Re: [s-d] Contract Ideals Discussion

["Charles Schaefer" <chuckles11489@xxxxxxxxx>]

2008/11/28, Charles Schaefer <chuckles11489@xxxxxxxxx>:

> 2008/11/28, Jamie Dallaire bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx:
>>
>>
>> That said, to make contract law an interesting and appealing mechanism
>> that
>> players will WANT to get involved in, it does need to have a certain
>> degree
>> of protection from being manipulated by non-party majorities. Whether that
>> protection is just unwritten sportsmanship or whether it's codified into B
>> law, we'll have to see.
>
>
> How about players agree to a contract prohibiting them from voting for
> proposals that interfere with other players' contracts? It seems like it
> could work if it was phrased properly and enough players joined. Is there
> some blatant loophole I'm missing?
>

In fact, how about a contract (or at least a set of principles somewhere
that players can informally agree to) defining what good sportsmanship is in
B Nomic? Once we get it written down, it makes it easier to decided when
that line is crossed.

Specific points to consider:
Interference with other player's stuff (contracts, etc.): what if there is a
rule proposed in the Grid (for example) allowing theft of other player's
items? would it then be okay (from an out-of-game perspective, at least) to
take them? I think so.
Scams: how far can they go without being unsportsman like? I generally think
that any attempts to control RL (e.g. "Wooble isn't allowed to eat or brush
his teeth", "all players have to give Charles all their Federal Reserve
Notes", etc) should be off limits.
Programming glitches/hacking: this isn't a programming nomic, so it
shouldn't be a problem any time soon, but it would be interesting to hear
how they handle the situation. I think some of you play them.

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