Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [IADoP] Metareport
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 06:39 -0700, Edward Murphy wrote: For the record, this dates back to the IADoP report of 2014-10-15, and was equally vague back then. A quick scan of a-b around that same time turns up an attempted scam involving the office, but nothing obviously suggesting that Rule 2437 wasn't created or that it fails to effectively define the office into existence. omd, do you remember anything more? I remember something more. There were various attempts to scam the office in question. IIRC, some of these scam attempts tried to repeal the office in an attempt to close the loophole behind them. So it'd depend on whether or not the scams were judged successful, something that I can't remember the resolution of. -- ais523
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: registration stadjer
I think I'll try to work out a new draft of the proposal on Organizations then. That is, unless someone thinks I better can spend time on an older draft? stadjer 2015-03-26 20:38 GMT+01:00 Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu: On Thu, 26 Mar 2015, Benjamin Schultz wrote: On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 6:12 AM, stad jer stadjerno...@gmail.com wrote: I'm willing to perform administrative duties after a revival, but I don't know how much game-experience one needs for that. How did Agora survive dead points like this in the past? stadjer, I suggest you do these: 1. Read the most recently published Short Logical Ruleset (SLR), if you haven't already. 2. Propose all sorts of rule changes. That will give you plenty of game experience. OscarMeyr In all seriousness, I think most dead periods ended when someone put forward a new Proposal with a set of new rules for a new Game Play idea, and also ran it long enough to work out the bugs in the idea. If the game is relatively easy to get into, enough other waiting players tended to jump right in. We saw it begin to happen with the Dungeon Master a couple months ago; people jumped in. But then a bug happened, and the original D.M. didn't care enough (or have the time) to fix it, so it just died out when e didn't do so. If you write your own rules for such a game/addition, you'll be the expert on those rules to begin with. Though they might not all work as you intend exactly, so if you do this, please post drafts of your proposal before you formally propose it; one thing our collective experience helps in is finding bugs. -G.
DIS: Re: OFF: [IADoP] Metareport
On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 05:17 -0700, Edward Murphy wrote: ~ May not exist (reason unknown) If we had a working criminal justice system, I'd consider crimming you for excessive vagueness here. (I'd identify the violated rule as 2143, and conveniently neglect to identify which paragraph.) Part of the problem with our current intentionally biased criminal justice system is that there's no room for arguing back and forth in email threads that span multiple weeks, so it's unintentionally contributing to a decrease in activity. Dictatorial systems have the advantage/disadvantage of low bureaucracy levels. -- ais523
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [IADoP] Metareport
ais523 wrote: On Sat, 2015-03-28 at 05:17 -0700, Edward Murphy wrote: ~ May not exist (reason unknown) If we had a working criminal justice system, I'd consider crimming you for excessive vagueness here. (I'd identify the violated rule as 2143, and conveniently neglect to identify which paragraph.) For the record, this dates back to the IADoP report of 2014-10-15, and was equally vague back then. A quick scan of a-b around that same time turns up an attempted scam involving the office, but nothing obviously suggesting that Rule 2437 wasn't created or that it fails to effectively define the office into existence. omd, do you remember anything more?
