3.3, __Proposing and Voting__ to
> > read as follows:
> >
> > {{
> > When a Proposal changes from Open to Historical, it is said to have
> > Resolved. At this point, the final votes cast by each player are
> > counted, and if the number of FOR votes exceeds the number of AGAINST
> > votes, or if all votes cast are AGAINST, the Proposal Passes;
> > otherwise, it fails.
> > }}
> >
> > [[This is basically to encourage use of political parties and hope
> > that it makes the voting a little bit more interesting... perhaps
> > we'll see more bargaining and bribes...]]
> > ---------------------------------
> 
> I quite like this prop - every nomic I've ever played has treated the
> proposal system as a means to an end, the end being creating another
> game within the Nomic. I've always wanted to play one where changing
> the rules really was the game, as Peter Suber seems to have intended.
> 
> And Eugene is right that e could make a prop to make em god-king of the
> realm, and it would pass if everyone voted down. And yes, if there were
> more rules like this a clever player could conceivably trick everyone
> into letting a proposal through that did such a thing. This isn't a
> flaw, it's a more interesting game.
> 
> I would like to note that if we're going to play the Voting Game, then
> I'm going to have to go against my anti-immutability tendencies and
> suggest that rule 0 should only be mutable via itself. That way we
> always have some way of extracting ourselves from a severe paradox.
> 
> Also, I like the convention (started by Wild Card, I believe) that a
> player who seizes absolute power over the game through clever loophole
> exploitation awards emself a win, fixes the problem, and lets the game
> keep going.
> 
> --
> Wonko

Thanks, Wonko.  That was my intention.  I'll even prop that rule 0 is
only mutable by itself in a few minutes...

Subgames are interesting and all, but for me, not nearly as
interesting as actually screwing with the mechanics of the game...

In fact, I feel a political party coming on...
-- 
.o0(The Voice)
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss