On 5/1/23 12:59, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote: > I'm sure that this is well-intended but I feel like this strongly > encourages "dynasties" of officers where the veterans are de facto heads of > who will get the privilege of choose who get to be the next Delegate or > not. Having been Delegate seem like major boon to have towards actually > getting the office eventually, perhaps it eventually becomes an unwritten > requirement for it. > > It's just more power to the older, more established players, and it bothers > me. > > I'm not sure if this is healthier for the game than the free-for-all > deputization/elections as we currently have it.
With due respect, this is a newer player perspective. Some roles (mostly rulekeepor, assessor, arbitor) tend to stay with the same player for several years. And then that player burns out/gets buys/moves on, and suddenly there's nobody that knows how to do them. This is meant to *lessen* the chokehold that established players have on the mechanisms of the game but preventing that from happening. -- nix Prime Minister, Herald
