Re: [s-d] [s-b] My RP: Set everything.

[Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Dec 14, 2007, at 8:42 AM, 0x44 wrote:

> Daniel Lepage wrote:
>> My RP is 100% scam-free, and will remain
>> so.
>>
> Your RP may be 100% scam-free, but adjudicating valid actions through
> the Justice system is what brought us into this emergency in the first
> place. The Justice system is too slow as written to be able to  
> properly
> adjudicate the validity of actions.

99% of the time the Justice system is not needed for this  
adjudication, and the real problem is that we're using it much more  
than we need to. Virtually all of the recent Consultations fall into  
one of four categories:

1) Consultations about mistakes. Example: Consultation 18 was on  
whether or not a particular proposal had been sent to the public forum.

This is not a necessary consultation - if you just tell the Minister  
"Hey, you made a mistake and recognized a proposal that went to the  
wrong forum" then the Minister can fix it. No need for a Consultation.


2) Consultations that are answered by the rules. Example: Consultation  
47 asks whether every device needs a blueprint. The reasoning is "The  
rules don't say they do", and the ruling was "Yeah, you're right".

All this consultation does is assert that what the rules say is true;  
the same effect could have been achieved by sending a message to spoon- 
discuss.


3) Redundant Consultations. Example: Consultations 11 through 15, 20,  
21, 27-34, 39, 40, 42, 44, 48, 49, 52, and 53 are all variations on  
the general question of exactly how a real-world person or group of  
persons can become a player, faction, or both.

These could have been solved with one or two Consultations and a  
single clarifying proposal submitted nweeks ago that would fix the  
rules and adjust which groups actually were players/factions. This is  
why it's important to ACT based on Consultations - propose changes to  
clarify whatever was confusing.


4) Stupid Consultations. Example: Consultations 70, 2i, and 3i are all  
about trout.


The only case where we actually NEED a consultation is when a rule is  
genuinely ambiguous. Permissibility of the Unprohibited is one such  
example - a Consultation asking precisely what "regulated" means in  
this context would have been perfectly reasonable, because it wasn't  
clear from the rule (at the time, that is) and it really could have  
gone either way.

When this arises, you have to take some time no matter what. It's  
unreasonable to expect any player to check his/her email more than  
once a day, and even that's a stretch sometimes. This means that no  
matter how you set it up, formally asserting the validity of an action  
will take at least four days:
  * The action is taken
  * Up to 24 hours later the Minister refutes the action
  * Up to 24 hours later the actor CFJs it
  * Up to 24 hours later the Oracle assigns the CFJ
  * Up to 24 hours later the Judge rules

There isn't any way around this, as far as I can see, but that's ok,  
because you almost never *need* the formal system - you can generally  
determine whether an action is valid without it.

And if it's a very serious question, that has to be answered before  
the game can go on, then you declare a State of Emergency and speed an  
RP through. This is precisely why my version of section 0 has short- 
circuiting - In the event that something stupid stops the game, we  
should all be able to simultaneously hit our panic buttons and vote  
for somebody's Finalized RP, so that the emergency starts and stops  
virtually instantaneously. The whole thing could happen in under a day  
if enough people are online at the right times.

-- 
Wonko

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