Re: [s-d] Comments on this nweek's proposals

[Alex Truelsen <dichotomousmind@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 5/3/05, Peter Cooper Jr. <pete+bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> p28 (Genechip change): This is being done by the current Tweak to the
> rules that hasn't been objected to yet, right?


Nope, this is new. 

> 
> 
> p34 (Soul Pennies): Hmm... As Wonko said, this takes a bit of tracking
> that I don't think I want to do, and I doubt anyone else really does
> either.


So I'll do it. I was the Banker back in pre-Wiki days when we did things by 
hand (well, by calculator), and it wasn't that odious a job. 

p35 (Specialty Proposals): Who determines if a proposal in fact fits
> one of these forms (especially Story)? Does the author get the bonus
> even if they don't realize that they put it in one of the special
> forms?


You'll be able to tell if you made it in one of the forms. It's really hard 
to accidentally write a haiku, limerick, rhyming couplets, or sonnet, and a 
Story is just as deliberate. If someone claims that they made a Story and 
you think they didn't, CFI it. I'm not making a specific definition of 
"story," that would restrict creativity and someone would find a loophole 
just to be annoying. As it is, how do you cheat at creative writing? And if 
someone does, then just don't vote fortheir proposals. 


> p41 (Grammar Nazi): Don't you mean "high standard *of* grammar"? :)


Now you see why we need this.

It looks to me like if I typo version 0 of my prop and then fix it
> right away with an amendment, I still get a violation for the first
> version.


So how long a grace period is fair, then? Five minutes? An hour? Fix it 
before you get caught? 

I don't see how "expected to enforce" actually works... Does
> the Nazi merely point out the violation so that the Secretary can
> track the Suck Points? Can the Nazi fix problems?


Well, the Nazi can't amend proposals, so no, they can't fix problems. The 
player will have to do that. Although I suppose one could ignore them... 
I'll strengthen the rule to prevent people ignoring the typos.

Also, Spivak
> pronouns aren't defined in the current rules (although people have
> been using them anyway out of habit).


Comma usage isn't defined in the current rules either. The rules of Spivak 
pronoun use can be found through Google pretty easily - there are plenty of 
pages about it.


> p50 (Political Parties): It's not really a "Generic definition", is
> it?


"Generic Definitions"can hold many types of things. Parties are one such 
thing. If you're going to get picky, there's no such thing as a generic 
definition - a definition defines a specific thing, so it's an oxymoron.

I'm not completely clear on how the parties can enforce
> things.


That's up to the Parties. 

Can a party require its members to vote certain ways?


That's also up to the Parties. 

What
> determines "directly influence the Gamestate"?


The Party rules can't do anything to the Gamestate. Members of the Parties 
may perform actions in accordance with Party rules, but the Party itself 
cannot perform actions, because it is not a thing.

--
> Peter C.
> "Do not worry about your difficulties in Mathematics. I can assure you
> mine are still greater."
> -- Albert Einstein
> 
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss