On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Quazie <quazieno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Taral <tar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Aaron Goldfein <aarongoldf...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Proposal: Legislative Dominance (AI = 2) > > > > I pledge to vote AGAINST this proposal. > > > > (As a note: If it passes, I will not come back. Enjoy your empty game.) > > > > -- > > Taral <tar...@gmail.com> > > "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." > > -- Unknown > > > > I submit an ai=1 proposal entitled "Failed Eris" with the following body: > > Append the following on to R 1922 > -- > (i) Failed Eris, to be awarded to those who have driven other, older, > well respected, members of the Agora community out with abusive > proposals. Owning this Patent Title is a Losing Condition. > -- > > Award the Patent Title of 'Failed Eris' to every player who won the > game as a result of the "Legislative Dominance" proposal > I see this proposal not as a way for me to be a jackass, but to reveal a part of the game as flawed. Scamming is something that is very intricate in the game, and as a result it should be expected that someone would submit a proposal like this. Instead of getting angry at the proposal, change the rules to make the proposal impossible. I don't see how this scam is different from any other.
