Re: [s-d] [s-b] to the "Minister of Health"

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

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 2:48 AM, Jay Campbell <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>
> > I would pick up the MoH since I'm the one who proposed the rule (see
> > e.g. MoT, MoF, which I've held pretty much continuously since their
> > inception).
>
> Without looking, I already guessed you'd proposed OCB. Bold move on MoT.


What do you mean, about the MoT?

>
> > If you do have a way of automating this (and game actions in
> > general) that could be quite interesting! I'm not sure if there are any
> > other options save for slogging vs automation. Are there?
> >
>
>
> My recent posts re ruby automation get us some percentage of the way
> there. Tracking users, points, macks and others are easy enough;
> figuring out which archived proposals and non-zotted consultations exist
> as game objects was the pain. Let's resubmit Plague with a more limited
> scope of objects .. e.g. rules, contracts and socks. Things you can
> count on fingers and toes.


Yes indeed. I'm still debating, in my mind, about whether or not
macks/points should be part of that scope. On the one hand, no one really
cares about individual macks or points, so there's not a big incentive there
to actually do anything about the plague. On the other, that's probably how
we'd actually get a large built up reservoir of plagued game objects that
would let the plague overrun everything else... I think Proposals aren't a
problem since they're all numbered and archived (even the withdrawn ones
should be since they used to be assigned numbers, though I think that's
fallen out of practice in the past year or so). You're right about
consultations though, hadn't thought about how a lot of the zotted ones are
still out there. Plus there are some consultations with non-standard
numbering which would make it all so complicated. About the macks/points
again, I'd considered making chunks of eg 50 macks or 20 points or whatever
be infected, but that would get quite complicated as far as I can tell.
These chunks are not game objects. It would be silly to redefine these
chunks to be game objects too, since they then couldn't really be divisible
(if they are, we'd have the same problem re the plague). Maybe we could
scrap macks and points from the list, but let nueces (if that passed) be
plagued? I drew up that list quite last minute because I knew "all game
objects" wouldn't fly.

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