On 1/19/2022 11:09 AM, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote: > On Wed, 2022-01-19 at 07:30 -0800, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: >> I submit the following proposal, AI=2, called "Points": >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Create the following power=2 rule, Points: >> >> A player's Score, indicated in Points, is an integer player switch >> defaulting to 0, tracked by the Herald. >> >> Upon a correct announcement from a player that one or more players >> have a score of 100+ points, each such player wins the game. If at >> least one player wins the game via such an announcement, all >> players' scores are set to their default. >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- > > Why power 2? This sort of thing is traditionally done at power 1, and I > can't see an obvious reason why more power would be needed. (Is it just > to make the rule harder to amend?) >
I considered both (also 1.5) - went with 2 so the basic win condition to be harder to change and most of the action being in the reward mechanisms, at a lower power. Of course in practice halving all the rewards is the same as doubling the goal, but 2.0 discourages a raw "someone's close, let's vote away the goal" play, especially if scoring methods end up being proposal-based. That said, don't mind it at 1 if that's preferred. Also wondered about 1000 instead of 100 for more granularity, tho 100 admittedly appeals to my originalist tendencies. -G.
