Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Pass
On 5 July 2012 05:19, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote: CFJ: omd initiated a CFJ in the above-quoted message. Arguments: If this is judged TRUE, I will deregister.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Pass
You hippies with your non-Mac computers. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 4, 2012, at 11:48 PM, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote: On 5 July 2012 05:19, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote: CFJ: omd initiated a CFJ in the above-quoted message. Arguments: If this is judged TRUE, I will deregister.
DIS: Re: BUS: Agora wears a Sad Hat
On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 09:44 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: Did I *really* just come back from a weekend AFK and find out that no-one wished Agora a happy 19th? For shame. Happy belated birthday, Agora. At least this has given me an idea for some gameplay. I feel that the reason for Agora's recent slump (which it is currently coming out of, honest!) is the lack of any really noticeable rewards for doing anything; there isn't even a weekly action (AAA harvesting or whatever) to keep people engaged with the game (boring and grindy as those are, they seem to improve the game around them). I had more fun back in the era of Infinitely Accumulable Currency, and we haven't tried anything even remotely similar since (unless you count the current trick with the Cayman Islands). Yet, I acknowledge the intrinsic unfairness to new players that such a system can bring (it never stopped /me/ when I was new, although it took several months to catch up). Our more recent systems tended to have a decay on the order of a week (rubles, etc) or month (Caste). A month is quite a short time in Agora; it only covers around four or five proposal distributions, for instance. The ideal length of time for a decay would be, I think, one year (this would be a system that we'd keep in place in the background for several years, probably modifying after two and getting bored of by three or four). The idea is to have a currency that can be accumulated by interacting with the game (a small amount just for being here, rewards for officiating, rewards for CFJs, rewards for voting because with no real motivation I keep forgetting to do that, points from contests as long as it doesn't get out of hand), that can't really be used for much (I can see trading it for the same reasons as kudo trading used to work, and also using somewhat larger amounts as bribes, and perhaps we can have a donation fund for new players to give them a head start, but make it have no game effect apart from that). We could have achievement-like things that give big points boosts that are only available once a year per player, too (sort-of like Ribbons used to work; not sure if it'd be better with a Renaissance equivalent, or without, although I'm biased because Renaissance is my favourite win condition). Then once a year, we reset the whole thing to 0 and give rewards for people who did well (should definitely be wins involved somehow, might be better if it's for anyone who did well enough rather than highest score, and perhaps a patent title for the overall high scorer). And the obvious date for the reset, especially as it's happened recently (giving us almost a year for the first cycle), is Agora's Birthday. Is this an interesting enough basic system that I should try to work out the details? It wouldn't replace the current economy, which works fine day-to-day, even if it is a bit boring; quick decay is probably better for that sort of thing. (Nor would it replace Promises, which are an awesome background currency to have around, and get more interesting the more things they have to interact with.) -- ais523
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3239 assigned to ais523 (and a couple of other things, including a proposal)
ais523 wrote: H. CotC Murphy, there's a feature that I'd find useful in your CotC database that doesn't currently seem to be there: to show the most recent 300 cases or so (regardless of other factors), without having to load the entire list. I often don't particularly want to see the entire list (although sometimes I do), so having to load it simply results in extra load both on me and on your server. Done. There's now a List last _ cases (default 100) in the main body, and an additional quick link to Last 100 cases on the right.
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Bard] The Agorad
Machiavelli wrote: On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 12:20 AM, Ed Murphyemurph...@socal.rr.com wrote: Machiavelli wrote: Honk. I yell CREAMPUFF. I've forgotten; what title does CREAMPUFF correspond to? It's a meme left over from a B Nomic discussion, along the lines of The clause in question is so vague that it would be equally valid to interpret it as referring to any player, or every player, or all players, or the first player to yell CREAMPUFF.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3239 assigned to ais523 (and a couple of other things, including a proposal)
On Thu, 2012-07-05 at 07:47 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote: ais523 wrote: H. CotC Murphy, there's a feature that I'd find useful in your CotC database that doesn't currently seem to be there: to show the most recent 300 cases or so (regardless of other factors), without having to load the entire list. I often don't particularly want to see the entire list (although sometimes I do), so having to load it simply results in extra load both on me and on your server. Done. There's now a List last _ cases (default 100) in the main body, and an additional quick link to Last 100 cases on the right. Thanks! I transfer a kudo from FKA441344 (for not providing much context in CFJs) to Murphy (for this nifty new feature). -- ais523
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3239 assigned to ais523 (and a couple of other things, including a proposal)
