On 8/29/2022 12:11 PM, Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022, 9:19 AM ais523 via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 2022-08-28 at 22:16 -0700, Forest Sweeney via agora-business
>> wrote:
>>> As I'm kinda bullying everyone, I thought it would be appropriate if
>>> anything passes that I have some sort of penalty also. This sorta
>>> thing really shouldn't be allowed, though.
>>
>> I think the easiest way to prevent this sort of thing would be to ban
>> people who try from submitting proposals. (In fact, given that your
>> stated intention is to bully us into passing your rule, I am going to
>> attempt to bully you into retracting it: if you don't retract it within
>> the next few days, I will submit a proposal to ban you from submitting
>> proposals.)
>>
>> A rules-based solution is not going to work. It is far too easy to work
>> around.
>
> I don't understand how one would work around it, but mainly, I think it
> codifies the intent that we shouldn't be bullying voters. However, the only
> reasons I had heard against it thus far was that it promotes interesting
> gameplay, which I disagree with, but I thank you for a different angle on
> this, as it isn't one I saw yet.

So, we once had this rule (this was before conditional votes existed):

Rule 1561/1 (Power=2)
Illegality of Bonus Clauses

      Any Proposal which offers a bribe to a Player or Players to
      vote either FOR or AGAINST a Proposal (either itself or another
      Proposal) shall be completely without effect, even if it is
      adopted, any Rule to the contrary notwithstanding.

It *did* lead to some interesting CFJs on what constituted a bribe (like,
if you adjust game balance without resetting everything, there will be
inevitably some people who come out ahead) but my memory is that it mostly
did the job (albeit with a vastly different overall ruleset, and now we'd
want to include "threats" as well as "bribes").

I'm on the fence on the need for this overall - I got a dictatorship last
year by bribing people in a proposal, and I think the players at the time
generally found that to be fun.  On the other hand, when we choose a set
of rules for coins, stones or whatever it's less fun if these sorts of
proposals disrupt things too much.

But I *do* agree with ais523, that I would have been far more likely to
vote for this sort of thing if it wasn't accompanied with the bullying
proof of concept... :P

-G.

Reply via email to