Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
Just as something to keep in mind: failed appeasement attempts should punish the failed appeaser, but not Agora as a whole (assuming that someone else comes along and does it correctly). Gaelan > On Feb 16, 2019, at 5:02 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > On 2/16/2019 4:16 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: >> Hmm. So the point is that I want to add enough variables that doing it >> correctly is a challenge. That way it’s really easy to accidentally mess >> up. Any ideas on how to do that without adding too much tedium? > > Regardless of the detailed steps needed, you could/should make really, > really, really strict communication standards such that any variance > whatsoever kills it, and indirection (e.g. "I pay the Ritual Fee" instead of > "I pay 7 coins") doesn't work. (Though you'll need to have the instructions > change each time so it doesn't just devolve into a cut/paste exercise). >
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
On 2/16/2019 4:21 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote: On Sat, 2019-02-16 at 16:16 -0800, Aris Merchant wrote: Hmm. So the point is that I want to add enough variables that doing it correctly is a challenge. That way it’s really easy to accidentally mess up. Any ideas on how to do that without adding too much tedium? FRC-style, perhaps? Every time you perform the Ritual, you add a new step or restriction to it. (I'd recommend that we require players to follow their own new step/restriction when performing the Ritual; this isn't an FRC rule but is more of an FRC guideline.) Restrictions can be removed with 1 Agoran Consent (the FRC has a similar rule in case people try to add restrictions that are too difficult or unfairly biased). The introduction of rules with Power<1 was originally intended to be a place for more easily-changed rules like FRC, though the risk of an escalation scam meant we were never really willing to let those rules change more flexibly.
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
On 2/16/2019 4:16 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: Hmm. So the point is that I want to add enough variables that doing it correctly is a challenge. That way it’s really easy to accidentally mess up. Any ideas on how to do that without adding too much tedium? Regardless of the detailed steps needed, you could/should make really, really, really strict communication standards such that any variance whatsoever kills it, and indirection (e.g. "I pay the Ritual Fee" instead of "I pay 7 coins") doesn't work. (Though you'll need to have the instructions change each time so it doesn't just devolve into a cut/paste exercise).
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
On Sat, 2019-02-16 at 16:16 -0800, Aris Merchant wrote: > Hmm. So the point is that I want to add enough variables that doing it > correctly is a challenge. That way it’s really easy to accidentally mess > up. Any ideas on how to do that without adding too much tedium? FRC-style, perhaps? Every time you perform the Ritual, you add a new step or restriction to it. (I'd recommend that we require players to follow their own new step/restriction when performing the Ritual; this isn't an FRC rule but is more of an FRC guideline.) Restrictions can be removed with 1 Agoran Consent (the FRC has a similar rule in case people try to add restrictions that are too difficult or unfairly biased). -- ais523
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
Hmm. So the point is that I want to add enough variables that doing it correctly is a challenge. That way it’s really easy to accidentally mess up. Any ideas on how to do that without adding too much tedium? -Aris On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 4:15 PM Cuddle Beam wrote: > I’d prefer that mundane tedium (such as just checking some website for the > star’s current position or just running some kind of calculation) wasn’t a > factor. FMPOV it doesn’t add more fun, it’s like playing chess but now with > weights on your wrists. > > On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 01:04, Aris Merchant < > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > In case this changes anyone’s plans, I have an idea to change the ritual > to > > make it harder to perform. Doing it successfully should require > consulting > > the time, phase of the moon, the way the last three people have performed > > it, the current zodiac sign, and other such things. > > > > -Aris > > > > On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 3:54 PM Cuddle Beam > wrote: > > > > > Maybe an Inquisitor to coordinate the consensus-shunning process and > > > otherwise suggest appropriately religious punishments. > > > > > > On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 00:17, D. Margaux > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 16, 2019, at 5:25 PM, D. Margaux > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Feb 16, 2019, at 2:58 PM, Aris Merchant < > > > > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> I don’t much like the idea of enforcing minor violations against > > > someone > > > > >> who hasn’t agreed to it. It doesn’t quite seem fair. > > > > > > > > > > Well, the heretic can point eir finger at all of the faithful for > > > > abetting heresy... > > > > > > > > But more seriously, if the people interested in joining preferred, we > > > > could use other language. But I’m still amused by the idea of having > > some > > > > sort of retaliation against a “heretic,” unless people are definitely > > > > opposed. > > > > > > > > Maybe: > > > > > > > > “The heretic MUST be shunned. The faithful SHOULD determine by > > consensus > > > > among themselves what an appropriate shunning would entail for any > > given > > > > heretic.” > > > > > >
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
I’d prefer that mundane tedium (such as just checking some website for the star’s current position or just running some kind of calculation) wasn’t a factor. FMPOV it doesn’t add more fun, it’s like playing chess but now with weights on your wrists. On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 01:04, Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > In case this changes anyone’s plans, I have an idea to change the ritual to > make it harder to perform. Doing it successfully should require consulting > the time, phase of the moon, the way the last three people have performed > it, the current zodiac sign, and other such things. > > -Aris > > On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 3:54 PM Cuddle Beam wrote: > > > Maybe an Inquisitor to coordinate the consensus-shunning process and > > otherwise suggest appropriately religious punishments. > > > > On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 00:17, D. Margaux wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 16, 2019, at 5:25 PM, D. Margaux > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Feb 16, 2019, at 2:58 PM, Aris Merchant < > > > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> I don’t much like the idea of enforcing minor violations against > > someone > > > >> who hasn’t agreed to it. It doesn’t quite seem fair. > > > > > > > > Well, the heretic can point eir finger at all of the faithful for > > > abetting heresy... > > > > > > But more seriously, if the people interested in joining preferred, we > > > could use other language. But I’m still amused by the idea of having > some > > > sort of retaliation against a “heretic,” unless people are definitely > > > opposed. > > > > > > Maybe: > > > > > > “The heretic MUST be shunned. The faithful SHOULD determine by > consensus > > > among themselves what an appropriate shunning would entail for any > given > > > heretic.” > > >
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
> On Feb 16, 2019, at 6:59 PM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > Or it could just be the Priest, really Yes except that as currently worded, if there is a heretic, then the priesthood remains vacant. We could say that, when/if a player becomes a heretic, then the most recent priest becomes the inquisitor. > > Also, I suggest to be able to waive a Collect by submitting a sufficiently > impressive work of venerative literature or art (it would also be a way to > add more made-up creed and fun roleplay to this) Lol sure haha
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
Religion is strikingly similar to a government lol. Maybe have the Priest’s focus be the devout and the Inquisitor’s focus be the pagans. On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 00:57, D. Margaux wrote: > > > > On Feb 16, 2019, at 6:54 PM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > > > Maybe an Inquisitor to coordinate the consensus-shunning process and > > otherwise suggest appropriately religious punishments. > > I like it!!! > > Maybe if there is a heretic in a given week, then the Inquisitor can be an > office imposed on the first faithful who performs the Ritual during that > week. Basically, the inquisitor would be the faithful who _would have_ been > the priest that week, except for the heretic’s prior performance of the > ritual...
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
In case this changes anyone’s plans, I have an idea to change the ritual to make it harder to perform. Doing it successfully should require consulting the time, phase of the moon, the way the last three people have performed it, the current zodiac sign, and other such things. -Aris On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 3:54 PM Cuddle Beam wrote: > Maybe an Inquisitor to coordinate the consensus-shunning process and > otherwise suggest appropriately religious punishments. > > On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 00:17, D. Margaux wrote: > > > > > > > > On Feb 16, 2019, at 5:25 PM, D. Margaux wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Feb 16, 2019, at 2:58 PM, Aris Merchant < > > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> I don’t much like the idea of enforcing minor violations against > someone > > >> who hasn’t agreed to it. It doesn’t quite seem fair. > > > > > > Well, the heretic can point eir finger at all of the faithful for > > abetting heresy... > > > > But more seriously, if the people interested in joining preferred, we > > could use other language. But I’m still amused by the idea of having some > > sort of retaliation against a “heretic,” unless people are definitely > > opposed. > > > > Maybe: > > > > “The heretic MUST be shunned. The faithful SHOULD determine by consensus > > among themselves what an appropriate shunning would entail for any given > > heretic.” >
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
Or it could just be the Priest, really Also, I suggest to be able to waive a Collect by submitting a sufficiently impressive work of venerative literature or art (it would also be a way to add more made-up creed and fun roleplay to this) On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 00:54, Cuddle Beam wrote: > Maybe an Inquisitor to coordinate the consensus-shunning process and > otherwise suggest appropriately religious punishments. > > On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 00:17, D. Margaux wrote: > >> >> >> > On Feb 16, 2019, at 5:25 PM, D. Margaux wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> >> On Feb 16, 2019, at 2:58 PM, Aris Merchant < >> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> I don’t much like the idea of enforcing minor violations against >> someone >> >> who hasn’t agreed to it. It doesn’t quite seem fair. >> > >> > Well, the heretic can point eir finger at all of the faithful for >> abetting heresy... >> >> But more seriously, if the people interested in joining preferred, we >> could use other language. But I’m still amused by the idea of having some >> sort of retaliation against a “heretic,” unless people are definitely >> opposed. >> >> Maybe: >> >> “The heretic MUST be shunned. The faithful SHOULD determine by consensus >> among themselves what an appropriate shunning would entail for any given >> heretic.” > >
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
> On Feb 16, 2019, at 6:54 PM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > Maybe an Inquisitor to coordinate the consensus-shunning process and > otherwise suggest appropriately religious punishments. I like it!!! Maybe if there is a heretic in a given week, then the Inquisitor can be an office imposed on the first faithful who performs the Ritual during that week. Basically, the inquisitor would be the faithful who _would have_ been the priest that week, except for the heretic’s prior performance of the ritual...
