Re: [s-d] [s-b] (no subject)

[Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Geoffrey Spear <wooble@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Elliott Hird
> <penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 23 Jan 2009, at 23:53, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> >
> >> But at the moment Consultations have no effect whatsoever. Who cares
> >> what some Priest Answers if we can just ignore it?  I say we get rid
> >> of the Answer altogether and *just* have Oracularities that work like
> >> judicial orders.
> >
> > Consultations are a semi-fair process to gather consensus on the
> > gamestate.
>
> We already have spoon-discuss.  Why do we need another procedure?
> Isn't that the argument against Oracularities?


I think the advantage of technically-powerless consultations over
spoon-discuss is that it formalizes the discussion process, and offers us a
chance to vote on which interpretation we think is correct. Spoon-discuss
might sometimes be a bit too diffuse to let consensus or even majority rule
shine through. More likely to become a flame war.

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