Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Liberonscien]

Proposal: Players may earn points in a manner determined by the rule set. The purpose of said points shall be determined by the rule set.

Proposal: Points are to be given to a player if a proposal of theirs passes. The number of points given is to be the same number of votes "for" the proposal received.

Points are to be revoked from a player if a proposal of theirs fails. The number of points revoked is to be the same number of votes "against" the proposal received.

Proposal: If a player votes against a passed proposal then they earn a point. If a player votes for a failed proposal then they lose a point.

+1

All three?

[Naturegirl1999]

Yes, they connect to each other

[Liberonscien]

Yes, they connect to each other

Alright, I proposed them separately so that I could increase the chances of one of them getting passed.

[The_Two_Eternities]

So, we're coming up on the period of time where rules start autopassing. Does anyone else think we should find some way to keep the vote box from getting crowded at the top?

Mandatory Character Sheet(3): Naturegirl1999, roseheart, TTE
3D Inactive OP Law(1-1): Liberonscien | TTE
Anti OP Slavery Law(4): roseheart, Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Alpha/Beta Tiers(3-1): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE | roseheart
Resolve Disputes by Gladiator Duels(3): roseheart, Eschar, Naturegirl1999
3D Auto-Kick(1-2): Liberonscien | TTE, roseheart
3D Kill Enabled(3): roseheart, Naturegirl1999, TTE
3D Inactive OP Law V2(3): roseheart, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Alignment CS Expansion(3): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Rule 3 Clarification(2): TTE, roseheart
Anti OP Slavery/Inactivity Law(1-1): TTE | Naturegirl1999
RTD Guest Boost(3): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Point System(3): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Points for Proposing(2-1): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999 | TTE
Points for Voting(2-1): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999 | TTE

Because I don't like the idea of people having to meta-vote.
(edit: cleaned up the votebox formatting)

[Liberonscien]

Meta vote?

[Naturegirl1999]

Meta vote?

I am curious about this as well. What are meta votes?

[RoseHeart]

(Let's avoid quoting the Votebox unless we are editing it. Mixing different timestamps in the conversation is baad)

Eschar is a player, let's add them to the roster please.


Ending Later Today
6 Player Limit Removal
I oppose this. It is ideal when a majority is reached to pass a rule, too many voters is too many cooks in the kitchen. However if we expand Guest participation, I feel the game has potential to grow even when maintaining a small High Council.

Mandatory Character Sheet
I support this. It's a backbone for more.


Ending Tomorrow
3D Inactive OP Law
I oppose this. I oppose auto demotions when we can have demotion vulnerability instead.

Anti OP Slavery Law
I support this. I support mandatory consent from task workers.

Alpha/Beta Tiers
I do not support this. But I will remove my oppose vote, because I don't have a strong enough argument against how OP Liberonscien wishes to classify.

Resolve Disputes by Gladiator Duels
I support this. I am running a demo, so check it out.

3D Auto-Kick
I oppose this. I oppose auto demotions when we can have demotion vulnerability instead.

3D Kill Enabled
I support this. I oppose auto demotions when we can have demotion vulnerability instead.

3D Inactive OP Law V2
I support this. I oppose auto demotions when we can have demotion vulnerability instead.

Alignment CS Expansion
I support this. It's a backbone for more.

Rule 3 Clarification
I oppose this. I am changing my stance. I like the current version, where after 48 hours, a decision is made on certain factors, and the game moves on. This would keep any proposal perpetually alive, until at some point it has a supporter and no opposers for any 48 period. Rule 3 Clarification was meant to avoid "sniping" and supporting a vote at the last second. But I feel that with 1 opposal stopping any vote, this isn't an issue.

Anti OP Slavery/Inactivity Law
I oppose this. I oppose auto demotions when we can have demotion vulnerability instead.

RTD Guest Boost
I oppose this. I support mandatory consent from task workers. In this case Gladiator Duel hosts. The idea of the Gladiator Duels was that each host could run it their own way. By making this a rule it requires all who host it have something like this. This should be a request or shown in action before becoming mandatory for all duels.

Aside: I intend to give it a try, as it is a good idea, just not a rule, at this point.

Point System
I support this. It's a backbone for more.

Points for Proposing
I oppose this. To quote The_Two_Eternities, "Because I don't like the idea of people having to meta-vote." A rule should be added because it is a good rule. Not to farm.

Points for Voting
I oppose this. To quote The_Two_Eternities, "Because I don't like the idea of people having to meta-vote." A vote should be cast because it is or isn't a good rule. Not to farm.


New
No Proposal Wednesdays
Wednesdays you cannot propose any new rules or rule revisions. (I informally encourage players to take part in this tomorrow)

Reason: To have a down period somewhere, look at the size of the Votebox. Or this post.


Wishes For The Future
Mafia-like Abilities
Like night actions. Just seems cool.

6 Player Limit Removal(1-1): KittyTac | roseheart
Mandatory Character Sheet(3): Naturegirl1999, roseheart, TTE
3D Inactive OP Law(1-2): Liberonscien | TTE, roseheart
Anti OP Slavery Law(4): roseheart, Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Alpha/Beta Tiers(3): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Resolve Disputes by Gladiator Duels(3): roseheart, Eschar, Naturegirl1999
3D Auto-Kick(1-2): Liberonscien | TTE, roseheart
3D Kill Enabled(3): roseheart, Naturegirl1999, TTE
3D Inactive OP Law V2(3): roseheart, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Alignment CS Expansion(4): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE, roseheart
Rule 3 Clarification(1-1): TTE | roseheart
Anti OP Slavery/Inactivity Law(1-3): TTE | roseheart, Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999
RTD Guest Boost(3-1): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE | roseheart
Point System(3-1): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE, roseheart
Points for Proposing(2-2): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999 | TTE, roseheart
Points for Voting(2-2): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999 | TTE, roseheart
No Proposal Wednesdays(1): roseheart

[Naturegirl1999]

[quite]No Proposal Wednesdays
Wednesdays you cannot propose any new rules or rule revisions. (I informally encourage players to take part in this tomorrow)

Reason: To have a down period somewhere, look at the size of the Votebox. Or this post.[/quote]
+1

[Eschar]

No Proposal Wednesdays
Wednesdays you cannot propose any new rules or rule revisions. (I informally encourage players to take part in this tomorrow)

Reason: To have a down period somewhere, look at the size of the Votebox. Or this post.

+1

[Liberonscien]

Proposal: The setting of the game is a universe identical to the real universe except for any exceptions made by future rules.

[Liberonscien]

Proposal: Guests in the RTD thread may, at intervals determined by the rule set, vote to give their favorite players boosts. The form these boosts will take will be randomly selected from a list. This list will be provided by the players in a way determined by the rule set.

Edited Proposal: The host of matches in the RTD thread may, at their own discretion, allow guests in the RTD thread, at intervals determined by the rule set, to vote to give their favorite players boosts. The form these boosts will take will be randomly selected from a list. This list will be provided by the players in a way determined by the rule set.

[Naturegirl1999]

Proposal: Guests in the RTD thread may, at intervals determined by the rule set, vote to give their favorite players boosts. The form these boosts will take will be randomly selected from a list. This list will be provided by the players in a way determined by the rule set.

Edited Proposal: The host of matches in the RTD thread may, at their own discretion, allow guests in the RTD thread, at intervals determined by the rule set, to vote to give their favorite players boosts. The form these boosts will take will be randomly selected from a list. This list will be provided by the players in a way determined by the rule set.

+1

Proposal: The setting of the game is a universe identical to the real universe except for any exceptions made by future rules.

+1

[Liberonscien]

Proposal: The players are to collectively be referred to as the "Global Directors". Each player is to therefore be referred to as "Global Director". Each Global Director is to select an unique single digit integer between one and X, X being the number of Global Directors, inclusive. Each Global Director may also pick a concise title for itself. Titles are not mandatory.

GD-1 "Clockwork", for example.

(This is to give players a fun themed shorthand for each other.)

Proposal: The Global Directors rule over willing non-Global Directors. The means for this is to be determined by the rule set.

