‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Monday, October 28, 2019 6:58 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On 10/28/2019 3:27 PM, Nch via agora-discussion wrote:
>
> > Cons
> >
> > -
> >
> > -Soft-locks newer players out of writing proposals. They're likely to write
> > duds that won't pass for a whil
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Monday, October 28, 2019 7:04 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk
wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-10-28 at 16:58 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> > On 10/28/2019 3:27 PM, Nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> >
> > > Cons
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> > > -Soft-locks newer players out of
On Mon, 2019-10-28 at 16:58 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On 10/28/2019 3:27 PM, Nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> > Cons
> >
> > -Soft-locks newer players out of writing proposals. They're likely
> > to write duds that won't pass for a while and this punishes them
> > for that
>
> This in part
On 10/28/2019 3:27 PM, Nch via agora-discussion wrote:
Cons
-Soft-locks newer players out of writing proposals. They're likely to write
duds that won't pass for a while and this punishes them for that
This in particular was solved (in one implementation) by making it cheaper
for new pla
Oh that's right! I had that script I mentioned below spit out a version in
XML format and played with it for a bit but I never used it much. I think
omd, who did a stint before me, had a YAML version too.
On 10/28/2019 4:42 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
Ah. You mentioned something about having th
Ah. You mentioned something about having the ruleset in XML (of course, you
mentioned that right after I parsed everything…), and I assumed that was part
of some automation.
Gaelan
> On Oct 28, 2019, at 4:17 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On 10/28/2019 3:06 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>> Heh, it’
On 10/28/2019 3:06 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
Heh, it’s pretty standard. It happened with Rulekeepor too:
G had some some sort of ruleset automation, which to be fair wasn’t public. I
parsed his FLR into YAML and wrote the new code in Ruby.
Alexis kept the YAML format and rewrote the code in Ha
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Monday, October 28, 2019 4:31 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
> On 10/28/19 5:20 PM, James Cook wrote:
>
> > I am more interested right now in seeing more things to spend Coins
> > on; the Coin balances are starting to feel like meaningless numbers.
> > There was some di
Heh, it’s pretty standard. It happened with Rulekeepor too:
G had some some sort of ruleset automation, which to be fair wasn’t public. I
parsed his FLR into YAML and wrote the new code in Ruby.
Alexis kept the YAML format and rewrote the code in Haskell, of all things.
Trigon kept the YAML, bu
On 10/28/19 5:20 PM, James Cook wrote:
I am more interested right now in seeing more things to spend Coins
on; the Coin balances are starting to feel like meaningless numbers.
There was some discussion in September about times in the past where
there were shortages, e.g. proposals were expensive.
On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 at 01:51, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> That’s a very interesting point, and one that I hadn’t considered. One
> possibility would be to have a few days at the beginning of each week in
> which only the person with the top reward (i.e. the “main” officeholder).
> This would help in
On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 at 01:43, Aris Merchant
wrote:
> This has been proposed before, IIRC, and consensus is against it for
> two reasons (it’s possible I’m misremembering here, but all the
> concerns are valid regardless). Firstly, many official duties are
> essential to the game, and having them a
On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 at 01:38, Nch wrote:
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Saturday, October 26, 2019 7:31 PM, James Cook
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 26 Oct 2019 at 15:23, Gaelan Steele g...@canishe.com wrote:
> >
> > > To be honest, I’m not sure I see the point. In my experience interim
> >
That’s a very interesting point, and one that I hadn’t considered. One
possibility would be to have a few days at the beginning of each week in which
only the person with the top reward (i.e. the “main” officeholder). This would
help in the most common cases, but maybe would still discourage sha
This has been proposed before, IIRC, and consensus is against it for
two reasons (it’s possible I’m misremembering here, but all the
concerns are valid regardless). Firstly, many official duties are
essential to the game, and having them assigned to the same person
promotes accountability, since th
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 26, 2019 7:31 PM, James Cook wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Oct 2019 at 15:23, Gaelan Steele g...@canishe.com wrote:
>
> > To be honest, I’m not sure I see the point. In my experience interim
> > incumbents nearly always win elections, and most modern A
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 26, 2019 7:53 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>
> TL;DR: No “officeholders”; anyone can do a job if it hasn’t been done yet
> that {week,month}. They get paid for doing so, and get paid more if they’ve
> been doing it consistently or if it’s be
On 10/26/19 8:53 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
TL;DR: No “officeholders”; anyone can do a job if it hasn’t been done yet that
{week,month}. They get paid for doing so, and get paid more if they’ve been
doing it consistently or if it’s been overdue for a while.
This is an interesting idea - but I t
I’ve had a proposal for an alternative “duty” (name TBD) bouncing around for a
while. It goes something like this:
* Most offices (basically, all but the imposed ones and the ones that handle
secret information) get replaced with “duties.”
* Anyone can fulfill a duty (i.e. publish the report, u
On Sat, 26 Oct 2019 at 15:23, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> To be honest, I’m not sure I see the point. In my experience interim
> incumbents nearly always win elections, and most modern Agoran offices have
> very little power anyway. All I really see this doing is punishing those who
> take up work t
On 10/26/2019 8:28 AM, Nch wrote:
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 26, 2019 10:22 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
To be honest, I’m not sure I see the point. In my experience interim incumbents
nearly always win elections, and most modern Agoran offices have very little
power
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Saturday, October 26, 2019 10:22 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> To be honest, I’m not sure I see the point. In my experience interim
> incumbents nearly always win elections, and most modern Agoran offices have
> very little power anyway. All I really see this do
To be honest, I’m not sure I see the point. In my experience interim incumbents
nearly always win elections, and most modern Agoran offices have very little
power anyway. All I really see this doing is punishing those who take up work
that’s not being done.
Gaelan
> On Oct 26, 2019, at 5:43 A
23 matches
Mail list logo
