Re: [s-d] [s-b] Straw poll

[Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

I'd go with C, as I think it'll be hard to agree on any version of B. A also
sounds good if people want to just ratify a new ruleset by fiat (essentially
a new nomic IMO) as mentioned earlier, but honestly I don't think that is
any different from using option C to create a gamestate that is identical to
what we thought the gamestate of B Nomic was before all this happened.

Billy Pilgrim

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Geoffrey Spear <wooble@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> This is a non-binding straw poll on how we should continue.
>
> Options:
> A) Social Construction: B's gamestate is what we thought it was all
> along; comments aren't a problem and the Tweak turning quoted text
> into Comment Monsters can probably be fixed with a new State of Unrest
> in which people vote correctly and use Contradictoriness as intended
> by the rule.
>
> B) Strict Platonism: the wording of the comment rule made it
> impossible to submit proposals at some time in the past, and we can
> recover the gamestate from that point and continue the game.
>
> C) Ancient History: Scrap B and continue with A Nomic using its
> existing ruleset.  Joel would probably appreciate one of use replacing
> em as Administrator :).
>
> D) Other options I missed?
>
> --
> Wooble
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-business mailing list
> spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss