Re: DIS: Re: BUS: An old flame
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013, omd wrote: On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote: Proposal: New Beginnings (AI=3) Generally, I was going to respond negatively, criticizing the extra complexity introduced when the latest batch of changes might finally produce a solid basis for gameplay (unlike several past attempts that are still in the ruleset or were just repealed), but I think this might be manageable. However, I think this proposal ought to repeal some of the other rules we have for defining random things as persons before lumping on new ones. I am personally with Wes on this in that we need a clean sweep of personhood (raise the personhood definition security to 3 in rule 2150, state right out only first-class persons can be players, then delete all reference to classes of players). I think, quite frankly, that all this personhood crap has been one of the drags on the game as it is overly complex to no purpose, and getting rid of it, rather than re-complicating it, would be better for activity. -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: An old flame
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote: I am personally with Wes on this in that we need a clean sweep of personhood (raise the personhood definition security to 3 in rule 2150, state right out only first-class persons can be players, then delete all reference to classes of players). I think, quite frankly, that all this personhood crap has been one of the drags on the game as it is overly complex to no purpose, and getting rid of it, rather than re-complicating it, would be better for activity. -G. It is not a critical component of my proposal that Titles be persons; it could be rewritten (before or after adoption) to instead just grant an increased voting limit based on holding a Title. (i.e. holding a Title gives you +2 VVLOP) -scshunt
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: An old flame
On Wed, 10 Apr 2013, Sean Hunt wrote: On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote: I am personally with Wes on this in that we need a clean sweep of personhood (raise the personhood definition security to 3 in rule 2150, state right out only first-class persons can be players, then delete all reference to classes of players). I think, quite frankly, that all this personhood crap has been one of the drags on the game as it is overly complex to no purpose, and getting rid of it, rather than re-complicating it, would be better for activity. -G. It is not a critical component of my proposal that Titles be persons; it could be rewritten (before or after adoption) to instead just grant an increased voting limit based on holding a Title. (i.e. holding a Title gives you +2 VVLOP) Sounds good; barring any minor bugs I haven't had a chance to delve for, the general idea of the gameplay, outside of the personhood complications, looks good. -G.
