On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Charles Walker <[email protected]> wrote: > Very interesting, but AGAINST so long as it repeals Sir Humphrey.
Hmm... I suppose I can give em another job. > I'd like to see an example of what you would have done with this on a past > proposal. - As someone (Machiavelli?) mentioned on IRC, if veto existed already and this proposal itself were merely amending it, it could be vetoed so that it says "any number of complete words, as well as any amount of punctuation and whitespace, may be added." Extremely powerful, but would depend on planning, as you'd have to be Speaker and use the government formation timer switch the identity of the Governor General so that you could veto two things in a row (actually, I need to fix that) to avoid players just democratizing everything... Could be prevented simply if players simply generally made AI<=2 proposals that mentioned rule changes democratic. - "Funcentives" is Star, but if it were Ordinary, it could be vetoed to read "When a decision in the Star Chamber is resolved[- with no votes FOR], then its author satisfies the Victory Condition of Kangaroo." Would depend on planning, as you'd have to have a decision resolved in the Star Chamber in the 1-2 weeks before a fix proposal would be adopted. - "Good Judgement" could be vetoed to say "The CotC CAN award Yaks by announcement." Would depend on being the CotC and having a way to win from Yaks (in 1-2 weeks). So a lot of theoretical possibilities, but executing on them would likely be nontrivial.