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
Maybe an Inquisitor to coordinate the consensus-shunning process and otherwise suggest appropriately religious punishments. On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 00:17, D. Margaux wrote: > > > > On Feb 16, 2019, at 5:25 PM, D. Margaux wrote: > > > > > > > >> On Feb 16, 2019, at 2:58 PM, Aris Merchant < > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> I don’t much like the idea of enforcing minor violations against someone > >> who hasn’t agreed to it. It doesn’t quite seem fair. > > > > Well, the heretic can point eir finger at all of the faithful for > abetting heresy... > > But more seriously, if the people interested in joining preferred, we > could use other language. But I’m still amused by the idea of having some > sort of retaliation against a “heretic,” unless people are definitely > opposed. > > Maybe: > > “The heretic MUST be shunned. The faithful SHOULD determine by consensus > among themselves what an appropriate shunning would entail for any given > heretic.”
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
> On Feb 16, 2019, at 5:25 PM, D. Margaux wrote: > > > >> On Feb 16, 2019, at 2:58 PM, Aris Merchant >> wrote: >> >> I don’t much like the idea of enforcing minor violations against someone >> who hasn’t agreed to it. It doesn’t quite seem fair. > > Well, the heretic can point eir finger at all of the faithful for abetting > heresy... But more seriously, if the people interested in joining preferred, we could use other language. But I’m still amused by the idea of having some sort of retaliation against a “heretic,” unless people are definitely opposed. Maybe: “The heretic MUST be shunned. The faithful SHOULD determine by consensus among themselves what an appropriate shunning would entail for any given heretic.”
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
> On Feb 16, 2019, at 2:58 PM, Aris Merchant > wrote: > > I don’t much like the idea of enforcing minor violations against someone > who hasn’t agreed to it. It doesn’t quite seem fair. Well, the heretic can point eir finger at all of the faithful for abetting heresy...
Re: DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
I don’t much like the idea of enforcing minor violations against someone who hasn’t agreed to it. It doesn’t quite seem fair. -Aris On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 11:31 AM D. Margaux wrote: > I _love_ the idea of enforcing minor rule violations against a pariah. > Hilarious. > > Some revisions to the protocontract below— > > /// > > This contract is to be known as The Church of The Ritual. Parties to the > contract are the faithful; nonparties are heathens. A heathen can become > faithful by announcement upon transferring 5 coins to the Church. A > faithful can become heathen by announcement, unless that faithful has left > unsatisfied one or more collection obligations. > > When this contract creates an “imposed office,” it creates a switch that > behaves as closely as possible to the way it would behave if it were a > rule-created imposed office. > > The priest and the heretic are imposed offices. The player who first > performs The Ritual in any given Agoran week becomes the priest (if > faithful) or the heretic (if heathen). At the start of each Agoran week, > the offices of priest and heretic are made vacant. > > The faithful MUST prevent all players from becoming the heretic; failure > to do so is the crime of Abetting Heresy. > > The heretic MUST be shunned. Faithful are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED to point eir > fingers at the heretic, and to seek and impose against the heretic the > maximum penalties allowable under the Rules. > > The priest SHOULD be treated right good. Upon being installed in the > office of priest, a faithful CAN once cause the Church to transfer to em 5 > coins. > > If the Church has fewer than 10 coins, any faithful CAN once call a > collection by announcement. If a collection is called, each faithful MUST > in a timely fashion satisfy eir collection obligation by transferring to > the Church 5 coins. If a faithful has left a collection obligation > unsatisfied for longer than 7 days, any faithful CAN act on eir behalf to > satisfy that obligation by causing em to transfer to the Church 5 coins. > > ///
DIS: Re: Church of Ritual
I _love_ the idea of enforcing minor rule violations against a pariah. Hilarious. Some revisions to the protocontract below— /// This contract is to be known as The Church of The Ritual. Parties to the contract are the faithful; nonparties are heathens. A heathen can become faithful by announcement upon transferring 5 coins to the Church. A faithful can become heathen by announcement, unless that faithful has left unsatisfied one or more collection obligations. When this contract creates an “imposed office,” it creates a switch that behaves as closely as possible to the way it would behave if it were a rule-created imposed office. The priest and the heretic are imposed offices. The player who first performs The Ritual in any given Agoran week becomes the priest (if faithful) or the heretic (if heathen). At the start of each Agoran week, the offices of priest and heretic are made vacant. The faithful MUST prevent all players from becoming the heretic; failure to do so is the crime of Abetting Heresy. The heretic MUST be shunned. Faithful are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED to point eir fingers at the heretic, and to seek and impose against the heretic the maximum penalties allowable under the Rules. The priest SHOULD be treated right good. Upon being installed in the office of priest, a faithful CAN once cause the Church to transfer to em 5 coins. If the Church has fewer than 10 coins, any faithful CAN once call a collection by announcement. If a collection is called, each faithful MUST in a timely fashion satisfy eir collection obligation by transferring to the Church 5 coins. If a faithful has left a collection obligation unsatisfied for longer than 7 days, any faithful CAN act on eir behalf to satisfy that obligation by causing em to transfer to the Church 5 coins. ///
