On 1/20/2020 1:30 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion wrote:
> ...aaaand, maybe, if it please m'lud, to request that at least the
> degree intent, if not also the separate title, be delayed for a further,
> oh, say, four to five days? For purely self-serving reasons, I admit.
Since this is "undergoing peer-review", I won't make any awards until you
say either "I'm happy with the published draft" or "here's a new draft".
Note that the Herald may change hands in the meantime.
>> Oh, and on peer-review: having read it, I can think of no edits. This is a
>> gem. Well done.
>
> Not even to suggest pointing out the Town Fountain and Royal Parade in
> the part where I talk about honouring interesting/memorable scams? I'm
> kicking myself for forgetting to mention them, as basically the most
> prominent memorials of gameplay past. Ah well.
Your writing focused on "recent scams", and of course the style of gameplay
preferred is a function of current and not past players, it didn't even
occur to me that it was missing!
That said, this reminded me of pers. comm/memory that supports your case.
For both the Town Fountain and the Royal Parade, the scam perpetrator
(myself and Alexis respectively), a while after each scam (a year or so
after IIRC), submitted proposals to repeal said rules. The proposals
failed, and I remember being told in no uncertain terms (by a couple of the
most fervent anti-scammers on the actual scam, no less) that it was part of
our history now and should stay. Good evidence that people might get annoyed
in the heat of the moment, but after the dust and emotions have settled it's
an accepted and appreciated part of the game.
-G.
