On Sun, 25 Jul 2010, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Tiger wrote:
>
> > I'm sorry about that, and I think I knew beforehand that I wouldn't be
> > able to create something that big that stood up to Agora's standards
> > of rigour. Still, it was adopted, and now I'm just unsure about
> > whether to view the inevitable CFJs as hindering the gameplay, or as a
> > success in the quest of generating more gameplay...
This isn't a bad thing per se. The only difficulty is doing a bug shakeout
run (where bugs are dealt with by the intended spirit and claification) in
an Agoran Rules environment when a bug might create a broader scam.
Proto: Contests Yet Again - Very Simple, in one rule.
A player CAN make a document into a Contest without 3 objections.
The player doing so becomes the Contestmaster. The Contest SHOULD
be a list of instructions for playing a type of game. The
contest SHOULD be fair and generally allow all players to join
and participate on an equal footing as governed by the instructions
of the contest. A player CAN join a contest by announcement; this
is the only way a player CAN join a contest.
The contest SHOULD include instructions for determining winner(s)
of the contest. When a player fulfills said conditions, the
contestmaster SHALL announce the winners asap; such an announcement,
if factually correct, causes the names players to fulfill the
Winning Condition of Game Club.
The contestmaster is the recordkeepor of all matters containing
to the contest, and SHALL publish a weekly report of the contest
listing all members and relevant activities and other records for
the contest.
The contestmaster is, prima facie, the adjudicator of contest
instructions and disputes. Disputes SHOULD, in general, be resolved
with the spirit of the instructions in mind. The contestmaster CAN
change the instructions without 3 objections, but SHOULD only do so
to improve gameplay or resolve disputes within the spirit of the
original contest.
If a court case arises with respect to the conduct of the contest
or the application and interpretation of its instructions, the
courts SHOULD give primacy of interpretation to the contestmaster's
interpretations, SHOULD judge UNDETERMINED if the contestmaster
has not been given a fair chance to suggest a resolution, and
SHOULD only find against the contestmaster if e is found to be
acting with arbitrary and capricious disregard for the Contest's
instructions and/or spirit.
Anyone CAN cause a contest to cease to be a contest provided
e does so both with Notice and with 3 supporters. [is this the
right phrasology for a combined with Notice/support requirement?]