On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, ais523 wrote: On Thu, 2012-07-05 at 07:47 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote: ais523 wrote: H. CotC Murphy, there's a feature that I'd find useful in your CotC database that doesn't currently seem to be there: to show the most recent 300 cases or so (regardless of other factors), without having to load the entire list. I often don't particularly want to see the entire list (although sometimes I do), so having to load it simply results in extra load both on me and on your server. Done. There's now a List last _ cases (default 100) in the main body, and an additional quick link to Last 100 cases on the right. Thanks! I transfer a kudo from FKA441344 (for not providing much context in CFJs) to Murphy (for this nifty new feature). I needed this just last week, so have a second kudo from me. Proto: CREAMPUFFS and CREAMPIES are each fixed currencies with no recordkeepor. At the beginning of each week, all instances of these currencies are destroyed, and then one instance of each is created in the possession of each first-class player. A player CAN offer a CREAMPUFF in eir possession to any other player by announcement, presumably because the other player did a Good Thing. The offer is automatically considered accepted and the CREAMPUFF is eaten by the other player (destroyed). A player CAN throw a CREAMPIE in eir possession at any other player by announcement, presumably because the other player did a Bad Thing. The throw automatically hits the other player's face and the CREAMPIE is destroyed. If no one has done so in the current month, a player CAN declare a FOOD FIGHT with support. Doing so creates 13 CREAMPIES in the possession of every first-class player.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Agora wears a Sad Hat
On Thu, 5 Jul 2012, ais523 wrote: I had more fun back in the era of Infinitely Accumulable Currency, and we haven't tried anything even remotely similar since Yes, let's do it again! Yet, I acknowledge the intrinsic unfairness to new players that such a system can bring (it never stopped /me/ when I was new, although it took several months to catch up). New player award ~ 2 months accumulation. Our more recent systems tended to have a decay on the order of a week (rubles, etc) or month (Caste). A month is quite a short time in Agora; I think Caste worked a bit better because while movements were once a month, the movements weren't a full reset but just up-or-down (i.e. you could position yourself longer-term). At a rough guess, I'd call this a quarterly scale game. IMO, over the years, quarterly is a good time scale for political system turnover (i.e. that's about the right number of distributions) but that's orthogonal to the time scale of any particular type of game/win condition we're playing. I think a long game is good. It wouldn't replace the current economy, which works fine day-to-day, even if it is a bit boring; quick decay is probably better for that sort of thing. A basic way of earning the long-term currency could be to trade in X rubles. Basically free in that the rubles would decay anyway, but requiring an active announcement/participation or choice (if there are multiple options). Then once a year, we reset the whole thing to 0 and give rewards for people who did well (should definitely be wins involved somehow, might be better if it's for anyone who did well enough rather than highest score, and perhaps a patent title for the overall high scorer). I think a once a year win is a good time scale. Maybe a compromise is top N get a named award? (The anyone who does well enough could end up as everyone). One of the reasons I disliked the more recent Points is that it was *too* egalitarian in that it didn't reset when someone won. Is this an interesting enough basic system that I should try to work out the details? (Nor would it replace Promises, which are an awesome background currency to have around, and get more interesting the more things they have to interact with.) I think we should have enough complexity in currency to encourage trades. To do this, trades need to be win/win, which means multiple routes to victory. I wonder - we haven't really tried this - if there's a way to manage secret victory conditions. Anyone ever played Careers? It works like: 1. 3 types of accumulatable currency (x,y,z). IMO, more (notes, ribbons) is too complicated to watch others' strategies. 2. Everyone chooses a secret win formula: I win if I get at least 3x + 27y + 30z, to be a valid formula the coefficients have to add to 60. 3. Different mechanisms for earning x,y,z, but a priori, one isn't rarer/harder than others. Rareness comes from chosen paths. Only real challenge is how to save/store/confirm secret formulas. Maybe reasonable is Player publishes a Hash (only allowed to change that once in a rare while), recordkeepor tracks hashes. -G.
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3239 assigned to ais523 (and a couple of other things, including a proposal)
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 11:59 PM, ais523 callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: [When the rule was changed from being written in negatives to being written in positives, the change in part (d) seems not to have taken De Morgan's Law into account.] Actually, it's not a typo. Part (d) was changed alone by Proposal 6932 (scshunt), which in context (it was submitted as a Judge's Proposal for CFJ 2910) was clearly intended to weaken the reasonable belief defense.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3239 assigned to ais523 (and a couple of other things, including a proposal)
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 4:00 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 11:59 PM, ais523 callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: [When the rule was changed from being written in negatives to being written in positives, the change in part (d) seems not to have taken De Morgan's Law into account.] Actually, it's not a typo. Part (d) was changed alone by Proposal 6932 (scshunt), which in context (it was submitted as a Judge's Proposal for CFJ 2910) was clearly intended to weaken the reasonable belief defense. Indeed; as it was, all the accused needed to be able to do was present an argument that what they were doing was legal, and (d) would exonerate them by virtue of them having an argument. -scshunt
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3239 assigned to ais523 (and a couple of other things, including a proposal)
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote: Indeed; as it was, all the accused needed to be able to do was present an argument that what they were doing was legal, and (d) would exonerate them by virtue of them having an argument. I don't think that was a bad idea, actually. Wooble's argument *was* eminently reasonable (modulo a very confused set of CFJs and an uncontested self-ratifying report) and based on existing game custom; we shouldn't punish players because the outcome went the other way after close inspection.