[Naturegirl1999]

Proposal: The players are to collectively be referred to as the "Global Directors". Each player is to therefore be referred to as "Global Director". Each Global Director is to select an unique single digit integer between one and X, X being the number of Global Directors, inclusive. Each Global Director may also pick a concise title for itself. Titles are not mandatory.

GD-1 "Clockwork", for example.

(This is to give players a fun themed shorthand for each other.)

Proposal: The Global Directors rule over willing non-Global Directors. The means for this is to be determined by the rule set.

+1 to both
Now that it’s Thursday
Proposal:Back up characters
Global Directors can create multiple characters, but only one character can be active at a time. When the active character dies, GD can choose which of their backup characters takes the Acive character’s place upon death. Backup characters do not start with what the Active character had upon death

[The_Two_Eternities]

"I like the current version, where after 48 hours, a decision is made on certain factors, and the game moves on. This would keep any proposal perpetually alive, until at some point it has a supporter and no opposers for any 48 period."
Ah. I see your point, and I agree that the vote box ought to shrink glares at Liberon and Naturegirl (:p), but when I proposed the rule I wasn't thinking in terms of whether the rule was good, only on whether it was unclear. In retrospect, I agree with with your idea, but it's not explicitly stated (or really even implied) in Rule 3. Now, obviously we can always just remove "failed" votes from the votebox, but that runs into the question of how much "tampering with the votebox" is ethical in this case.

I would propose "Rule 3 Clarification V2" codifying your point of view, but it's No Proposal Wednesday (even if that's not official yet, I want to give the votebox a little downtime; it's got almost twenty proposals.)

6 Player Limit Removal(1-1): KittyTac | roseheart: "FAILED"
Mandatory Character Sheet(3): Naturegirl1999, roseheart, TTE: PASSED
3D Inactive OP Law(1-2): Liberonscien | TTE, roseheart: "FAILED"
Anti OP Slavery Law(4): roseheart, Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE: PASSED

Make your character sheets, everyone!

Edit:
Name: Ra-Ptan
Appearance: A lich wearing plain white robes and an amulet in the form of the white half of the yin-yang symbol.
Goal: Bring the fire of the sun to every piece of evil in the world.
(I came up with Ra-Ptan for this thread, and then decided to use him for the RTD thread because MCS hadn't passed yet.)

Alpha/Beta Tiers(3): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Resolve Disputes by Gladiator Duels(3): roseheart, Eschar, Naturegirl1999
3D Auto-Kick(1-2): Liberonscien | TTE, roseheart
3D Kill Enabled(3): roseheart, Naturegirl1999, TTE
3D Inactive OP Law V2(3): roseheart, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Alignment CS Expansion(4): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE, roseheart
Rule 3 Clarification(1-1): TTE | roseheart
Anti OP Slavery/Inactivity Law(1-3): TTE | roseheart, Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999
RTD Guest Boost(3-1): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE | roseheart
Point System(4): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE, roseheart
Points for Proposing(2-2): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999 | TTE, roseheart
Points for Voting(2-2): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999 | TTE, roseheart
No Proposal Wednesdays(4): roseheart, Naturegirl1999, Eschar, TTE
Game Setting(2-1): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999 | TTE
RTD Guest Boost V2(3): Liberonscien, Naturgirl1999, TTE
Global Directors(3): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999, TTE
Global Director Rulership(2): Liberonscien, Naturegirl1999
Backup Characters(1): Naturegirl1999

Hm. With "Alpha/Beta Tiers" autopassing in less than two hours, it might be useful to divide the proposals between Alpha and Beta. And would "Mandatory Character Sheets" fall under Alpha (because it is a compulsion of the players) or Beta (because it is for a subgame)?

I oppose the proposal Game Setting because I feel that it unnecessarily restricts the options of task workers.
I support the proposal RTD Guest Boost V2 because it promotes creativity instead of restricting it.
I support the proposal Global Directors because it sounds cool.
I do not support the proposal Global Director Rulership because it is a little vague for my tastes.
I do not support the proposal Backup Characters because I'm not sure whether I want it or not.