Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Squaredness is mandatory

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

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I amend my most recent proposal to read:
>
> {{In rule 5E48, replace the text {An Unsquared Player can set their
> Resident Square as a Game Action, within the boundaries of (-100,100)
> to (100,100).} with the text {An Unsquared Player can set their
> Resident Square as a Game Action to any Square whose coordinates are
> both in the range from -100 to 100. A player can, as a game action
> with two support, cause an Unsquared player's Resident Square to be
> set to a random square with less than two residents whose coordinates
> are both within the range from -50 to 50; the random determination is
> to be made at the time this action is taken rather than at the time
> intent is declared.}
>

Sounds good. However, I'd suggest two changes:

1) give new players / those who are unsquared after this proposal passes a
grace period of a few ndays. Let them decide where to go rather than allow
other players to square them immediately.

2) so we don't litter the board with inactive players, restrict the squaring
of unsquared players to others to the squaring of active unsquared players.

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