Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: The Ministry of Goods

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

All good points, thanks. I will work on a revision later.

I was originally going to make bidding more than you've got impossible, but
then figured people might want to bid over their own store of cash and have
a plan backed up to collect said cash - through points exchange and bidding
- that they will only enact if they end up winning the auction. So something
workable might be to make cash transfer automatic unless that cash is
unavailable, then give the player a day to come up with it. Is the current
penalty for defaulting too high? Also, good idea on blueprints and making
the device transfer automatic, no sense burdening the artisan.

bad_leprechaun

On 8/9/07, Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 8/9/07, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > In Rule 3-10: Currency, paragraph 1, amend
> > {
> > A "currency owning object", or COO, is a type of game object that can
> own
> > currency (also called "money"). All players are currency owning objects.
> > }
> > to read
> > {
> > A "currency owning object", or COO, is a type of game object that can
> own
> > currency (also called "money"). All players as well as the Ministry of
> Goods
> > are currency owning objects.
> > }
>
> I don't see the point of defining COOs. I'd prefer just "Any object
> can possess currency".
>
> >
> > In Rule 3-12: devices, paragraph 2, amend
> > {
> > A "device owner object", or DOO, is a type of game object that may own
> > devices. All players are device owner objects.
> > }
> > to read
> > {
> > A "device owner object", or DOO, is a type of game object that may own
> > devices. All players as well as the Ministry of Goods are device owner
> > objects.
> > }
>
> Likewise, "Any object can possess devices".
>
> > Create a new rule that reads
> > {
> > === The Ministry of Goods ===
> >
> > There exists a ministry known as the Ministry of Goods. The Minister of
> > Goods, also known as the Artisan, is responsible for maintaining a
> Public
> > Display of all currently existing devices and their Attributes,
> Properties,
> > current states and, in the case of devices
> > available for purchase from the Ministry of Goods, price in mackerel.
>
> It would be nice if the Artisan could collaborate with the Registrar -
> I'd want to see a list showing each player's name, score, mackerel,
> and devices.
>
> > The Artisan has the power to transfer ownership of devices from the
> Ministry
> > of Goods to that of specific players, but may only do so when explicitly
> > instructed to by the Rules. Under no circumstances may the Artisan
> transfer
> > any currency from the Ministry of Goods to any other party, emself
> included.
>
> So, currency going to the Ministry is lost forever? I suppose we can
> give it another outlet later.
>
> > The Artisan may, without 2 objections, define one new device, unique or
> > non-unique, within the first 4 ndays of a given nweek. The Ministry of
> Goods
> > immediately gains ownership of any device thus defined. A price in
> mackerel
> > must accompany the definition of any non-unique device.
>
> Does this mean he gets one definition per nweek, or one successful
> definition per nweek? I.e., if the first one is objected away, can he
> immediately make a new one?
>
> Also, how soon do the objections need to come?
>
> And finally, is it per Artisan? If the Artisan defines an object, and
> then somehow loses the Ministry and is replaced by a new Artisan
> before nday 4, can the new Artisan also make a new object?
>
> > Non-unique devices defined by the Artisan immediately and indefinitely
> > become available for purchase from the Ministry of Goods. Any player
> may, as
> > a Game Action, give the Ministry of Goods the amount of mackerel
> required to
> > purchase any available non-unique device. In return, the Artisan must
> > transfer ownership of the device in question from the Ministry of Goods
> to
> > this player. The Artisan may, at any time and without objection, alter
> the
> > price of any available non-unique device.
>
> You should specify that "Non-unique" means that copies of it can be
> bought multiple times. Right now it seems to say that there's still
> only one copy of each Non-unique device.
>
> > Any unique device defined by the Artisan is immediately put to auction.
> Any
> > player, including the Artisan, may, as a Game Action, submit a bid via a
> > Public Forum, specifying an amount of mackerel. Bids are not retractable
> and
> > bidding ends at the start of Ballotday. Once bidding ends, the highest
> > bidder has 1 nday to pay, giving the Ministry of Goods a quantity of
> > mackerel equal to eir highest bid. If ey fails to do so, eir Voting
> Power is
> > set to 0, ey loses 25 points, and the next highest bidder is allowed 1
> > further nday to pay eir own highest bid. The Artisan must transfer
> ownership
> > of the unique device to any player who successfully pays. If neither of
> the
> > two highest bidders successfully pay, or if such bidders do not exist,
> the
> > unique device is destroyed, ceasing to exist.
>
> I agree with comex - you should just take the Mackerel from the
> winning bidder and have both transfers be automatic. To avoid payment
> problems, you could add that any player who bids more than he has
> automatically has eir bid reduced to 0.
>
> > [[Yes, the devices in public display, as per the rule above, would
> include
> > Panic Buttons. Also, under the current phrasing, I would advise any
> Minister
> > of Goods to include a condition on any created device that says that its
> > effects will occur unless the owner is an object other than the Ministry
> of
> > Goods. Unless, of course, that's specifically what you're trying to
> do...
>
> One thing would be to have the Ministry not actually hold Devices
> itself, but have basically blueprints for Devices so that when you buy
> one it is created on the spot and given to you.
>
> > a) I figured before writing this that I'd have to amend more existing
> rules
> > to prevent conflicts, but can only find two now, so maybe I forgot some?
> b)
> > I'm torn as to whether the Artisan should be allowed to bid on unique
> > devices created by the Artisan... What do you think? Any other
> suggestions
> > for revision?]]
>
> I don't see any rules that this would break. However, there is a
> conflict with an open proposal - this proposal uses spivak pronouns
> even if the anti-spivak prop passes.
>
> Perhaps the anti-spivak prop should include other current proposals as
> well?
>
> --
> Wonko
> _______________________________________________
> 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