Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Hurried Proposals

[Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

Actually, now I think YOU're right. It's probably more common for one person
to be unhelpful than for one person to be picked on via tweak!

A simple fix: We go ahead with the no-two-objections one, then form a
"justice league" of at least two people. These two are obliged to object to
any tweak which unfairly singles out a single player.

Also, it could have a better name...

On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Charles Walker <
charles.w.walker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I suppose, but not allowing any objections makes it easy for one person to
> be... unhelpful. Actually, on the whole, I think you're right.
> I amend the Proposal Hurried Proposals to read:
>
> {
>
> Create a new rule titled 'Tweaks' with the following text:
>
> {
>
> A player may, as a Game Action, perform a Tweak. A Tweak is a list
> of arbitrary changes to the gamestate. If a Tweak has not received any
> objections 3 ndays after its submission, the list of changes it specifies
> is
> followed to make the resulting changes to the game occur.
>
>  }
>
>  }
>
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx
> >wrote:
>
> >
> > How about no objections at all? Allowing one makes it a little too easy
> to
> > pick on one person, no?
> _______________________________________________
> 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