Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ruleset Ratification
e's right though - having those R101/R1698 up front in their own section is a better intro to the whole spirit of the thing than what I had. On 3/3/2019 9:34 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote: Looks like I put it as the second rule when I did my big reorganization after becoming Rulekeepor. It wasn’t a drastic change, though—G has it as the sixth. Gaelan On Mar 2, 2019, at 9:29 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote: On another note, whose idea was it to put rule 1698 as the second rule in the Ruleset? That was really clever, as it manages to serve as a fundamental "protection of Agora" rule, and an explanation to new players as to what the game is all about, at the same time.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ruleset Ratification
Looks like I put it as the second rule when I did my big reorganization after becoming Rulekeepor. It wasn’t a drastic change, though—G has it as the sixth. Gaelan > On Mar 2, 2019, at 9:29 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote: > > On another note, whose idea was it to put rule 1698 as the second rule > in the Ruleset? That was really clever, as it manages to serve as a > fundamental "protection of Agora" rule, and an explanation to new > players as to what the game is all about, at the same time. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ruleset Ratification
> Indeed, but I thought I'd point it out so that people were aware. > > In general, rule 1698 triggers should be avoided as much as possible. > The problem is that it (intentionally) defeats Agora's existing > mechanisms for ensuring that we know what the gamestate is; it's better > to have an unknown but playable gamestate, than a known but ossified > gamestate. However, when it does trigger, it can take a lot of effort > to figure out what the resulting gamestate is. That makes sense! Glad my understanding of the rule is correct. The everyone-has-blots scenario is interesting. > On another note, whose idea was it to put rule 1698 as the second rule > in the Ruleset? That was really clever, as it manages to serve as a > fundamental "protection of Agora" rule, and an explanation to new > players as to what the game is all about, at the same time. It is nice!
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ruleset Ratification
On Sun, 2019-03-03 at 05:16 +, James Cook wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Mar 2019 at 05:23, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk
> wrote:
> > That said, there is a possible failure state: if every player has at
> > least 13 Blots, and nobody has any Ribbons, the adoption of a proposal
> > within four weeks would require someone with fewer Blots than that to
> > register.
>
> Wouldn't the gamestate part of Rule 1698 ("If any other single
> change...") prevent that situation from arising? I agree it would be
> nice to close it off, but I don't see how it affects the ruleset
> ratification.
Indeed, but I thought I'd point it out so that people were aware.
In general, rule 1698 triggers should be avoided as much as possible.
The problem is that it (intentionally) defeats Agora's existing
mechanisms for ensuring that we know what the gamestate is; it's better
to have an unknown but playable gamestate, than a known but ossified
gamestate. However, when it does trigger, it can take a lot of effort
to figure out what the resulting gamestate is.
On another note, whose idea was it to put rule 1698 as the second rule
in the Ruleset? That was really clever, as it manages to serve as a
fundamental "protection of Agora" rule, and an explanation to new
players as to what the game is all about, at the same time.
--
ais523
DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ruleset Ratification
On Sat, 2 Mar 2019 at 05:23, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk
wrote:
> That said, there is a possible failure state: if every player has at
> least 13 Blots, and nobody has any Ribbons, the adoption of a proposal
> within four weeks would require someone with fewer Blots than that to
> register.
Wouldn't the gamestate part of Rule 1698 ("If any other single
change...") prevent that situation from arising? I agree it would be
nice to close it off, but I don't see how it affects the ruleset
ratification.
DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ruleset Ratification
On 3/1/2019 9:22 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote: It might, however, be a good idea to close off even this theoretical possibility via some sort of global expungement mechanism (e.g. reintroduce Solitude as a victory condition and have it do a global expunge during the cleanup). Going way back, my favorite method for this was for the criminals to Rebel: Rule 1664/20 (Power=2) Rebellion A Rebellious player may Call for a Revolt at any time by publicly announcing e does so. A Call for Revolt is only effective if no other Call for Revolt has been made that week and no successful Revolt has occurred for a month or more. As soon as possible after an effective Call for Revolt has been posted, the Registrar must determine whether the Revolt succeeds, as outlined below, and publicly announce the result. The Registrar shall select a random integer from 1 to the number of players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne). If this number is less than or equal to the number of Rebellious players (plus 1 if Miscreant is Borne by a Rebellious player), then the Revolt succeeds; otherwise it fails. All numbers used in this calculation are determined at the time of the Call for Revolt. If a Revolt succeeds, then the following events occur in order: - The Registrar shall expunge the Blots of each Rebellious player - The Registrar shall pay out 8 Stems to each Rebellious player - The GWotO shall remove all Abiding Oligarchs from the Oligarchy - Each Abiding player that is the Electee to an Office is retired from that Office. - All Rebellious players become Abiding again - The Registrar shall levy a 75% Indulgence tax. For this levy, the Bearor of the Patent Title "Robespierre" is tax-exempt. - A Speaker Transition occurs - Any Indulgence Auction in progress is cancelled If a Revolt does not succeed, then: - All Rebellious players gain 2 Blots. - The player who Called for Revolt gains 2 (additional) Blots The effects of a Call for Revolt shall be based on the Political Status, Oligarchy membership, and Indulgence holdings of players at the time of the Call. The Registrar shall notify the Herald of all Blots gained or expunged as a result of this Rule.
