On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 2:35 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion <[email protected]> wrote: > This is a RECOMMENDED method for resetting aspects of the game in a > fair and equitable manner following the discovery and/or exploitation > of unintended loopholes within the Rules
Following twg's thesis, I'm far more concerned about becoming too heavy-handed about fairness and equity, and only use something like this when a scam truly "breaks" the gameplay. E.g. If someone wins 200 coins through a scam, "equity" would suggest taking it away. But I wouldn't. I'd only reset if, say, the scam led to infinite/18,000 coins or something such that coins themselves became meaningless without a reset (spaceships was a better example, where the scams halted all gameplay). So (with apologies) I no longer support this with the "fairness and equitable" language. > 1. If the changes are manifestly abusive, disproportionate, or > unreasonable, they do not take effect; and On a technical level, a leading purpose of the adjustment system evolved a bit in my mind and discussion, towards facilitating convergences (however we define them), even though that didn't appear so much in my original draft. I'm concerned when EFFECTIVENESS is judged based on as-yet unexplored squishy terms like this, as it might amplify uncertainty not dampen it while we CFJ to define "disproportionate" or whatever.
