On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 8:46 PM Rebecca Lee via agora-discussion <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 1:30 PM OatmealSurprise via agora-business < > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > I (Mask) hereby propose the following: > > """ > > Reduce, Reuse, Recycle > > On successful repeal of a rule, the player who proposed the repeal gains 2 > > Pendants. > > """ > > > A proposal needs to specify what it's doing, like creating a new rule, > amending an existing rule etc. So this proposal should say "create a new > rule called 'Reduce Reuse Recycle' with the following text". Also, any new > rule should have a power (a number between 1 and 4 that determines whether > it overrules other rules). This rule could probably be power 1. Also, > proposals should have a title and an adoption index (they don't have to, > but all of them tend to). Adoption index is a complicated concept, but > basically it's 1 if you're doing anything at power 1, 2 if you're doing > anything at power 2, and 3 for anything at power 3. Power is that weird > number that appears in brackets after each rule's title. A rule that does > things at a higher power needs more votes. > > So essentially, a properly formatted version of this proposal would look > like this > > "Title: Let's Repeal Stuff (or whatever other title) > AI: 1 > Text: Create a new power-1 rule called "Reduce Reuse Recycle" with the text > "On successful repeal of a rule, the player who proposed the repeal gains 2 > Pendants". > > > Obviously you don't have to use that exact formatting, just give that > information.
I generally agree with R. Lee's procedural comments. A few additions to those: The "Text:" marker shouldn't go on the same line as the start of the text. You can either just leave the marker out, or if you really want it to be there, add a newline after it. It's in the proposal style guide, which may be worth reading: it lives in the ACORN. When you're submitting proposals for discussion purposes, you shouldn't submit an actual proposal. Instead, either post it on the Discord server or to agora-discussion. It's alright to retract proposals after they've been submitted if you need to, but it's not good to submit until you think the proposal has a fair chance of being ready. Now, onto some substantive comments: To balance this, it would need to be 1 pendant. I think it would need to be 1 pendant per proposal, too. Maybe a pendant for each proposal that repeals more rules than it creates? I don't know if I'd vote FOR it with that change, but it could be interesting as a way of incentivising ruleset simplification. I'd have to reflect on whether I think ruleset simplification is a good thing. I certainly wouldn't like us to start, say, repealing all the asset rules, or something. For that reason, I think I might vote AGAINST or PRESENT even with the changes. Also, it might be worth adding this to the list in Rule 2496. That way we could make it the responsibility of either the Assessor or the Rulekeepor to do. Jason would need to comment on which one would be appropriate. I know this is a lot of negative feedback, but don't be disheartened. It's very rare for a player's first substantive proposal to pass. It can take a while to see what sorts of changes people favor and get up to speed.
