Re: [s-d] [s-b] New Contract

["Craig Daniel" <teucer@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 1:44 AM, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Welcome back!

Thank you.

> ThermodyNomic's deliberately inevitable demise? Not familiar with that one,
> but sounds quite intriguing...

It was a pretty short-lived experiment in unusual nomic ruleset
design, and not a particularly well-known one. At its peak it had
maybe half a dozen players, and it lasted only a couple months.

> Did it max out its entropy or something?

More or less. The Second Law kept it from maintaining a constant level
of stuff in the game by destroying a random game object if we failed
to get rid of any for a week. Eventually a couple players took
vacations simultaneously and, since that was a large fraction of the
game, we didn't have enough people left behind to keep passing
proposals - so the gamestate ate itself.

Which, to be honest, was an entirely expected endgame condition.

...man, this is taking me back. But now it is time to study the
present, and see how present B Nomians do things.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss