On 16 December 2013 00:31, Michael Norrish <michael.norr...@nicta.com.au>wrote:
> On 16/12/13 10:28, Tanner Swett wrote: > > On Dec 15, 2013, at 5:21 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote: > >> Why? Maybe the fact people have lost interest in Agora is because the > core > >> of the game has hardly changed in years. It seems like we found > >> judicial/proposal/etc. systems that work, and so we don't want to change > >> them. But a working Nomic is a boring Nomic. We may need to consider > >> fundamentally changing the way we handle these issues so we can have > >> something that doesn't work again. That way, we'll get to have fun > >> fixing/scamming it. > > > > What I'd really like (at least, what I think I'd really like) is a > "subgame" > > that's fun and interesting, has an obvious goal to strive for, has clear > ways > > to go about trying to achieve that goal, requires a bunch of Nomicky > thought > > in order to do well in (by which I mean the sort of legal and > philosophical > > thought that goes into writing proposals and judgements), has strong > effects > > on every aspect of the nomic, and works well over a mailing list. The > game > > ought to become one of Agora's institutions, like the judicial system, > rather > > than coming and going, like the economic systems. > > Absolutely. See > http://users.cecs.anu.edu.au/~michaeln/agora/subgame-manifesto.html > > If Fall of the Republic starts, I'll join Agora again. I'd even enjoy being the referee, I think. - Tiger
